Marijuana / Cannabis ( legality )

[Miserabilia]

Okay I thought it would be time for one of these.

-----

What's your opinion on weed? Should it be legal?


------

I'd like to debate/share opinions but I'm also going to rant a little so hold on.

I'm always really frustrated on debates regarding mariujana because I feel both sides are making some terrible points that I don't want to relate with.

On the anti-weed side is the ridiculous far fetched scientificaly disproven arguments often used, the same disproven statements again and again, and the hypocricy of drinking...

On the pro weed side is a lot of glorification and often saying it's has "no negative effects at all! It's actualy healthy!" and blatantly ignoring any possible downsides.

So personaly, I think weed should be legal. Alchohol is a major part of culture and is in fact a drug, and it is completely legal and not frowned upon, despite being toxic and having a LOT of downsides.
Especialy in the us, a lot of people seem to have the reaction of "weed = drugs... and drugs are bad, mkay"
Without even having a reason of why it is bad in the first place, and meanwhile happily drinking alchohol.

But I'm REALLY REALLY REALLY frustrated with almost the entire pro weed legality side because of the anoying culture surrounding it
"oh just smoke and be chill dude hehehehehe I like bob marley 420 blazin' "
like seriously please shut the hell up, please, you're making yourself look like an imbicele, no wonder you're not convincing a lot of people.
And PLEASE stop glorifying it. Sure, it has a lot of positive effects, and it is in fact not addictive.
That being said
- actualy smoking it (as in burning and inhaling) is STUPID, you're inhaling fumes and tar which IS bad for you and your lungs, like it or not
- the crazy amount of people who mix it with tobacco; you're indirectly smoking, and getting yourself addicted to niccotine, so yes, that is in fact addictive.
- it doesn't get you anywhere! Sure it's nice, it's recreational, it's fun and relaxed. But so many smokers do it every day, or more, and talk about it like it's cool "oh I don't really do anythin' I just smoke all day bruh".
Is it really that productive? Is it still fun in that amount? What about hobbies? It's a time waster.

Unlike most anti-weed people I actualy know what it is and most of my family knows and or smokes and they ALL acknowledge any downsides and they don't glorify it.
That's the thing with living somewhere where it's completely normal to smoke weed; people don't flip their shit about it.



-------

tl;dr I think weed should be legal anywhere alchohol is also legal,
but I don't even want to relate with pot culture


-----

What's your opinion on weed? Should it be legal?

[tasminsmith]

no it shouldn't be legal my cousin and stepdad grow and sell weed and it just causes trouble and seeing the effects in the long term users is horrible, it's obviously addictive else they wouldn't come back, and it causes psychosis with long term use.

[Miserabilia]

no it shouldn't be legal my cousin and stepdad grow and sell weed and it just causes trouble

It causes trouble because it's illegal doesn't it though? Or is it legal where they do it?

it's obviously addictive else they wouldn't come back, and it causes psychosis with long term use.

Well it can definetely be mentally addictive but so can tasty food and a lot of other unharmful things.
Tobacco is physicaly addictive though.

And I've heard of psychosis before, even from someone that smokes it themselves but I haven't really seen any conrete proof for it, just testimonials, though I aggree it does cause problems long term.

Do you aggree that legalizing it would reduce a lot of the problems like the crimes because of it?

[Abhorrence]

I have no issues with marijuana and it doesn't seem to be overly that bad. I think it would probably be better to be legal because it would free up a lot of police time that is wasted on chasing people that aren't exactly criminals.

[tasminsmith]

Do you aggree that legalizing it would reduce a lot of the problems like the crimes because of it?

Well it would reduce crimes obviously because it isn't illegal but if it was legal more people would smoke weed and therefore more people would be drug driving so it would cause more crimes there. without fear of being reprimanded for the possession of cannabis more people would grow it leading to confrontation between dealers, people smoking it more and longer, it has been proven to be a contributing factor to lung cancer and bronchitis as well as the paranoia, psychosis and the worsening of other medical conditions such as schizophreina (can't spell it). although it might seem to provide tempory relief from problems such as depression the unstable mental state can worsen it. people steal cheat and lie in order to fuel their consumption so increasing crime in that area. so making marijuana legal would be a stupid decision

[Miserabilia]

, it has been proven to be a contributing factor to lung cancer and bronchitis as well as the paranoia, psychosis and the worsening of other medical conditions such as schizophreina (can't spell it). although it might seem to provide tempory relief from problems such as depression the unstable mental state can worsen it.

I aggree that those are good examples for some downsides.

You do beleive medical marijuana should be avaibable though right? As it's also been proven to help numerous conditions.

[tasminsmith]

You do beleive medical marijuana should be avaibable though right? As it's also been proven to help numerous conditions.

if the patient was given a proper background checks and under specific circumstances I believe it could work

[IconoclasticHeretic]

What's your opinion on weed? Should it be legal?

Weed relaxes, expands consciousness, has a myriad of health benefits, not to mention being a sacred plant in many cultures. As far as I believe in legality, weed should certainly be so.


I'm always really frustrated on debates regarding mariujana because I feel both sides are making some terrible points that I don't want to relate with.


That's the typically the issue when they only show you two sides of an issue.



But I'm REALLY REALLY REALLY frustrated with almost the entire pro weed legality side because of the anoying culture surrounding it
"oh just smoke and be chill dude hehehehehe I like bob marley 420 blazin' "
like seriously please shut the hell up, please, you're making yourself look like an imbicele, no wonder you're not convincing a lot of people.


Just a thought, the "weed culture" isn't really responsible for making themselves sparkly clean and presentable to the anti-drug side of the argument. It may help and there are many people who do, but putting on a business suit and being productive at work and listening to capitalist pop music doesn't make them any more legitimate and isn't necessary. Bob Marley is fucking good even if a lot of people miss out on a lot of his messages because they don't dig deeper. The story of 420 is pretty interesting, no matter how obnoxious you find it. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/20/420-meaning-the-true-stor_n_543854.html)


And PLEASE stop glorifying it.


Nah.


That being said
- actualy smoking it (as in burning and inhaling) is STUPID, you're inhaling fumes and tar which IS bad for you and your lungs, like it or not


I'll give you that, yes. Combusting any material (like campfire wood or gasoline or cigarettes, all legal) is unhealthy to breathe in and can irritate your bronchial tubes. However, THC can filter your lungs and clean out some of the gunk from smoking other substances. I would recommend a vaporizer.


- the crazy amount of people who mix it with tobacco; you're indirectly smoking, and getting yourself addicted to niccotine, so yes, that is in fact addictive.


Spliffs are typically only common with people who already smoke tobacco, so there's not really a negative side effect of weed, the subject matter. Next.


- it doesn't get you anywhere! Sure it's nice, it's recreational, it's fun and relaxed. But so many smokers do it every day, or more, and talk about it like it's cool "oh I don't really do anythin' I just smoke all day bruh".
Is it really that productive? Is it still fun in that amount? What about hobbies? It's a time waster.


