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.

Da Boss wrote:As a percentage of the total people that eat food? And the dosage? Incomparable. Seriously.

Thats what I thought when I read what he said too. Everyone HAS to eat. Compare that to how many people (even teens that lie about it to be cool) smoke pot and it would be way less then 1% you cant compare that crap. Thats like airlines saying that flying is safer then driving because they have fewer accidents. Well yea, thats because pretty much everyone has 2 cars at their houses, how many airplanes are their?

But Im with the legalize it camp. The economic potential alone should be reason to do it. You think big tobacco makes alot of money? Their product kills people. Pot on the other hand....now that would make some insane money for everyone involved

@Da boss.

Thats nice, you never proved me wrong though.

Shadowbrand wrote:@Da boss.

Thats nice, you never proved me wrong though.

Thats because you said something stupid and incontrovertible. That doesn't make it a good point.

While i do not think it will directly decrease gang drug sales, as now i believe Meth is the number one street drug. What taxes, and fees would bring in from legalization would/could mean increased funding to the task forces that deal with gangs, and drugs etc.

Shadowbrand wrote:@Da boss.

Thats nice, you never proved me wrong though.

He proved that your point was irrelevant, which is just as good.

Deadshane1 wrote:What is the difference between the prohibition of alchohol back in the 20's or whenever and the "prohibition" of marijuana now?

Not making a statement. Actually wondering if there IS any significant difference.

Legalise it....and I'm in law enforcement.

Even the cops are on board!

Why would weed and other soft drugs be considered for rolling out to the public when a current narcotic substance and a current intoxicant have plenty of evidence against their consumption and have medical political and asocial campaigns warning of the effects of their use.

There are campaigns and warnings about alcohol as well, 'evidence against their consumption', as you may put it...

But damn, that was a long sentence w/o any punctuation.

Wait, marijuana's killed people?

I'm seriously asking, I've never heard of a single death directly related to pot.

Pot doesn't kill people.

I think it was Da Boss that suggested a few scientific findings regarding the health hazards of pot. Again, none of what he suggested sounded prevalent, although he suggested a situation in which a person he knew went to the hospital because of smoking pot. I don't doubt that it happened, but it is not anything I knew of before.

Something else about your brains most outer layer... I don't doubt there are health hazards, but the science suggesting links between pot and psychosis presume that in general, the subjects were not massively screwed up regardless. I don't mean to offend, but those that have used pot as a gateway drug, are certainly not your average stoners, and those that have encountered problems due to using marijuana, usually have factors suggesting previous symptoms.

Note: While pot may be able to trigger mental illness, there are no solid links to suggest this being the case, and those that experience effects along those lines were, IMHO and on average, predisposed to such changes happening in the first place. What I have seen, is hard drugs make a normal person crazy (albeit people that had addictive personalities); what I have not seen is pot make mellow Joe the average dude, turn into a raving psychopath, or even into a depressed individual for that matter. They seem to start out that way.

I won't say it has no effect at all, but it certainly doesn't seem to do much besides make people less active in general. That can be good or bad, and I certainly would not agree with it as a psychiatric medication. There may be some cases where it may help (eating disorders being one), but in general it doesn't seem like a good mix for already troubled people.

To the points concerning other drugs mixed into marijuana, I might suggest not smoking crazy ass looking weed. That might be a good idea. The pot that looks like it fell out of a camels butt, may not be the stuff that you want to smoke. Peer pressure is for suckers, don't smoke pot that looks like camel gak.

Two points, the reaction my ex had could have been due to what the weed was cut with, and yes you're absolutely right, generally the people who suffer psychological effects from pot have some sort of vunerability to that sort of thing. Drug induced psychosis does still happen though, and pot can definitely act as a catalyst in those situations.
As for deaths due to pot, I'm sure there are some road fatalities which can be directly attributed to the slackening of reaction times, but I've never read any hard numbers.

There are anti-use campaigns against booz and tobacco, they are controlled substances and are heavily regulated, i don't see why the same couldn't be done for MJ, while i am do not have the stats in front of me, i am sure more driving deaths are blamed on Drunk Driving, than weed smoking. But there are already laws against driving while stoned, so much would change there. The only thing i would have an issue with is states where its ok to smoke inside.. there would have to be regulations for outside in public places, because there is a very real thing called contact high, it bad enough with cigarette smoke... i don't want to get stoned because the guy next to me is toking up.

