NationStates Jolt Archive


Who thinks marijuana should be legalized?

Infinite Revolution
26-07-2007, 15:13
me

wheeeeee!!!! thread-steal!!
IL Ruffino
26-07-2007, 15:14
*raises hand*
New Nietzche
26-07-2007, 15:14
?
Maraque
26-07-2007, 15:16
Absolutely should be.
Philosopy
26-07-2007, 15:17
Nope.
Four-oh-Four
26-07-2007, 15:19
I absolutely think *all* drugs should be legalized...and mandated by law that they only be sold in their purest form. Y'know why?

Because the gene pool needs some chlorine.
Levee en masse
26-07-2007, 15:20
?

To have your thread stolen once may be regarded as a misfortune. Twice just looks careless
Naturality
26-07-2007, 15:20
I do.
Pure Metal
26-07-2007, 15:23
yeah but it should be regulated just as alcohol is.

ditto for E, shrooms and possibly acid too


the netherlands have a pretty good way of legalising/decriminalising weed. as far as i understand, the only real problem with it is the throngs of stoned tourists bumbling about :P
IL Ruffino
26-07-2007, 15:25
yeah but it should be regulated just as alcohol is.

ditto for E, shrooms and possibly acid too


the netherlands have a pretty good way of legalising/decriminalising weed. as far as i understand, the only real problem with it is the throngs of stoned tourists bumbling about :P

Yourself included?
XORitude
26-07-2007, 15:27
It should be legal. You know why?

Because if people are stupid, and use it, and then they die, that's one less stupid person in the world. The world needs less stupid people.

Of course, this needs practically zero social welfare. Or maybe something along the lines of "You're allowed to smoke marijuana, but remember that insurance companies will force you to pay a premium, and most hospitals won't admit you."
Infinite Revolution
26-07-2007, 15:33
It should be legal. You know why?

Because if people are stupid, and use it, and then they die, that's one less stupid person in the world. The world needs less stupid people.

Of course, this needs practically zero social welfare. Or maybe something along the lines of "You're allowed to smoke marijuana, but remember that insurance companies will force you to pay a premium, and most hospitals won't admit you."

that's bollocks. as far as i'm aware there has only been one death in the whole world attributed to THC intoxication. compare that to figures for alcohol, and then also look at the number of accidents causing injury attributed to use of either and i think you'll see that marajuana it far less harmful.
XORitude
26-07-2007, 15:49
that's bollocks. as far as i'm aware there has only been one death in the whole world attributed to THC intoxication. compare that to figures for alcohol, and then also look at the number of accidents causing injury attributed to use of either and i think you'll see that marajuana it far less harmful.

Intoxication is not the only reason. Its status as a gateway drug, I guess, would be the major player in the case of marijuana, with stuff like not being able to maintain a decent quality of life coming a close second.

I'm counting deaths due to marijuana, that is, deaths (or, realistically, people rendered unable to have children) that would not have occurred if marijuana was illegal. You can't tell me that that number is low.

I actually just understood the gene-pool-chlorinating comment above. That is precisely what I'm trying to say.
Infinite Revolution
26-07-2007, 15:55
Intoxication is not the only reason. Its status as a gateway drug, I guess, would be the major player in the case of marijuana, with stuff like not being able to maintain a decent quality of life coming a close second.

I'm counting deaths due to marijuana, that is, deaths (or, realistically, people rendered unable to have children) that would not have occurred if marijuana was illegal. You can't tell me that that number is low.

I actually just understood the gene-pool-chlorinating comment above. That is precisely what I'm trying to say.

gateway drug... HAAHAHA!


so when you say 'deaths' what you mean is people not being conceived? odd. and while THC has been shown in some studies to reduce male fertility just go and count bob marley's kids and come back to me. a poor diet in some people can case reduced fertility, so can going for a walk every day in the city. i hardly think legalising marijuana is going to have a significant impact on national fertility rates. also, there are a number of reasons why fertility rates in the netherlands might be low. and there are also a number of countries with lower rates that have not legalised canabis. i think i might be misunderstanding what you are getting at because it doesn't make an awful lot of sense.
Fleckenstein
26-07-2007, 15:56
Intoxication is not the only reason. Its status as a gateway drug, I guess, would be the major player in the case of marijuana, with stuff like not being able to maintain a decent quality of life coming a close second.

I'm counting deaths due to marijuana, that is, deaths (or, realistically, people rendered unable to have children) that would not have occurred if marijuana was illegal. You can't tell me that that number is low.

I actually just understood the gene-pool-chlorinating comment above. That is precisely what I'm trying to say.

That doesn't make any sense.
Soheran
26-07-2007, 15:57
Its status as a gateway drug

...would not continue past legalization.
Infinite Revolution
26-07-2007, 15:57
That doesn't make any sense.

i'm glad you said that too cuz i was struggling to interpret it.
Kryozerkia
26-07-2007, 16:01
Marijuana should not only be legal but everyone should be expected to try it at least one. It would solve most of our world's problems. After all, when was the last time you heard about someone being stoned wanting to go to war? :)
Occeandrive3
26-07-2007, 16:01
... people rendered unable to have children (by marijuana) ...ohh I see :rolleyes:

Masturbation makes you blind and Marijuana causes your penis to fall off...

So that is why I am blind and penis-less. :D
Swilatia
26-07-2007, 16:05
Of course i should be. There is absolutely no reason for it not to be.
The_pantless_hero
26-07-2007, 16:06
Its status as a gateway drug
Let me highlight the key word for you. Because the federal government says its a gateway drug so they can justify arresting potheads, doesn't mean it is.
Kryozerkia
26-07-2007, 16:06
Intoxication is not the only reason. Its status as a gateway drug, I guess, would be the major player in the case of marijuana, with stuff like not being able to maintain a decent quality of life coming a close second.

Alcohol and tobacco are also gateway drugs.

Hell, I could say that coffee is a gateway drug. I used it and alcohol before I every touched Marijuana. They are as much a gateway drug as Marijuana is. So, why don't we outlaw coffee, tobacco and alcohol then?
Kryozerkia
26-07-2007, 16:12
I dunno, I seem to remember fighting a pretty pitched battle in the walk-in freezer the last time I tried it...

What? I get silly when stoned.

I usually just spin in my chair and play video games. I seem better at games when I'm stoned, though I die frequently due to stupid mistakes...
Telesha
26-07-2007, 16:13
Marijuana should not only be legal but everyone should be expected to try it at least one. It would solve most of our world's problems. After all, when was the last time you heard about someone being stoned wanting to go to war? :)

I dunno, I seem to remember fighting a pretty pitched battle in the walk-in freezer the last time I tried it...

What? I get silly when stoned.
South Libertopia
26-07-2007, 16:14
Marijuana and all other drugs should be legalized. However, that doesn't mean everybody should be able to smoke marijuana wherever they want. Ideally, all land should be privately owned and the private owner of a particular piece of land will have the right to determine whether somebody may smoke pot on their property.

Yes, it is definitely stupid to smoke pot, but it is even dumber to arrest people who engage in a peaceful activity that harms nobody (except themselves) on their own property. Every person, as the rightful owner of their own body, has the right to harm themself if they desire to do so, provided that they do so on property that they either own or have permission to do so on.
Nathaniel Sanford
26-07-2007, 16:15
Intoxication is not the only reason. Its status as a gateway drug, I guess, would be the major player in the case of marijuana, with stuff like not being able to maintain a decent quality of life coming a close second.

I'm counting deaths due to marijuana, that is, deaths (or, realistically, people rendered unable to have children) that would not have occurred if marijuana was illegal. You can't tell me that that number is low.

I actually just understood the gene-pool-chlorinating comment above. That is precisely what I'm trying to say.

Alcohol and tobacco are also "gateway drugs". People that drink or smoke are more likely to use illegal drugs.

Counting people being unable to have children as "deaths" is probably one of the most moronic things I've ever heard. I have family members that can't conceive, and I'd hardly call them dead. They seem generally happy to me.

Maintaining a decent quality of life? So you think it's a good argument to make that anything which can make people unhappy should be banned? Not to mention that I'm not aware of any evidence supporting marijuana damaging peoples' "quality of life", whatever that is supposed to mean.
Risottia
26-07-2007, 16:18
Fact: at least here in Italy, marijuana use, widespread (at least 25% of the students admit having used marijuana) although illegal, causes less deaths than the use of alcohol and tobacco (including drugged/drunken driving, lung cancer, hepatitis, foetus malformation etc).

Fact: in Italy, tobacco and alcohol are sold legally to anyone who's older than 15.

Fact: the State imposes sale taxes (a State monopoly) on the sales of alcohol and tobacco.

Hence, I'd say that marijuana should be legalised, and a State monopoly should be imposed on its sale.
Lunatic Goofballs
26-07-2007, 16:18
It doesn't matter to me. For the sake of humanity, I still won't smoke it. The last thing I need is something to make me behave even more oddly. :p
Telesha
26-07-2007, 16:18
I usually just spin in my chair and play video games. I seem better at games when I'm stoned, though I die frequently due to stupid mistakes...

I noticed that too. Last time I played a game buzzed, my accuracy was almost perfect.

On topic: compared to some of the really hard stuff out there, marijuana is small beans. It's been shown that it doesn't cause as many deaths as alcohol. I'd fully expect to see marijuana sales taxed as heavily as cigarettes (fucking Illinois would make a fortune...) and such, however.
Eastern Noble
26-07-2007, 16:18
Should definitely make ALL of the less heavy drugs legal and regulate like alcohol/cigarettes (some sort of age limit).

And yeah - the gene pool would start to clear up a bit :p
Earabia
26-07-2007, 16:22
that's bollocks. as far as i'm aware there has only been one death in the whole world attributed to THC intoxication. compare that to figures for alcohol, and then also look at the number of accidents causing injury attributed to use of either and i think you'll see that marajuana it far less harmful.

Nice try. But when you look at the deaths of alcohol, there is more numbers in what alcohol can do to others with the ACTIONS of the drinker. Same with pot/cannabis. The actions of the users are impaired and is dangerous to not only themselves but others. Worked with families that had to deal with this drug and others.
The exaulted Ozz
26-07-2007, 16:23
If you've had a friend turn into a mindless, angry, stupid, worthless sack of meat who's so far convinced of his own superiority he depresses himself over the most mundane tasks, waste his life and drive his wonderful parents to divorce, and had his distraught girlfrien crying on your shoulder because her boyfriend, who she loves, is a world reknowned fuck up and stresses about stupid fucking things, ALL because of Marijuana, then you're more than entitled to answer this question.

A whole-hearted, unrelenting fuck-no.

And yes, I did smoke it in my youth.
The blessed Chris
26-07-2007, 16:24
Of course. Regulation of quality and purity would help to avoid the adverse effects of cannabis use now beginning to manifest themselves.
Anti-Social Darwinism
26-07-2007, 16:33
Prohibition doesn't work, that was proven in the twenties. It only stops those who won't use it anyway, it provides opportunities for organized (and unorganized crime), it distracts law enforcement from really important issues (like whether someone is going 5 miles over the speed limit) and it bars the state from getting in on a good taxation opportunity.

By all means, legalize marijuana. It isn't any more dangerous than alcohol and tobacco. It has proven medical uses. As a cash crop, it brings in more than any of the others, it's easy to grow. If it's legal, the government can regulate and tax it, and the tobacco companies can have something to make up for their falling tobacco revenues - which means we may see a reduction in tobacco-related advertising (unlikely, but one can hope).
Tanstaria
26-07-2007, 16:33
If you've had a friend turn into a mindless, angry, stupid, worthless sack of meat who's so far convinced of his own superiority he depresses himself over the most mundane tasks, waste his life and drive his wonderful parents to divorce, and had his distraught girlfrien crying on your shoulder because her boyfriend, who she loves, is a world reknowned fuck up and stresses about stupid fucking things, ALL because of Marijuana, then you're more than entitled to answer this question.

A whole-hearted, unrelenting fuck-no.

And yes, I did smoke it in my youth.

Using this argument, alcohol and tobacco should also be illegal, as should many, many, many prescription drugs. Most painkillers, narcotics, and sleep aids for example. Any drug that has the potential to be abused, which is all of them, though I doubt aspirin or saline eye drops would really cause depression if over used. If that's cool with you. Me personally, as an insomniac, a little sleep aid helps every once in awhile. And, imagine the horrible pain everyone would have to go through just to have a little dental work. Oh, and screw major surgery, because no one would survive it.
The blessed Chris
26-07-2007, 16:35
Using this argument, alcohol and tobacco should also be illegal, as should many, many, many prescription drugs. Most painkillers, narcotics, and sleep aids for example. Any drug that has the potential to be abused, which is all of them, though I doubt aspirin or saline eye drops would really cause depression if over used. If that's cool with you. Me personally, as an insomniac, a little sleep aid helps every once in awhile. And, imagine the horrible pain everyone would have to go through just to have a little dental work. Oh, and screw major surgery, because no one would survive it.

Well said.
Pure Metal
26-07-2007, 17:23
If you've had a friend turn into a mindless, angry, stupid, worthless sack of meat who's so far convinced of his own superiority he depresses himself over the most mundane tasks, waste his life and drive his wonderful parents to divorce, and had his distraught girlfrien crying on your shoulder because her boyfriend, who she loves, is a world reknowned fuck up and stresses about stupid fucking things, ALL because of Marijuana, then you're more than entitled to answer this question.

A whole-hearted, unrelenting fuck-no.

And yes, I did smoke it in my youth.

as a person to which that happened, i still say yes. just as with alcohol, if you use it responsibly then its fine and down to the individual. it is perfectly possible to use marijuana responsibly, just as it is wine or beer. its not all that possible for most people, however, to use heroin or crack responsibly, and as such i advocate the government restricting people's access to those drugs. but that's a side issue.

i did get pretty fucked up while i was a stoner, smoking every day for 2 years + at uni. until i dropped out. however it was the depression that was the real cause of the problems, and what drove me to try weed in the first place. i used it to hide and escape from problems in my life, and while i was high those problems didn't matter any more. my biggest concern became just being high - like some kind of sedative for life. but to blame the weed would be wrong, at least in my case. i could have turned to any other drug, should they have been easily available. had i become so dependent on another drug i would more than likely have more problems than i did using weed. if i'd turned to alcohol and drunk myself into a stupor all day every day for 2 years, i'd most likely have liver disease or something, and be in a worse state than i am now with no lasting health issues (apart from a mild cough when i wake up every morning...)

my point is, as evils go, pot ain't bad. and it can be used responsibly by many people. some people can't take it, or turn to it for the wrong reasons, but that's not the pot's fault imho.
Constantanaple
26-07-2007, 17:24
It should be legal. You know why?

Because if people are stupid, and use it, and then they die, that's one less stupid person in the world. The world needs less stupid people.

Of course, this needs practically zero social welfare. Or maybe something along the lines of "You're allowed to smoke marijuana, but remember that insurance companies will force you to pay a premium, and most hospitals won't admit you."

Thats a good idea, except weed kills none. Well, stoned drivers kill, but weed dosnt kill people people kill people. Stoned people are to stoned to killl anyone
Bitchkitten
26-07-2007, 17:39
If we're going to make anything with any potential harm illegal, let's not forget to outlaw cheeseburgers.
I don't feel like it's any of my business what another adult puts in their body.
Greater Trostia
26-07-2007, 17:41
If you've had a friend turn into a mindless, angry, stupid, worthless sack of meat who's so far convinced of his own superiority he depresses himself over the most mundane tasks, waste his life and drive his wonderful parents to divorce, and had his distraught girlfrien crying on your shoulder because her boyfriend, who she loves, is a world reknowned fuck up and stresses about stupid fucking things, ALL because of Marijuana

You know what's sad - your friend fucked up, but you blame an inanimate object.

You have no sense of personal responsibility. Or perhaps you are just unwilling to think that maybe your friend was a douchebag to begin with. Or perhaps he wasn't a douchebag at all, and his parents were "driven" to divorce by something else, and his girlfriend was not "distraught" simply because of marijuana use.

