Should Marijuana be legalized in the United States?

[Teh Pwned]

I've heard alot of talk back and forth on the legalization of marijuana in the government and wondered began to wonder exactly why it was Illegal.

Was it addictive?
Not physically, at least, not any more than alcohol, but thats legal, is it not?

Was it hazardous to your health?
All drugs are, but then, cigarettes are too, and besides, shouldn't a person have the right if they want to hurt thier body or not?

How Badly did it influence your decisions?
Marijuana, being to mild to be in the catagory of hallucinogenics, only amplifies your sensitivity to light and colors, disinhibits, and relaxes the user, while at times giving them a euphoric high. And though it does slightly disable motor functions and coordination, its 7 times less potent than alcohol, making it much safer, although I'd be all for giving out DUH's. (Driving while high.)

But can't it been grown at your house, thus escaping taxation?
Yes, but alcohol too, can be distilled at a house, thus making them both able to evade taxation.

But Doesn't marijuana lead to bigger drugs?
Yes, its been shown that around 50% big time addicts of higher level drugs (I.E., Meth, Herion, Cocain.) started with marijuana. But, amazingly, the other 50% achieved it through alcohol.

So whats so bad about marijuana that's not bad about alcohol? I mean, I would think that staying home, getting stoned, and watching some TV would be worse than going to the bar, downing ten beers, then driving home and taking out a family. Personally, I say make it legal, its our choice if we want to smoke ourselves to death.

Opinions?

[Blackghost905]

I really dont care

[Ikerous]

I think Denver is an example of how the general public is starting to realize all of those facts (They just recently voted to legalize it).
We really just need to get it on some state ballots so people can vote on it.

Personally, I really want to see it legalized mostly because 280-300 bucks for an ounce is rediculous

[Nat Turner]

Legalize it. It's a person's own responsibility, and one should be able to take their health into their own hands.

[Sulkdodds]

I believe the answer is: yeah, probably.

[DrDevin]

I've heard alot of talk back and forth on the legalization of marijuana in the government and wondered began to wonder exactly why it was Illegal.

Was it addictive?
Not physically, at least, not any more than alcohol, but thats legal, is it not?

Was it hazardous to your health?
All drugs are, but then, cigarettes are too, and besides, shouldn't a person have the right if they want to hurt thier body or not?

How Badly did it influence your decisions?
Marijuana, being to mild to be in the catagory of hallucinogenics, only amplifies your sensitivity to light and colors, disinhibits, and relaxes the user, while at times giving them a euphoric high. And though it does slightly disable motor functions and coordination, its 7 times less potent than alcohol, making it much safer, although I'd be all for giving out DUH's. (Driving while high.)

But can't it been grown at your house, thus escaping taxation?
Yes, but alcohol too, can be distilled at a house, thus making them both able to evade taxation.

But Doesn't marijuana lead to bigger drugs?
Yes, its been shown that around 50% big time addicts of higher level drugs (I.E., Meth, Herion, Cocain.) started with marijuana. But, amazingly, the other 50% achieved it through alcohol.

So whats so bad about marijuana that's not bad about alcohol? I mean, I would think that staying home, getting stoned, and watching some TV would be worse than going to the bar, downing ten beers, then driving home and taking out a family. Personally, I say make it legal, its our choice if we want to smoke ourselves to death.

Opinions?

Anything addictive is usually not good: drugs, alcohol, etc

No you should not be allowed to hurt yourself, I pay taxes for peoples healthcare. I will allow you to kill youself only if they pass a law that says anyone who is diagnosed with lung cancer or is suffering from some sort of overdose should be left to die, not treated at my expense (or worse I die because I need an operation and you are in there). Of course this is in Canada so we pay for our healthcare not per visit so it may not apply there.

I dont like any sensory distortion, thats when bad things happen (ie drinking related deaths) although I know it is nothing too serious. I dont want any more DWH's as alcohol is bad enough. Why add more to the problem. Although if legalised it would be a good idea to give them out.

If legalised it would be either home grown or like the LCBO where it can only be purchased through the government.

Leading to worse drugs is never a good thing. Every drug user I know drinks but most alcohol users I know dont do drugs. Either way not good.

My #1 complaint is second hand smoke. Sure you can hurt yourself but the problem is that I will be getting hurt too and that is not right. Besides if alcohol is a bad thing why do you compare marijuana to it? because it is slightly "less bad?"

Well if you can overcome the second hand smoke and healthcare issues then sure legalise it!

[Ennui]

I've recently decided to stop smoking marijuana for a while (I was only a light smoker anyway), and it's working out fine for me. Cannabis is not at all addicting to me. Secondhand smoke is a NON ISSUE with marijuana and to be honest lung cancer is barely one.

I also never drink, even when I did smoke.

Mushrooms, now... that's a different story.

I believe it should be legalized - either that or alcohol become illegal.

Someone get burner in here!


But Doesn't marijuana lead to bigger drugs?
Yes, its been shown that around 50% big time addicts of higher level drugs (I.E., Meth, Herion, Cocain.) started with marijuana. But, amazingly, the other 50% achieved it through alcohol.

This is manipulative propaganda. Marijuana use does NOT, and I repeat does NOT lead to more dangerous drug habits. The fact that most hard drug users also smoke / have smoked marijuana doesn't mean that all marijuana smokers use hard drugs. In fact, the vast majority of pot smokers don't ever do any other drugs, except perhaps alcohol or tobacco.


The bottom line is that you cannot make a real argument against the legalization of marijuana without bending the facts or making an argument against alcohol or tobacco as well.

[Teh Pwned]

I think the easy problem to second-hand smoke would be not to hang around people when they are smoking, and make smoking in public places illegal. (As it is in Florida.)

But yes, shrooms, pcp, cocaine? That can stay on the illegal list.

[Ikerous]

But yes, shrooms, pcp, cocaine? That can stay on the illegal list.
I wholeheartedly disagree

[DeusExMachina]

Mary Jane should stay illegal. They should make alcohol illegal too. And cigarettes.

[Teh Pwned]

I wholeheartedly disagree

Cocaine is one helluva drug. :smoking:

[Ennui]

I think the easy problem to second-hand smoke would be not to hang around people when they are smoking, and make smoking in public places illegal. (As it is in Florida.)

But yes, shrooms, pcp, cocaine? That can stay on the illegal list.
If you knew even the barest of facts about psilocybin mushrooms you wouldn't have said that. Lumping ANY hallucinogen (except ones like Datura that are natural poisons) in with stimulants (cocaine, speed, methamphetamine), depressants (various prescription pills, alcohol), or dissociatives (PCP, ketamine, DXM) is purely ignorant.

Magic Mushrooms facts:
http://www.shroomery.org/index.php/par/24311
http://www.shroomery.org/index.php/par/3170
http://www.erowid.org/plants/mushrooms/
http://leda.lycaeum.org/?ID=54

[Teh Pwned]

If you knew even the barest of facts about psilocybin mushrooms you wouldn't have said that. Lumping ANY hallucinogen (except ones like Datura that are natural poisons) in with stimulants (cocaine, speed, methamphetamine), depressants (various prescription pills, alcohol), or dissociatives (PCP, ketamine, DXM) is purely ignoran

It wasn't out of ignorance, it was out of bad experiance.