Well, I'm glad the master of how everyone's time should be managed has arrived. Maybe you can also address those who sleep for more than the required 8 hours, those who watch TV and movies, those who use social media, those who tie their shoes too slowly, those who drive under the speed limit, etc. how much time they're "wasting" and how they can be producing more valid and marketable endeavors. /sarcasm
Fuck off, if someone likes smoking all day, that's nothing to be ashamed about. They like it. That's the only reason they need. Now, it may have seemed harsh the way I picked apart your arguments, but for the most part we agree. Just wait till I get to some of these other posts.

no it shouldn't be legal my cousin and stepdad grow and sell weed and it just causes trouble and seeing the effects in the long term users is horrible, it's obviously addictive else they wouldn't come back, and it causes psychosis with long term use.

Weed is less addictive than meat, television, or driving. All of which cause much more harm. Your logic here is severely flawed too. They come back because they like it, not necessarily because of addiction. The same way you would continue returning to a specific restaurant or supermarket. As for the psychosis, I'm not a neurologist but as I understand it, it only brings out preexisting neurodivergent disorders, it does not cause them. I would avoid marijuana if you feel as if you're at risk of developing schizophrenia.

I have no issues with marijuana and it doesn't seem to be overly that bad. I think it would probably be better to be legal because it would free up a lot of police time that is wasted on chasing people that aren't exactly criminals.

It would free up even more time if we got rid of police altogether, but that's a little off-topic.

Well it would reduce crimes obviously because it isn't illegal but if it was legal more people would smoke weed and therefore more people would be drug driving so it would cause more crimes there.


Most people I know are pretty capable of gauging their driving capabilities while high. It is much different than alcohol in that respect.

without fear of being reprimanded for the possession of cannabis more people would grow it leading to confrontation between dealers, people smoking it more and longer, it has been proven to be a contributing factor to lung cancer and bronchitis

No.

as well as the paranoia, psychosis and the worsening of other medical conditions such as schizophreina (can't spell it).


Paranoia wouldn't be a side effect if it was legal. And don't use it as an argument if you don't know how to spell it. I may have a limited knowledge of neurology but I can spell schizophrenia and guarantee I've read more about it than you have.

although it might seem to provide tempory relief from problems such as depression the unstable mental state can worsen it. people steal cheat and lie in order to fuel their consumption so increasing crime in that area. so making marijuana legal would be a stupid decision

Weed is helpful for relaxing and treating those with depression and anxiety.
People steal cheat and lie to fuel their consumption of ANYTHING under a capitalist system. That's just the love of money, friend. Making weed illegal is saying that you know better than other people how they should run their lives. Fuck you for saying that.

if the patient was given a proper background checks and under specific circumstances I believe it could work

What consists of a proper background check? What are these specific circumstances? The only background check someone needs is a question of what is bothering them and the answer would help the doctor figure out which strain to give them and in what form.


And now, an important thing that a lot of you failed to bring up is the negative effects of the drug war.
No matter what harm could come of weed or even heroin, the drug war must end. (http://www.tni.org/article/introduction-damaging-side-effects-war-drugs)

[Vlerchan]

CosmicNoodle?

---

Legalise.
Weed culture is stupid.

[tasminsmith]

IconoclasticHeretic your being very optimistic about weed and (no offense) stupidly so. so seeing people who would rarther go without meat to fund the consumption of weed so your logic is flawed there. and yes scientific tests in lab animals etc have found that weed can worsen the onset of lung cancer and bronchitis. and as for driving mildly high it migh not make a difference but when your high af trust me it's dangerous not to mention against the law therefore increasing crime. and yes after prolonged use of stronger strains of weed you can develop paranoia and psychosis even with no outstanding mental health problems. and please don't point out the fact i'm not the best at spelling it doesn't relate to intellect so it's irrelavent on a forum unrelated to spelling.

[CharlieHorse]

It should be legal, but I still wont use it. People can use it all they want, I don't care. It's a quality I don't respect. I prefer no drug influence. Ty

[everlong]

I'd say let it be legal. I don't smoke weed myself, but from what I know, it's nothing compared to other drugs. I think police should worry about other things a lot more than a plant. Just me though.

[queenofcontrariety]

The one thing I do want to point out here is that it can be physically addictive if smoked daily, the body stops producing its own THC and there are actual withdrawal symptoms, that being said I think it should be legal. Marijuana would no longer be a gateway drug because its sale is taken from the underground dangerous market where other drugs are sold, after legalization it would be in it's own category for sale and crime would go down. I personally am not a user, but if it were legal I might occasionally engage in edible usage because I don't want to kill my lungs. Obviously there would need to be high standards and monitoring but the tax income and the decrease in money needing to be spent on law enforcement it's definitely worth it.

[Babs]

it's obviously addictive else they wouldn't come back, and it causes psychosis with long term use.

People go back to it because they enjoy it. That is no where near qualifying as addictive. Weed isn't all that physically addictive. To an extent, it is, but so is caffeine and alcohol but those are legal.

As for my own personal views, I think it should be legal because it's honestly not the worst thing in the world. That's not to say it's GOOD, but I don't think it's bad enough to justify banning it.

[IconoclasticHeretic]

IconoclasticHeretic your being very optimistic about weed and (no offense) stupidly so. so seeing people who would rarther go without meat to fund the consumption of weed so your logic is flawed there. and yes scientific tests in lab animals etc have found that weed can worsen the onset of lung cancer and bronchitis. and as for driving mildly high it migh not make a difference but when your high af trust me it's dangerous not to mention against the law therefore increasing crime. and yes after prolonged use of stronger strains of weed you can develop paranoia and psychosis even with no outstanding mental health problems. and please don't point out the fact i'm not the best at spelling it doesn't relate to intellect so it's irrelavent on a forum unrelated to spelling.

I did mention it can irritate bronchial tubes and it does deposit tar when combusted, hence why I recommend vaporizing. I know quite a few people who prefer edible goods as well. As for the driving, for the most part if someone is TOO high to drive, they won't, in my experience. As for those who do get too blazed and they hurt someone, they should experience the consequences for their lack of responsibility. I won't address the parts of your comment where you're just repeating yourself and I already addressed it as for spelling, I know it's obnoxious to point that out when it's irrelevant but I am curious as to your actual knowledge of neurology. Typically those who do know a bit can spell it and that's why I mentioned it.

[phuckphace]

Weed relaxes, expands consciousness, has a myriad of health benefits, not to mention being a sacred plant in many cultures.