At any rate, your little anecdote here isn't a valid argument against legalization.
The blessed Chris
26-07-2007, 17:45
You know what's sad - your friend fucked up, but you blame an inanimate object.

You have no sense of personal responsibility. Or perhaps you are just unwilling to think that maybe your friend was a douchebag to begin with. Or perhaps he wasn't a douchebag at all, and his parents were "driven" to divorce by something else, and his girlfriend was not "distraught" simply because of marijuana use.

At any rate, your little anecdote here isn't a valid argument against legalization.

Your cold hearted lack of human compassion notwithstanding, I distinctly remember you ranting incoherently about my reference to "personal responsibility" some weeks ago. Hypocritical? Much?
Kwangistar
26-07-2007, 17:56
I'm a right-winger but I think marijuana should be legalized. Its nowhere as dangerous as the government and other advocacy groups claim. It does have its detrimental effects, but not on the level of something like heroin or cocaine. Legalization would also greatly relieve stress on our penal system, as well as hurting organized crime outfits. Some other drugs - like LSD - should also be legalized.
Greater Trostia
26-07-2007, 18:05
Your cold hearted lack of human compassion notwithstanding, I distinctly remember you ranting incoherently about my reference to "personal responsibility" some weeks ago. Hypocritical? Much?

Not at all. I believe in personal responsibility. If this confuses you, I suggest you try being coherent yourself, reading what I wrote and then pointing out in what way I'm a hypocrite. Or of course, your other option, STFU.
Librazia
26-07-2007, 18:55
All drugs should be legal and totally unregulated. Anyone has the right to what they want with themselves on their property, and anyone else's who gives them permission. Any arguments about the health effects and dangers, no matter how real or frivolous, are entirely irrelevant as far as I am concerned, because freedom is more important. I don't care if marijuana is far more safe than alcohol and tobacco (which it is) because it is no business of the state what is done on private property.

Furthermore, the war on drugs is a huge drain on society. It costs billions of dollars. Drug use should be a drain on the individual not society. If the government didn't take your money and waste it on this most frivolous of causes, would you voluntarily donate money to a group that takes potheads and punishes them. I doubt it.

And if you are concerned about the dangers of drugs, then stay away from them. That is your right. But, it is no one's right to impose their choice to not use drugs on anyone else.
Rubiconic Crossings
26-07-2007, 19:06
If you've had a friend turn into a mindless, angry, stupid, worthless sack of meat who's so far convinced of his own superiority he depresses himself over the most mundane tasks, waste his life and drive his wonderful parents to divorce, and had his distraught girlfrien crying on your shoulder because her boyfriend, who she loves, is a world reknowned fuck up and stresses about stupid fucking things, ALL because of Marijuana, then you're more than entitled to answer this question.

A whole-hearted, unrelenting fuck-no.

And yes, I did smoke it in my youth.

Bollocks.

Yes I have. And quite frankly despite a rather frightening experience involving ambulances and hospitals I hold by the belief that there are total dickheads out there. Boozers and druggies combined. The vast majority are totally normal.

I find sad that there was recent press hysteria about the strength of Skunk in the UK and that it was driving youngsters insane. All based on a gruesome murder by a 'Emo' kid who slaughtered his girlfriend while wasted on weed.

If you can't handle it don't do it.

My pet peev are people who go out to a pub just to get totally and utterly slaughtered to the point of puking up their ring piece. Or the ones who just sit there in the corner pissed out of their gourd and then collapse.

Lovely.

Ah and of course let us not forget that there are people out there....teetotaler's by name. Most are totally fine...yet there are those.....those few (?) who....guess what....are also dickheads.
Good Lifes
26-07-2007, 19:56
This has been argued on here many times and it all comes down to: Your rights end where others lives begin.

If we had known 500 years ago what tobacco did it wouldn't be legal. If we had known 10,000 years ago all of the problems with alcohol it would be illegal. The reason they aren't is they became a part of the culture before we realized their negatives. It would be insane to add other things to the culture that not only detract from the value of the person using them, but also kill those innocent people around the user. When I drive down the road there are enough drunks already. Why would I want to add potheads to the driving mix?
Good Lifes
26-07-2007, 19:58
Prohibition doesn't work, that was proven in the twenties.

The difference is alcohol is a part of the culture, pot isn't.
Chumblywumbly
26-07-2007, 20:03
The difference is alcohol is a part of the culture, pot isn't.
What about the millions upon millions of people who smoke pot?

If anything has a culture, pot does. Etiquette, language, cliques, it's all there.

The idea that a substance should be legalised for merely being a tradition seems rather silly.
New Granada
26-07-2007, 20:03
Decriminalize
Dexlysia
26-07-2007, 20:03
Who thinks marijuana should be legalized?
90% of this forum.
Kormanthor
26-07-2007, 20:05
?



Legalize it and tax it just like alcohol .... yep
Kormanthor
26-07-2007, 20:07
The difference is alcohol is a part of the culture, pot isn't.

I beg to differ, pot is part of culture just as alcohol was once illegal.
Nipeng
26-07-2007, 20:10
If we had known 500 years ago what tobacco did it wouldn't be legal. If we had known 10,000 years ago all of the problems with alcohol it would be illegal.
Had we known what can be done with hammer and nails... Jesus would have been hanged. And the churches would be even creepier.
Grape-eaters
26-07-2007, 20:16
This has been argued on here many times and it all comes down to: Your rights end where others lives begin.

If we had known 500 years ago what tobacco did it wouldn't be legal. If we had known 10,000 years ago all of the problems with alcohol it would be illegal. The reason they aren't is they became a part of the culture before we realized their negatives. It would be insane to add other things to the culture that not only detract from the value of the person using them, but also kill those innocent people around the user. When I drive down the road there are enough drunks already. Why would I want to add potheads to the driving mix?

I agree with other posters who say that a marijuana culture already exists.

As to your comments about driving, I would direct your attention here (http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/Misc/driving/s1p2.htm) and here. (http://www.erowid.org/plants/cannabis/cannabis_driving4.shtml)
Dexlysia
26-07-2007, 20:20
When I drive down the road there are enough drunks already. Why would I want to add potheads to the driving mix?

Should we outlaw cellphones entirely and enforce a mandatory 8 hours of sleep per day?
Kryozerkia
26-07-2007, 20:29
Should we outlaw cellphones entirely and enforce a mandatory 8 hours of sleep per day?

We should also outlaw eating while driving, smoking, putting on make-up as well as talking, listening to music and a plethora of other things.
Good Lifes
26-07-2007, 20:34
Should we outlaw cellphones entirely and enforce a mandatory 8 hours of sleep per day?

Of course it should be illegal to use a cell while driving. Statistics show that use of a cell while driving is as safe as being drunk.
Dexlysia
26-07-2007, 20:38
Of course it should be illegal to use a cell while driving. Statistics show that use of a cell while driving is as safe as being drunk.

I was asking if we should criminalize cell phones entirely.
Good Lifes
26-07-2007, 20:39
I agree with other posters who say that a marijuana culture already exists.

As to your comments about driving, I would direct your attention here (http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/Misc/driving/s1p2.htm) and here. (http://www.erowid.org/plants/cannabis/cannabis_driving4.shtml)

A "marijuana culture" exists but is outside of the general culture. Alcohol has been a part of the culture for thousands of years. It becomes a pragmatic decision as to what government is able to control and what it isn't.

If pot were legal and acceptable in the general culture then there would be less fear of using it for driving or other dangerous activity, just as alcohol is used today.
Good Lifes
26-07-2007, 20:42
I was asking if we should criminalize cell phones entirely.

As far as I know, unless you are driving or using some other dangerous equipment around me, you aren't going to kill me with a cell phone, and a cell phone can make you a more productive member of society. Pot is dangerous to me and costs me money in lost productivity.
Jasporia
26-07-2007, 20:49
The only reason "illegal" drugs are such a problem is that they are illegal. People don't kill to import beer or tobacco, or chocolate for that matter, WHY? because they are not illegal, they won't make the supplier a large amount of money because everyone can sell it, and it is not dangerouse to make or sell it.
If "illegal" drugs were lagalized there woudn't be such a large profit, so people wouldn't try so hard to sell it. Trying to save people from themselves is like hitting your head against the wall, it hurts you more than the wall and doesn't get you antwhere.:headbang:
Dexlysia
26-07-2007, 21:03
As far as I know, unless you are driving or using some other dangerous equipment around me, you aren't going to kill me with a cell phone, and a cell phone can make you a more productive member of society. Pot is dangerous to me and costs me money in lost productivity.

If a drug is dangerous to you, you can choose not to use it.
If you are concerned about a loss of productivity in a business, you are free to fire people for being unproductive.
Why does the government need to intervene?
German Nightmare
26-07-2007, 21:11
It shouldn't be legalized but it should be decriminalized.
Good Lifes
26-07-2007, 21:12
If a drug is dangerous to you, you can choose not to use it.
If you are concerned about a loss of productivity in a business, you are free to fire people for being unproductive.
Why does the government need to intervene?

It's dangerous because people are using equipment while under the influence.

I fire their a-- on a regular basis. Which means I have to spend time and money training someone else which lowers my income at tax time. At the same time they are no longer paying tax, which means the rest of us are. And they collect services which tax pays for.

From a simply economic point of view it's costing the government massive amounts of money.
Dosuun
26-07-2007, 21:24
I do. I'm also a supporter of all other drugs including but not limited to tobacco, alcohol, cocaine, and opiates.

People have a right to do with their lives what they wish so long as it doesn't hurt others. If they choose to destroy their bodies for a few hours of fun then that's their problem.
Chumblywumbly
26-07-2007, 21:27
A "marijuana culture" exists but is outside of the general culture. Alcohol has been a part of the culture for thousands of years. It becomes a pragmatic decision as to what government is able to control and what it isn't.
Just because a practice is traditional, does not mean it is any more acceptable. Slavery has been part of culture for thousands of years, while human rights haven't.

Moreover, just because a practice is acceptable to the majority does not mean it is any more acceptable than a practice acceptable to the majority.

Now, the same arguments apply to practices of the minority, or new practices; just because a practice is new, or practised by the majority, does not mean that practice is any more acceptable. However, judging legally or morally correct practices by their popularity or timeframe is ridiculous.

If pot were legal and acceptable in the general culture then there would be less fear of using it for driving or other dangerous activity, just as alcohol is used today.
So pot should be illegal because it is illegal, while alcohol shouldn't be illegal because it isn't illegal? Round and round and round we go.

Pot is dangerous to me and costs me money in lost productivity.
How is grass dangerous to you, in particular?

If you were to give an example of machinery or vehicles being driven by those who smoke pot (as you do indeed below), then you could use the same argument for alcohol, many medicines, or other substances. Yes, one shouldn't do certain actions while on certain substances, but that, again, is no reason to make the substance itself illegal.

It's dangerous because people are using equipment while under the influence....From a simply economic point of view it's costing the government massive amounts of money.
As does prohibition, on a massive scale.

And that's one of the reasons I support the legalisation of all drugs.
Rizzoinabox336
26-07-2007, 21:29
There are 26 countries that punish drug-related offences by death....lets be number 27 :)
Dexlysia
26-07-2007, 21:36
It's dangerous because people are using equipment while under the influence.

I fire their a-- on a regular basis. Which means I have to spend time and money training someone else which lowers my income at tax time. At the same time they are no longer paying tax, which means the rest of us are. And they collect services which tax pays for.

From a simply economic point of view it's costing the government massive amounts of money.

Decriminalization would stop funding the unwinnable "War on Drugs" and unclog the bloated legal and prison systems.
The incarceration of people for drug crimes removes them from the working class while burdening taxpayers with the cost of putting them in jail.
Legalization would also create a multi-billion dollar industry overnight and bring in substantial tax revenue that was going into the black market.
Vandal-Unknown
26-07-2007, 21:44
No!

Legalizing it would take out most of the fun in doing the ganja.
Chumblywumbly
26-07-2007, 21:46
No!

Legalizing it would take out most of the fun in doing the ganja.
Someone's selling you crap. :p
Rizzoinabox336
26-07-2007, 21:50
Decriminalization would stop funding the unwinnable "War on Drugs" and unclog the bloated legal and prison systems.
The incarceration of people for drug crimes removes them from the working class while burdening taxpayers with the cost of putting them in jail.
Legalization would also create a multi-billion dollar industry overnight and bring in substantial tax revenue that was going into the black market.

Maybe we should decriminaliaze slavery and make a huge profit off human trafficking. The fight against is too hard, lets give in, it costs too much.
Winning the "War on Drugs" is simple, make punishment for using those drugs so high people won't risk using them.
Intangelon
26-07-2007, 21:50
Maybe we should decriminaliaze slavery and make a huge profit off human trafficking. The fight against is too hard, lets give in, it costs too much.
Winning the "War on Drugs" is simple, make punishment for using those drugs so high people won't risk using them.

Ginormous strawman.

Slavery clearly hurts another human being (I had to type that? Yikes.) -- legalizing marijuana is no different that the prior legalization and regulation of booze and cigarettes. Given that weed is less harmful or addictive than either of those two, your argument blows.

Non-violent recreational users of marijuana are in jail and in the court system wasting time and money. Legalize, tax and regulate. End of problem.
Chumblywumbly
26-07-2007, 21:50
Winning the "War on Drugs" is simple, make punishment for using those drugs so high people won't risk using them.
Or, we could make our way back to reality, and deal with substances in a mature, rational way.

Deal with the abuse of the substance, not the substance itself. If someone eats too much or too little, you deal with their eating disorder; you don't get rid of food.
Dexlysia
26-07-2007, 21:57
Maybe we should decriminaliaze slavery and make a huge profit off human trafficking. The fight against is too hard, lets give in, it costs too much.
Winning the "War on Drugs" is simple, make punishment for using those drugs so high people won't risk using them.

Hi, troll.:)
Intangelon
26-07-2007, 21:58
It's dangerous because people are using equipment while under the influence.

I fire their a-- on a regular basis. Which means I have to spend time and money training someone else which lowers my income at tax time. At the same time they are no longer paying tax, which means the rest of us are. And they collect services which tax pays for.

From a simply economic point of view it's costing the government massive amounts of money.

Gee, just like they use equipment while on antidepressants, alcohol, cold medicine, Benadryl...and on and on. Look -- would you "fire someone's ass on a regular basis" if they were abusing alcohol and coming to work drunk? Of course you would. People who show up stoned deserve the same treatment until people figure out that going to work under the influence is a bad fucking idea. Criminalizing ONE naturally-occurring substance which has that effect is stupid and is costing you more money because potential employees who were busted for having an eigth-ounce baggie are in jail. Once out of jail, depending on the length of their sentence, they've missed out on potential employment, educational or training opportunities and guess what? They might start collecting those "services which tax pays for". Your argument is completely nonsensical.

My life is better now that I stopped using drugs, but my life would be infinitely worse if I'd ever gone to jail because I used them.

QFT.
Rizzoinabox336
26-07-2007, 22:02
Ginormous strawman.

Slavery clearly hurts another human being (I had to type that? Yikes.) -- legalizing marijuana is no different that the prior legalization and regulation of booze and cigarettes. Given that weed is less harmful or addictive than either of those two, your argument blows.

Non-violent recreational users of marijuana are in jail and in the court system wasting time and money. Legalize, tax and regulate. End of problem.

Of course slavery hurts people, so does drug use. A good example of that is where I'm from, they are coming out with flavored meth, so that they can get kids hooked. Neither of those drugs should have been legalized either. Hell I'd take a trade off you make alcohol illegal and make weed legal. All drug use reacreational or not is harmful to people, the government shouldn't benefit from people destroying their lives.
Vandal-Unknown
26-07-2007, 22:03
Someone's selling you crap. :p

Well, atleast my crap's better than yours :D and it's organic too.

(Though really, if everybody has access to it, how can it be "cool" or "badass" anymore?)
Intangelon
26-07-2007, 22:05
Nice try. But when you look at the deaths of alcohol, there is more numbers in what alcohol can do to others with the ACTIONS of the drinker. Same with pot/cannabis. The actions of the users are impaired and is dangerous to not only themselves but others. Worked with families that had to deal with this drug and others.