[Blackghost905]

Mary Jane should stay illegal. They should make alcohol illegal too. And cigarettes.
If they did that you know how many people would be ticked off! ALMOST! our whole country would be killers without nicotine and Alcohol!

[Ennui]

It wasn't out of ignorance, it was out of bad experiance.
A personal experience? Should have prepared adequately. Practically every decent mushroom information site on the internet is completely riddled with cautions on how important it is to be in a good mindset and situation. Set and setting, as Leary put it.

[Teh Pwned]

Well, first time, weekend, wanted to get to them quick, ect. It was the worst trip of my life, so suffice to say, I'm just personaly biased against using shrooms myself, but I don't really care about thier legalization so much as, say, herion.

[Ennui]

Well, first time, weekend, wanted to get to them quick, ect.
Well that doesn't sound good. My first trip was completely ****ed up too, we messed up in planning and ended up completely falling apart... I won't get into details but let me tell you, getting busted by your friends mom because she thinks you're stoned off your ass is scary on shrooms, and eating dinner with his family while tripping my balls off was one of the strangest, most confusing experiences of my life.

[Teh Pwned]

Well that doesn't sound good. My first trip was completely ****ed up too, we messed up in planning and ended up completely falling apart... I won't get into details but let me tell you, getting busted by your friends mom because she thinks you're stoned off your ass is scary on shrooms, and eating dinner with his family while tripping my balls off was one of the strangest, most confusing experiences of my life.

We tried it at my friends house, it managed to stay all good for a while, but we forgot to lock the doors, and one of us decided to leave. We figured out he was missing, went to find him, I thought I was in Lord of The Rings, looking for the Ring Bearer, and I thought that the woods were trying to kill me. That about did it for me.

[Dalamari]

I don't care if pot is legalized, just as long as I don't have to hear some idiot talking about "I GOT SO ****EN WASTED OMG!" we get it, you're a loser (not that I'm saying that all reefers are losers)

[brink's]

I don't care if pot is legalized, just as long as I don't have to hear some idiot talking about "I GOT SO ****EN WASTED OMG!" we get it, you're a loser (not that I'm saying that all reefers are losers)
You'd have to hear that anyways....so it's lose/lose for you.;)

[ailevation]

Be careful where you buy your pot from, dealers can be shady and put other substances in your marijuana.

Yah like somebody else it was Denver or some other mid-western state in one of their little cities whatever, it's legal to have possession of marijuana, but only an amount that is under an ounce.

That'd be so tight, buying mari J at the local 7/11 and the dude passes you this cute little bag full made by, "Maribrand"

[short recoil]

It should be legal, as should all drugs (i believe nothing should be banned if you can aquire it yourself)
But medical help should not be given to those who develop health problems through drug use.

[Blackghost905]

Yeh well, There are ups and downs to this subject, People are getting it anyway right now as it is.

[Danimal]

I think it should be legal, but for private use in the home.

[DeusExMachina]

I hear enough people say "OH MAN WE GOT SO ****ED UP YO." I don't want to hear about how more retards got ****ed up tenfold :|.

[brink's]

It should be legal, as should all drugs (i believe nothing should be banned if you can aquire it yourself)
But medical help should not be given to those who develop health problems through drug use.
I don't know about that, some 14 year old gets hooked on Meth because he's at the "experimental stage" in his life, and its in wide supply his local Cosco ( or where ever). Realizes he's made a huge mistake, tries to stop, but hears "srry, thats your problem, now **** off".

Let's face it, drugs harder then Weed/Mush have a tendency to rouine lives, legalizing them all would be opening the door to disaster.

Yes, weed should be legalized, the only person it hurts is.........well.....no one.

[Ikerous]

I don't know about that, some 14 year old gets hooked on Meth because he's at the "experimental stage" in his life, and its in wide supply his local Cosco
It's a lot easier for minors to get drugs when they're illegal.
I think it should be legal, but for private use in the home.
qft

[TheGrimSweeper]

Mary Jane should stay illegal. They should make alcohol illegal too. And cigarettes.

If they banned alcohol I would be tempted to kill someone.

As for weed, dont care, but if cigarrettes are legal, then weed should be, as cigarettes are worse for your health. Alcohol really is due depending on how often and how much you drink.

[Danimal]

qft

<3

6Clowns

I've recently decided to stop smoking marijuana for a while (I was only a light smoker anyway), and it's working out fine for me. Cannabis is not at all addicting to me. Secondhand smoke is a NON ISSUE with marijuana and to be honest lung cancer is barely one.

I also never drink, even when I did smoke.

Mushrooms, now... that's a different story.

I believe it should be legalized - either that or alcohol become illegal.

Someone get burner in here!


This is manipulative propaganda. Marijuana use does NOT, and I repeat does NOT lead to more dangerous drug habits. The fact that most hard drug users also smoke / have smoked marijuana doesn't mean that all marijuana smokers use hard drugs. In fact, the vast majority of pot smokers don't ever do any other drugs, except perhaps alcohol or tobacco.


The bottom line is that you cannot make a real argument against the legalization of marijuana without bending the facts or making an argument against alcohol or tobacco as well.

Quoted for future reference when penguins are our masters.

[brink's]

It's a lot easier for minors to get drugs when they're illegal.

qft
It wasn't for me, by the time i was 16 I knew a group 18 year olds quite well and let's say they liked to drink.....

I guess its the double edged sword, but i still think drugs would be in wider use by all age groups, if it were legal.

[willyd]

First off, I am for total legalization of marijuana.

But I must say what really gets me is that only a few states have allowed medical marijuana. I have crohn's disease and using marijuana has been very effective for reducing my nausea. The other drugs they prescribe have way too many side effects and make me feel awful. So everytime somebody is against medical marijuana...be prepared because its an emotional subject to me.

[Spectre01]

No it should not.

[The Mullinator]

Either ban all recreational and/or mood/mind altering drugs or legalize it. It is perfectly safe unlike many other kinds of drugs which is why there are so few arguments against it.

If you want to ban all recreational and/or mood/mind altering drugs then we are going to have to ban anything with caffeine as well. Yes it is in fact a drug. In other words yes I do think it should be legalized.

[Vigilante]

If its legalized I'm going to open an exporting plant in Colombia and hire 100 ten-year-olds to roll weed for me and pay them $.13 an hour, all the while I'm sitting in my office in my big leather chair counting profits.


Disclaimer: I do not smoke weed.

[gh0st]

no because all people who smoke weed are losers. our youth is ****ed up enough as it is, we dont need them staring at pretty colors or wearing sandels and making hemp bracelets.

legalize it only if you make military service mandatory for 4 years after high school.