:lol3: it expands consciousness duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuude....

a marijuana high makes you giggle like an idiot, scarf a bunch of snacks and then drift off to sleep. I've been toking for the better part of a year and have yet to figure out what the fuck this even means and why potheads always say this while flailing their arms about like street preachers.

the high is fun but that's about it. it's not a miracle drug or "window into another plane of existence" or w/e

Making weed illegal is saying that you know better than other people how they should run their lives. Fuck you for saying that.

this attitude is another reason normal people hate potheads. HEY DUDEBROMAN GET YOUR STATIST HANDS OFF MY ENDO NOT COOL MAAAAN NOT COOL

drug laws are in place to manage risk. The System has other, more effective ways to control the populace, namely via the TV set that 99% of people kneel to religiously

[IconoclasticHeretic]

:lol3: it expands consciousness duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuude....

a marijuana high makes you giggle like an idiot, scarf a bunch of snacks and then drift off to sleep. I've been toking for the better part of a year and have yet to figure out what the fuck this even means and why potheads always say this while flailing their arms about like street preachers.

the high is fun but that's about it. it's not a miracle drug or "window into another plane of existence" or w/e

I understand where you are coming from. I suppose it depends on the method and use. There is a valid reason why many cultures - such as Jamaican Rastafarians - use it as a religious sacrament and treat its use with discipline and sanctity. In the United States, the use of marijuana, even for religious purposes, is still illegal. I still think it should be legalized entirely, regardless of religious affiliation or medical issues, but it does open your mind to new ways of thinking if that's your goal.


this attitude is another reason normal people hate potheads. HEY DUDEBROMAN GET YOUR STATIST HANDS OFF MY ENDO NOT COOL MAAAAN NOT COOL

drug laws are in place to manage risk. The System has other, more effective ways to control the populace, namely via the TV set that 99% of people kneel to religiously

First and foremost, people who enjoy the use of marijuana are normal people. Whether they are not normal is typically unrelated to their enjoyment of cannabis. As for your mocking, I would like Statist hands off not only my marijuana, but everything in my life, however my Anarchist beliefs are unrelated to the thread and I've already been popped once by staff on this forum for getting off topic so I'll just leave that alone.

But I totally agree with you on the TV set issue. I personally don't watch TV. I share one with my roommates that I use for gaming purposes only.
Throw Away Your Television by The Red Hot Chili Peppers is a good song.

[CRH99]

the real legal issue with marijuana is that after being illegal for so many years, all sales are off the government's radar. the new issue is not so much about whether its good or bad, but how it can be taxed.

[Vlerchan]

ut [cannabis] does open your mind to new ways of thinking if that's your goal.
Abstract
RATIONALE: Cannabis users often claim that cannabis has the potential to enhance their creativity. Research suggests that aspects of creative performance might be improved when intoxicated with cannabis; however, the evidence is not conclusive.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the acute effects of cannabis on creativity.
METHODS: We examined the effects of administering a low (5.5 mg delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol [THC]) or high (22 mg THC) dose of vaporized cannabis vs. placebo on creativity tasks tapping into divergent (Alternate Uses Task) and convergent (Remote Associates Task) thinking, in a population of regular cannabis users. The study used a randomized, double-blind, between-groups design.
[b]RESULTS: Participants in the high-dose group (n = 18) displayed significantly worse performance on the divergent thinking task, compared to individuals in both the low-dose (n = 18) and placebo (n = 18) groups.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that cannabis with low potency does not have any impact on creativity, while highly potent cannabis actually impairs divergent thinking.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25288512

[Miserabilia]

The findings suggest that cannabis with low potency does not have any impact on creativity, while highly potent cannabis actually impairs divergent thinking.


This is pretty important. I've never liked the whole "smoking made me creative / freethinking / expand consciousness " etc


the real legal issue with marijuana is that after being illegal for so many years, all sales are off the government's radar. the new issue is not so much about whether its good or bad, but how it can be taxed.

Didn't even think about this. This is a pretty important factor too I suppose.

but it does open your mind to new ways of thinking if that's your goal.

See above.




a marijuana high makes you giggle like an idiot, scarf a bunch of snacks and then drift off to sleep. I've been toking for the better part of a year and have yet to figure out what the fuck this even means and why potheads always say this while flailing their arms about like street preachers.
the high is fun but that's about it. it's not a miracle drug or "window into another plane of existence" or w/e
this attitude is another reason normal people hate potheads. HEY DUDEBROMAN GET YOUR STATIST HANDS OFF MY ENDO NOT COOL MAAAAN NOT COOL
drug laws are in place to manage risk. The System has other, more effective ways to control the populace, namely via the TV set that 99% of people kneel to religiously

Aggree with pretty much all that

I did mention it can irritate bronchial tubes and it does deposit tar when combusted, hence why I recommend vaporizing. I know quite a few people who prefer edible goods as well. As for the driving, for the most part if someone is TOO high to drive, they won't, in my experience. As for those who do get too blazed and they hurt someone, they should experience the consequences for their lack of responsibility. I won't address the parts of your comment where you're just repeating yourself and I already addressed it as for spelling, I know it's obnoxious to point that out when it's irrelevant but I am curious as to your actual knowledge of neurology. Typically those who do know a bit can spell it and that's why I mentioned it.

N̶i̶c̶e̶ ̶p̶a̶s̶s̶i̶v̶e̶ ̶a̶g̶g̶r̶e̶s̶s̶i̶o̶n̶ ̶a̶t̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶e̶n̶d̶
You recommend vaporizing which is good, but you should also realize that in a lot of parts of the world smoking it (mixed with tobaccco) is the standard and almost everyone uses it that way,
often saying it's too burn more evenly or something like that.

People go back to it because they enjoy it. That is no where near qualifying as addictive. Weed isn't all that physically addictive. To an extent, it is, but so is caffeine and alcohol but those are legal.

As for my own personal views, I think it should be legal because it's honestly not the worst thing in the world. That's not to say it's GOOD, but I don't think it's bad enough to justify banning it.

My thoughts exactly

Marijuana would no longer be a gateway drug because its sale is taken from the underground dangerous market where other drugs are sold, after legalization it would be in it's own category for sale and crime would go down.

This is one of the reasons I think it should be legal.

. and yes scientific tests in lab animals etc have found that weed can worsen the onset of lung cancer and bronchitis.

Well yes obviously burning something and inhaling the smoke is always a cause for this, weed actualy releases more tar into the lungs than cigarettesl which is why I think vaporizing weed should not be a problem




It may help and there are many people who do, but putting on a business suit and being productive at work and listening to capitalist pop music doesn't make them any more legitimate and isn't necessary. Bob Marley is fucking good even if a lot of people miss out on a lot of his messages because they don't dig deeper.


You're... I don't know if you're realizing it but this is exactly what I was talking about




I'll give you that, yes. Combusting any material (like campfire wood or gasoline or cigarettes, all legal) is unhealthy to breathe in and can irritate your bronchial tubes. However, THC can filter your lungs and clean out some of the gunk from smoking other substances. I would recommend a vaporizer.


Vaping is a good idea, yes


Spliffs are typically only common with people who already smoke tobacco, so there's not really a negative side effect of weed, the subject matter. Next.

This is simply not true. Smoking mixed with tobacco is the norm here.
Not everything is the same everywhere on the world.


Well, I'm glad the master of how everyone's time should be managed has arrived. Maybe you can also address those who sleep for more than the required 8 hours, those who watch TV and movies, those who use social media, those who tie their shoes too slowly, those who drive under the speed limit, etc. how much time they're "wasting" and how they can be producing more valid and marketable endeavors. /sarcasm
Fuck off, if someone likes smoking all day, that's nothing to be ashamed about. They like it. That's the only reason they need. Now, it may have seemed harsh the way I picked apart your arguments, but for the most part we agree. Just wait till I get to some of these other posts.


Oh *just wait* :lol3:
So you're totally okay with people that drink all day?
People that are passed out drunk and hungover most of the time?
I aggree that alchohol is actualy pretty destructive to your body compared to weed but let's just say the mental part; would you be okay with that?