Its almost impossible to overdose on cannabis because you would have to take so much that you wouldn't be able to move to give yourself any more. Admittedly there will be people that have an adverse reaction to it, but there are also people that can die from eating nuts, dairy or seafood. The evidence that cannabis causes psycosis in people with predispositions towards mental problems is shakey and extremely difficult to prove. Honestly there are far worse things for you than cannabis.

Also to the guy that suggested a removal of health care to anyone to takes it, thejhn you would also have to do the same to people that smoke, drink, eat bad food, engage in dangerous sports, have dangerous jobs or do anything interesting at all.

Regwon wrote:

Also to the guy that suggested a removal of health care to anyone to takes it, thejhn you would also have to do the same to people that smoke, drink, eat bad food, engage in dangerous sports, have dangerous jobs or do anything interesting at all.

Yep, and thats already going on.

Legalize it, there's really no valid reason not to. its as simple as that.

Sorry guys, but your all wrong.

Marijuana HAS killed people.

For example...


In Afghanistan they grow lots of it, and i once caved a Taliban fighters skull in by smashing a 20lbs sack of it repeatedly over his head until the bag spilt.

this story is not actually true and was merely a poor attempt at humour

mattyrm wrote:Sorry guys, but your all wrong.

Marijuana HAS killed people.

For example...


In Afghanistan they grow lots of it, and i once caved a Taliban fighters skull in by smashing a 20lbs sack of it repeatedly over his head until the bag spilt.

this story is not actually true and was merely a poor attempt at humour

I'm sorry but you're wrong, Terrorists aren't people silly

Regwon wrote:
Also to the guy that suggested a removal of health care to anyone to takes it, thejhn you would also have to do the same to people that smoke, drink, eat bad food, engage in dangerous sports, have dangerous jobs or do anything interesting at all.

All those things directly impact insurance premiums, though its rare that any one will be the cause of a denied application. There's no reason that legal marijuana couldn't be roped into a similar category, though it would be up to the various insurance companies to decide if there was enough additional risk to merit the increase when compared to the total volume marijuana smokers.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mr. Burning wrote:Why would weed and other soft drugs be considered for rolling out to the public when a current narcotic substance and a current intoxicant have plenty of evidence against their consumption...

There's also a large body of evidence correlating the consumption of large amounts of meat and fat with the incidence of cancer, heart disease, diabetes, and many other maladies. Should we therefore regulate the consumption of meat and fat?

The truth is that raw longevity and perfect health are not necessarily to be considered so desirable as to forgo all other considerations in their pursuit. It is, of course, acceptable for someone to think in that manner, but it becomes problematic when social policy dictates that thinking.

Mr. Burning wrote:
...and have medical political and asocial campaigns warning of the effects of their use.

This is true, but there is a difference between trying to dissuade people from using drugs while accepting that it is their choice to do so, and outright making them illegal.

Regwon: I'm not anti pot legalisation, but I am anti pot disinformation.
Shadowbrand, I didn't see your earlier post, but as Dogma pointed out, I didn't need to prove you wrong, your statements had nothing to do with the argument.

Erm, wow, quoted indirectly twice by people, I feel special...feel free to call me by the name above the smurf picture rather than the 'guy that suggested...'

That is unless you can't see over the edge of the beerbong that is blocking your screen hippies!

Seriously though, yeah, joking about healthcare removal. I really don't think thats ever a good idea, although i do reckon there are some good arguements for legalizing a lot of different drugs like Cannabis and the like.

If only because it would spur the development of other more out there substances in other areas like food.

Come on, Ham Gum!

Mr. Burning wrote:Why would weed and other soft drugs be considered for rolling out to the public when a current narcotic substance and a current intoxicant have plenty of evidence against their consumption and have medical political and asocial campaigns warning of the effects of their use.

Because weed is apparently less dangerous than said substances, among other things?

gak, this is like saying that because morphine is addictive we should never try to develop new painkillers.

Making it legal will not stop the flow of illegal (untaxed) pot. If anything it will be harder to control what is legal and what is illegal. Alcohol is legal, yet you can still get illegal alcohol.

Pot is also a gateway drug. It leads peple to harder drugs, like Meth, coke, crack, and others. Of course Alcohol can do the same, but rationalizing that one bad thing is legal so every bad thing should be legal is flawed at best.

jbunny wrote:Making it legal will not stop the flow of illegal (untaxed) pot. If anything it will be harder to control what is legal and what is illegal. Alcohol is legal, yet you can still get illegal alcohol.

You can get illegal handbags as well. What is your point?

