Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I'm yet to hear one convincing argument against the legalization of marijuana, anyone care to proffer one?

Why stop at marijuna?

What about its links with causing mental disorders especially when combined with continual long term use.

I've seen it happen to two of my friends who were in their 20s.

I say do as the Dutch do, legalise most class B and below drugs, and for that matter legalise prostitution, then tax it and regulate the hell out of it.
Then again thats just me.....
No I can see no reason to not legalise Marijuana,
also pronouncing it Ma-rij-oo-ana sounds better

EDIT: George Spiggott, that must've been awful to see
but potentially anything damages health and the money spent keeping marijuana off the streets could be better spent keeping it with the dealers not in the hands of addicts

Do you know any potheads? That should be reason enough.

Well many people say that it has some sort of medical use(most likely releaving pain).I watched a tv program on it,in some parts of Canada it is already legalized(I think),there is a big movement from what I understand.

whatwhat wrote:Why stop at marijuna?

I wholeheartedly agree, but I think this thread will be a lot more manageable if we do.

George Spiggott wrote:What about its links with causing mental disorders especially when combined with continual long term use.

I've seen it happen to two of my friends who were in their 20s.

Alcohol causes brain damage if used heavily enough over a long enough period of time. If we are in the business of banning anything that has the potential to cause harm, why stop at weed? Why is alcohol legal?

Also, I'm always interested in reading studies linking cannabis to mental health problems, if you know of any good ones let me know. Annecdotal evidence is not evidence I'm afraid.

I'm a pretty big proponent of individual rights, so legal pot kinda falls into that category. National Public Radio had a really interesting debate between some experts on the subject. They look at the possible effects of it. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=103276152

"Here is my final point. About drugs, about alcohol, about pornography and smoking and everything else. What business is it of yours what I do, read, buy, see, say, think, who I feth, what I take into my body - as long as I do not harm another human being on this planet?"

Bill Hicks speaks the truth.

Yes but weed gives you mad munchies that can lead to terrible thing,lol.

George Spiggott wrote:What about its links with causing mental disorders especially when combined with continual long term use.

I've seen it happen to two of my friends who were in their 20s.

Disproved by the Danish study last year. There is no higher rate of schizophrenia amongst cannabis users than the general population, once you screen out family tendency to mental disorder.

No disrespect to your friends. My brother had a breakdown while using cannabis in his 20s.

Septic wrote:I say do as the Dutch do, legalise most class B and below drugs, and for that matter legalise prostitution, then tax it and regulate the hell out of it.
Then again thats just me.....
No I can see no reason to not legalise Marijuana,
also pronouncing it Ma-rij-oo-ana sounds better

EDIT: George Spiggott, that must've been awful to see
but potentially anything damages health and the money spent keeping marijuana off the streets could be better spent keeping it with the dealers not in the hands of addicts

I agree with this. There are a number of normal human behaviours such as taking drugs, getting drunk and having sex, which are never going to go away no matter how much they are made illegal.

While they do some social harm, it is better to minimise the harm by sensible regulation within a legal framework, rather than encourage the activities to flourish as organised crime.

Greebynog wrote:Alcohol causes brain damage if used heavily enough over a long enough period of time. If we are in the business of banning anything that has the potential to cause harm, why stop at weed? Why is alcohol legal?

The argument is for adding an additional 'product' onto the mass market, that Alcohol damages people is not a reason to legalise cannabis.

Greebynog wrote:Annecdotal evidence is not evidence I'm afraid.

Then what is it?

In all seriousness, I was relating my personal experiences. I would be opposed to cannabis becoming as commonly used as say tobacco you can Google the studies yourself if they're the only evidence you'll accept.

Someone needs to come up with a way to allow these things to become available without creating the bingeing lifestyle that accompanies tobacco and alcohol use. There needs to be more limiting factors that price because that just makes people poor and dependant.

I forgot,using a certain drug(think it is meth)is not illegal in Norway.The government supplies them with magazines to sell(to be able to feed their habit),they also have set up restraunts that the people who can prove they are on afore mentioned drug can eat for free.They also have places where they can recieve clean needles,and use the drug in a controlled setting.