[Ikerous]

no because all people who smoke weed are losers.
**** you.
legalize it only if you make military service mandatory for 4 years after high school.
13th ammendment

[gh0st]

13th ammendment
wow... so south korea is a slave state? and israel?

paying your taxes is slavery? hint: because something is "mandatory" does not make it "slavery". thats an easy one, give me another. maybe another doobie will help you think of a better argument.

[Ikerous]

wow... so south korea is a slave state? and israel?
In my opinion... yea
hint: because something is "mandatory" does not make it "slavery".
Mandatory servitude is completely different than taxes...
key word being servitude

And i'd give you more reasons why im against the draft, but im out to go smoke a j :) peace

[gh0st]

In my opinion... yea
behold the logic of a pothead. south korea the slave state! HOORAH! :rolling:

And i'd give you more reasons why im against the draft, but im out to go smoke a j :) peace
ah theres youre problem: reading is difficult for you.

draft is not equal to mandatory military service. a draft is where the poor black kids have to go to war and the rich white ones sit around and suck on j's all day. mandatory service is where EVERYONE has to devote a certain number of years to kicking peoples ass.

on second thought, no this is a bad idea. i dont want a bunch of emaciated stoners fighting with me.

ps, if the 13th amendment applies to anything other than slavery as it existed 120 years ago, then why did we have a draft in the 70s? ouch. should have paid attention during US history.

[Ikerous]

behold the logic of a pothead. south korea the slave state! HOORAH! :rolling:

ah theres youre problem: reading is difficult for you.

draft is not equal to mandatory military service. a draft is where the poor black kids have to go to war and the rich white ones sit around and suck on j's all day. mandatory service is where EVERYONE has to devote a certain number of years to kicking peoples ass.

on second thought, no this is a bad idea. i dont want a bunch of emaciated stoners fighting with me.

ps, if the 13th amendment applies to anything other than slavery as it existed 120 years ago, then why did we have a draft in the 70s? ouch. should have paid attention during US history.
I like how you make points by being mean

[gh0st]

I like how you make points by being mean
you're right, i apologize

[Ikerous]

you're right, i apologize
:) <3 .

[Glirk Dient]

Trying to say marijuana should be legalized because alchohol is has to be one of the worst arguments ever. Alchohol is legal because we can't make it illegal. It has been tried before and didn't work well.

[Ikerous]

Trying to say marijuana should be legalized because alchohol is has to be one of the worst arguments ever. Alchohol is legal because we can't make it illegal. It has been tried before and didn't work well.
Yea, it really isn't the best point. However, it tends to be effective because most ppl are against alcohol prohibition. Therefore that person would also logically be against marijuana prohibition.

Personally the most convincing arguements against it come from the libertarian perspective

[ailevation]

Alcohol and tobacco basically grew up with America itself. Rum and Tobacco were major exports back in the day.

now that I think about it...
If marijuana IS legalized, who knows what the companies would stash in Mary J when they sell the stuff for profits? Most likely some nicotine with Mary J.

[Ikerous]

If marijuana IS legalized, who knows what the companies would stash in Mary J when they sell the stuff for profits? Most likely some nicotine with Mary J.
Wouldn't bother me any. If it were legal i'd just buy cases of blunts from reputable companies and have a very foggy life :)

[ericms]

Wouldn't bother me cause I would just eat it raw anyway. It just seems a little silly to me that a plant is illegal.

[shadow6899]

well im glad this thread was covered before i even got a chance to speak. Ghost man, plz stop being so ignorant. That's not a diss or disgrace toward you, i seriously mean it. If you really believe and mean everything you said then i feel sorry for you. Nothing else to say really, it's all been covered.

[Sulkdodds]

Trying to say marijuana should be legalized because alchohol is has to be one of the worst arguments ever. Alchohol is legal because we can't make it illegal. It has been tried before and didn't work well.

Not exactly the worst argument ever. Alcohol causes far more crime, strife and harm than weed has ever done. Cigarettes have the issue of passive smoking which, most scientists appear to argue, is very dangerous. Isn't it an infringement of civil liberties to allow someone to kill your brain cells by walking past you? But it's not illegal. So why should weed be illegal, especially if we're talking about legalisation only in the home and not in public places?

Also, way to go on the 'all stoners are losers' generalisation Gh0st. Hey, did you know? All drinkers are losers too! And so are all smokers!

NOTE: This is a 'sarcasm'.

[the_lone_wolf]

LOL, i love how it's the people who smoke it that seem to be defending it:D

ok, first off, i've been through University, i know people who have and still smoke cannabis, frequently and infrequently, i don't mind occasionally being around people who smoke it but would never use it myself because of the following:

"Self reported cannabis use as a risk factor for schizophrenia in Swedish conscripts of 1969" published in the BMJ (British Medical Journal) in 2002

This study surveyed 50,087 Swedish conscripts from 1969-70 (97% of the country's male population aged 18-20). Data on self-reported cannabis use prior to conscription was cross-checked against linked records for hospital admissions from 1970-1996 for schizophrenia and other psychoses. Confounding variables such as use of other psychoactive drugs and personality traits linked to social integration were controlled for.

Zammit and colleagues concluded that cannabis use is associated with an increased risk of developing schizophrenia, consistent with a causal relationship. Use of cannabis prior to age of conscription was associated with a 30% increase in risk of developing schizophrenia. Risk increased with frequency of use. Cannabis use more than 50 times prior to age of conscription was associated with a 6.7 fold increase in risk for developing schizophrenia.

Or see "Cannabis use in adolescence and risk for adult psychosis" by Louise Arseneault and others which followed 1037 individuals born in Dunedin, New Zealand, in 1972-73 to age 26. It obtained information on psychotic symptoms at age 11 and drug use at ages 15 and 18 from self reports and assessed psychiatric symptoms at age 26.

...cannabis use is associated with an increased risk of schizophrenia even after psychotic symptoms preceding first cannabis use are controlled for. Early cannabis use confers greater risk for schizophrenia, possibly because cannabis use becomes longstanding. 10% of cannabis users by age 15 developed schizophrenia by age 26 compared to 3% of the remaining cohort.

These two studies focus on the effect of smoking cannabis on the young, they both show patterns that the use of cannabis before the age of 18 are at a greater risk of developing schizophrenia, this relationship is even more pronounced if those who are smoking cannabis are below the age of 15...

See also:

MTS. CONCLUSION: Marijuana and tobacco smoking each produces significant bronchial mucosal histopathology and the effects of marijuana and tobacco appear additive.
http://www.chestjournal.org/cgi/content/abstract/112/2/319?ijkey=f7431b889f0e428e8174cd182e21f11455277cef&keytype2=tf_ipsecsha

And:

Our analysis indicated that marijuana use may interact with mutagen sensitivity and other risk factors to increase the risk of head and neck cancer
...the carcinogenic properties of marijuana smoke are similar to those of tobacco
http://cebp.aacrjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/8/12/1071

Now excuse me for using sources like the BMJ and CHEST, i don't believe what anti-drug or pro-drug people say simply because they are biased for whatever reason. there is enough scientific medical evidence of the negatives of smoking cannabis (as well as drinking too much and smoking) to make me think the short term reward is certainly not worth the long term risk...