Legalize and regulate, it will make a huge difference in what you are suggesting.

Pot is also a gateway drug. It leads peple to harder drugs, like Meth, coke, crack, and others. Of course Alcohol can do the same, but rationalizing that one bad thing is legal so every bad thing should be legal is flawed at best.

I have seen some very scary situations involving hard drugs. People slamming heroin, smoking crack, and going no less than completely crazy smoking meth. You know what seeing that did to me? It showed the clear difference between a pothead, and a hardcore drug addict. Show me a person that used marijuana as a gateway drug, and I will show you someone who was predisposed to wanting to slam freaking needles in their arm. It takes a special sort of person to end up in situations such as that, and that is not insulting to their character, more a statement of the diversity of people.

Is there a good chance that little billy will grow up to use hard drugs after living in a crack house? Yes, and I feel terrible for his situation. Is there a good chance that little bobby will hunt down some crack after smoking a joint, all the while living a comfortable (if not kind of boring) suburban lifestyle? Not really. There are likely studies on this, and I would appreciate if anyone could link them into this discussion.

Can billy become a lawyer while bobby becomes a crackhead? Sure, but it is more than likely to be the opposite case in most situations. Go to AA meetings and a few NA meetings, then tell me what most of those people have in common. You can compare it to my experience, which is their background based in bad situations, that are very hard to deal with.

Your right though, giving kids hard drugs is fine as long as a doctor hands it to you in pill form. The problem is that we are discussing marijuana, and your gateway drug argument doesn't do enough to drag every single 'bad' thing on the planet into this conversation.

^^ Got to agree. As for the gateway thing, most people who smoked weed had drunk a beer before that at some point or had had a cigarette. They're the REAL gateway drugs. And anyone who has ever smoked cigarettes and quit, multiple times, knows how more addictive tobacco is than MJ.

Now where's me bong?

jbunny wrote:Making it legal will not stop the flow of illegal (untaxed) pot. If anything it will be harder to control what is legal and what is illegal. Alcohol is legal, yet you can still get illegal alcohol.

But you can't get illegal alcohol in the same quantities you could during prohibition, and the vast majority of states do not have a significant issue with the production and consumption of illegal alcohol. Compare this to the time when alcohol was illegal and bootlegging served as one of the primary revenue streams for the various crime syndicates across the United States.

jbunny wrote:
Pot is also a gateway drug. It leads peple to harder drugs, like Meth, coke, crack, and others. Of course Alcohol can do the same, but rationalizing that one bad thing is legal so every bad thing should be legal is flawed at best.

The gateway drug theory is almost total nonsense. It relies on the notion that marijuana, tobacco, and alcohol are somehow causal by nature; ie. using marijuana makes one more likely to use other drugs. The theory is deeply flawed because it fails to account for variance in the relative availability of the 'gateway drugs' when compared to 'harder' substances. The result is that it becomes impossible to establish anything beyond a correlative relationship; meaning only that people who use one drug are more likely to use other drugs. Note also that raw correlation makes no reference to the frequency of use.

If they legalize marijuana than I have nobody to bust a cap in when drug deals go down in my neighborhood since it'll be legal for the growers to sell and the buyers to buy.

Who the feth will I use for target practice?

helgrenze wrote:In Canada it is medically legalized. They have state controlled growers, it is graded and taxed and only sold through licensed pharmacies, which pay a fee for the license. If you get caught with untaxed (illegal) MJ, the confiscate your stash, test and grade it, tax and resell it. You also get a citation and have to pay a fine, no jail time unless you don't pay.

Some-one tell me where Canada is losing money on this.

This is the system I want in the U.S. Seriously.

Karon wrote:

helgrenze wrote:In Canada it is medically legalized. They have state controlled growers, it is graded and taxed and only sold through licensed pharmacies, which pay a fee for the license. If you get caught with untaxed (illegal) MJ, the confiscate your stash, test and grade it, tax and resell it. You also get a citation and have to pay a fine, no jail time unless you don't pay.

Some-one tell me where Canada is losing money on this.

This is the system I want in the U.S. Seriously.

I agree. Having it available for medical purposes (and requiring a prescription) would be great.

I say legalize, because I support the Rastafari movement. But it should be homegrown and not with any added stuff like some do.

Fateweaver wrote:If they legalize marijuana than I have nobody to bust a cap in when drug deals go down in my neighborhood since it'll be legal for the growers to sell and the buyers to buy.

Who the feth will I use for target practice?

Revenuers?