They say they have had less crime,also that they have had less drug related death.Maybe if other governments could run such a program,people would not have to resort to crime or something of this manner to feed their habit.

The name of the documentary is escaping me, but one of the main underlying themes of it is that weed today is much more potent than it was 30+ years ago. The increased potentcy (sp) is creating different, and untested, side effects.

Personally I'm against it. Unfortunately I know several potheads (within my family tree as well) and there is rarely a casual user. They generally started when they were younger and the continued use has been detrimental to their life.

Let's say the US government (heaven forbid) should legalize it. Guess what, the government is going to get involved. They'll grow it, sale it, and tax it. It will do nothing but harm society. If you're going to legalize it then why not legalize cocaine and pcp? What harm could that do.

The documentary was called super weed.(If I rember correctly.)

I'm for it.
If there's less medical problems associated with it than smoking tobacco and alcohol, then what's the problem?

EDIT::
I won't be using it, and if you tax it to huge heights I still have no problem.

Again, I'd love to see evidence that increased potency causes unintended side affects.

Cannabis is non-addictive, non-lethal and has proven medical benefits. How is it in any way the same as cocaine or pcp?

Just remembered: Messing with Heads
http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2005/s1315274.htm

Covers the lives of some Australian teens.

Regardless of what weed may, or may not, do for you it comes down to people having a hole in their lives and their need to fill it with something. I understand this, I chew tobacco and have had issues with other stuff in my past. It makes you feel good and gives you the opportunity to live "outside the box", I get this.

Off topic, but look at heroine. How many musicians have lived and died by heroine? It allows them to feel and think differently. They become inspired and create great music. For an example see Scott Weiland (STP), the guy from Blind Melon, and many others. It always ends badly. I'm not saying that weed is on the same level, but it leads to people doing stupid stuff. Alcohol acts in the same way (in mass quantities of course). I think weed becomes like a wrecking ball to your inhibitions.

barlio wrote:The name of the documentary is escaping me, but one of the main underlying themes of it is that weed today is much more potent than it was 30+ years ago. The increased potentcy (sp) is creating different, and untested, side effects.

Personally I'm against it. Unfortunately I know several potheads (within my family tree as well) and there is rarely a casual user. They generally started when they were younger and the continued use has been detrimental to their life.

Let's say the US government (heaven forbid) should legalize it. Guess what, the government is going to get involved. They'll grow it, sale it, and tax it. It will do nothing but harm society. If you're going to legalize it then why not legalize cocaine and pcp? What harm could that do.

There is no reliable scientific evidence to support the widely spoken claim that modern pot is much (20x, 40x) stronger than 20-30 years ago.

Secondly, users titrate the amount of active chemical they ingest through the smoking process. It's different with eaten cannabis of course.

Thirdly, part of the advantage of a legal framework would be to test and classify the strength of doses in the same way as beer or medicines.

Greebynog wrote:Again, I'd love to see evidence that increased potency causes unintended side affects.

Cannabis is non-addictive, non-lethal and has proven medical benefits. How is it in any way the same as cocaine or pcp?

Non-addictive my butt. Sure you smoke it once no problems, a couple of times life is good, then eventually you're smoking twice a week and buying Dave Matthews CDs (nothing wrong with Dave Matthews).

Again I'm not an expert (not that anybody is implying that), but I'm going off of personal experience with people I know. You can't measure how people cope with life. Science can only go so far. Why would anybody invest serious amounts of money into proving what marijuana can, or cannot do to you? For the time being most countries are going to keep it restricted. The stated medical benefits only help a limited amount of people and a majority of people in the real world could care less. Grass-root campaigns to legalize it (I used a pun, hurr hurr) are generally poorly organized and bad sources of information. Until there is a world-wide campaign to legalize it I will see it as a relatively non-issue.

Edit: @op, to obtain a more balanced view I would have suggested a thread title of "Should Marijuana be Legalized? Discuss". Just from the title we know your intentions and I don't know if you would get the full extent of possible disscusions. Just saying.

People can certainly fall into a cycle of excessive usage, but cannabis is not physically addictive. Thus, non-addictive. Also, addictiveness is not something we measure potential legality by. Cigarettes are extremely addictive.