If someone want's to do it then that's fine, so long as they do it in the privacy of their home, and they give up their right to medical treatment because of it, much like people who refuse to stop smoking shouldn't get treatment for mouth/throat/lung cancer, those who are obese through their own laziness don't deserve treatment for their failing hearts, and people on the liver transplant list who go out and get wasted don't deserve the second chance either...

to counter the "oh noes but drinking is like a million times worse" argument i agree, ongoing studies are currently showing that alchohol damages the brain more than cannabis or tobacco, that's why i don't make a habit of getting bladdered on a frequent basis.

:cheers:

[Sulkdodds]

Well, I don't actually smoke pot, so I'm pretty unbiased in this matter....


If someone want's to do it then that's fine, so long as they do it in the privacy of their home, and they give up their right to medical treatment because of it, much like people who are obese through their own laziness don't deserve treatment for their failing hearts

???????

[the_lone_wolf]

???????
what's wrong with that? you cause suffering to yourself, someone else sorts it out for you at someone else's expense, seems illogical to me

it seems right wing but i have remarkably little sympathy for people who choose to eat lots of fried chicken and cake and get so fat they can't move, it's a choice and it doesn't happen overnight, the same as years of heavy drinking will screw over your liver and years of smoking will screw over your respitory system, the only difference is the obese people should have to buy two airplane seats so they don't overhang mine;)

[Sulkdodds]

Right, but what if you're a kid with stupid parents that don't bring you up to eat properly? Isn't that a very common problem? What if you have some sort of problem, an eating addiction (as it were)? What if you're incredibly depressed and eat to get out of it and it's not really your fault (even though it is, to be honest)? What if? There are too many ifs and maybes to just say 'fat people don't deserve medical help' even without the fact that it's pretty unethical anyway. A government should provide completely equal help to all its citizens, and not make distinctions - because how far can you take that? You could argue that poor people don't deserve help because it's their own fault they're poor (that is, after all, the American Dream).

[the_lone_wolf]

A government should provide completely equal help to all its citizens, and not make distinctions - because how far can you take that? You could argue that poor people don't deserve help because it's their own fault they're poor
no, if you read what i said it's not "fat people don't deserve medical help" it's "people who choose to damage themselves by doing whatever, smoking/drinking/overeating, don't deserve to be supported by the state"

kids who are fed junk by their parents don't know what they're doing to themselves, the parents are to blame, but once you hit 20 i think a basic knowledge of what's good for you and what's not should be there if you've had reasonable contact with other people who's parents did tell them to eat the right stuff...

an eating addiction isn't the same as eating loads out of choice, you should be able to get help for any addiction...

What if you're incredibly depressed and eat to get out of it and it's not really your fault (even though it is, to be honest)?
if someone is depressed they ought to seek medical help, not nip out to KFC

as for poor people, well, as i said before it depends on whether the result is caused by their own choice, as wrong as it is some children will be born into families that are poor (perhaps if the parents had thought the process through a little better or hadn't got drunk/stoned and forgotten the condom it would be different), there's not a lot (besides redistributing the world's wealth) that we can do about it and children there will most likely end up like their parents, it's a shame and the ones that don't end up in gangs, on drugs or in jail deserve better and should get help to get out of situations like that, however if they're poor cause they spent all their money on fried chicken and cake then i have little sympathy:thumbs:

anyway, somewhere back there we were discussing cannabis:)

[Sulkdodds]

Who's going to say whether people deserve help or not? What, do you suggest an independant commision be set up to judge people? Everyone should get help.

Oh yeah, cannibis discussion.

[brink's]

Who else is going to defend cannabis use LoneWolf? It's those who use it who are most affected.
Marijuana is not addictive, at least not physically.
A recent study in Macleans Magazine stated that near 75% of canadians over 18 have tried marjuana in their life, and that compared to the amount of people who are schizophrenic are quite low. I'm not saying it doesn't contribute, but i don't think its unfair to say that at the very least the majority of people who have used MJ or even use it on a regualr basis are going to be diagnosed with schizophrenia.

[the_lone_wolf]

Marijuana is not addictive
i suggest you inform the people who do the studies and the BMJ, as they seem to be saying the opposite...
A recent study in Macleans Magazine stated that near 75% if canadians over 18 have tried marjuana in their life, and that compared to the amount of people who are schizophrenic are quite low.
read the articles, you'll see (and as i said) the causal relationship between cannabis use and schizophrenia is based on use before the age of 18, after the age of 18 the known risks would appear to be similar to smoking (although some papers are suggesting that cannabis smoking is more damaging than tobacco for several reasons i'll cover later when i get back)

as for the Macleans article, i'm sorry but i've never heard of that magazine here, "maclean" to me is a brand of toothpaste, i'd prefer to take my source of medical information from someone like the BMJ...

Sulkdodds: the people who dispense the medical help are probably in the best place to assess whether someone should contribute to their healthcare or be refused. much like the do currently with liver transplant patients.

[Shakermaker]

Cannabis should be legal. Making substances illegal only promotes criminal activities. Besides, like someone else wrote: why make a plant illegal?

Cannabis is basically legal over here in the Netherlands and it works fine. It's not like we're a nation of dippy potheads. And we have the lowest figures of hard drug addicts in the whole of Europe.

[OCybrManO]

Sulkdodds: the people who dispense the medical help are probably in the best place to assess whether someone should contribute to their healthcare or be refused. much like the do currently with liver transplant patients.That's because there aren't enough livers to go around. If you have five livers and 100 patients... do you give them to 97-year-old people that drank their entire lives? No. It's not an effective use of the limited resource. There are a lot of factors to consider. If there were enough livers there would be no need for a list. Everyone could get one. In the case of medicines, most can be produced in large enough capacities to serve everyone that needs them. So, the only limiting factor is profit.

The nice (and I use that term loosely) healthcare system we have in the USA is purely optional. What does that do? It kills the system. How? Let's break it down. First, a theoretical explanation of the system is necessary... because, in theory, it could work (possibly even with enough left over to cover poor people if the payments were right)... but it isn't... so, something is wrong. The idea is that everyone pays a monthly fee to get coverage whether or not they need it at the moment so that, at any given time, your money is helping other people and, when you need it, other people's money will help you. The total money fed into the program by the subscribers would be able to cover the relatively small percentage of people that are sick at any given time. The bad part is that's not how it really works... and it's not all the insurance company's fault. It only works if healthy people pay for insurance... but healthy people don't plan on getting sick. So, they think they can put it off until they get older. Without healthy people feeding money into the system to spread the load the insurance company can't give the patients as much coverage. Then, to help paying customers and minimize the number of freeloaders... they create a screening process to make sure you aren't sick before you get the insurance... or have a history of illness. Then, that isn't enough to scare people into getting insurance early... so, all it does is prevent people from joining even after they become healthy again... further cutting down on the number of people feeding the system. So, they're left with no choice but to raise the payments, cut the benefits, or both. Eventually, people or their employers can no longer afford healthcare and some people are forced to go without it. With a smaller percentage of the population covered, more sick people are forced to go to an ER (where they, by law, have to treat you if they are able to and have the room) instead of a doctor's office. Then, when the space is full people have to be turned away to other hospitals. With the influx of new patients in the ER... what would you expect them to do? Build larger facilities, right? Wrong. See, the new customers can't afford to pay... so, the profitability goes through the floor and the hospitals start bleeding money. Then, some hospitals are forced to close... and the new ones being built, because of the money sink that having an ER has become, decide either to not have an ER (to avoid the legal issue altogether) or to shrink it and minimize losses. That means, even though there is already an issue of overcrowding there are now less facilities than there used to be... the result being that, instead of just going to the ER to get care, uncovered sick people have nowhere to go... making the issue of not having insurance even more important... despite the decreasing number of insured people. It's spiraling downward to its inevitable destruction. The countermeasures are like putting a band-aid on a severed limb.