Not to mention so many people (especialy teens) start treating it as a hobby.
I find it very comparable to when I was in grade school, and I would find some new thing or lean about some new thing I liked, I'd do it ALL the time, talk about it ALL the time, and convince others to like it too (And how'd dare they not aggree with me?)
I feel like weed smoking teens are often the same, including some of my friends.
When they're like "huehuehue let's get high in class"
"omg dude no way hehuhuehue"
Well actualy they're not that bad and they're pretty private about it, but still,
I just cringe internaly. I don't say that because I don't want to be a dick but being so enthousiastic about it is a bit unnatural and cringy.

I mean, I like chocolate. I like to eat chocolate. Eating chocolate makes me feel hella good. Occasionaly I'll say something about it, post something about it, or reblog a picture of delicious chocolate.
I won't however spend all day eating chocolate as a hobby.

Then again, eating chocolate is actualy worse for a person than THC, and i'd end up really fat, but still.

And speaking of fat, spending all day inside and smoking weed may not neccecairly be bad because of the weed but it definetel means your lacking regular healthy activity and probably are not eating healthy.
"munchies" might be nice once but it's not a good way to base your diet around.


Weed is less addictive than meat, television, or driving. All of which cause much more harm. Your logic here is severely flawed too. They come back because they like it, not necessarily because of addiction. The same way you would continue returning to a specific restaurant or supermarket.


I 100% aggree


Most people I know are pretty capable of gauging their driving capabilities while high. It is much different than alcohol in that respect.


In all honestly I wouldn't take this seriously if an alchoholic said, so my logic would be pretty flawed if I saw this as a good argument.

[tasminsmith]

Typically those who do know a bit can spell it and that's why I mentioned it.

well you act like you know a lot about thc but trying spelling it straight away not saying you would get it wrong but you would probably make a spelling mistake.

[Babs]

Whether or not someonr can spell a certain word is completely irrelevant and a petty thing to get hung up on.
The both of you are kind of building up the pros and cons of weed.

[IconoclasticHeretic]

Abstract
RATIONALE: Cannabis users often claim that cannabis has the potential to enhance their creativity. Research suggests that aspects of creative performance might be improved when intoxicated with cannabis; however, the evidence is not conclusive.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the acute effects of cannabis on creativity.
METHODS: We examined the effects of administering a low (5.5 mg delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol [THC]) or high (22 mg THC) dose of vaporized cannabis vs. placebo on creativity tasks tapping into divergent (Alternate Uses Task) and convergent (Remote Associates Task) thinking, in a population of regular cannabis users. The study used a randomized, double-blind, between-groups design.
RESULTS: Participants in the high-dose group (n = 18) displayed significantly worse performance on the divergent thinking task, compared to individuals in both the low-dose (n = 18) and placebo (n = 18) groups.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that cannabis with low potency does not have any impact on creativity, while highly potent cannabis actually impairs divergent thinking.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25288512

I don't trust a .gov study on that sort of subject matter considering the State is the very body that bans it. It would be expected that they would try to legitimize their own laws. Not to mention that one study, even when it is independent, does not prove anything conclusively. And with how structured this seems, I'm unsure as to how it can gauge creativity, if anything can gauge creativity. It's not really something that can be quantified in such a way. It's a personal experience. So I would put greater credibility in someone sharing their own personal experiences than a bunch of scientists who don't think very creatively to begin with being funded by tax dollars. Just my take.


N̶i̶c̶e̶ ̶p̶a̶s̶s̶i̶v̶e̶ ̶a̶g̶g̶r̶e̶s̶s̶i̶o̶n̶ ̶a̶t̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶e̶n̶d̶
You recommend vaporizing which is good, but you should also realize that in a lot of parts of the world smoking it (mixed with tobaccco) is the standard and almost everyone uses it that way,
often saying it's too burn more evenly or something like that.


Touche. I have lived a lot of places but just because no one did it where I lived doesn't mean there aren't niche communities where people do.


You're... I don't know if you're realizing it but this is exactly what I was talking about


Is enjoying Bob Marley's music, cultural impact, philosophy and image something you find detestable?


Oh *just wait* :lol3:
So you're totally okay with people that drink all day?
People that are passed out drunk and hungover most of the time?
I aggree that alchohol is actualy pretty destructive to your body compared to weed but let's just say the mental part; would you be okay with that?

Not to mention so many people (especialy teens) start treating it as a hobby.
I find it very comparable to when I was in grade school, and I would find some new thing or lean about some new thing I liked, I'd do it ALL the time, talk about it ALL the time, and convince others to like it too (And how'd dare they not aggree with me?)
I feel like weed smoking teens are often the same, including some of my friends.
When they're like "huehuehue let's get high in class"
"omg dude no way hehuhuehue"
Well actualy they're not that bad and they're pretty private about it, but still,
I just cringe internaly. I don't say that because I don't want to be a dick but being so enthousiastic about it is a bit unnatural and cringy.

I mean, I like chocolate. I like to eat chocolate. Eating chocolate makes me feel hella good. Occasionaly I'll say something about it, post something about it, or reblog a picture of delicious chocolate.
I won't however spend all day eating chocolate as a hobby.

Then again, eating chocolate is actualy worse for a person than THC, and i'd end up really fat, but still.

And speaking of fat, spending all day inside and smoking weed may not neccecairly be bad because of the weed but it definetel means your lacking regular healthy activity and probably are not eating healthy.
"munchies" might be nice once but it's not a good way to base your diet around.


So, what you're saying is, it should be legal, but you may find it annoying? None of these are legitimate reasons to forcibly tear people from families, wreck other country's economies, imprison and fine people, and cut them off from their source of subsistence (jobs)? Basically, to sum up your arguments - as I'm interpreting them - is some people who smoke weed are annoying, immature, or unhealthy. None of these are dependent upon the weed but sometimes correlate. Me, personally? I do like Bob Marley - which you have a problem with - but I exercise, cook all my food now that I have a kitchen (which is healthy, typically, due to my vegetarian diet), and do have other interests. None of which matters. It's none of your business if they smoke all day or once a month, it's none of your business if they get drunk and get hungover a lot (not saying I don't have qualms with the alcohol industry), it's none of your business if they like Bob Marley or weed leaves on their socks and backpacks. Not your thing? That's fine. But, it is not your place to look down on someone else's life because it's different from your own.



In all honestly I wouldn't take this seriously if an alchoholic said, so my logic would be pretty flawed if I saw this as a good argument.

And? You've already stated that alcohol inebriation is much different from a marijuana high.

Whether or not someonr can spell a certain word is completely irrelevant and a petty thing to get hung up on.
The both of you are kind of building up the pros and cons of weed.

Alright, you know what? Fuck the spelling. You're right. It is completely irrelevant to her general ignorance about the topic in general. Fucking weed does not cause schizophrenia. Regardless of the way you feel like restructuring the English language.

[Vlerchan]

I don't trust a .gov study on that sort of subject matter considering the State is the very body that bans it.
Psychopharmacology is an international journal that covers the broad topic of elucidating mechanisms by which drugs affect behavior [...]

[...] Impact Factor: 3.998

http://www.springer.com/biomed/neuroscience/journal/213?detailsPage=aboutThis

It just happens to be hosted on a government site. The authors are all independent researchers working inside an institution in Holland; a country where cannabis is legal.

And with how structured this seems, I'm unsure as to how it can gauge creativity, if anything can gauge creativity.