News flash: Alcohol's legal. People use it. People drive drunk and kill themselves and others. Marijuana is illegal. People still use it. FAR FEWER people drive stoned because driving takes motivation. Okay, seriously, the one thing missing is that booze is regulated and taxed.

The whole argument that OMG! People will drive stoned!!! Child, they already do. The vast majority of DUI arrests are for alcohol. Your argument is a flawed vessel and barely holds air, let alone water.
Redwulf
26-07-2007, 22:06
I absolutely think *all* drugs should be legalized...and mandated by law that they only be sold in their purest form. Y'know why?

Because the gene pool needs some chlorine.

Actualy one of the most dangerous things about street drugs is their IMPURITY. Or to be more precise the fact that they're often cut with things that are more dangerous than the drug it self (stryknine for example . . . which I'm sure I've misspelled).
Dexlysia
26-07-2007, 22:07
All drug use reacreational or not is harmful to people, the government shouldn't benefit from people destroying their lives.

Yeah, penecilin is t3h ebil!
Intangelon
26-07-2007, 22:09
Of course slavery hurts people, so does drug use. A good example of that is where I'm from, they are coming out with flavored meth, so that they can get kids hooked. Neither of those drugs should have been legalized either. Hell I'd take a trade off you make alcohol illegal and make weed legal. All drug use reacreational or not is harmful to people, the government shouldn't benefit from people destroying their lives.

1st bolded: Whiskey tango foxtrot, over? Meth has never been legal.

2nd bolded: So no aspirin, acetaminophen, penicillin? Those are certainly not recreational.

Those two bolded statements show me that you, in fact, are on drugs. How dare you get stoned and tell us not to!

Meth is so much unlike weed as to be laughable, just like your post.

Meth destroys lives because it's a poison cooked up with things like drain cleaner and ammonia and pseudoephedrine.

Weed grows without cultivation (hence "weed") and is proof that God loves us and wants us to relax.
Intangelon
26-07-2007, 22:11
Actualy one of the most dangerous things about street drugs is their IMPURITY. Or to be more precise the fact that they're often cut with things that are more dangerous than the drug it self (stryknine for example . . . which I'm sure I've misspelled).

Another reason to legalize.

And don't sweat spelling strychnine -- the Greeks and Romans make that one hard to spell for anyone speaking a language that includes the letter K.
Telesha
26-07-2007, 22:12
Well, atleast my crap's better than yours :D and it's organic too.

(Though really, if everybody has access to it, how can it be "cool" or "badass" anymore?)

Probably in the same way they did it with clothing: different brands. You'll have your "Hot Topic" pot for the counter-culture poseurs, "GAP" for the preppy stoners, etc.

American marketing at its finest.:D

Actualy one of the most dangerous things about street drugs is their IMPURITY. Or to be more precise the fact that they're often cut with things that are more dangerous than the drug it self (stryknine for example . . . which I'm sure I've misspelled).

Yes. Isn't one of the major cutting ingredients for cocaine powdered bleach? I don't think we should be legalizing drugs like cocaine or heroin, but you do have a point. Though the regular effects of use are no picnic either.
Vandal-Unknown
26-07-2007, 22:13
Probably in the same way they did it with clothing: different brands. You'll have your "Hot Topic" pot for the counter-culture poseurs, "GAP" for the preppy stoners, etc.

American marketing at its finest.:D

I must concede to that fact,... damn you corporatism!
Intangelon
26-07-2007, 22:17
Probably in the same way they did it with clothing: different brands. You'll have your "Hot Topic" pot for the counter-culture poseurs, "GAP" for the preppy stoners, etc.

American marketing at its finest.:D
*snip*

More like the way they used to market cigarettes. Why else were there so many brands? Winston and Marlboro for the cowboys and rural tough-guy jocks and other assorted assholes. Yves Saint Laurent for my friends who were emo before it existed; listening to The Cure and C89 FM Vancouver for dance hits while smoking the YSL menthols they called "peppermint patties" when they weren't smoking cloves. Camel and Camel "bare-ass" for the stoner crowd listening to Rush and Pink Floyd. "Lights" and "Light 100s" for those preppies who wanted to cachet of smoking with less of the hacking cough. Aaaand Virgnia Slims for those who were just stealing smokes from Mom.

Yeah. More like ciggies than clothing.
Redwulf
26-07-2007, 22:17
Intoxication is not the only reason. Its status as a gateway drug


:ROTFLMAO:

The fact that A: it's curently used only by those who clearly have no problem breaking the law already and B: the fact that the current laws FORCE any one who wants weed to deal with the same sort of folks who deal in heroin and meth has NOTHING to do with that, eh?
Urcea
26-07-2007, 22:22
Not me.
Telesha
26-07-2007, 22:22
More like the way they used to market cigarettes. Why else were there so many brands? Winston and Marlboro for the cowboys and rural tough-guy jocks and other assorted assholes. Yves Saint Laurent for my friends who were emo before it existed; listening to The Cure and C89 FM Vancouver for dance hits while smoking the YSL menthols they called "peppermint patties" when they weren't smoking cloves. Camel and Camel "bare-ass" for the stoner crowd listening to Rush and Pink Floyd. "Lights" and "Light 100s" for those preppies who wanted to cachet of smoking with less of the hacking cough. Aaaand Virgnia Slims for those who were just stealing smokes from Mom.

Yeah. More like ciggies than clothing.

True, but the image just isn't as humourous to me (and I only ever smoked Marlboros in the time I still smoked :p).
Earabia
26-07-2007, 22:23
Using this argument, alcohol and tobacco should also be illegal, as should many, many, many prescription drugs. Most painkillers, narcotics, and sleep aids for example. Any drug that has the potential to be abused, which is all of them, though I doubt aspirin or saline eye drops would really cause depression if over used. If that's cool with you. Me personally, as an insomniac, a little sleep aid helps every once in awhile. And, imagine the horrible pain everyone would have to go through just to have a little dental work. Oh, and screw major surgery, because no one would survive it.

You are comparing apples to oranges with this topic. And i am talking about painkillers and sleep aids. And even if it is so called "regulated", doesnt matter, cannabis is dangerous no matter what.
Redwulf
26-07-2007, 22:25
If you've had a friend turn into a mindless, angry, stupid, worthless sack of meat who's so far convinced of his own superiority he depresses himself over the most mundane tasks, waste his life and drive his wonderful parents to divorce, and had his distraught girlfrien crying on your shoulder because her boyfriend, who she loves, is a world reknowned fuck up and stresses about stupid fucking things, ALL because of Marijuana, then you're more than entitled to answer this question.

A whole-hearted, unrelenting fuck-no.

And yes, I did smoke it in my youth.


It all the fault of the evil wicked weed and none of it is his huh?
Earabia
26-07-2007, 22:25
If you've had a friend turn into a mindless, angry, stupid, worthless sack of meat who's so far convinced of his own superiority he depresses himself over the most mundane tasks, waste his life and drive his wonderful parents to divorce, and had his distraught girlfrien crying on your shoulder because her boyfriend, who she loves, is a world reknowned fuck up and stresses about stupid fucking things, ALL because of Marijuana, then you're more than entitled to answer this question.

A whole-hearted, unrelenting fuck-no.

And yes, I did smoke it in my youth.

And i have seen this up and close and personal. Both in family AND in experience outside of family. That drug is pathetically dangerous and too many in this nation and abroad are so pathetically in denial of this.
Dexlysia
26-07-2007, 22:30
http://www.rapbay.com/catalog/images/reefer%20madness.jpg
Redwulf
26-07-2007, 22:30
As far as I know, unless you are driving or using some other dangerous equipment around me, you aren't going to kill me with a cell phone, and a cell phone can make you a more productive member of society. Pot is dangerous to me and costs me money in lost productivity.

In what situations is pot dangerous to you that would not become equaly dangerous with the substitution of alchohol, a cell phone, or both?
Earabia
26-07-2007, 22:32
Should we outlaw cellphones entirely and enforce a mandatory 8 hours of sleep per day?

You people keep comparing apples to oranges. Compring two totally different things is irrelavent and outragious. Even comparing cigarettes/alcohol is a distraction from the main point of topic of cannabis.
Earabia
26-07-2007, 22:34
http://www.rapbay.com/catalog/images/reefer%20madness.jpg

Then again i am not talking about a major conspiracy, i am talking about facts. Ever since the 1970s pot has been growing because of advocacy groups saying it is ok to use.
Dexlysia
26-07-2007, 22:40
You people keep comparing apples to oranges. Compring two totally different things is irrelavent and outragious. Even comparing cigarettes/alcohol is a distraction from the main point of topic of cannabis.

Actually, it was relevant.
I was addressing his/her point that it should be illegal because some people drive while under the influence.
Earabia
26-07-2007, 22:41
In what situations is pot dangerous to you that would not become equaly dangerous with the substitution of alchohol, a cell phone, or both?

You are able to hang up the phone and the other issue is irrelavent.

Point is, those other issues are irrelavent.

short term problems caused by cannabis:

Impaired memory and ability to learn
Difficulty thinking and problem solving
Anxiety attacks or feelings of paranoia
Impaired muscle coordination and judgment
Increased susceptibility to infections
Dangerous impairment of driving skills. Studies show that it impairs braking time, attention to traffic signals and other driving behaviors.
Cardiac problems for people with heart disease or high blood pressure, because marijuana increases the heart rate

Long term problems:

Respiratory problems
Memory and learning
Fertility
addiction

http://www.brown.edu/Student_Services/Health_Services/Health_Education/atod/marijuana.htm
Chumblywumbly
26-07-2007, 22:42
And i have seen this up and close and personal. Both in family AND in experience outside of family. That drug is pathetically dangerous and too many in this nation and abroad are so pathetically in denial of this.
You're right. It is pathetically dangerous.

i.e. Hardly dangerous at all.

Then again i am not talking about a major conspiracy, i am talking about facts. Ever since the 1970s pot has been growing because of advocacy groups saying it is ok to use.
Yeah, millions upon millions of people take a substance because of an advocacy group.

Lookit! The kids are dancing to the Devil's music. Better wag your finger.
Redwulf
26-07-2007, 22:45
You are able to hang up the phone and the other issue is irrelavent.

Point is, those other issues are irrelavent.



Incorrect. You said pot is dangerous to you yet you don't want to ban Alchohol or cell phones. You can hang up a cell phone, that doesn't keep people from not doing so and hitting people with their car. Alchohol is even more relevent because you can't "hang up" being drunk. Explain how pot is more dangerous than alchohol or cell phones or start arguing to ban them too.
Earabia
26-07-2007, 22:48
Ginormous strawman.

Slavery clearly hurts another human being (I had to type that? Yikes.) -- legalizing marijuana is no different that the prior legalization and regulation of booze and cigarettes. Given that weed is less harmful or addictive than either of those two, your argument blows.

Non-violent recreational users of marijuana are in jail and in the court system wasting time and money. Legalize, tax and regulate. End of problem.

No different huh?

Because the consequences of marijuana use can be subtle and insidious, it is more difficult to recognize signs of addiction. Cultural and societal beliefs that marijuana cannot be addictive make it less likely for people to seek help or to get support for quitting.
http://www.brown.edu/Student_Services/Health_Services/Health_Education/atod/marijuana.htm

And i have seen it harshness and addictiveness multiple times in family and in my experiences with others.
Rizzoinabox336
26-07-2007, 22:49
Well....since i can't win I'm going to make a profit of all your deaths!

I'm going to be sure to target children ages 8-12 for my flavored meth products as well as weed.

"Buy one pound of weed and get speed balls free!!"

Also I'll take out life insurance on all the people I sell to!

Damn this is a win win win situation.

Less gangs, more dead idoits and i get rich.

leaglize!!!
Earabia
26-07-2007, 22:49
Incorrect. You said pot is dangerous to you yet you don't want to ban Alchohol or cell phones. You can hang up a cell phone, that doesn't keep people from not doing so and hitting people with their car. Alchohol is even more relevent because you can't "hang up" being drunk. Explain how pot is more dangerous than alchohol or cell phones or start arguing to ban them too.

I never said that alcohol or cigarettes shouldnt be illegal, that is YOU saying i said that. Nice try to deflect the real issue.
Oh looka t what i listed above and its link, only one source for many that show teh dangers of pot.
The exaulted Ozz
26-07-2007, 22:49
Using this argument, alcohol and tobacco should also be illegal, as should many, many, many prescription drugs. Most painkillers, narcotics, and sleep aids for example. Any drug that has the potential to be abused, which is all of them, though I doubt aspirin or saline eye drops would really cause depression if over used. If that's cool with you. Me personally, as an insomniac, a little sleep aid helps every once in awhile. And, imagine the horrible pain everyone would have to go through just to have a little dental work. Oh, and screw major surgery, because no one would survive it.

I agree so far as alcohol, I was saying the lasting effect don't justify the immediate, however with prescription drugs and such, they do.
More the fool me for smoking cigarettes, but they aren't as mentally affective as Marijuana.
Intangelon
26-07-2007, 22:51
No different huh?


http://www.brown.edu/Student_Services/Health_Services/Health_Education/atod/marijuana.htm

And i have seen it harshness and addictiveness multiple times in family and in my experiences with others.

You're posting a link from a university student health center website? That's laughable. Show me some actual research, not some university receiving federal education funds whose job it is to toe the administration's line. AMA? NIH? CDC? FDA? Anything?

No. It's no different. Most of the stuff you listed can happen as a result of a sedentary lifestyle perched in front of a PlayStation.

Fail.
The exaulted Ozz
26-07-2007, 22:51
It all the fault of the evil wicked weed and none of it is his huh?

Nope.
He was a wonderful kid before he started smoking pot.
I've known him all my life, practically my little brother.
Earabia
26-07-2007, 22:51
You're right. It is pathetically dangerous.

i.e. Hardly dangerous at all.


Yeah, millions upon millions of people take a substance because of an advocacy group.

Lookit! The kids are dancing to the Devil's music. Better wag your finger.

Nice job making yourself look like a fool. I said that advocacy groups/and peers that use it and say it make it look like its a ok drug, so kids hearing this not only in fall for it. Are you in denial that fact that it is a problem? I guess so. Quite sad really.
Pompous world
26-07-2007, 22:51
yeah, completely
Earabia
26-07-2007, 22:53
I'm going to be sure to target children ages 8-12 for my flavored meth products as well as weed.


And i will make sure you go to jail for a long time too. Love the attitude, so mature and really backs up your view nicely, showing how the individuals like you we need to make sure the kids dont go near.
Intangelon
26-07-2007, 22:54
Well....since i can't win I'm going to make a profit of all your deaths!

I'm going to be sure to target children ages 8-12 for my flavored meth products as well as weed.

"Buy one pound of weed and get speed balls free!!"

Also I'll take out life insurance on all the people I sell to!

Damn this is a win win win situation.

Less gangs, more dead idoits and i get rich.

leaglize!!!

HEY! You've been caught trying to conflate meth and weed already. They're two different drugs, for fuck's sake, and you know it. The THREAD is about marijuana. The only thing more dangerous that something concocted with protective gear on is perhaps playing blind man's bluff on a rush-hour freeway in Houston.

Coke and heroin don't compare either, so give it a rest.
Rizzoinabox336
26-07-2007, 22:56
As I said before.

I'm going to fight for all drugs to be legal so I can get rich.

Its a win win win situation.

Less gangs, more dead idoits and i'm rich.

I'm going to be the pioneer of selling legalized drugs, I'm also going to get life insurance on the people who buy so i can get filth rich. Also I'll open rehab clinics so when people want to stop I'll make money off them then.

ahhahaha, I can't wait
Redwulf
26-07-2007, 22:59
I never said that alcohol or cigarettes shouldnt be illegal, that is YOU saying i said that. Nice try to deflect the real issue.
Oh looka t what i listed above and its link, only one source for many that show teh dangers of pot.