AFAIK, that whole thing is already happening, but it's all off the top of my head, so feel free to fact-check it and get back to me...

In short, human nature (not wanting to pay for insurance until you need it) is the cause of the failure. The only way to fix that part is to force people to use it. The best way to do that would be through a universal federal healthcare program paid for by taxes... which has the added benefit of higher efficiency (less administrative waste and other similar expenditures) than privatized insurance and, for the most part, the infrastructure is already there.

... but enough about healthcare. :angel: Let's get back to the issue at hand.

[brink's]

i suggest you inform the people who do the studies and the BMJ, as they seem to be saying the opposite...
then i don't know what to say, I've known many people who were at one time long time users and quit no problem, while i myself havn't used for over a year and have had no problem doing so. So as far as personal experience goes, its like eating a bag of chips....."gee I'm full and don't like this brand anymore( puts down, never looks back).

as for the Macleans article, i'm sorry but i've never heard of that magazine here, "maclean" to me is a brand of toothpaste, i'd prefer to take my source of medical information from someone like the BMJ...

Macleans is a political magazine, like the Canadian version of TIME and it was, very accuratly, stating how many people in Canada have tried various substances over the age of 18, marijuana was one of them. It wasn't giving any incite into the effects of the drugs. So, I'm pretty sure its credible.

[Glirk Dient]

Not exactly the worst argument ever. Alcohol causes far more crime, strife and harm than weed has ever done. Cigarettes have the issue of passive smoking which, most scientists appear to argue, is very dangerous. Isn't it an infringement of civil liberties to allow someone to kill your brain cells by walking past you? But it's not illegal. So why should weed be illegal, especially if we're talking about legalisation only in the home and not in public places?

Yeah...alchohol is very bad. It was legalized and has become too popular to make illegal again. Back when they legalized it(or allowed it at least) they all liked it and didn't think it was as bad as it is in any way. So to put alchohol and marijuana in the same argument kind of puts marijuana in a bad light. How do we know we won't regret making it legal? It would become too popular and common to make illegal again and would be far easier to bootleg than alchohol.

[OCybrManO]

If Jesus was on drugs (http://www.cannabisculture.com/backissues/cc11/christ.html)... who are we to argue?

[Zeus]

it should be legal

[ailevation]

I wouldn't doubt mary J is addictive. Why is that such a big factor? It's probably not HIGHLY addictive, but, it is. I mean, McDonalds and chocolate is addictive, I saw this on Supersize me. The guy started getting addicted for McDonalds for god's sake. People get addicted off of caffeine. I mean people are highly addicted to tobacco because of the nicotine. Why woudn't people get highly addicted off of mary J if they stuffed it with nictotine?

[Solaris]

I say legalise it.
If it was legal it would be safe too, cause some times there like rat posion and all sort of stuff in with it.
Although kids are more likely to get hold of it. I think what we need is proper responcable drugs education, maybe give the kids some weed in school, in a safe enviroment of course, and explain it too them and remove the cool factor ect.

[Glirk Dient]

I say legalise it.
If it was legal it would be safe too, cause some times there like rat posion and all sort of stuff in with it.
Although kids are more likely to get hold of it. I think what we need is proper responcable drugs education, maybe give the kids some weed in school, in a safe enviroment of course, and explain it too them and remove the cool factor ect.

Just because it is legal does not in any way mean it is safe. Look at cigarettes and alchohol...IMO those should be illegal but since they have been legal there is no turning back.

[The Mullinator]

Just because it is legal does not in any way mean it is safe. Look at cigarettes and alchohol...IMO those should be illegal but since they have been legal there is no turning back.
But what is so unsafe about marijuana? Smoking it is unsafe just like smoking any substance is unsafe. However when it comes to other forms of consumption there really aren't any known safety concerns that are any worse than things like caffeine.

[Reaktor4]

Was it addictive?
Not physically, at least, not any more than alcohol
:laugh:
But Doesn't marijuana lead to bigger drugs?
Yes, its been shown that around 50% big time addicts of higher level drugs (I.E., Meth, Herion, Cocain.) started with marijuana.
It really doesnt lead to anything. Id love if you could prove chemically that it makes people want to try other drugs. The only two reasons why this could happen are:
a) someone tries it and realises what a load of bollocks they had been taught about it from the government, school, media etc and think that chances are the stuff they heard about other drugs also is untrue, and therefore out of curiosity they decide to try other drugs.
b) the dealer convinces them to buy something else.
People 'start' with weed because they come across it first.
Anything addictive is usually not good: drugs, alcohol, etc
It depends. If the person has access to enough of the drug to keep withdrawals in check (eg, if it was legal and sold at a reasonable price or available on prescription), and long term use of said drug isnt harmful (eg, clean heroin), then its not much of a problem.
No you should not be allowed to hurt yourself, I pay taxes for peoples healthcare. I will allow you to kill youself only if they pass a law that says anyone who is diagnosed with lung cancer or is suffering from some sort of overdose should be left to die, not treated at my expense (or worse I die because I need an operation and you are in there). Of course this is in Canada so we pay for our healthcare not per visit so it may not apply there.
This is ridiculous.. Far more people need hospital visits when you make drugs illegal. And dont forget about this (http://www.drugsense.org/wodclock.htm)
My #1 complaint is second hand smoke. Sure you can hurt yourself but the problem is that I will be getting hurt too and that is not right.
It barely causes respitory harm to the user let alone you.
Besides if alcohol is a bad thing why do you compare marijuana to it? because it is slightly "less bad?"
Less bad? Theyre not in the same universe.
I've recently decided to stop smoking marijuana for a while (I was only a light smoker anyway), and it's working out fine for me. Cannabis is not at all addicting to me.
Me either. I havnt smoked in a few months and as with every other time ive taken a break, no matter how heavily i smoked, i notice absolutely nothing.
I wholeheartedly disagree
Me too.
Mary Jane should stay illegal. They should make alcohol illegal too. And cigarettes.
Good idea, lets cause more crime, fund and make more criminals, put all the tobacco/alcohol addicts into the same position crack addicts are currently in, reduce productivity further, waste more billions etc
I don't know about that, some 14 year old gets hooked on Meth because he's at the "experimental stage" in his life, and its in wide supply his local Cosco
Who presumably wouldnt sell it to him at that age. A dealer would though.
Let's face it, drugs harder then Weed/Mush have a tendency to rouine lives, legalizing them all would be opening the door to disaster.
Have you thought about how 'they' ruin lives? Someone gets addicted, and since the people who have control of the market are criminals who charge many times more than the drugs are actually worth for an impure, more dangerous version of the drug, they quickly end up skint, so they start stealing, burgling houses, prostituting or whatever else they can do to get the money. Meantime, the guys selling the stuff are raking in billion upon billion yearly, and billions in taxpayers money is wasted.
i still think drugs would be in wider use by all age groups, if it were legal.
So why is drug use lower in countries where they are decriminalised, but continually increasing in prohibitionist countries? America and the uk have the biggest, and youngest, userbase in the world.
Either ban all recreational and/or mood/mind altering drugs or legalize it. It is perfectly safe unlike many other kinds of drugs which is why there are so few arguments against it.
Not exactly, it can cause mild bronchitis (a cough)..
If you want to ban all recreational and/or mood/mind altering drugs then we are going to have to ban anything with caffeine as well. Yes it is in fact a drug. In other words yes I do think it should be legalized.
Chocolate too. And dont forget anti-depressants and half the other 'mood/mind altering' drugs used as medication.