And what's wrong with smoking a couple of times a week? There is plenty wrong with the Dave Matthews Band though.

Edit: Barlio, I think my opinion would have become clear very quickly anyway, and I've invited the opposite viewpoint throughout, that was the entire content of my first post in fact.

Also, regardless of whether marijuana is harmful or not, is that enough reason for your government to stop you doing it? Who has the right to tell me not to do anything I want that harms no other? The only real, serious harm caused by marijuana today is because it is illegal.

Greebynog wrote:have become clear very quickly anyway, and I've invited the opposite viewpoint throughout, that was the entire content of my first post in fact.

Also, regardless of whether marijuana is harmful or not, is that enough reason for your government to stop you doing it? Who has the right to tell me not to do anything I want that harms no other? The only real, serious harm caused by marijuana today is because it is illegal.

@Greebynog: I get your point. I just disagree with it, but as long as you are not willing to change your mind on a dime than that is fine (having principles is a good thing even if I disagree with them). As long as healthy discussion is on the table I'm cool with it (good for the brain).

Whether or not it harms somebody else is irrelevant. Sometimes we don't see the full effects. As far as not being harmful the last point I will make is in regards to a pregnant woman. If it is not harmful then what is wrong with a pregnant woman toking up? http://alcoholism.about.com/cs/pot/f/mjkids_faq14.htm

I just think it is one of those things that should be avoided, but the discussion is interesting regardless.

Advocating legalization isn't the same as saying 'WEED FOR ALL!'. I think there should be an age limit, as marijuana can have detrimental affects on the developing brain, hence why it's not a good idea for pregnant women. In adults though, not harmful.

I can see why you think it should be avoided, but should otherwise law-abiding citizens be criminalised and put through an already stretched legal system because they get high?

Well, that's the crux of anything that is illegal. Regardless of why, or why not, it is illegal, it's still illegal. If people break the law, you go to jail. It sucks that drug infractions make up such a large proportion of the crime (at least in the US), but when people are dumb that's what happens. Trust me, I hate paying for these people sitting around doing little in jail, but that is just the way things are. It's a common sense thing to you and me, but some people don't get it.

This reminds me of an episode of COPS where the cop had pulled over this redneck. The redneck had a joint on the top of his ear (next to his cap and fine, fine mullet) and the cop was asking him if he had smoked any weed today. The guy was like, "Hurr, nope not today". The cop points out the joint and the guy goes whiter than he already was.

Off topic, but the best episode of COPS was when the cop couldn't stop laughing because of the black midget (who just started booking it the second he saw the cop)that was trying to scale a light pole.

barlio wrote:Do you know any potheads? That should be reason enough.

What, they perform a useful function in society. Before the invention of the illegal immigrant they worked in countless minimum wage jobs the non-mouthbreathers wouldn't touch. Besides, someone has to give blood and "volunteer" for medical trials





(The above is sarcasm for the professionally offended).

barlio wrote:Well, that's the crux of anything that is illegal. Regardless of why, or why not, it is illegal, it's still illegal. If people break the law, you go to jail. It sucks that drug infractions make up such a large proportion of the crime (at least in the US), but when people are dumb that's what happens.

That's almost circular reasoning. It's illegal because its wrong and we know its wrong because its illegal?

I haven't smoked dope since University but it strikes me that the vast majority of problems surrounding dope (and most other drugs) stem from its legal status and the problems would be vastly reduced (if not eliminated) if dope where to be legalized, taxed and controlled.

The health concerns are a generally a smoke screen, given that heath problems can be also attributed to Alcohol, Salt, fatty foods and any attempt to regulate these are, rather hypocritically, met with almost universal commendation.

Besides when was the last time you read about anyone getting stoned and then murdering someone?

Pineapple Express, but I think since they were being shot at I don't think it is murder.

Who says that doing drugs doesn't harm anyone else. Think about if a father smoked weed every day after he got home from work just to relax a while, the kids would have a good chance of thinking of him as a dispassionate jerk off. I don't think that drugs could be regulated well enough for (all of) them to be legal. Let's ignore large crimes like murder as an result of drug use (since it doesn't really happen), but does a druge user add a whole lot to others? Again, I'm coming at this from the viewpoint of if parents were using with kids in the house.