You showed some posible dangers to pot smokers, most of which are no worse than the side efects of many medications or other perfectly legal substances such as alchohol. You made no mention of what would make me smoking weed dangerous to you that would not be caused by other substances or activitys that are already legal. Looking back, no you never did say that alchohol should be legal you just ignored alchohol whenever it was brought up. So your official position on alchohol is that it should be banned once more? I'd just like to know you're being consistant in your logic here.
Chumblywumbly
26-07-2007, 23:03
Nice job making yourself look like a fool. I said that advocacy groups/and peers that use it and say it make it look like its a ok drug, so kids hearing this not only in fall for it. Are you in denial that fact that it is a problem? I guess so. Quite sad really.
I'm trying to understand. Please help.

I said that advocacy groups/and peers that use it and say it make it look like its a ok drug, so kids hearing this not only in fall for it.
I think this indicates you believe (some?) kids smoke pot because of peer pressure. Your original post that I replied to indicated that (some?) kids smoked pot because of lobbyists for pot, which is hard to believe.

Are you in denial that fact that it is a problem?
The above, I'm not sure.

If you mean that I deny that pot is a problem to the vast majority of the population, then I would confirm your suspicions.

But, your posts are a bit hard to understand. As I say, please help me do so.
Gizico
26-07-2007, 23:07
Marijuana should legal and sold under local regulations that prohibit it being sold where minors are allowed to enter the facility. The liqour store can sell pot, but would have to card the person, and record the amount of pot sold. Drugs are bad for your body alcohold, tobacco, junkfood, but to make it illegal only invites criminal elements to profit off it.
Hydesland
26-07-2007, 23:13
Weed is the devils plant, and should be hastily destroyed when seen. All people who take cannabis should be tortured for information, and then put in the tower of London to die a long horrible death. Such action will preserve our nation, it shall protect our children, and most importantly, it shall protect our freedoms.

Terrorists, you loose.
Hydesland
26-07-2007, 23:18
As I said before.

I'm going to fight for all drugs to be legal so I can get rich.

Its a win win win situation.

Less gangs, more dead idoits and i'm rich.

I'm going to be the pioneer of selling legalized drugs, I'm also going to get life insurance on the people who buy so i can get filth rich. Also I'll open rehab clinics so when people want to stop I'll make money off them then.

ahhahaha, I can't wait

I like the cut of your jip!
Kormanthor
26-07-2007, 23:23
Of course it should be illegal to use a cell while driving. Statistics show that use of a cell while driving is as safe as being drunk.


Statistics can be doctored to fit the writers beliefs
Sel Appa
26-07-2007, 23:30
I see no reason whatsoever to do so.
Kormanthor
26-07-2007, 23:31
It shouldn't be legalized but it should be decriminalized.

Decriminalize - make legal ; "Marijuana should be legalized"
decriminalise, legalise, legalize, legitimate, legitimatise, legitimatize, legitimise, legitimize countenance, permit, allow, let - consent to, give permission; "She permitted her son to visit her estranged husband"; "I won't let the police search her basement"; "I cannot allow you to see your exam"
monetise, monetize - give legal value to or establish as the legal tender of a country; "They monetized the lira"
criminalise, illegalise, illegalize, outlaw, criminalize - declare illegal; outlaw; "Marijuana is criminalized in the U.S."



Legalize - make legal ; "Marijuana should be legalized"
decriminalise, decriminalize, legalise, legitimate, legitimatise, legitimatize, legitimise, legitimize
countenance, permit, allow, let - consent to, give permission; "She permitted her son to visit her estranged husband"; "I won't let the police search her basement"; "I cannot allow you to see your exam"
monetise, monetize - give legal value to or establish as the legal tender of a country; "They monetized the lira"
criminalise, illegalise, illegalize, outlaw, criminalize - declare illegal; outlaw; "Marijuana is criminalized in the U.S."


They look the same to me .... why not you? :rolleyes:
Chumblywumbly
26-07-2007, 23:39
snip
German Nightmare means it shouldn't be legal (not legalised) to buy pot, but those caught with the drug shouldn't be prosecuted (decriminalised).

IIRC, Canada has such a policy in force.
Thumbless Pete Crabbe
26-07-2007, 23:58
I'm against legalization.

The "not as dangerous as X" argument isn't too persuasive - it's still dangerous. ;)
Wallachis
27-07-2007, 00:23
If you want it legalised, come up with some sort of drug test like the breathalyzer to tag how much pot's in your system and will hold up in court-once intoxication for driving under the influence can be proved, a lot of the anti-marijuana arguments will disappear in -ahem-a cloud of smoke. Until then, reconcile yourselves to it's continuing illegality. I admit, with some sort of legally admissible test, I couldn't care less about it's legalisation
Thumbless Pete Crabbe
27-07-2007, 00:26
If you want it legalised, come up with some sort of drug test like the breathalyzer to tag how much pot's in your system and will hold up in court-once intoxication for driving under the influence can be proved, a lot of the anti-marijuana arguments will disappear in -ahem-a cloud of smoke. Until then, reconcile yourselves to it's continuing illegality. I admit, with some sort of legally admissible test, I couldn't care less about it's legalisation

Seeing as people nowadays seem to be hell-bent on banning *cigarette* smoking, I really don't think legalization of marijuana is on the horizon. :p But the pot-a-lyzer would be a good idea in that case, I agree.
German Nightmare
27-07-2007, 02:05
Decriminalize - make legal ; "Marijuana should be legalized"
decriminalise, legalise, legalize, legitimate, legitimatise, legitimatize, legitimise, legitimize countenance, permit, allow, let - consent to, give permission; "She permitted her son to visit her estranged husband"; "I won't let the police search her basement"; "I cannot allow you to see your exam"
monetise, monetize - give legal value to or establish as the legal tender of a country; "They monetized the lira"
criminalise, illegalise, illegalize, outlaw, criminalize - declare illegal; outlaw; "Marijuana is criminalized in the U.S."
Legalize - make legal ; "Marijuana should be legalized"
decriminalise, decriminalize, legalise, legitimate, legitimatise, legitimatize, legitimise, legitimize
countenance, permit, allow, let - consent to, give permission; "She permitted her son to visit her estranged husband"; "I won't let the police search her basement"; "I cannot allow you to see your exam"
monetise, monetize - give legal value to or establish as the legal tender of a country; "They monetized the lira"
criminalise, illegalise, illegalize, outlaw, criminalize - declare illegal; outlaw; "Marijuana is criminalized in the U.S."
They look the same to me .... why not you? :rolleyes:
German Nightmare means it shouldn't be legal (not legalised) to buy pot, but those caught with the drug shouldn't be prosecuted (decriminalised).

IIRC, Canada has such a policy in force.
Exactly. That wasn't so hard to understand, now was it, Kormanthor? You think I'm stupid?
So I'll take your :rolleyes: and raise you a :p. Feel free to :headbang: while I :D.
Ravea
27-07-2007, 02:07
To the original question:

Nae.
Good Lifes
27-07-2007, 02:44
In what situations is pot dangerous to you that would not become equaly dangerous with the substitution of alchohol, a cell phone, or both?

I answered this in the beginning but will answer again. If we knew the risks of alcohol 10,000 years ago, of course it would be illegal. But alcohol became a part of the culture. As such it became impossible to control within the culture. It would be illogical to add more danger to the culture without offsetting rewards. Just because we have danger in the culture is no logical argument to add more danger.

As to cell phones. Of course they should be outlawed when used while driving or in any other dangerous situation that requires concentration. Unlike alcohol or pot they do have redeeming social value as they can be used to increase (not decrease) productivity, and have been shown to be a safety device when used with care.
Chumblywumbly
27-07-2007, 02:59
Exactly. That wasn't so hard to understand, now was it?
Quoting dictionary.com never pays...

Unlike alcohol or pot they do have redeeming social value as they can be used to increase (not decrease) productivity, and have been shown to be a safety device when used with care.
A number of points:

Firstly, an action shouldn't be (and isn't) legalised or not depending on its productivity. If it was, all art would be illegal. As would many other wonderful, yet unproductive, actions, objects and activities.

Secondly, cannabis does have 'redeeming' social values. It helps with a number of medical complaints, including glaucoma and multiple sclerosis. It also, like all substances illegal or not, when used properly can lead to increased happiness, audio and visual stimulation, and a number of other pleasant effects.

You agree that, when used with care, mobile phones, which can lead to harmful consequences, are useful and can increase happiness. The same applies to cannabis and most other illicit substances, when used with care.

Again, it's not the substance we need to worry about, it's the abuse of the substance that we must deal with. Pushing it underground leads to bad situations.

Ever seen Bugsy Malone?
Good Lifes
27-07-2007, 03:09
Quoting dictionary.com never pays...


A number of points:

Firstly, an action shouldn't be (and isn't) legalised or not depending on its productivity. If it was, all art would be illegal. As would many other wonderful, yet unproductive, actions, objects and activities.

Secondly, cannabis does have 'redeeming' social values. It helps with a number of medical complaints, including glaucoma and multiple sclerosis. It also, like all substances illegal or not, when used properly can lead to increased happiness, audio and visual stimulation, and a number of other pleasant effects.

You agree that, when used with care, mobile phones, which can lead to harmful consequences, are useful and can increase happiness. The same applies to cannabis and most other illicit substances, when used with care.

Again, it's not the substance we need to worry about, it's the abuse of the substance that we must deal with. Pushing it underground leads to bad situations.

Ever seen Bugsy Malone?

I'm all for use as a medical substance where science shows it has value. I don't think that's the legalization most are talking about.
Chumblywumbly
27-07-2007, 03:15
I'm all for use as a medical substance where science shows it has value. I don't think that's the legalization most are talking about.
Care to address any of the other points?
Good Lifes
27-07-2007, 03:36
Quoting dictionary.com never pays...


A number of points:

Firstly, an action shouldn't be (and isn't) legalised or not depending on its productivity. If it was, all art would be illegal. As would many other wonderful, yet unproductive, actions, objects and activities.

Secondly, cannabis does have 'redeeming' social values. It helps with a number of medical complaints, including glaucoma and multiple sclerosis. It also, like all substances illegal or not, when used properly can lead to increased happiness, audio and visual stimulation, and a number of other pleasant effects.

You agree that, when used with care, mobile phones, which can lead to harmful consequences, are useful and can increase happiness. The same applies to cannabis and most other illicit substances, when used with care.

Again, it's not the substance we need to worry about, it's the abuse of the substance that we must deal with. Pushing it underground leads to bad situations.

Ever seen Bugsy Malone?

Art has been chosen by our culture to have an intrinsic value beyond the extrinsic value as a useful object thereby being a contributing factor to society. Culture has in that way defined art as useful. And I don't remember too many artists driving their painting down the road and killing someone. Therefore even if it doesn't have a value, it does no harm to anyone who isn't using it.

In order to get the pleasant effects it puts others in danger and reduces overall productivity.

The average mobile phone user doesn't have side effects for hours after they hang up. When a cell phone user sees dangerous traffic (even though they shouldn't be using them in traffic) they can hang up and instantly regain concentration. When a cell phone user goes to work they can leave the phone in their jacket for 8 hrs and it doesn't matter when their last call was or when their next will be.

Making it an acceptable part of the culture would multiply the social ills beyond the ills created by "underground".
Chumblywumbly
27-07-2007, 03:50
Art has been chosen by our culture to have an intrinsic value beyond the extrinsic value as a useful object thereby being a contributing factor to society. Culture has in that way defined art as useful.
Again, why should something be legalised or not depending on its usefulness to society?

And I don't remember too many artists driving their painting down the road and killing someone.
And I don't remember too many stoners driving their joint down the road and killing someone.

In order to get the pleasant effects it puts others in danger and reduces overall productivity.
How does someone sitting in a room smoking a joint put another individual in danger? The idea that stoners might drive a car and might drive erratically and might hit someone could be made for near about any substance, action or object imaginable. Prescribed medications, Irn-Bru, blowjobs... you name it, it might make a driver hit someone in their car.

The average mobile phone user doesn't have side effects for hours after they hang up. When a cell phone user sees dangerous traffic (even though they shouldn't be using them in traffic) they can hang up and instantly regain concentration. When a cell phone user goes to work they can leave the phone in their jacket for 8 hrs and it doesn't matter when their last call was or when their next will be.
If you will insist on using this futile argument I'll take another tack:

I know plenty of people who smoke cannabis. Those who drive, wouldn't do so under the influence of any substance, be it cannabis, alcohol, LSD or whatever. If those who drink alcohol are trusted to not drive while under the influence why should those who smoke pot (a drug which doesn't reduce inhibitions, at least not to the extent of alcohol) be any different?

Making it an acceptable part of the culture would multiply the social ills beyond the ills created by "underground".
So making it available in the shops would increase the black market for pot, and the crime that follows it? Methinks not.

Furthermore, I'd say pot is already an acceptable part of Western culture.
Good Lifes
27-07-2007, 04:20
Again, why should something be legalised or not depending on its usefulness to society? A combination of safety and economics. Art is safe to those not using it.


And I don't remember too many stoners driving their joint down the road and killing someone. Anything that limits total mental alertness becomes a safety hazard to the innocent.


How does someone sitting in a room smoking a joint put another individual in danger? The idea that stoners might drive a car and might drive erratically and might hit someone could be made for near about any substance, action or object imaginable. Prescribed medications, Irn-Bru, blowjobs... you name it, it might make a driver hit someone in their car.
Prescribed drugs are partially prescribed because of side effects such as impairing driving ability. I would hope it would be somehow illegal to get a blowjob while driving.


If you will insist on using this futile argument I'll take another tack:

I know plenty of people who smoke cannabis. Those who drive, wouldn't do so under the influence of any substance, be it cannabis, alcohol, LSD or whatever. If those who drink alcohol are trusted to not drive while under the influence why should those who smoke pot (a drug which doesn't reduce inhibitions, at least not to the extent of alcohol) be any different?
I touched on alcohol several times. It became a part of the culture before we knew the dangers. Once something becomes a part of the culture it is hard to control. And it is totally illogical to argue that adding more danger is justified because we already have danger. One danger doesn't justify further danger.

So making it available in the shops would increase the black market for pot, and the crime that follows it? Methinks not.
That's obviously a distortion. Of course when you make something legal it ends the blackmarket. But when you make it legal you increase use and increase the locations where use takes place. The increase of use and increase of locations in contact with nonusers increases the negatives.


Furthermore, I'd say pot is already an acceptable part of Western culture.

Obviously, it is not. If it were we would not be having this conversation.
Chumblywumbly
27-07-2007, 04:31
A combination of safety and economics. Art is safe to those not using it.
What a dull outlook on art and life. You aren't an accountant by any chance?

Anything that limits total mental alertness becomes a safety hazard to the innocent.
And who, pray tell, are the innocent?

Prescribed drugs are partially prescribed because of side effects such as impairing driving ability.
¿Qué?

Surely prescribed drugs are prescribed to cure illness, not because of their side effect?

I would hope it would be somehow illegal to get a blowjob while driving.
:eek:

Killjoy.

I touched on alcohol several times. It became a part of the culture before we knew the dangers. Once something becomes a part of the culture it is hard to control. And it is totally illogical to argue that adding more danger is justified because we already have danger. One danger doesn't justify further danger
Logic=phail.

See: many, many previous posts.

You seem to want to criminalise anything that has any possible danger attached to it in any way. A very sterile, and if I might say, boring take on life.

That's obviously a distortion. Of course when you make something legal it ends the blackmarket. But when you make it legal you increase use and increase the locations where use takes place. The increase of use and increase of locations in contact with nonusers increases the negatives.
What are these elusive 'negatives'?

Obviously, it is not. If it were we would not be having this conversation.
It may not be illegal, but I'd say you were in the minority if you thought cannabis to be unacceptable. Not everyone would want it to be legalised, but how many (apart from your good self :p) are still honking on about reefer madness?
JuNii
27-07-2007, 05:06
It should be legal. You know why?

Because if people are stupid, and use it, and then they die, that's one less stupid person in the world. The world needs less stupid people.

Of course, this needs practically zero social welfare. Or maybe something along the lines of "You're allowed to smoke marijuana, but remember that insurance companies will force you to pay a premium, and most hospitals won't admit you."

you really, REALLY need to watch Interstate 60:Episodes of the Road (http://imdb.com/title/tt0165832/)
Mad Chester
27-07-2007, 05:13
Yessirreebob.