no because all people who smoke weed are losers.
foad.
http://www.slatts.fsworld.co.uk/famous.htm all losers?
Trying to say marijuana should be legalized because alchohol is has to be one of the worst arguments ever. Alchohol is legal because we can't make it illegal. It has been tried before and didn't work well.
Prohibition of anything doesnt work well, the complete opposite actually.
they both show patterns that the use of cannabis before the age of 18 are at a greater risk of developing schizophrenia
For people who are genetically predisposed to it. I dont think anyone here is saying kids with a family history of mental illness should toke.
i suggest you inform the people who do the studies and the BMJ, as they seem to be saying the opposite...
Then they dont know what addictive means.
some papers are suggesting that cannabis smoking is more damaging than tobacco for several reasons i'll cover later when i get back)
Its not. Tobacco is so dangerous because of how its grown, in radioactive soil. Thats why it causes cancer.
If it was legal it would be safe too, cause some times there like rat posion and all sort of stuff in with it.
umm i dont think rat poison has ever been found in it..

[Ikerous]

foad.
http://www.slatts.fsworld.co.uk/famous.htm all losers?
Holy crap! Bob Marley smokes weed!?

Oh, and nice post :)

[DeusExMachina]

I have no problem with people smoking weed. I don't care nor want to do it, but you know, to each its own. What I don't like is how people brag that they smoke weed. Why are you so proud of smoking a substance? They act like they're hot shit. Its retarded.

This country will never make weed legal. Caffeine/Alcohol/Cigarettes are bad enough, we don't need anymore body pollutants. Sure, I like drinking Snapple and Soda from time to time, but drinking them doesn't make me act like a ****ing moron. If there was a required test for people to take to be eligible for buying weed, then I'd be fine with it. The other ****tards would have to keep buying it illegaly.

[Glirk Dient]

I don't really see anyone condeming marijuana use. I am pretty neutral on the subject but for debates sake I will pick the torch up and see where I can get with it.

Here are many negative effects...some of you may not know of. Read the link below as it has a whole lot of negative effects or marijuana. If it was legalized it would be pretty harmful to society. Especially the driving impairments that comes with marijuana...the effects can last up to 4 hours. That is far too long to legalize...there would be so many accidents from peoples delayed reactions.

http://www.well.com/user/woa/fspot.htm

It really doesnt lead to anything. Id love if you could prove chemically that it makes people want to try other drugs. The only two reasons why this could happen are:
a) someone tries it and realises what a load of bollocks they had been taught about it from the government, school, media etc and think that chances are the stuff they heard about other drugs also is untrue, and therefore out of curiosity they decide to try other drugs.
b) the dealer convinces them to buy something else.
People 'start' with weed because they come across it first.


Chemically it may not be posible to PROVE. However psychologically that is a different issue. A person may like the effect of being high and the altered state with it. He may like it so much that he does it a lot and the drug doesn't have nearly as much an effect anymore. The solution...move onto other drugs that will offer a high .

[The Mullinator]

I don't really see anyone condeming marijuana use. I am pretty neutral on the subject but for debates sake I will pick the torch up and see where I can get with it.

Here are many negative effects...some of you may not know of. Read the link below as it has a whole lot of negative effects or marijuana. If it was legalized it would be pretty harmful to society. Especially the driving impairments that comes with marijuana...the effects can last up to 4 hours. That is far too long to legalize...there would be so many accidents from peoples delayed reactions.

http://www.well.com/user/woa/fspot.htm



Chemically it may not be posible to PROVE. However psychologically that is a different issue. A person may like the effect of being high and the altered state with it. He may like it so much that he does it a lot and the drug doesn't have nearly as much an effect anymore. The solution...move onto other drugs that will offer a high .
Driving is not a problem since the current law in most areas is about "impaired driving". It isn't just about alcohal, driving while being under the influence of anything that may have a negative effect on driving is illegal. I have heard of people being charged alongside drunk drivers for driving while under the influence of sleeping pills. So as long as someone is high they will already be charged for impaired driving whether the drug is legal or not.

The increased heart rate is only a problem for a few people, and these people really should not be using alcohal or any other legal drug that can affect heart rate anyway.

The risk to the lungs is not a problem caused by cannabis itself but rather in the way it is most often consumed. There are no negative effects associated with marijuana usage in the lungs if it is ingested instead.

The dangers to "young people" should not even be considered in any decision to legalize since no matter what it would have an age restriction applied anyway.

[Glirk Dient]

Driving is not a problem since the current law in most areas is about "impaired driving". It isn't just about alcohal, driving while being under the influence of anything that may have a negative effect on driving is illegal. I have heard of people being charged alongside drunk drivers for driving while under the influence of sleeping pills. So as long as someone is high they will already be charged for impaired driving whether the drug is legal or not.

The increased heart rate is only a problem for a few people, and these people really should not be using alcohal or any other legal drug that can affect heart rate anyway.

The risk to the lungs is not a problem caused by cannabis itself but rather in the way it is most often consumed. There are no negative effects associated with marijuana usage in the lungs if it is ingested instead.

The dangers to "young people" should not even be considered in any decision to legalize since no matter what it would have an age restriction applied anyway.


Just because it is legal or only affects a few people doesn't mean it won't be a problem. The impairment lasts for 4 hours after you smoke...4 hours! That is a long time to not be able to drive. With the effects lasting that long people will drive while under the influence all the time. Just because it is illegal doesn't mean people won't do it. Drunk driving is the biggest trafic issue right now...we don't need to add more dead bodies to the statistics.

The health issues are there...and people who have heart problems will get hurt by it because people are dumbasses. Same with the lung issues...people are dumb and don't care as long as they can get high.

Also kids can get their hands on alchohol already...it is illegal to minors and they have no problem whatso ever getting their hands on it.