To circumvent these difficulties [of defining creativity], we restricted our analyses to two well-established creative processes and the respective classical assessment methods: divergent and convergent thinking (Guilford 1967). Divergent thinking takes place when people try to find as many solutions to a loosely defined problem as possible—a process often referred to as “brainstorming.” It is often assessed by means of Guilford’s (1967) Alternate Uses Task (AUT), which requires individuals to generate as many as possible uses for a common household item (such as a pen or book) as they can think of (e.g., reading it, using it as a doorstop, etc.). In contrast, convergent thinking takes place when trying to find the one possible solution to a very well-defined problem. This is often assessed by means of Mednick’s (1962) Remote Associates Task (RAT), in which people are presented with three supposedly unrelated concepts (e.g., “time,” “hair,” “stretch”) and are requested to identify the one concept that can be related to all three of them (“long”).
Research indicates that performance in AUT and RAT is not (strongly) correlated (Akbari Chermahini and Hommel 2010; Akbari Chermahini et al. 2012). Moreover, there is evidence that the two types of creative thinking are differently related to subcortical DA levels: While divergent thinking performance relates to markers of DA levels in the form of an inverted U-shape, convergent thinking performance displays a linear, negative correlation with DA markers (Akbari Chermahini and Hommel 2010). In addition, this dissociation of human creativity seems to correspond to the dual pathway to creativity model (De Dreu et al. 2008; Nijstad et al. 2010) suggesting that creative performance emerges from the balance between cognitive flexibility and cognitive persistence—two dissociable cognitive control functions (De Dreu et al. 2012).

Kowel M.A., et al. (2015) Cannabis and creativity: highly potent cannabis impairs divergent thinking in regular cannabis users, Psychopharmacology (Berl), 232(6), p.1124

---

I also wonder how you can make claims like it expands conciousness when you don't think it's possible to gauge creativity.

So I would put greater credibility in someone sharing their own personal experiences than a bunch of scientists who don't think very creatively to begin with being funded by tax dollars.
I personally think that creating experiments like this takes a lot of creativity.

It's also not funded by tax dollars.

Fucking weed does not cause schizophrenia.
Recent advances in knowledge about cannabinoid receptor function have renewed interest in the association between cannabis and psychosis. Converging lines of evidence suggest that cannabinoids can produce a full range of transient schizophrenia-like positive, negative and cognitive symptoms. Cannabinoids also produce some psychophysiological deficits also known to be present in schizophrenia. Also clear is that in individuals with an established psychotic disorder, cannabinoids can exacerbate symptoms, trigger relapse, and have negative consequences on the course of the illness. Increasing evidence suggests that early and heavy cannabis exposure may increase the risk of developing a psychotic disorder such as schizophrenia. The relationship between cannabis exposure and schizophrenia fulfills some, but not all, of the usual criteria for causality. However, most people who use cannabis do not develop schizophrenia, and many people diagnosed with schizophrenia have never used cannabis. Therefore, it is likely that cannabis exposure is a "component cause" that interacts with other factors to "cause" schizophrenia or other psychotic disorder, but is neither necessary nor sufficient to do so alone.

D'Souza, D. C., Sewell, R. A., Ranganathan, M. (2009) Cannabis and psychosis/schizophrenia: human studies, European Archives of Psychiatry & Clinical Neuroscience, 259(7), p.413 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2864503/)

It's the case that cannabis contains about 85 different cannabinoids.

The authors also all operate in Portugal, where cannabis is decriminalised.

---

I also still don't support making cannabis illegal for the reasons you gave and the legislation doing more harm than good in general.

That goes for hard drugs too.

[IconoclasticHeretic]

I also still don't support making cannabis illegal for the reasons you gave and the legislation doing more harm than good in general.

That goes for hard drugs too.

I suppose I can respect your argument so long as you can see that making something illegal is not the solution to anything for both of those situations (weed and hard drugs).

So long as you don't also socially judge others' lifestyles, I can accept it, even if I feel a little more strongly toward cannabis' defense.

[Human]

I agree with you that both sides are often making stupid points, I'm pro-marijuana and for legalising but when people are saying it's healthy etc. to me it appears like they're trying to overcompensate or something, can't it just be something fun to do like alcohol and smoking cigarettes(but arguably healthier and safer). Marijuana does have some health benefits but I don't think we should be legalising marijuana for the health benefits, because then you'd need something wrong with you to use it!

[Saint of Sinners]

I think that it should be legal cause hey, it doesn't harm anybody. If it does cause any negative side effects and this information is made public, or if the person would rather buy weed than food or anything, then id say it's the persons fault for making the wrong decision. We can't go around banning every single mildly addictive pastime no? Next it'll be video games being banned for all kinds of 'negative psychological effects'

[phuckphace]

I understand where you are coming from. I suppose it depends on the method and use. There is a valid reason why many cultures - such as Jamaican Rastafarians - use it as a religious sacrament and treat its use with discipline and sanctity. In the United States, the use of marijuana, even for religious purposes, is still illegal. I still think it should be legalized entirely, regardless of religious affiliation or medical issues, but it does open your mind to new ways of thinking if that's your goal.

I think it should be legalized too.

First and foremost, people who enjoy the use of marijuana are normal people. Whether they are not normal is typically unrelated to their enjoyment of cannabis.

there are indeed normal people who use cannabis recreationally (like me) and then there are potheads. the latter make cannabis use the center of their lives, and obsess over it like religious fanatics. I'm saying that the latter do more harm to their own cause than good.

while I support legalization, I'm not going to lose any sleep if it doesn't happen. there are over 420 more important issues that require our attention, after all.

As for your mocking, I would like Statist hands off not only my marijuana, but everything in my life[...]

well I hate to burst your bubble but not only is that never going to happen, it's very unrealistic given how societies work.

however my Anarchist beliefs are unrelated to the thread and I've already been popped once by staff on this forum for getting off topic so I'll just leave that alone.

this is a thread about policy so I'd say it's relevant enough.

it's one thing to call for legalization because marijuana is a low-risk substance and not worth the resources it takes to suppress its use (that I can agree with). it's entirely another to recklessly call for full-bore legalization of everything because you just dislike having to follow rules in general, which is why I mocked your post.

But I totally agree with you on the TV set issue. I personally don't watch TV. I share one with my roommates that I use for gaming purposes only.
Throw Away Your Television by The Red Hot Chili Peppers is a good song.

heh. I guess no matter how diametrically opposed an authoritarian and an anarchist might be, there's always a teeny bit of common ground.

[Miserabilia]

Touche. I have lived a lot of places but just because no one did it where I lived doesn't mean there aren't niche communities where people do.



Not exactly niche but close enough okay move on etc etc


Is enjoying Bob Marley's music, cultural impact, philosophy and image something you find detestable?


Nope just the way it's talked about, reminds me of me in my euphoric atheism phase

So, what you're saying is, it should be legal, but you may find it annoying?

No, I won't find weed itself annoying. I already don't. I think weed culture and potheads are pretty damn annoying though and I will continue to think this which is my opinion and nothing else.


None of these are legitimate reasons to forcibly tear people from families, wreck other country's economies, imprison and fine people, and cut them off from their source of subsistence (jobs)? Basically, to sum up your arguments

I think weed should be legal??? I don't understand what you're saying? My arguments? i'm just saying why I'm not really surprised weed doesn't have a very good image, I personaly think it should be legal though.