Stop the madness already and let the people have their weed.

I'm not a smoker but I have many friends who do... and they live perfectly normal lives.

All this banishment and harassment and criminalization of users & dealers is pure bullshit. I recently looked at a map of the world color-coded in terms of pot legality... and only a handful of countries have out-and-out legalized it.

I hope this foolishness stops in my lifetime, at least.

(BTW, weed is completely legal in Mad Chester.)
Tanstaria
27-07-2007, 05:27
You are comparing apples to oranges with this topic. And i am talking about painkillers and sleep aids. And even if it is so called "regulated", doesnt matter, cannabis is dangerous no matter what.

Actually, I'm comparing one drug to another drug, which is a completely legitimate analogy. The original argument states that:

If marijuana causes suffering, then it should be illegal.
Marijuana causes social pain (example my friend who is a deadbeat).
Therefore: Marijuana should be illegal.

This is a valid argument form, but it isn't true. In logic, you can test for truth using what's called a "logical substitution." This is where you substitute something else into the argument to test its veracity. Here is my example:

If morphine causes suffering, then it should be illegal.
Morphine causes suffering (example, Rush Limbaugh).
Therefore: Morphine should be illegal.

The argument loses its veracity because morphine is actually a very useful drug. So why doesn't this argument work for marijuana? The problem is the first premise, "if marijuana causes suffering, then it should be illegal." Since drugs are pretty much the only logical substitution for this argument, it can be rewritten thusly, "If X causes suffering, then it should be illegal," where X is any drug. Since any drug abused causes suffering, the argument should read as such:

If drugs cause suffering, they should be illegal.
All drugs cause suffering (example, bazillions).
Therefore: All drugs should be illegal.

As we can plainly see, not all drugs should be illegal, because the vast majority of them are useful in some way. In fact, marijuana is useful in its own way. Thus the argument isn't true.

And that was my lesson in rational thinking for the day.

As for cannabis being "dangerous, no matter what," I will need to see clear and irrefutable evidence that no matter what, cannabis is a dangerous drug. (In fact, I have never been attacked by a cannabis plant. They are quite placid, and since I am not allergic, touching one has had no detrimental effects on me.) Methinks that you will not be able to produce such evidence. So, preemptively I advise you, do not make statements that are impossible to prove.
G3N13
27-07-2007, 05:34
I wouldn't liberate it in the same way as alcohol is liberated as drugs (incl. alcohol) cause cultural & social problems, more so if they're readily available as then the potential for abuse is much greater.

Besides, smoking always causes passive hazards to bystanders and the smell is rather unpleasant enough to not impose it upon others. I also do wonder what long term effects using pot has (especially memory & personality wise)


In the end, I think some sort of restricted access - for example for medical purposes, coffeeshops, license to buy for home use when certain qualifications were met (eg. no children present, possibly some sort of cannabis-lock in car, etc..) - would be the best compromise.
Kwangistar
27-07-2007, 05:35
I said earlier in the thread that I support legalization. I still do. My friend sent me this article, though, I thought it was interesting (it is anti-marijuana)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=471106&in_page_id=1770&ct=5

I don't know the reputation of that newspaper, and the report obviously comes from an anti-drug source, in this case, the government. Still, the findings are there, albeit perhaps analyzed incorrectly.
Tanstaria
27-07-2007, 05:48
I agree so far as alcohol, I was saying the lasting effect don't justify the immediate, however with prescription drugs and such, they do.
More the fool me for smoking cigarettes, but they aren't as mentally affective as Marijuana.

Marijuana has medical benefits. It can be used as a painkiller, as an anti-nausea agent (which is useful for people who take drugs that have side-effects like nausea), and it treats glaucoma. Let alone the pleasant experience that some people have when they use it recreationally. I'm sure many of the people here could regale us with some very pleasant marijuana stories.

The point is to evaluate your opinions and arguments with reason. Sure, you don't like marijuana. You think it has ruined your friends life. Very possibly it has. But marijuana doesn't overwhelmingly ruin peoples lives. Sure, some people's lives are ruined, but the same can be said for alcohol, tobacco, sleep aids, morphine, oxycontin, and many others. Hell, even antibiotics have a downside, with drug resistant strains developing. But we do not ban those, because the benefits outweigh the down side. Hell, alcohol ruins more peoples lives than marijuana just because it is more available and more addictive.
Sominium Effectus
27-07-2007, 05:53
If you've had a friend turn into a mindless, angry, stupid, worthless sack of meat who's so far convinced of his own superiority he depresses himself over the most mundane tasks, waste his life and drive his wonderful parents to divorce, and had his distraught girlfrien crying on your shoulder because her boyfriend, who she loves, is a world reknowned fuck up and stresses about stupid fucking things, ALL because of Marijuana, then you're more than entitled to answer this question.

A whole-hearted, unrelenting fuck-no.

And yes, I did smoke it in my youth.

Guess what? Your personal experience doesn't give you the right to impose your beliefs on others. I know some people whose lives have been improved thoroughly by marijuana and associated drugs.

Also, no onehas died of marijuana overdose. There was one disputed case a while back, but it was highly ambiguous. Meanwhile people die of excess drinking all the time. Marijuana is a mostly harmless, useful plant that should definitely be legalized and regulated. I don't mind if it's taxed, it will still be cheaper than it is now, probably.

Also, at the Italian guy who was talking about establishing a "state monopoly" on marijuana, I'm confused. Sales taxes are not the same as state monopolies. Unless "sales tax" means something different in Italy than in the U.S.
G3N13
27-07-2007, 06:00
Guess what? Your personal experience doesn't give you the right to impose your beliefs on others.I suggest you read that again :D

Also, no onehas died of marijuana overdose.Dubious as people have died of water overdose.

Besides, the risks of marijuana people talk about doesn't usually include immediate death.
Marijuana is a mostly harmlessKeyword being mostly.

When it's easily accessible that mostly fails to cover a whole lot of people and circumstances...probably the biggest risk would be traffic related.

For the smell alone I think it should be restricted let alone what it does in the hands of underaged children with developing brains. (see my post above)Also, at the Italian guy who was talking about establishing a "state monopoly" on marijuana, I'm confused.Some European countries have state monopolies for selling hard liquors...it could be something similar.
Marrakech II
27-07-2007, 06:06
If alcohol can be legal I don't see why pot can't. I would vote for legalization. Where is the poll for this thread??? To high to remember to do it??
Kwangistar
27-07-2007, 06:19
Dubious as people have died of water overdose.

Besides, the risks of marijuana people talk about doesn't usually include immediate death.

Its true - its nearly impossible to die from a cannabis 'overdose'. There's more deaths due to water overdose in a year than in the history of the two most common psychadelics - marijuana and LSD - combined (1, from someone who shot himself intravenously with acid). Its theoretically possible to die from an overdose of either of the drugs - but the amout needed to die from it exceeds the amount needed to feel the effects by factors of ten thousand. In short, if someone died from an overdose, it would be because they're trying to commit suicide, not get high.
Earabia
27-07-2007, 06:30
And I don't remember too many stoners driving their joint down the road and killing someone.

Guess you havent been on the road that long as a driver....


How does someone sitting in a room smoking a joint put another individual in danger? The idea that stoners might drive a car and might drive erratically and might hit someone could be made for near about any substance, action or object imaginable. Prescribed medications, Irn-Bru, blowjobs... you name it, it might make a driver hit someone in their car.

Not so much YOU might be affected, but their families like childern can be effected by the decisions they make while under the influence, and this goes fro alcohol and such.


If you will insist on using this futile argument I'll take another tack:

I know plenty of people who smoke cannabis. Those who drive, wouldn't do so under the influence of any substance, be it cannabis, alcohol, LSD or whatever. If those who drink alcohol are trusted to not drive while under the influence why should those who smoke pot (a drug which doesn't reduce inhibitions, at least not to the extent of alcohol) be any different?

But its not futile, and YOU DO get the influence of inhibitations, seen it and it is recorded and i even gave a link earlier saying this.


So making it available in the shops would increase the black market for pot, and the crime that follows it? Methinks not.

Oh so it it solves blackmarket issues, its ok then huh? Methinks not. The point is we shouldnt allow a substance to be used just because it solves a short term problem, when in the long run long term problems will still be there.

Furthermore, I'd say pot is already an acceptable part of Western culture.

Sub-culture maybe, but not mainstream.
Earabia
27-07-2007, 06:35
Guess what? Your personal experience doesn't give you the right to impose your beliefs on others. I know some people whose lives have been improved thoroughly by marijuana and associated drugs.

Also, no onehas died of marijuana overdose. There was one disputed case a while back, but it was highly ambiguous. Meanwhile people die of excess drinking all the time. Marijuana is a mostly harmless, useful plant that should definitely be legalized and regulated. I don't mind if it's taxed, it will still be cheaper than it is now, probably.

Also, at the Italian guy who was talking about establishing a "state monopoly" on marijuana, I'm confused. Sales taxes are not the same as state monopolies. Unless "sales tax" means something different in Italy than in the U.S.

Oh so it is ok for you to impose your personal views ont eh drug and want it promoted as safe? Nice one. :rolleyes:
And there is plenty of dangers of cannabis, even though some on here can not comprehend the fact that they can not think they can compare it to other medical drugs. Point is, ALL drugs in this nation go through a rigorious inspection and studies before they are allowed to be used, and cannabis is not passed this studying because they deem it unsafe. Period.
Cannot think of a name
27-07-2007, 06:46
Oh so it is ok for you to impose your personal views ont eh drug and want it promoted as safe? Nice one. :rolleyes:
And there is plenty of dangers of cannabis, even though some on here can not comprehend the fact that they can not think they can compare it to other medical drugs. Point is, ALL drugs in this nation go through a rigorious inspection and studies before they are allowed to be used, and cannabis is not passed this studying because they deem it unsafe. Period.

Are you kidding me with this shit? Until California and other states passed medical marijuana propositions, testing wasn't even allowed. And since it has been allowed they've found things like it slowing the development of cancer (and receeding it in some lab mice), giving cancer and AIDS patients their appetite back, and little evidence of any long term memory loss.

For fucks sake. If you don't like it, don't smoke it (or eat it, as per your preference), but I've had friends who've become losers just by dating a chick-doesn't mean we're gonna be in the streets banning girlfriends (If Yoko didn't start that riot, then it's not starting.)
Earabia
27-07-2007, 06:51
Marijuana has medical benefits. It can be used as a painkiller, as an anti-nausea agent (which is useful for people who take drugs that have side-effects like nausea), and it treats glaucoma. Let alone the pleasant experience that some people have when they use it recreationally. I'm sure many of the people here could regale us with some very pleasant marijuana stories.

The point is to evaluate your opinions and arguments with reason. Sure, you don't like marijuana. You think it has ruined your friends life. Very possibly it has. But marijuana doesn't overwhelmingly ruin peoples lives. Sure, some people's lives are ruined, but the same can be said for alcohol, tobacco, sleep aids, morphine, oxycontin, and many others. Hell, even antibiotics have a downside, with drug resistant strains developing. But we do not ban those, because the benefits outweigh the down side. Hell, alcohol ruins more peoples lives than marijuana just because it is more available and more addictive.


Doesnt overwelmingly ruin lives? Hmm really?

From 1995–2005, the number of admissions to treatment in which marijuana was the primary drug of abuse increased from 171,344 in 1995 to 292,250 in 2005.
http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/drugfact/marijuana/index.html

And they give plenty of sources at bottom.

And i gave other reasons how this drug is dangerous.
Andaras Prime
27-07-2007, 06:52
Actually to be completely honest I have always kinda wanted to experiment with smoking hash or whatnot, but I never really access so never did, I would have to say that if it were regulated and legal I would have felt much better about getting some.
Earabia
27-07-2007, 06:55
Are you kidding me with this shit? Until California and other states passed medical marijuana propositions, testing wasn't even allowed. And since it has been allowed they've found things like it slowing the development of cancer (and receeding it in some lab mice), giving cancer and AIDS patients their appetite back, and little evidence of any long term memory loss.

For fucks sake. If you don't like it, don't smoke it (or eat it, as per your preference), but I've had friends who've become losers just by dating a chick-doesn't mean we're gonna be in the streets banning girlfriends (If Yoko didn't start that riot, then it's not starting.)

Actually government testing WAS AND IS allowed. And frankly the Supreme Court actually said what California did was illegal by federal law.
And there is LOTS of evidence that memory loss and such and such i gave, actually look at ligit links like Brown University and not your pro-pot blogs....

Also, i didnt just have a "friend" that did it. I had my family destroyed by this drug when they had NO OTHER family issues until they started using the crap.
And YOU do effect me if you are using near me and i will not allow it, so remember that next time you are at a work place, never know when a co-worker will turn you in. Point is it EFFECTS all around you just like alcohol and cigarettes can. If you want to live in denial of this, your problem, but dont whine when you get arrested using the crap.
Cannot think of a name
27-07-2007, 07:07
Actually government testing WAS
Nope.
AND IS allowed. And frankly the Supreme Court actually said what California did was illegal by federal law.
And there is LOTS of evidence that memory loss and such and such i gave, actually look at ligit links like Brown University and not your pro-pot blogs....
Frankly I'm too tired to bother linking the dozens and dozens of recent studies showing the benefits of marijuana from legitimate testing organizations.

Also, i didnt just have a "friend" that did it. I had my family destroyed by this drug when they had NO OTHER family issues until they started using the crap.
Doubtful. Drugs don't bring anything to the table. I know it's easier to blame externalities, but in the real world it just doesn't work that way. Sorry about your family, but if we banned everything people blamed for their troubles we'd all live in bubbles.
And YOU do effect me if you are using near me and i will not allow it, so remember that next time you are at a work place, never know when a co-worker will turn you in. Point is it EFFECTS all around you just like alcohol and cigarettes can. If you want to live in denial of this, your problem, but dont whine when you get arrested using the crap.

Fucking retarded. Alcohol is legal but you still can't drive or work while drunk-no one is advocating that we should be stoned 24-7, don't be a fucking moron.

And you bet your fucking ass if I get arrested because after a hard day of work I come home, spark a jay, scarf a burrito and watch some TV I'm going to be upset.-because it doesn't effect your judgmental ass any more than the beer I just drank (with my burrito, as it turns out). Frankly because you have a stick up your ass because some people you know don't have any fucking self control is no reason i shouldn't be able to use something responsibly on my own.
Kloogoo
27-07-2007, 07:13
Nope, simple as that. Legalizing something that is addictive, which most drugs are, is just making the gene pool WORSE.
Newborns are born addicted, and hence, the addiction and harm of said drugs, continues to worsen and destroy people's lives.
Cannot think of a name
27-07-2007, 07:23
Nope, simple as that. Legalizing something that is addictive, which most drugs are, is just making the gene pool WORSE.
Newborns are born addicted, and hence, the addiction and harm of said drugs, continues to worsen and destroy people's lives.

Yeah...you're talking about crack. Marijuana is less addictive than caffine, in fact it's addiction level is almost negligible. Physical addiction is pretty much non-existant.
Kloogoo
27-07-2007, 07:26
True, but you can't say that Marijuana is harmless. If it WAS harmless, than why would it be illegal, and why would we have rehab for it?
Greater Trostia
27-07-2007, 07:41
True, but you can't say that Marijuana is harmless.

Maybe not, but strictly speaking, NOTHING is "harmless." So there are merely degrees of harmfulness. Compared to a good many legal substances, marijuana is far less harmful - alcohol, tobacco for example.

If it WAS harmless, than why would it be illegal, and why would we have rehab for it?

They have marijuana rehab?

And really, legal=/=harmless so why should harmful=illegal?
Kloogoo
27-07-2007, 07:44
Because most illegal things ARE harmful/dangerous...
Let's think about it for a minute.