[Reaktor4]

http://www.well.com/user/woa/fspot.htm
They havnt got a clue.
Chemically it may not be posible to PROVE. However psychologically that is a different issue. A person may like the effect of being high and the altered state with it. He may like it so much that he does it a lot and the drug doesn't have nearly as much an effect anymore. The solution...move onto other drugs that will offer a high .
It produces no long term tolerance (side note: thats why it cant be described as addictive). All they would have to do is use it less or stop for a short while.

[Glirk Dient]

They havnt got a clue.

It produces no long term tolerance (side note: thats why it cant be described as addictive). All they would have to do is use it less or stop for a short while.

Do you know how something becomes addictive? There are different versions(physically addictive and psychologically addictive)

Look it up...weed can be addicting.

[shadow6899]

the high doesn't last 4 hours... i dont know what kinda weed your smokin but damn, gimmie some. The most my high lasts for is 2 hours. I have driven high plenty of times and to this day i have not had an accident nor any kind of ticket. Huh weird, for a pothead i should be dead :X statistically speaking... now i'd be all for making weed illegal to use when driving but seeing as it's already illegal their isn't many places to do it besides the car.

[Ikerous]

the high doesn't last 4 hours... i dont know what kinda weed your smokin but damn, gimmie some. The most my high lasts for is 2 hours. I have driven high plenty of times and to this day i have not had an accident nor any kind of ticket. Huh weird, for a pothead i should be dead :X statistically speaking... now i'd be all for making weed illegal to use when driving but seeing as it's already illegal their isn't many places to do it besides the car.
Normally when I'm driving high I'm paranoid about being pulled over so i obey all the traffic laws; when I'm sober i obey very few. People are much safer with me driving high :)

Unfortunately if it did become legal, there would be a lot of people driving high. Nothing like a nice hotbox

[satch919]

I used to be for legalizing it but after seeing how many idiots there are, no way. Only for medicinal purposes.

[shadow6899]

/sigh, theirs idiots with or w/o marijuana :/

[Glirk Dient]

Normally when I'm driving high I'm paranoid about being pulled over so i obey all the traffic laws; when I'm sober i obey very few. People are much safer with me driving high :)

Unfortunately if it did become legal, there would be a lot of people driving high. Nothing like a nice hotbox

It slows your reaction times. Your just lucky you haven't had to react very quickly...like a car flying at you or else you would be dead. Or even slamming on your breaks late would cause you to hit the car in front of you. It is still a danger and just becuase you haven't gotten in an accident doesn't mean it isn't dangerous.

Research shows that these skills are impaired for at least 4-6 hours after smoking a single marijuana cigarette, long after the "high" is gone.
http://www.well.com/user/woa/fspot.htm

[Ikerous]

It slows your reaction times. Your just lucky you haven't had to react very quickly...like a car flying at you or else you would be dead. Or even slamming on your breaks late would cause you to hit the car in front of you. It is still a danger and just becuase you haven't gotten in an accident doesn't mean it isn't dangerous.
I'm completely aware of how marijuana effects me and i more than compensate for it when driving :)
And i never said it wasn't dangerous XD
I drive my motorcycle in traffic while its raining with my eyes closed
(the rain flies into your eyes really fast and it hurts...)

At least when I'm high I don't speed, drive between lanes and cut people off

(I'm not actually trying to make a debatable point, I'm simply stating personal experience)

[kirovman]

I'm completely aware of how marijuana effects me and i more than compensate for it when driving :)
And i never said it wasn't dangerous XD
I drive my motorcycle in traffic while its raining with my eyes closed
(the rain flies into your eyes really fast and it hurts...)

At least when I'm high I don't speed, drive between lanes and cut people off

(I'm not actually trying to make a debatable point, I'm simply stating personal experience)

I don't think it's appropriate to drive under the influence of anything. I think there's a few drink-drivers who would say that they were well aware of the alcoholic affects on them, and they compensate whilst driving.

I think driving under the influence of anything risks lives. Dangerous driving doesn't only affect yourself, it affects pedestrains, other road users etc, and if anyone lost their lives due to dulled reaction times, that would be very unfortunate and unnecessary indeed.

[short recoil]

I don't think it's appropriate to drive under the influence of anything. I think there's a few drink-drivers who would say that they were well aware of the alcoholic affects on them, and they compensate whilst driving.

I think driving under the influence of anything risks lives. Dangerous driving doesn't only affect yourself, it affects pedestrains, other road users etc, and if anyone lost their lives due to dulled reaction times, that would be very unfortunate and unnecessary indeed.
QFT
Only drugs like caffiene are acceptable with driving....they make you safer generally.

[Ikerous]

I don't think it's appropriate to drive under the influence of anything. I think there's a few drink-drivers who would say that they were well aware of the alcoholic affects on them, and they compensate whilst driving.

I think driving under the influence of anything risks lives. Dangerous driving doesn't only affect yourself, it affects pedestrains, other road users etc, and if anyone lost their lives due to dulled reaction times, that would be very unfortunate and unnecessary indeed.
I personally find it more disorientating to drive with new shose on than to drive high
I think most people that have driven high will tell you it really isn't all that complicated
(Of course I'm not advocating it, it's clearly not the best idea. I'm just saying it's nowhere near as bad as people think...)

Now driving drunk is hard and something i never do

[the_lone_wolf]

For people who are genetically predisposed to it. I dont think anyone here is saying kids with a family history of mental illness should toke.
erm, no, the follow up study to the swedish conscript study concluded that:
Cannabis use is associated with an increased risk of developing schizophrenia, consistent with a causal relation. This association is not explained by use of other psychoactive drugs or personality traits relating to social integration.
What this study adds
Self reported cannabis use is associated with an increased risk of subsequently developing schizophrenia, consistent with a causal relation

This association is not explained by sociability personality traits...
http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/abstract/325/7374/1199?ijkey=35a1eba96431db251b10e88dd4e9c84bce067b43&keytype2=tf_ipsecsha

Tobacco is so dangerous because of how its grown, in radioactive soil. Thats why it causes cancer.
errrm, yeah, are you high right now? It's tar that contains the carcinogens (which cause cancer). not being grown in "radioactive soil"

@OCybrManO - Sorry for the late reply, i was out all day and only just got back, you said:
It's not an effective use of the limited resource. There are a lot of factors to consider. If there were enough livers there would be no need for a list. Everyone could get one. In the case of medicines, most can be produced in large enough capacities to serve everyone that needs them. So, the only limiting factor is profit
OK, so the liver example was a bad one..