- is some people who smoke weed are annoying, immature, or unhealthy. None of these are dependent upon the weed but sometimes correlate.

I'm pointing out that there are annoting immature and unhealthy weed smokers and that it gives a pretty bad image to weed.

Me, personally? I do like Bob Marley - which you have a problem with -
Did you just tell me what my own opinion is lmao

but I exercise, cook all my food now that I have a kitchen (which is healthy, typically, due to my vegetarian diet), and do have other interests.

Good for you.

None of which matters. It's none of your business if they smoke all day or once a month, it's none of your business if they get drunk and get hungover a lot (not saying I don't have qualms with the alcohol industry), it's none of your business if they like Bob Marley or weed leaves on their socks and backpacks. Not your thing? That's fine. But, it is not your place to look down on someone else's life because it's different from your own.


As a human being with free speech I'm actualy all of my buseness and it's exactly my place to look down on it and say what I want.
If someone spends all day drunk I won't respect them, if someone is severely overweight I won't respect them, and if someone spends all day high I won't respect them.
That is my choice, based on my opinions on them.




And? You've already stated that alcohol inebriation is much different from a marijuana high.


Not in this example, which has nothing to do with how it effects your health.

[IconoclasticHeretic]

there are over 420 more important issues that require our attention, after all.


I agree 100%. And +1 for the pun.


well I hate to burst your bubble but not only is that never going to happen, it's very unrealistic given how societies work.


My bubble remains unburst. I guess we'll agree to disagree then. I am confident it is full within the realms of possibility.


this is a thread about policy so I'd say it's relevant enough.


Well, then it's on you if the staff get cranky. :P


it's one thing to call for legalization because marijuana is a low-risk substance and not worth the resources it takes to suppress its use (that I can agree with). it's entirely another to recklessly call for full-bore legalization of everything because you just dislike having to follow rules in general, which is why I mocked your post.


I don't dislike following rules. There are rules that must occur in general. It's a given rule not to fuck with a dangerous animal if you don't want to get hurt. A midwife may impose a rule of gentleness and good vibes during a labor. She deserves that authority as she is facilitating the childbirth process. I will follow the rules of this forum to whatever extent I can because I am joining a community which has, through trial and error discovered what's best for them. As for laws and systems created by people that do not represent me for reasons often motivated by greed, I will not respect those rules. Drug "rules" are victimless "crimes" that do more harm than good that were established by people I didn't vote for. Therefore, I refuse to acknowledge them. The only reason I argue for legalization rather than just remaining tacit is because it would be pretty fucking nice to not be expelled/imprisoned/fined for it.


heh. I guess no matter how diametrically opposed an authoritarian and an anarchist might be, there's always a teeny bit of common ground.

It's called the horseshoe effect. The more opposed two political ideologies are, typically, the more they can agree on when existing in an "in between" society.
I bet we could agree on quite a bit. For example, correct me if I'm wrong on any of the assumptions, we both don't care for Barack Obama, we both find pop culture severely lacking in substance and the idolatry of figures within it ridiculous, we both find social services systems extremely inefficient and worth rethinking, we both would prefer more environmental consciousness within the society (regardless of our disagreement on method), etc.
I have some authoritarian friends. I can always find some kind of common ground.


As a human being with free speech I'm actualy all of my buseness and it's exactly my place to look down on it and say what I want.
If someone spends all day drunk I won't respect them, if someone is severely overweight I won't respect them, and if someone spends all day high I won't respect them.
That is my choice, based on my opinions on them.


Free speech doesn't protect you from the consequences of your actions, just government intervention. If you choose not to respect people for their life choices, conversely, I may also choose not to respect you for vocalizing judgment. But so long as you don't attempt coercion to stop them, then I feel as if we've come to a good inclusion on this issue.


Not in this example, which has nothing to do with how it effects your health.

The effects of being drunk and the effects of ingesting marijuana are much different. I can't see anyone possibly arguing that they are the same. Even with alcohol, they have a set blood alcohol level which you are allowed to drive at, often one beer is acceptable (depending on physiology and tolerance) but being blitzed is illegal. With marijuana, there is no breathalyzer test, but there are different levels in which people can gauge. Some even prefer driving a little high to driving sober as it can take some of the edge off.

[Miserabilia]

The effects of being drunk and the effects of ingesting marijuana are much different. I can't see anyone possibly arguing that they are the same. Even with alcohol, they have a set blood alcohol level which you are allowed to drive at, often one beer is acceptable (depending on physiology and tolerance) but being blitzed is illegal. With marijuana, there is no breathalyzer test, but there are different levels in which people can gauge. Some even prefer driving a little high to driving sober as it can take some of the edge off.

Actualy, the example still fits, regardless of law. If someone is under influence of something (note; influence) it's not logical to take their statement as an argument. Drunk people often think they are okay to drive and end up killing people and themselves in traffic. Untill you can proove to me that thc has zero influence on driving and concentration on driving, it's completely logical to have driving under it's influence be illegal.

[IconoclasticHeretic]

Actualy, the example still fits, regardless of law. If someone is under influence of something (note; influence) it's not logical to take their statement as an argument. Drunk people often think they are okay to drive and end up killing people and themselves in traffic. Untill you can proove to me that thc has zero influence on driving and concentration on driving, it's completely logical to have driving under it's influence be illegal.

Being drunk and being high are very different, as I've stated. If you're going to regulate any amount of thc while driving you might as well also regulate phone use, minimum sleep requirements, minimum caffeine consumption, prescription drug limitations, etc. Yes, this is a slippery slope argument but only to point out how absurd your statement is that they must prove there is no effect. Of course there's an effect, listening to a sad song on the radio has an effect but we don't ban music. People can, in my experience, typically gauge if they're okay to drive.

[Vlerchan]

So long as you don't also socially judge others' lifestyles[.]
This view is what I call inverted-authoritarianism. It's what happens when the cult of the individual gets so large that we begin to see the individual as all-important in her own right and not because she exists with respect to other people to the benefit of the whole.

[Miserabilia]

If you're going to regulate any amount of thc while driving you might as well also regulate phone use

They do, being on your phone while driving is illegal.

, minimum sleep requirements

They do, obviously they can't really controll/check this with normal drivers, but if you know anything about professional drivers you'll know they have forced resting and sleeping times.

, minimum caffeine consumption

This is actualy not a bad point, but caffeine is a stimulant; meaning it has less effect in how you behave but more helps you concentrate and not dose away; it has actualy been proven that caffeine helps drivers stay alert and thereby prevent accidents from drivers dozing away,
there is no such proof for weed, and weed is psychoactive so a whole different story.

edit; technicaly caffeine is also psychoactive but the reason it's still legal to drive under is because it's actualy been proven to be benefical rather than harmful for driving


, prescription drug limitations,
Any psychoactive drug, including many prescribed drugs, is illegal to drive under. Simple google search will tell you this.



Yes, this is a slippery slope argument but only to point out how absurd your statement is that they must prove there is no effect. Of course there's an effect, listening to a sad song on the radio has an effect but we don't ban music. People can, in my experience, typically gauge if they're okay to drive.