Drunk Driving = DANGEROUS
Shooting People = DANGEROUS
Smuggling Weapons/Drugs = DANGEROUS
Abuse = DANGEROUS
Domestic Disturbances = DANGEROUS
Greater Trostia
27-07-2007, 07:50
Because most illegal things ARE harmful/dangerous...
Let's think about it for a minute.

Drunk Driving = DANGEROUS
Shooting People = DANGEROUS
Smuggling Weapons/Drugs = DANGEROUS
Abuse = DANGEROUS
Domestic Disturbances = DANGEROUS

Heh! OK, so cheating on your income tax? Nonpayment of parking meters? Doesn't fall into the paradigm, does it?

Neither do legal tobacco and alcohol. They are harmful and dangerous, but legal - and marijuana is less harmful and dangerous, yet illegal. This is because either lawmakers exagerrated marijauna's harmfulness to beyond alcohol and tobacco (true), or because lawmakers don't declare things legal or illegal based purely on harmfulness (also true).
Intangelon
27-07-2007, 07:52
Nope.

Frankly I'm too tired to bother linking the dozens and dozens of recent studies showing the benefits of marijuana from legitimate testing organizations.

Doubtful. Drugs don't bring anything to the table. I know it's easier to blame externalities, but in the real world it just doesn't work that way. Sorry about your family, but if we banned everything people blamed for their troubles we'd all live in bubbles.


Fucking retarded. Alcohol is legal but you still can't drive or work while drunk-no one is advocating that we should be stoned 24-7, don't be a fucking moron.

And you bet your fucking ass if I get arrested because after a hard day of work I come home, spark a jay, scarf a burrito and watch some TV I'm going to be upset.-because it doesn't effect your judgmental ass any more than the beer I just drank (with my burrito, as it turns out). Frankly because you have a stick up your ass because some people you know don't have any fucking self control is no reason i shouldn't be able to use something responsibly on my own.

AMEN! AMEN TWICE!

I don't even smoke the shit anymore; I haven't since 1991. The drug war is ludicrous and personal freedom is more valuable to me than Puritanical ranting. Earabia, I'm sorry you have a personal crusade, but you've been shown wrong so many times here, you'd better haul ass back to the Knights Temperence and get some better swords -- the ones you're using don't cut it.
Kloogoo
27-07-2007, 07:54
Touche. But still, think about it. Why would the government, who only cares about the welfare of it's citizens, make a product which you claim is safe and harmless, illegal. They have reasons for everything they do. They're not trying to bother us. They're trying to save us, and keep us safe. And coming form a country which is corrupt on so many levels, I'll tell you, this government is only looking out for us.
Greater Trostia
27-07-2007, 08:04
Touche. But still, think about it. Why would the government, who only cares about the welfare of it's citizens, make a product which you claim is safe and harmless, illegal. They have reasons for everything they do.

Yes they DO have reasons, and "harmfulness" is only one (if it is a consideration at all). Appealing to political parties, ideologies and constituencies are another, and a big one in any democracy. Those constituents, parties, ideologies may all be ill-informed about the facts about marijuana.

In the early days of recognized US national use of marijuana, propaganda widely spread that it was incredibly dangerous. That it could "turn ordinary people into psychotic killers/rapists" etc. It was on THAT prevailing basis that marijuana was first made illegal.

Since then, marijuana is merely claimed a "gateway drug" that supposedly, once you do, you turn to more dangerous drugs.

But it's the same ill-informed cultural and political bias that keeps it illegal in most places.

They're not trying to bother us. They're trying to save us, and keep us safe. And coming form a country which is corrupt on so many levels, I'll tell you, this government is only looking out for us.

Well, I know the Mexican government is *more* corrupt, but that doesn't mean the US government is *not* corrupt. And I am very, very, very skeptical about how the government only wants to "save us." If they want to keep us safe, how come they are sending us off to die in Iraq? That doesn't keep us safe.
Intangelon
27-07-2007, 08:06
Touche. But still, think about it. Why would the government, who only cares about the welfare of it's citizens, make a product which you claim is safe and harmless, illegal. They have reasons for everything they do. They're not trying to bother us. They're trying to save us, and keep us safe. And coming form a country which is corrupt on so many levels, I'll tell you, this government is only looking out for us.

When you get back from Oz, please clean off my monitor.
XORitude
27-07-2007, 08:06
Counting people being unable to have children as "deaths" is probably one of the most moronic things I've ever heard. I have family members that can't conceive, and I'd hardly call them dead. They seem generally happy to me.


As far as the gene pool is concerned, they are dead. They will have no effect on it, and thus they are "dead".

I have been called out on the premise, though, that marijuana renders you unable to have children. I will say that I have no basis for this, but I'm not looking at things from a strictly marijuana-causes-X point. The sociological effects, wherein already-stupid-but-hiding-it-well people take marijuana and reveal themselves to be an idiot, and thus, have much less of an effect on the gene pool than they would have otherwise, need to be considered as well.

So, to explain, the line of reasoning I was following was (and no, this is not a perfect syllogistic representation of it. I don't think there are any assumptions in it that can be challenged other than the ones I have named, though.)

1) Marijuana fucks up your body.
2) If X fucks up your body, it is not desirable.
3) Thus, marijuana is not desirable.
4) Most people know that marijuana is not desirable.
5) There are people who smoke it anyway.
6) Thus, these people are idiots.
7) Thus, the world is better off without them, or at least without their children.
8) Fucking up your body, as marijuana does, removes you from the gene pool.
9) Thus, they should be allowed to consume said non-desirable substance, and fuck up their body.

I have been called out on the assumptions of (1) and (8), and barring further research, I am not going to give an opinion at this point.

If (1) and (8) hold to be true, my opinion stands.

That doesn't make any sense.

I believe the statement was perfectly clear. Let's quote it again.


I'm counting deaths due to marijuana, that is, deaths (or, realistically, people rendered unable to have children) that would not have occurred if marijuana was illegal.


So, let's split this.

I am counting (deaths, (due to marijuana)), that is, (deaths (or realistically, (people rendered unable to have children)) (that (would not have occurred) (if (marijuana was illegal)))).

Understandable now?

No? Then let's rephrase it.

I am counting Darwin Award nominees who would not have been nominated if marijuana was illegal.

Better?
Kloogoo
27-07-2007, 08:14
First of all, the statement that it was first unlegalized becasue it can turn people into killers, rapist, ect. is still in play today! Do you really believe that Marijuana turned from a seriously problematic drug, MIRACULOUSLY turned safe? I think not.

And for the country's corruptness, yes, the U.S. is corrupt in some ways. But in Mexico, you would not believe HOW corrupt it is. You can do almost anything there if you have connections. My dad used to work for the government, and even he says that it is screwed up horribly. The don't care about education, welfare, social security, or anything. Why do you think I'm in the U.S. now?

And for the war, oh well. Saddam had control of a nation that would ENDANGER the lives of free people. While we have won the war, we can't just let the country free to do what it wants. It's called occupation. They do it so they can suppress the stuff like the car bombs, shootings, ect. Once the violence is suppressed, The US will clear out and leave it be.
AnarchyeL
27-07-2007, 08:24
Its status as a gateway drug, I guess, would be the major player in the case of marijuanaNonsense.

Sniffing glue and chugging cough syrup are gateway drugs.

The sort of person who is going to jump from drug to drug looking for an increasingly intense high is the exactly the sort of person who goes out of her/his way, at any early age, to get high.

But the vast majority of marijuana users are not glue-sniffers or cough medicine junkies. Most are satisfied with the combination of rewards and minor risks attendant on using marijuana. Most of them, regardless of whether they think other drugs should be legal, tend to think that drugs like cocaine, heroin, and Oxycontin pose greater risks. Moreover, unlike the "thrill seeking" drug user, many marijuana users feel that stronger drugs are less enjoyable, even unpleasant.

The future marijuana user just isn't willing to choke down whole tablespoons of nutmeg to get a "high"... accompanied by severe flu-like symptoms. She just doesn't need it that bad.

It's your glue addicts and nutmeg eaters you should worry about. They may meet up with marijuana for a time on their way to crack cocaine. But they went through the gate a long time before that.

So what are you going to do now? Ban nutmeg? :rolleyes:
Avarum
27-07-2007, 08:27
True, but you can't say that Marijuana is harmless. If it WAS harmless, than why would it be illegal, and why would we have rehab for it?

Rehab is popular, because if you're caught the only other option is going to jail.
Al haaqqa
27-07-2007, 08:51
It's know for at least 30 years that, in people prone to psychosis it can trigger an episode. This can also happen to these people if they use any of the stimulants or psychedelics. What is lest well advertised is that if these same type of people use heroin the age at which a first psychotic episode occurs is increased. I'm not advocating everyone should start using heroin, but saying that harm/benefit are not absolutes and what is safe for one isn't always for someone else.

Well at least angel's tumpets are still legal, a strong hallucinogen that likely to kill if the dose is just a little too high by paralysing the breathing muscles.
Flawlessjess
27-07-2007, 08:53
ME i reckon it should be legalized ^_^ let people decide what they want to do
Intestinal fluids
27-07-2007, 09:08
I have been called out on the premise, though, that marijuana renders you unable to have children. I will say that I have no basis for this, but I'm not looking at things from a strictly marijuana-causes-X point. The sociological effects, wherein already-stupid-but-hiding-it-well people take marijuana and reveal themselves to be an idiot, and thus, have much less of an effect on the gene pool than they would have otherwise, need to be considered as well.



Where do i even begin? Its easy to get horney while stoned and one may legitimatly argue that more people might have sex more while stoned then may while sober. In fact, while stoned you "MAY" be less prone to using birthcontrol and may actually be increasing birth rates. Your logic is faulty at best and the evidence of any connection existing even slightly is tenuous.

If marijuanna is so dumb, then why do some of the most brilliant minds on the planet smoke it? Carl Sagan, for example, was famous for describing frequently getting really stoned in the shower and sitting under the water for an hour brainstorming about astronomy and credited pot with enhanced creativity.

You have completly failed to draw any real connection from pot use to being an idiot. If somehow someone "reveals" themselves to be an idiot, id be far more willing to believe he was an idiot long before pot came along in his/her life.
Intestinal fluids
27-07-2007, 09:12
Touche. But still, think about it. Why would the government, who only cares about the welfare of it's citizens, make a product which you claim is safe and harmless, illegal. .

Is this the same government that thinks gambling is immoral and illegal if private citizens do it but is perfectly fine to sponsor State Lotterys as long as its the State thats making all the money?
Schopfergeist
27-07-2007, 09:18
"Let us hand out, I mean prescribe, like candy, powerful psychotropic drugs, but a natural plant, no, criminalize it, for we cannot profit from nor control it's diffusion." -- The System
Intestinal fluids
27-07-2007, 09:21
True, but you can't say that Marijuana is harmless. If it WAS harmless, than why would it be illegal, and why would we have rehab for it?

Gambling is not physically harmful, is illegal in many forms, and there is a rehab for it. Check mate you lose.
Intestinal fluids
27-07-2007, 09:26
Oxygen is a gateway drug. A stunning 100% of all drug users tried Oxygen first before moving on to the harder gasses.
Avarum
27-07-2007, 10:29
Oxygen is a gateway drug. A stunning 100% of all drug users tried Oxygen first before moving on to the harder gasses.

Not only that, but 100% of people who try to quit oxygen die.

edit: I just realized a fallacy in what I said, 100% of all people die anyways so I could say 100% of people try to quit anything die, and I'd be telling the truth.
XORitude
27-07-2007, 12:14
Where do i even begin? Its easy to get horney while stoned and one may legitimatly argue that more people might have sex more while stoned then may while sober. In fact, while stoned you "MAY" be less prone to using birthcontrol and may actually be increasing birth rates. Your logic is faulty at best and the evidence of any connection existing even slightly is tenuous.

If marijuanna is so dumb, then why do some of the most brilliant minds on the planet smoke it? Carl Sagan, for example, was famous for describing frequently getting really stoned in the shower and sitting under the water for an hour brainstorming about astronomy and credited pot with enhanced creativity.

You have completly failed to draw any real connection from pot use to being an idiot. If somehow someone "reveals" themselves to be an idiot, id be far more willing to believe he was an idiot long before pot came along in his/her life.

That is, you are completely agreeing with my next paragraph, wherein I say that yes, the assumptions that marijuana fucks you up and decreases your effect on the gene pool are suspect.
Chumblywumbly
27-07-2007, 15:12
Guess you havent been on the road that long as a driver....
I don't, and probably won't ever, drive.

But I'm pretty sure you can't drive a joint, just as you can't drive a painting. :p

Not so much YOU might be affected, but their families like childern can be effected by the decisions they make while under the influence, and this goes fro alcohol and such.
Decisions under the influence of cannabis?

Like: I need to eat that dougnut.

Or: Let's try and complete Fuzzy's World of Minature Space Golf.

Or: I need to eat another dougnut.

YOU DO get the influence of inhibitations, seen it and it is recorded and i even gave a link earlier saying this.
And I agreed that cannabis does slightly reduce inhibitions, just not as much as alcohol and other drugs.

Oh so it it solves blackmarket issues, its ok then huh? Methinks not. The point is we shouldnt allow a substance to be used just because it solves a short term problem, when in the long run long term problems will still be there.
Again, I never said that we should legalise cannabis because it would end certain problems associated with the black market. Just that this would be a good side effect.

Sub-culture maybe, but not mainstream.
Lines between sub-cultures and mainstream cultures are so blurry, at the best of times.

Pot 'culture' is certainly no small clique. According to the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/hottopics/cannabis/) 44% of 16 to 29 year-olds have tried cannabis at some point in their lives. Half of them have used it in the last year. Fairly 'mainstream', I'd say.

Oxygen is a gateway drug. A stunning 100% of all drug users tried Oxygen first before moving on to the harder gasses.
I'm addicted to Krypton. :(
Librazia
27-07-2007, 16:44
You are comparing apples to oranges with this topic. And i am talking about painkillers and sleep aids. And even if it is so called "regulated", doesnt matter, cannabis is dangerous no matter what.

This danger argument is idiotic. First, alcohol and tobacco are more dangerous. Secondly, lots of non-drug things are dangerous, such as crossing the street, and going down the stairs. Finally, it is a danger to the user, and as such, a victim less crime. Or at the very least, the victim is also the perpetrator. For some reason, we consider a crime against oneself a crime against the state. Why should governments tell people that they cannot ruin their own lives?
G3N13
27-07-2007, 18:02
ME i reckon it should be legalized ^_^ let people decide what they want to do

The problem is that smoking nearly always imposes your personal descision unto others, innocent bystanders so to speak.

Full legalization also grants access to many more people that shouldn't be doing it in the first place - including underaged children - and causes the side effects a chance to harm many, many more people, like driving under the influence (reactions are slowed up to ~5 hours after smoking 1 joint), neglegting your other duties and then there's the godawful smell.

Besides, there haven't been enough controlled studies about long term effects of frequent use to people, especially its effects on memory, personality and social life. Aside from the obvious health hazards inhaling carcinogens has. ;)

I do support controlled legalization, including medicinal use, controlled coffeeshops and licensed home sales, but not legalization to a level similar of alcohol (we all know how bad that stuff is, we don't need 'another alcohol').
Tanstaria
27-07-2007, 19:23
Doesnt overwelmingly ruin lives? Hmm really?


http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/drugfact/marijuana/index.html

And they give plenty of sources at bottom.

And i gave other reasons how this drug is dangerous.

Fascinating. However, that is far less that 1% of the population of the United States. I'd go as far as to say that it's less than 10% of actual regular pot users. So, for the sake of simplicity, let's say that there are 3 million regular marijuana users, or 1% of the population of the United states. That leaves 10% of regular marijuana users who checked into rehab and by your standards, who's lives are ruined. (As if ruination came from checking into rehab.) That's is hardly an overwhelming percentage.

As for their lives being ruined, I'm going to go ahead and say that either they were killed by the drug or as a result of the use of the drug, or that the vast majority of their life was suffering as a result of the debilitating effects of marijuana or addiction to it. Now, seriously, can you say that their lives are ruined? When people go to rehab, they have a problem. Their life isn't ruined or over.

How many go to rehab over alcohol? Morphine or other opiate related drugs? How many die from tobacco use? You're seriously overstating the case. Yes, marijuana is a drug that can cause people to suffer. But so is nearly every single other drug in the world, along with an incredible list of activities and behaviors.
Tanstaria
27-07-2007, 19:33
You are able to hang up the phone and the other issue is irrelavent.

Point is, those other issues are irrelavent.

short term problems caused by cannabis:

Impaired memory and ability to learn
Difficulty thinking and problem solving
Anxiety attacks or feelings of paranoia
Impaired muscle coordination and judgment
Increased susceptibility to infections
Dangerous impairment of driving skills. Studies show that it impairs braking time, attention to traffic signals and other driving behaviors.
Cardiac problems for people with heart disease or high blood pressure, because marijuana increases the heart rate

Long term problems:

Respiratory problems
Memory and learning
Fertility
addiction

http://www.brown.edu/Student_Services/Health_Services/Health_Education/atod/marijuana.htm

And none of these problems appear with any other drugs, like, say, alcohol and tobacco? Morphine causes many of these problems as well. Tylenol can ruin your liver. Ibuprofen can damage your stomach lining. Shall we outlaw these as well because they have detrimental effects. Seriously, you are just singling out and demonizing marijuana. This is probably affective, but it's certainly not persuasive.
Sominium Effectus
27-07-2007, 20:42
I suggest you read that again :D

No. The guy who wrote that was wrong. He said he was untitled to refute the case for marijuana legalization based soley on his own personal experience. Ridiculous. But it's ok, you're just not smart. :D

Dubious as people have died of water overdose.

Water is much, much more dangerous than marijuana. If legality was detirmined exclusively by the hazard a substance poses to society, water would be outlawed immediately. Lakes, rivers, and bays would become tightly regulated danger zones.

Besides, the risks of marijuana people talk about doesn't usually include immediate death.

Those dangers are mostly relative to the user.

Keyword being mostly.

According to Hitchhiker's Guide the whole planet is classified as "mostly harmless".

When it's easily accessible that mostly fails to cover a whole lot of people and circumstances...probably the biggest risk would be traffic related.

Bear in mind that immediately upon legalization, marijuana use would probably be tightly regulated, people would have to be screened to be qualified to use it. Those with questionable driving histories would probably be turned down. Anyway driving stoned isn't nearly as hazardous as driving drunk.

On a side note, if it ever came down to either keeping the status quo, or legalizing marijuana and outlawing alcohol, I would take marijuana in a heartbeat.

Nope, simple as that. Legalizing something that is addictive, which most drugs are, is just making the gene pool WORSE.
Newborns are born addicted, and hence, the addiction and harm of said drugs, continues to worsen and destroy people's lives.

Actually, marijuana's not really addictive! :) There are also many studies showing either that marijuana has no effect on fetal development or that it actually promotes psychological development. It's ok though, that was just your 2nd post, you'll learn these things once you've been here longer.

Touche. But still, think about it. Why would the government, who only cares about the welfare of it's citizens, make a product which you claim is safe and harmless, illegal. They have reasons for everything they do. They're not trying to bother us. They're trying to save us, and keep us safe. And coming form a country which is corrupt on so many levels, I'll tell you, this government is only looking out for us.

The reason marijuana is illegal is simple: racism. Back in the 1930s there was a huge propaganda campaign that associated cannabis (using "marijuana", the Spanish term for the word) with dirty, Mexican filth. The only reason the law hasn't been revised now that racism is (rightfully) considered shameful is that the government's indoctrination campaign has become so succesful that the current generation of leaders believe what the lies their forerunners fed them. And also there's the issue of lobbying and tobacco companies fearing that their industry would become less lucrative if a competing recreational drug was on the market.
Post Texas
27-07-2007, 20:44
What do you mean? It's already legalized ;)
Captain Sexy Pants
27-07-2007, 20:51
I love it how the people on here who DON'T use weed put up better and more intelligent arguments then the morons who do. Good job stoner's... =UNITE!
Spartacka
27-07-2007, 20:56
Absolutely yes. I'm with Infinite Revolution on this one. Too much misinformation out there about pot. Alcohol is a far more dangerous "gateway drug" than marijuana could ever be. Regulate and tax like cigarettes and alcohol, restrict to those over 21, and treat people driving under as DUIs. The government will profit and innocent people will no longer be targeted for smoking a joint.
Yandelltopia
27-07-2007, 21:03
marijuana should be legal by the way
GOD MADE MARIJUANA
MAN MADE BEER
IN GOD WE TRUST
G3N13
27-07-2007, 22:12
No. The guy who wrote that was wrong. He said he was untitled to refute the case for marijuana legalization based soley on his own personal experience. Ridiculous. But it's ok, you're just not smart.
I assume you're going for legalization based on your own experiences, no?

Water is much, much more dangerous than marijuana. If legality was detirmined exclusively by the hazard a substance poses to society, water would be outlawed immediately. Lakes, rivers, and bays would become tightly regulated danger zones.
I wasn't talking about drowning but consumption...but you knew it.

Cannabis is mind altering substance that effects consciousness therefore it is a potential hazard when ever you have a need to be alert.

Those dangers are mostly relative to the user.Marijuana's dangers are mostly relative to the society: What the person does under influence and how does its use change his or her social behaviour or personality.

Bear in mind that immediately upon legalization, marijuana use would probably be tightly regulated, people would have to be screened to be qualified to use it. Those with questionable driving histories would probably be turned down.

Like I said, I'm all for controlled legalization in such a way that other people wouldn't have to put up with (most of) the negative effects, including passive smoking.

Anyway driving stoned isn't nearly as hazardous as driving drunk.Do you have neutral statistics for this?

I found following (http://mojo.calyx.net/~olsen/HEMP/IHA/iha01206.html):
After alcohol, delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), marijuana's major psychoactive constituent, is the drug which is found most often in the blood of drivers involved in road accidents. With some exceptions, epidemiological studies indicate the presence of THC in roughly 4-12% of drivers injured or killed in traffic accidents: for example, 10% in New York (Terhune 1982), 7% in New South Wales (Chesher and Starmer 1983), 8% in North Carolina (Mason and McBay 1984), 11% in DŸsseldorf (Daldrup et al. 1987), 10% in Tasmania (McLean 1987) and 11% in Ontario (Cimbura et al. 1990).

Now multiply marijuana use by a factor of 10 and tell me it wouldn't be a serious risk to society if uncontrolled or as laxly controlled as cigarettes are?

Infact...Consider if a standard employee would enjoy a joint break instead of a cigarette break...?
On a side note, if it ever came down to either keeping the status quo, or legalizing marijuana and outlawing alcohol, I would take marijuana in a heartbeat.I wouldn't.

I loathe the smell of marijuana more :D

(btw. I'm also for stricter regulation of cigarettes).

Actually, marijuana's not really addictive!It has some level of psychological addiction, because people enjoy using it and want to continue using it.

Physical addiction is a different issue.

There are also many studies showing either that marijuana has no effect on fetal development or that it actually promotes psychological development.

http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=51663

In addition to fertility issues, marijuana has been linked in some studies to children's low birth weight, behavioral problems, poor growth, physical abnormalities, lower IQ, and difficulty with language comprehension and memory. One study, conducted by researchers at the University of Minnesota and published in May 1989 in the journal Cancer, found that exposing a fetus to marijuana increased a child's risk of getting leukemia.
Tanstaria
28-07-2007, 00:04
I love it how the people on here who DON'T use weed put up better and more intelligent arguments then the morons who do. Good job stoner's... =UNITE!

Actually, I don't use weed, and, also, I use proper grammar in--and logic to support--my arguments. I have yet to see a proper argument against marijuana yet, but there is still time. The whole "marijuana has detrimental effects" argument is just too cursory and simple to actually work.
Redwulf
28-07-2007, 00:47
I'm against legalization.

The "not as dangerous as X" argument isn't too persuasive - it's still dangerous. ;)

So what you're saying is that we should ban alcohol, yes? After all it too is dangerous.
Redwulf
28-07-2007, 01:01
I wouldn't liberate it in the same way as alcohol is liberated as drugs (incl. alcohol) cause cultural & social problems, more so if they're readily available as then the potential for abuse is much greater.

Besides, smoking always causes passive hazards to bystanders

This keeps being said but no one can tell me what these "hazards" are. The only one that even comes close is operating heavy machinery and there are OVER THE COUNTER MEDICINES that impair your ability to operate heavy machinery.
Redwulf
28-07-2007, 01:17
Doesnt overwelmingly ruin lives? Hmm really?

From 1995–2005, the number of admissions to treatment in which marijuana was the primary drug of abuse increased from 171,344 in 1995 to 292,250 in 2005.

Nice statistics, got any damn lies to go with them? Here are some problems with your statistics . . .

A: Those numbers are hardly overwhelming considering the national population.

B: "Admitted for treatment" (I'm assuming this is in regards to treatment for drug abuse) does not = life ruined.

C: How many of these cases were because the person thought he or she had a problem with weed and how many were the result of a plea bargain or judges decision?
Good Lifes
28-07-2007, 06:02
So what you're saying is that we should ban alcohol, yes? After all it too is dangerous.

Been answered several times. If we would have known the dangers of alcohol 10,000 years ago it would never be legal. The problem is it has a long history as part of the culture. As a part of the culture it is difficult to outlaw.

Pot is not a part of the main culture. It is not logical to say that just because one dangerous thing is part of the culture we should make other dangerous things a part of the culture. It is irrelevant that alcohol is legal. One mistake doesn't justify new mistakes.
Hamilay
28-07-2007, 06:07
Been answered several times. If we would have known the dangers of alcohol 10,000 years ago it would never be legal. The problem is it has a long history as part of the culture. As a part of the culture it is difficult to outlaw.

Pot is not a part of the main culture. It is not logical to say that just because one dangerous thing is part of the culture we should make other dangerous things a part of the culture. It is irrelevant that alcohol is legal. One mistake doesn't justify new mistakes.

Let's assume that marijuana and hence alcohol both should be illegal.

You can't just let something go because it's 'part of the culture'. If it should be illegal, it should be illegal. Culture doesn't come into it. Many societies have misogyny built into their culture, that doesn't mean that it shouldn't be stopped. Maybe you take slow steps towards criminalization. You can't get around the fact that if marijuana should be illegal, alcohol should be too, regardless of how much people like it and don't want it to be taken away.
Beidians
28-07-2007, 06:07
I think everything should be legalized. Coke/Crack, Heroin, Meth and PCP should be legal but should be put under a Dr.'s care to stop it from going out of control. Medicine should develop a cure for addiction(Not treatment) and if a person develops an addiction should seek care for treatment. Family and friends should immediatly take steps to halt the destructive behavior.
Good Lifes
28-07-2007, 06:22
Let's assume that marijuana and hence alcohol both should be illegal.

You can't just let something go because it's 'part of the culture'. If it should be illegal, it should be illegal. Culture doesn't come into it. Many societies have misogyny built into their culture, that doesn't mean that it shouldn't be stopped. Maybe you take slow steps towards criminalization. You can't get around the fact that if marijuana should be illegal, alcohol should be too, regardless of how much people like it and don't want it to be taken away.

Things that are built into the culture have to be handled differently. The acceptance by the culture has to change first. The prime example is tobacco use. It was a part of the culture for 500 years. If an attempt to outlaw it would have been pushed through in 1960 it wouldn't have worked. Instead there was a campaign to reeducate people and change culture. If you would have asked me in 1960 if smokers would be on the outside (or I should say, moving to the outside) of culture, I would have bet everything and given great odds. Someday the same may be true of alcohol. It will take a long time. I do see some minute movement in that direction. Not too many three martini lunches as there were 40 years ago.

The point of my argument was one mistake (or two, tobacco and alcohol) can't be used to justify another mistake. That is totally illogical.
Sominium Effectus
28-07-2007, 08:30
I assume you're going for legalization based on your own experiences, no?

Nope. I'm using facts! :)


I wasn't talking about drowning but consumption...but you knew it.

That was the just the neccesary reductio ad absurdum that every post needs.

Like I said, I'm all for controlled legalization in such a way that other people wouldn't have to put up with (most of) the negative effects, including passive smoking.

OK, so long as said restrictions to prevent second-hand smoke issues don't inhibit the users' ability to take the drug conveniently.

Do you have neutral statistics for this?

Yes, somewhere, but unfortunately I can't be arsed to find them right now. So I'll just try to refute your citation for now.

I found following (http://mojo.calyx.net/~olsen/HEMP/IHA/iha01206.html):
After alcohol, delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), marijuana's major psychoactive constituent, is the drug which is found most often in the blood of drivers involved in road accidents. With some exceptions, epidemiological studies indicate the presence of THC in roughly 4-12% of drivers injured or killed in traffic accidents: for example, 10% in New York (Terhune 1982), 7% in New South Wales (Chesher and Starmer 1983), 8% in North Carolina (Mason and McBay 1984), 11% in DŸsseldorf (Daldrup et al. 1987), 10% in Tasmania (McLean 1987) and 11% in Ontario (Cimbura et al. 1990).

Wait...isn't that approximately the same as the percentage of marijuana users among the general population? Even if it is slightly higher, I think it's worth considering that many stoners are also the type of people who would be likely to involved in a car wreck, but not neccesarily as a result of their drug use. These statistics don't show the same kind of cause-effect correlation that the statistics for alcohol do.

(btw. I'm also for stricter regulation of cigarettes).

At least you aren't calling for their prohibition, like Fox News did.

It has some level of psychological addiction, because people enjoy using it and want to continue using it.

Physical addiction is a different issue.

If I read all the time, am I addicted to literature?


http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=51663

In addition to fertility issues, marijuana has been linked in some studies to children's low birth weight, behavioral problems, poor growth, physical abnormalities, lower IQ, and difficulty with language comprehension and memory. One study, conducted by researchers at the University of Minnesota and published in May 1989 in the journal Cancer, found that exposing a fetus to marijuana increased a child's risk of getting leukemia.

I see no contradiction. I said "some studies" showed no correlation or showed benefits. They're on wikipedia. It's clear that there hasn't been a terrible amount of research in the field for legality reasons.
Al haaqqa
28-07-2007, 09:57
Regulate and tax like cigarettes and alcohol, restrict to those over 21, and treat people driving under as DUIs. The government will profit and innocent people will no longer be targeted for smoking a joint.
Well i don't like how they've implemented it here. You get a DUI if you test positive, that is if ANY amount is detected wether you are under the influence or not and you loose your driving licence for a few weeks/months.
General Alekseyev
28-07-2007, 10:06
Hell yeah. High people have all the fun!!

EXAMPLE:

It's like I don't care about nothin' man
Role another blunt, Yeah cuz
(Yeah x 2)

I was gonna clean my room, until I got high
I was gonna get up and find the broom, But then I got high
My room is still messed up And I know why, (why man) 'cuz I got high
Because I got high
Because I got high

I was gonna go to class, before I got high
I coulda' cheated and I coulda passed, but I got high
I'm taking it next semester and I know why, (why man) 'cuz I got high
Because I got high
Because I got high

I was gonna go to work, but then I got high
I just got a new promotion, but I got high
Now I'm selling dope and I know why, (why man) 'cuz I got high
Because I got high
Because I got high

I was gonna go to court, before I got high
I was gonna pay my child support, but then I got high (No you weren't)
They took my whole pay check, and I know why, (why man) 'cuz I got high,
Because I got high
Because I got high

I wasn't gonna run from the cops but I was high, (I'm serious man)
I was gonna pull right over and stop, but I was high
Now I'm a paraplegic, and I know why, (why man) 'cuz I got high
Because I got high
Because I got high

I was gonna pay my car a note, until I got high
I wasn't gonna gamble on the boat, but then I got high
Now the tow truck's pulling away, and I know why, (why man) 'cuz I got high, because I got high, because I got high
Because I got high
Because I got high

I was gonna make love to you, but then I got high, I'm serious
I was gonna [CENCORED] to, but then I got high
Now i'm jacking off and I know why, (turn this shit off) 'cuz I got high, because I got high, because I got high

I messed up my entire life, because I got high
I lost my kids and wife , because I got high
Now I'm sleeping on the sidewalk, and I know why, (why man) 'cuz I got high, because I got high, because I got high

I'm gonna stop singing this song, because I'm high
I'm singing this whole thing wrong, because I'm high
And if I don't sell one copy I know why, (why man) 'cuz I'm high,
because I'm high, because I'm high

(Are you really high man?) (he really is high man!) get jiggy with it
O bring it back (say what say what oh, Because I'm high
Because I'm high, because I'm high

Well my name is afroman and I'm from east palmdale,
All the 'Dale weed i be smokin, is mama's hell
I dont belive in Hitler thats what I say' (O my goodness)
So all of you skins, please give me more head
Mother fucker, afro mother fucker m-a-n

A-e-i-o-u and somtimes w
We aint going to sell any of these mother fucking albums cuz
Lets go back to marshal durbans and hang some more chickins cuz fuck it
Fuck the corporate world bitch
Sakaba
28-07-2007, 11:26
Just spend about 3 hours listening to Kottonmouth Kings and you will want to smoke weed too.