There's nothing absurd about it, since we know (proven, and simply observed) that thc is psychoactive and effects the way a person behaves, just like alchohol.
So unless you can proove that weed effecsts behaviour but not while driving, for example, it doesn't decrease your concentration/focus, doesn't make you less alert, etc, it's the logical solution to say that it's illegal to do it while driving.

[Kahn]

Abstract
RATIONALE: Cannabis users often claim that cannabis has the potential to enhance their creativity. Research suggests that aspects of creative performance might be improved when intoxicated with cannabis; however, the evidence is not conclusive.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the acute effects of cannabis on creativity.
METHODS: We examined the effects of administering a low (5.5 mg delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol [THC]) or high (22 mg THC) dose of vaporized cannabis vs. placebo on creativity tasks tapping into divergent (Alternate Uses Task) and convergent (Remote Associates Task) thinking, in a population of regular cannabis users. The study used a randomized, double-blind, between-groups design.
RESULTS: Participants in the high-dose group (n = 18) displayed significantly worse performance on the divergent thinking task, compared to individuals in both the low-dose (n = 18) and placebo (n = 18) groups.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that cannabis with low potency does not have any impact on creativity, while highly potent cannabis actually impairs divergent thinking.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25288512

I've felt this way since I've started smoking. I've always felt dumber because of it. My writing isn't as precise, I'm not as intelligible, and can't put as much thought into a subject as I normally would be able to.

I'd like to refrain on commenting on the OP's question regarding legality until I'm finished fully becoming sober. I had been an everyday smoker for 3 years up until several weeks ago. It's hard to kick the habit, truth be told, and those in this thread saying it is unaddictive are inaccurate, from my perspective.

[Miserabilia]

I've felt this way since I've started smoking. I've always felt dumber because of it. My writing isn't as precise, I'm not as intelligible, and can't put as much thought into a subject as I normally would be able to.

I'd like to refrain on commenting on the OP's question regarding legality until I'm finished fully becoming sober. I had been an everyday smoker for 3 years up until several weeks ago. It's hard to kick the habit, truth be told, and those in this thread saying it is unaddictive are inaccurate, from my perspective.

Wel it depends; so far there isn't concrete proof for physical addictivity like hard drugs , but it's definetely emotionaly/mentally addictive, I see what you mean because in my family there have been a lot of similar problems.

[tasminsmith]

It is completely irrelevant to her general ignorance about the topic in general. Fucking weed does not cause schizophrenia. Regardless of the way you feel like restructuring the English language.

i never said it caused schizophrenia i just said it can worsen it, which it can. And i was the one who said it was irrelevant. And what ignorance? sorry that not everyone is pro weed and ignorant to the problems it causes unlike some people.

[Mil1dreded]

I do think it should be legalised not because I'm all for drug addiction but it'll make weed safer and take money away from dealers and locking someone up just turns them to harder drugs . Although I think weed on a regular basis is a bad thing my friend regularly smokes and he looks half dead most of the time he got dumped by his gf and is failing at college that's why it should be legal those experiences are more likely to make people change than arresting them

[Hyper]

i never said it caused schizophrenia i just said it can worsen it, which it can. And i was the one who said it was irrelevant. And what ignorance? sorry that not everyone is pro weed and ignorant to the problems it causes unlike some people.

A lot of things worsen or cause serious illnesses and yet they are very much legal.

Biggest obvious cuplrits being alcohol & smoking.

Putting it quite bluntly if the notion of women having a right to their bodies i.e abortion applies in a society so should the right to harm your body with whatever substances a person deems fit be a legal right.

The odd thing about marijuana is really how it got criminalized in the first place. Some major pot head/anti marijuana person could correct me here... But if I remember correctly marijuana was pretty much legal everywhere until the 1950s? I believe when the US criminalized it and everyone else followed suit.

Not that this is in any way a case of cause and effect... But the amount of people that smoke marijuana started to grow steadily after criminalisation.

[Miserabilia]

Putting it quite bluntly if the notion of women having a right to their bodies i.e abortion applies in a society so should the right to harm your body with whatever substances a person deems fit be a legal right.


ummmm no why

[Hyper]

ummmm no why

If you use the rhetoric it's a woman's body... Thus freedom to do with it as a person pleases then it stands to reason a person should be free to harm their body as well if it does not affect anyone else or is not due to a medical condition.

Don't take the example as the main point here.

[Miserabilia]

If you use the rhetoric it's a woman's body... Thus freedom to do with it as a person pleases then it stands to reason a person should be free to harm their body as well if it does not affect anyone else or is not due to a medical condition.

Don't take the example as the main point here.

Hmmm don't exactly aggree there.
It's saying
"well someone can slightly harm themselves temporarily for a long term benefical purpose, so we should all be able to harm ourselves any way we want and get away with it"

[Hyper]

Hmmm don't exactly aggree there.
It's saying
"well someone can slightly harm themselves temporarily for a long term benefical purpose, so we should all be able to harm ourselves any way we want and get away with it"

I'm not going to argue about how harmful abortion is to the female body.

But get away with what? If it's a persons own body and the only one getting hurt as far as I see it... It's their right to do so and it already is so for alcohol & smoking.

[IconoclasticHeretic]

This view is what I call inverted-authoritarianism. It's what happens when the cult of the individual gets so large that we begin to see the individual as all-important in her own right and not because she exists with respect to other people to the benefit of the whole.

So, in other words, people aren't intrinsically valuable but how useful they are.

They do, being on your phone while driving is illegal.

They do, obviously they can't really controll/check this with normal drivers, but if you know anything about professional drivers you'll know they have forced resting and sleeping times.

This is actualy not a bad point, but caffeine is a stimulant; meaning it has less effect in how you behave but more helps you concentrate and not dose away; it has actualy been proven that caffeine helps drivers stay alert and thereby prevent accidents from drivers dozing away,
there is no such proof for weed, and weed is psychoactive so a whole different story.

edit; technicaly caffeine is also psychoactive but the reason it's still legal to drive under is because it's actualy been proven to be benefical rather than harmful for driving

Any psychoactive drug, including many prescribed drugs, is illegal to drive under. Simple google search will tell you this.

There's nothing absurd about it, since we know (proven, and simply observed) that thc is psychoactive and effects the way a person behaves, just like alchohol.


So, we already live under totalitarianism. Nice.


So unless you can proove that weed effecsts behaviour but not while driving, for example, it doesn't decrease your concentration/focus, doesn't make you less alert, etc, it's the logical solution to say that it's illegal to do it while driving.

Look, I'm not an idiot. Of course it has an effect. An effect is not equal to blood, screaming, dying. Self regulation is a thing that exists. And in the cases where it does not, that person should certainly be held responsible. However, plenty of people are also better drivers/okay drivers with a certain level of thc consumption. People stand up and say, "I'm fine," on one occasion and then on the next occasion say, "No, I'm too high, sorry guys." I have one friend that says they can't drive no matter how much they smoked if they smoked that day and I have another one that drives more recklessly when sober. It's not "easier" to just make it illegal for everyone. It just eliminates the possibility of anyone who does do it being "good".

ummmm no why

Self-determination, autonomy, keeping the government's nose out of our own business on what we decide to do with our own bodies with no victim.