I for one wish it was legal. :)

This should have been made into a poll :P
G3N13
28-07-2007, 17:50
Nope. I'm using facts! :)Facts that suit you based on your personal experience :p

OK, so long as said restrictions to prevent second-hand smoke issues don't inhibit the users' ability to take the drug conveniently.I fail to see why your freedoms should infringe on my freedoms: Cigarettes are banned from restaurants et al for a reason (note: I don't mind dedicated coffeeshops where people can smoke whatever they want - I can always choose not to go there)

Also, if the user is underaged or otherwise in a position where he/she shouldn't take the drug (like, say, driving a car or doing a job) I sure as hell would like to inhibit his/her right to take the drug conveniently. :D

Wait...isn't that approximately the same as the percentage of marijuana users among the general population?
http://www.suicideconference2006.ca/

According to the UN's estimate, 141 million people around the world use marijuana. This represents about 2.5 percent of the world population.

However this makes that article seem at least mildly biased:
Data has shown that people high on marijuana show the same lack of coordination on standard "drunk driver" tests as do people who have had to much to drink.

Reaction time for motor skills, such as driving is reduced by 41% after smoking 1 joint and is reduced 63% after smoking 2 joints.

<Googles for more sources>

Oh look, the UN World Drug Report 2006 (PDF!) (http://www.unodc.org/pdf/WDR_2006/wdr2006_volume1.pdf)

Cannabis remains by far the most commonly used drug
in the world. An estimated 162 million people used
cannabis in 2004, equivalent to 3.9 per cent of the
global population age 15-64.

American statistics: (http://www.dfaf.org/marijuana/whyharmful.php)
Marijuana is the most commonly used illicit drug, with a rate of 6.2 percent. Of the 14.6 million past month marijuana users in 2002, about one third, or 4.8 million persons, used it on 20 or more days in the past month.

So in conclusion, usage of marijuana seems to cause significant number of accidents, injuries and deaths, in traffic compared to its prevalence. Then again, with a working cannabis-lock (in vein of alcolock) in the car this would be almost a non-issue.

I think it's worth considering that many stoners are also the type of people who would be likely to involved in a car wreck, but not neccesarily as a result of their drug use. These statistics don't show the same kind of cause-effect correlation that the statistics for alcohol do.

You should also remember that the percentage of alcohol users is probably around 75-80% (wild guess) of population with alcohol being a cause "only" in around 15-30% (http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/misc/driving/s18p5.htm) (similar numbers in Australia (http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2004/11/25/1251691.htm)) of road accidents, while the number of accidents caused by driving under the influence of marijuana seems to be higher (4-12%) than the actual percentage of users (4-8%)!

At least you aren't calling for their prohibition, like Fox News did.Complete illegality of cigarettes is ridiculous.

But, I have to say that I personally think it's better for marijuana to remain illegal than legalize it to a level of tobacco.

If I read all the time, am I addicted to literature?Dunno, that would depend if you can quit without wanting to read again.

People can become psychologically addicted to work, sex, gambling, gaming and internet use so marijuana isn't any special in that regard.

I see no contradiction. I said "some studies" showed no correlation or showed benefits. They're on wikipedia. It's clear that there hasn't been a terrible amount of research in the field for legality reasons.I agree.

There should be neutral studies made before outside-of-medical-use cannabis should be controllably legalized....but people who make these studies too often have an agenda: A cannabis user thinks it's safer than water (;)) while the other side thinks that cannabis dosen't only rot your brain but destroys everyone who has seen it used! :D
Present Day Comatica
28-07-2007, 21:51
I'm in favor of legalization. The only problem is that there are too many societal preconceptions about weed. Polititians would most likely be unwilling to vote in favor of any legalization legislature because of the loud voices of some constituants shouting out about "dangers" and abstract arguments about economics.

Mostly, this is due to DARE, the large program dedicated to educating youths about drugs, still using incorrect statistics.

Marijuana is incredibly safe when used responsibly. What we really should be outlawing here is stupidity. ;)
Tetrahydrocannaboloids
28-07-2007, 22:37
Weed is the devils plant, and should be hastily destroyed when seen. All people who take cannabis should be tortured for information, and then put in the tower of London to die a long horrible death. Such action will preserve our nation, it shall protect our children, and most importantly, it shall protect our freedoms.

Terrorists, you loose.


Direct quote from the bible : Genesis 1:12 "i give you all seed bearing plants to use" so that kinda destroys the devils plant theory :upyours:
Tetrahydrocannaboloids
28-07-2007, 22:38
Weed is the devils plant, and should be hastily destroyed when seen. All people who take cannabis should be tortured for information, and then put in the tower of London to die a long horrible death. Such action will preserve our nation, it shall protect our children, and most importantly, it shall protect our freedoms.

Terrorists, you loose.


Direct quote from the bible : Genesis 1:12 "i give you all seed bearing plants to use" so that kinda destroys the devils plant theory :upyours:
Shlarg
28-07-2007, 23:20
http://www.sdearthtimes.com/et0199/et0199s11.html
Lach-Land
28-07-2007, 23:22
who cares if its legel i do it anyway.
Present Day Comatica
29-07-2007, 02:09
Added note: Marijuana use will either be minimally affected or not affected at all if it were to be legalized. Studies show us this. And if I'm not mistaken, that's what happened in The Netherlands when it was legalized.
Velka Morava
29-07-2007, 02:26
Touche. But still, think about it. Why would the government, who only cares about the welfare of it's citizens, make a product which you claim is safe and harmless, illegal. They have reasons for everything they do. They're not trying to bother us. They're trying to save us, and keep us safe. And coming form a country which is corrupt on so many levels, I'll tell you, this government is only looking out for us.

The reason is nylon.
Start from this hint and educate yourself, it can be fun.
Australiasiaville
29-07-2007, 02:37
To have your thread stolen once may be regarded as a misfortune. Twice just looks careless

As does the 'Last edited' tag at the bottom of your post. :p

Thats a good idea, except weed kills none. Well, stoned drivers kill, but weed dosnt kill people people kill people. Stoned people are to stoned to killl anyone

Are you stoned right now? Because your English skills suggests this...

Furthermore, the war on drugs is a huge drain on society. It costs billions of dollars. Drug use should be a drain on the individual not society. If the government didn't take your money and waste it on this most frivolous of causes, would you voluntarily donate money to a group that takes potheads and punishes them. I doubt it.

Yeah, but isn't the problem here (with legalisation of ALL drugs as you suggest) that the individual drain will naturally become a drain on society? Maybe not so much with pot but harder drugs like crystal meth. If you legalised that and had people high on it at will that would naturally fuck up a lot of innocent people, no?
Redwulf
30-07-2007, 03:31
Been answered several times. If we would have known the dangers of alcohol 10,000 years ago it would never be legal. The problem is it has a long history as part of the culture. As a part of the culture it is difficult to outlaw.

This is the answer to that question that YOU have been giving. I want it answered by the posters I've been asking it of.
Sominium Effectus
30-07-2007, 04:00
I fail to see why your freedoms should infringe on my freedoms: Cigarettes are banned from restaurants et al for a reason (note: I don't mind dedicated coffeeshops where people can smoke whatever they want - I can always choose not to go there)

Cigarettes banned from restaurants? Not here, at least not by law, and most restaurant facilities have smoking sections. I take it you live in either a really conservative town, or the UK. (I live in Houston btw)

If you're admitting that there's nothing wrong with dedicated facilities for marijuana smoking that seems to me like a concession of a key point. I'd be satisfied with that. I would hope that home use would be legal as well, of course.


You should also remember that the percentage of alcohol users is probably around 75-80% (wild guess) of population with alcohol being a cause "only" in around 15-30% (http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/misc/driving/s18p5.htm) (similar numbers in Australia (http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2004/11/25/1251691.htm)) of road accidents, while the number of accidents caused by driving under the influence of marijuana seems to be higher (4-12%) than the actual percentage of users (4-8%)!

Well the numbers don't lie I guess. I will say, though, that

a.) marijuana stays in your system for weeks, wheras alcohol only stays for a day or so. As a result, a marijuana is more likely to be caught with marijuana in their system than a drinker is to be caught with alcohol in their system.
b.) marijuana users generally have few predispositions against illegal behavior (obviously), making them more likely to be involved in an accident.
c.) some marijuana users may also have been under the influence of alcohol
d.) I doubt 75% of the population uses alcohol with the regularity that stoners use marijuana.
e.) Marijuana use will not multiply tenfold upon legalization.

I concede that stoned driving would be a problem, but not a large enough problem to outlaw all use of the drug whatsoever.

Complete illegality of cigarettes is ridiculous.

I absolutely agree.

that would depend if you can quit without wanting to read again.

When I stop using marijuana for periods of time (in the weeks before examinations, as an example; some people are able to study while high, I'm certainly not), I still *want* to use it, but I'm more than capable of resisting that temptation out of enlightened self-interest.

I agree.

There should be neutral studies made before outside-of-medical-use cannabis should be controllably legalized....but people who make these studies too often have an agenda: A cannabis user thinks it's safer than water (;)) while the other side thinks that cannabis dosen't only rot your brain but destroys everyone who has seen it used! :D

I agree that we should do more research before enacting total legalization, but there are several things we should do right now. Firstly, we should get rid of mandatory minimum sentences for soft drug offenses, right now. We should legalize use of cannabis for medical purposes, and revise its status as a Schedule I drug. In time, I'd like to see the status of possesion of marijuana as a federal crime abolished, and leave it to the states to decriminalize the growth, sale, and/or possession of marijuana as they see fit. Then I'll just move to a state that has liberal cannabis laws, and be sure to drive real careful ;) .
Kormanthor
02-08-2007, 15:08
Cigarettes banned from restaurants? Not here, at least not by law, and most restaurant facilities have smoking sections. I take it you live in either a really conservative town, or the UK. (I live in Houston btw)

If you're admitting that there's nothing wrong with dedicated facilities for marijuana smoking that seems to me like a concession of a key point. I'd be satisfied with that. I would hope that home use would be legal as well, of course.



Well the numbers don't lie I guess. I will say, though, that

a.) marijuana stays in your system for weeks, wheras alcohol only stays for a day or so. As a result, a marijuana is more likely to be caught with marijuana in their system than a drinker is to be caught with alcohol in their system.
b.) marijuana users generally have few predispositions against illegal behavior (obviously), making them more likely to be involved in an accident.
c.) some marijuana users may also have been under the influence of alcohol
d.) I doubt 75% of the population uses alcohol with the regularity that stoners use marijuana.
e.) Marijuana use will not multiply tenfold upon legalization.

I concede that stoned driving would be a problem, but not a large enough problem to outlaw all use of the drug whatsoever.



I absolutely agree.



When I stop using marijuana for periods of time (in the weeks before examinations, as an example; some people are able to study while high, I'm certainly not), I still *want* to use it, but I'm more than capable of resisting that temptation out of enlightened self-interest.



I agree that we should do more research before enacting total legalization, but there are several things we should do right now. Firstly, we should get rid of mandatory minimum sentences for soft drug offenses, right now. We should legalize use of cannabis for medical purposes, and revise its status as a Schedule I drug. In time, I'd like to see the status of possesion of marijuana as a federal crime abolished, and leave it to the states to decriminalize the growth, sale, and/or possession of marijuana as they see fit. Then I'll just move to a state that has liberal cannabis laws, and be sure to drive real careful ;) .


I don't want the states to have a say so because if you do california will legalize it, as will other more open minded states but Ohio never will.
Criminals and Outlaws
02-08-2007, 15:13
Should be legalised without any more time being wasted. Then the world can get blazed, and we can hot-box the atmosphere.
El trotto
02-08-2007, 15:22
A recent survey concluded that 85% of Nation States Players use cannabis on a regular basis........
Tetrahydrocannaboloids
05-08-2007, 01:48
A recent survey concluded that 85% of Nation States Players use cannabis on a regular basis........

haha :D

only 85% ;)
Silliopolous
05-08-2007, 03:39
Sheesh man. this whole conversation is ruining my buzz....
CoallitionOfTheWilling
05-08-2007, 05:05
that's bollocks. as far as i'm aware there has only been one death in the whole world attributed to THC intoxication. compare that to figures for alcohol, and then also look at the number of accidents causing injury attributed to use of either and i think you'll see that marajuana it far less harmful.

Marajuana can cause the same conditions for car accidents and such that alcohol produces.

THC itself is not really able to be overdosed on, but its affects on the person can ruin their judgment and delay reactions while driving.
Ainronfilac
05-08-2007, 05:24
im all for legalization of pot, e and lsd. the only problem with it is how would you regulate sales and put a tax on it. i think it should be regulated like alcohol and cigarettes and meet a purity standard but how will you keep people from having a black market for the other stuff like heroin
Good Lifes
05-08-2007, 05:43
A recent survey concluded that 85% of Nation States Players use cannabis on a regular basis........

And who clicks of a NS poll?
Thelocious
05-08-2007, 06:02
Could somebody please explain how exactly picking something off of the ground, rolling it up, setting it on fire, and inhaling the fumes seems like a good idea?
Intestinal fluids
05-08-2007, 16:28
Could somebody please explain how exactly picking something off of the ground, rolling it up, setting it on fire, and inhaling the fumes seems like a good idea?

How is that much different then yanking a tuber all covered with dirt out of the ground, cutting it up into strips and submerging it in boiling oil for several minutes before eating?
Newer Burmecia
05-08-2007, 17:44
Could somebody please explain how exactly picking something off of the ground, rolling it up, setting it on fire, and inhaling the fumes seems like a good idea?
Because it's fun?
Intestinal fluids
06-08-2007, 03:51
Could somebody please explain how exactly picking something off of the ground, rolling it up, setting it on fire, and inhaling the fumes seems like a good idea?


Someone needs to introduce you to a vaporizer.
Kormanthor
14-08-2007, 03:08
Marajuana can cause the same conditions for car accidents and such that alcohol produces.

THC itself is not really able to be overdosed on, but its affects on the person can ruin their judgment and delay reactions while driving.


So stay home then .... simple really
Andaluciae
14-08-2007, 03:41
After how sick the marijuana and tobacco smoke made me feel at the DMB concert last Friday, I'd prefer no one ever smoke anything of any sort ever again.
Good Lifes
14-08-2007, 04:02
Jeez, Who revived this dead horse?

Ain't gonna happen. Case closed.
Walker-Texas-Ranger
14-08-2007, 04:38
Let me highlight the key word for you. Because the federal government says its a gateway drug so they can justify arresting potheads, doesn't mean it is.

If it is currently illegal, they wouldn't need to justify anything if someone had it in posession/was using it.
New Manvir
14-08-2007, 04:47
Jeez, Who revived this dead horse?

Ain't gonna happen. Case closed.

QFT
Kormanthor
19-08-2007, 13:53
Jeez, Who revived this dead horse?

Ain't gonna happen. Case closed.


Well not under the bush administration, but someday maybe. After all the government always needs new ways to tax the people. God forbid they ever having to stop or even slowdown on their spending.