[Miserabilia]

I'm not going to argue about how harmful abortion is to the female body.

But get away with what? If it's a persons own body and the only one getting hurt as far as I see it... It's their right to do so and it already is so for alcohol & smoking.

Eh, I guess it's more of a philosophical thing; should we save people from themselves or give them controll to be free to harm themselves.




So, we already live under totalitarianism. Nice.


:yeah:

Look, I'm not an idiot. Of course it has an effect. An effect is not equal to blood, screaming, dying. Self regulation is a thing that exists. And in the cases where it does not, that person should certainly be held responsible.

apply all this to alchohol; seems to work

However, plenty of people are also better drivers/okay drivers with a certain level of thc consumption.

now apply this to alchohol- doesn't work.

People stand up and say, "I'm fine," on one occasion and then on the next occasion say, "No, I'm too high, sorry guys." I have one friend that says they can't drive no matter how much they smoked if they smoked that day and I have another one that drives more recklessly when sober.

So you're admitting that there are people that literaly can not drive properly when high, but we should allow everyone to do so purely to trust them.
Seems safe.

[Vlerchan]

So, in other words, people aren't intrinsically valuable but how useful they are.
People are valuable because of the meaning they create in the lives of others.

I don't believe in an intrinsic value of human life is correct though. I also guess it can be phrased the same as you did.

[IconoclasticHeretic]

So you're admitting that there are people that literaly can not drive properly when high, but we should allow everyone to do so purely to trust them.
Seems safe.

Alcohol and weed do not have the same effect. I'm not going to say it a third time. As for the "allowing" people. If you don't trust a person to drive, you stop them. Don't hire uniformed gang members to do your dirty work for you.

People are valuable because of the meaning they create in the lives of others.

I don't believe in an intrinsic value of human life is correct though. I also guess it can be phrased the same as you did.

I respectfully disagree. I highly doubt that's something that can be debated though.

[deadpie]

You have to understand the reason why certain drugs became illegal is because of race and the influence of the white anglo saxon protestants. Remember alcohol prohibition? White upper class women were the ones against alcohol, yet were using opium and heroin at this time. Opium was banned when eastern migrants started taking jobs from white people, because you couldn't simply throw them in prison for being a race. Marijuana was made illegal when mexicans started to take jobs as well. Cocaine was banned when african americans started using it. And guess what? White people were doing all of these drugs too!

In fact, when you look at how the crack epidemic was dealt with, you'll see a lot of racism embedded in it. There's no real difference between cocaine and crack. There used to a bigger offense for it though. More blacks were being arrested for crack, but is it surprising that white people were doing blow just as much? Because it could be smoked and because african americans were doing it, society gave it a stigma and something to freak out about.

A lot of people, like us millennials and young people in general, have this cool thing called the internet at hand, which presents us unbiased facts that the six monopolies that control the media don't give us. Ok, it's obvious that anything you inhale is going to effect you. Why doesn't anyone talk about how fucking bad it is to inhale all the nitrous oxide that cars dispose of? Or the danger of global warming? Nobody dies of a marijuana overdose. People are noticing the medical benefits that it has. And if there's such a big problem with smoking it, then you should note the rise of vaporizers or the 'dab' culture.

Cigarettes are coded with tons of chemicals in them, not just tobacco. They're just as addictive as any other drug. Alcohol is legal too and I've seen great people do horrible things on it; crash their cars and kill people, rape people, get in fights. I think pot has always made me more self aware. I know people that drive better stoned than sober to be honest. Weed doesn't make me or anyone I know pissed off.

People are going to notice the economic growth in states that have legalized pot and eventually every state is going to want to do it. You'd have to be a fucking idiot not to, and of course there are a lot of fucking baby boomer generation idiots out there.

People are given these stupid minimum mandatory sentences for small amounts of weed and get their life fucking ruined over this plant that does no harm. It's stupid. Thing is, mass incarceration is a business of its own. Even though most of the people in prison are non violent offenders locked up for drug related crimes, there's a system making money off of them. There are even events carried out in buildings made to sell chairs, fancy handcuffs and lights for police officers and prisons. If you wanted to, you could make a business profiting off of seat cushions for executed prisoners. The government gives these organizations money and if they don't use it all, then their funding gets fucked.

The Drug war has always been a failure, but it made more sense when people were put in rehabs before all of it was transferred to mass incarceration. Look at how many people die over drug trade between US and Mexico. Sure, even if pot is legalized their will still be that movement of coke and meth, but that will put a huge dent in it.

[Miserabilia]

Alcohol and weed do not have the same effect. I'm not going to say it a third time.


If you actualy read what I've been saying you'd know you wouldn't have to say it because it's completely irrelevant

As for the "allowing" people. If you don't trust a person to drive, you stop them. Don't hire uniformed gang members to do your dirty work for you.


That's a whole different subject; you don't want police/state/system to exist at all, which is fine but it's not an argument to make something legal, it's an argument to completely eliminate all police and law.

[IconoclasticHeretic]

That's a whole different subject; you don't want police/state/system to exist at all, which is fine but it's not an argument to make something legal, it's an argument to completely eliminate all police and law.

Good point, I should probably stay away from any law kind of debates in general.

[dirtyboxer55]

I think it should be legalized for adults over 18 but not hard drugs like cocaine or heroin

[Melodic]

Here's my opinion. If tobacco is legal, weed should be legal too. Weed is actually a better alternative to cigarettes if you think about it. It's not as addicting.

[Microcosm]

It reminds me of the time the government tried to ban alcohol with the eighteenth amendment. Government restriction of these sorts of things 1)doesn't really work and 2)is something that the government really shouldn't have the right to do... I mean, in my opinion we should be able to take whatever kinds of drugs we want to; however, we absolutely are responsible for the consequences and, perhaps with most drugs, it should be societally looked down upon or discouraged. I mean drugs are typically bad for the mental state and should be regulated, but not regulated by the government. My reasoning for such a claim is pretty much just civil freedoms. We should have the freedom to put such a thing into our body.

[Paladino]

It should be legalized.

I drink and smoke and I'd say they are the two most widely used recreational 'drugs' if you were to class alcohol as a drug the way most people do. It should be legalized because I believe it does more good than bad, compared to alcohol which causes more bad than good.

In my opinion weed chills you out, relaxes you and makes you fall asleep at night a lot faster and usually gives you a better sleep & if you are smoking with other people there is never any drama/arguements or even fights when your high. Although, depending on the person it can make you lazy & lose motivation but like I said it depends on the person. Some people also get slightly dependent on it and are in bad moods when they can't get any.

Alcohol makes people more social and more talkative and generally people have a great time when they drink it. However if you drink too much and most young people do nowadays it can cause arguements between people which leads to fights which then sometimes can even lead to murder. Lots of people suffer drunken accidents from being that drunk they lose balance(myself included) & the risks of liver failure are also a factor. Some people end up getting that pissed they cheat on their partner and cause devastation to the partner. People can become highly dependent on alcohol like my uncle and even though he goes through spells of being sober and then back on the bottle .. You can see the effects alcohol has had on his body, making his face look rough permanently and made him very very skinny when he wasn't originally like that.

So, I'd say legalize it and maybe the alcohol consumptions rates would go down and people would stop fighting, arguing & cheating.