limitless resources is not something that would appear to apply to the NHS over here, it's in a mess and doesn't have the resources in terms of doctors, nurses, money and beds to treat everybody who needs it adequately. now call me crazy but would it not be better to have a system where those people who actually did their best to remain healthy and not burden the health system (ate well, exercised etc) were rewarded by cheaper medical care when something unexpected gets them? i'm not saying that they should get prefferential treatment after involvement in a car accident, but let's say you have the limited resources to perform one life saving heart surgery (assuming the cost, in time and money, is the only factor for now for the sake of the example) - would you give the limited surgeon's time and limited health system money to someone who has taken care of their body and looks set to continue to do so if given the second chance, or someone who's obese and will likely just have another heart attack? if people want to abuse themselves through drink/drugs then the same should apply, should a lifetime non smoker have to pay the same amount for an operation to remove/treat a cancerous growth in the lung/throat as a long term smoker who *knew* about the risks of cancer yet continued to smoke for decades for whatever reason?

if you answer yes to that then there's going to be little point in us carrying on, as our views on what we find ethically and morally right and wrong are fundamentally different:)

@brink's - I'm not trying to discredit Macleans as a magazine, i'm sure it's perfectly reputable, but you missed the point that the study which shows a causal link between smoking cannabis and developing schizophrenia concludes that the most noticable effects only occur in children smoking cannabis when below the age of 18 and are far more pronounced under the age of 16, after the age of 18 the link is practically non existant, however:

Smoking pure marijuana is at least as harmful to lungs as smoking tobacco, a report from the British Lung Foundation concludes. And in some key ways, it may be more dangerous.

For example, the BLF's review of previous research highlights that just three marijuana joints a day causes the same damage to the lung's airways as 20 cigarettes, mainly because of the way joints are smoked.

Individually, cannabis and tobacco produce the same constituents and quantities of chemicals known to be toxic to respiratory tissue, other than nicotine, the report says. But when cannabis and tobacco are smoked together, the health effects are worse.

"These statistics will come as a surprise to many people, especially those who choose to smoke cannabis rather than tobacco in the belief it is safer for them," says Mark Britton, chairman of the BLF. A UK survey conducted earlier in 2002 found that 79 per cent of children believed cannabis to be 'safe'.

...

• Tar from cannabis cigarettes contains up to 50 per cent higher concentrations of carcinogens benzathracenes and benzpyrenes than tobacco smoke

• THC, the primary psychoactive ingredient of cannabis, decreases the function of immune system cells that help protect the lungs from infection

• The average cannabis cigarette smoked in the 1960s contained about 10 milligrams of tetrahydrocanabinol (THC), the primary psychoactive ingredient. Today[2002], it may contain 150 mg.
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn3039

//steps into his flame retardant jacket for a second time in one day:cheese:

[baxter]

I do not use drugs and personally do not see the appeal. Having said that I believe firmly in each to their own.
In the ideal world we would all be in perfect heath, with perfect levels of intellect and the world would be utopia.

This world doesn't exist and each and every one of us seeks ways to forget, ways out of the everyday. Alcohol, drugs, tobacco, it's a way out.

Drugs will never be eradicated anymore than alcohol, cigarettes will be and as such I believe drugs should be legalised. They should be state controlled in the same other legalised drugs are.

I personally would prefer to see my children never to come into contact with any of these, but they will.

With is acceptance I would also prefer to know drugs were being produced under strict and controlled guide lines rather than some back street lab and dealt out by sleazy drug pushers

[Dog--]

I think Denver is an example of how the general public is starting to realize all of those facts (They just recently voted to legalize it).
We really just need to get it on some state ballots so people can vote on it.

Personally, I really want to see it legalized mostly because 280-300 bucks for an ounce is rediculous


280-300 Bucks an ounce??!?! And thats american money! I'm from Canada and I don't even smoke it, and I would be able to get an ounce for like $30, and it's not fake or anything like that, my friend is a stoner.

[Ikerous]

280-300 Bucks an ounce??!?! And thats american money! I'm from Canada and I don't even smoke it, and I would be able to get an ounce for like $30, and it's not fake or anything like that, my friend is a stoner.
The lowest i've seen an ounce go for is 220 XD
::moves to canada::

Theres no way it could be that cheap... even if an ounce was 80 bucks thats only 10 bucks an eigth!

[Que-Ever]

Just looking at my school, I don't think it would make much of a difference if they legalized it anyway.

[Dog--]

The lowest i've seen an ounce go for is 220 XD
::moves to canada::

Theres no way it could be that cheap... even if an ounce was 80 bucks thats only 10 bucks an eigth!


Man, I'm not kidding, I was exagerating (spelling?) when I said $30, maybe about 50-70 though.

Also In my school it wouldn't matter :D

[shadow6899]

lol ikerous ouch... lowest i've got it for was 150, and it was really good. I've gotten a pound for 2300 before too. But anyways back on topic... i dont see how you can refute the fact that marijuana should be legal, at the very least inside your own home and privatly owned bars and cafes. If you think that just b/c someone gets addicted to something they dont deserver help... then i think you need help D:

lone wolf, everybody man child woman, bad, good, it doesn't matter they all deserve healthcare. If we are to every move on to become a utopia in any shape or form one thing we need is healthy people, or at the very least places for unhealthy people to get treated if they cannot afford it. If you think that is wrong then the debate truly is over D:

[Glirk Dient]

http://www.well.com/user/woa/fspot.htm

[Ikerous]

http://www.well.com/user/woa/fspot.htm

What are some of the immediate effects of smoking marijuana?
Some immediate physical effects of marijuana include a faster heartbeat and pulse rate, bloodshot eyes, and a dry mouth and throat. No scientific evidence indicates that marijuana improves hearing, eyesight, and skin sensitivity. Studies of marijuana's mental effects show that the drug can impair or reduce short-term memory, alter sense of time, and reduce ability to do things which require concentration, swift reactions, and coordination, such as driving a car or operating machinery.
Yea, if it didn't have inebriating effects, we wouldnt smoke it...
Are there any other adverse reactions to marijuana?
A common bad reaction to marijuana is the "acute panic anxiety reaction." People describe this reaction as an extreme fear of "losing control," which causes panic. The symptoms usually disappear in a few hours.
People who have reactions like that generally dont continue smoking so it's not exactly a problem...
What about psychological dependence on marijuana?
Long-term regular users of marijuana may become psychologically dependent. They may have a hard time limiting their use, they may need more of the drug to get the same effect, and they may develop problems with their jobs and personal relationships. The drug can become the most important aspect of their lives.
So basically marijuana is just like anything else that people enjoy?
What are the dangers for young people?
One major concern about marijuana is its possible effects on young people as they grow up. Research shows that the earlier people start using drugs, the more likely they are to go on to experiment with other drugs. In addition, when young people start using marijuana regularly, they often lose interest and are not motivated to do their schoolwork. The effects of marijuana can interfere with learning by impairing thinking, reading comprehension, and verbal and mathematical skills. Research shows that students do not remember what they have learned when they are "high".
Lmao, ya think? Thats why you don't study high, just like you don't study when you're half asleep.
How does marijuana affect driving ability?
Driving experiments show that marijuana affects a wide range of skills needed for safe driving -- thinking and reflexes are slowed, making it hard for drivers to respond to sudden, unexpected events. Also, a driver's ability to "track" (stay in lane) through curves, to brake quickly, and to maintain speed and the proper distance between cars is affected. Research shows that these skills are impaired for at least 4-6 hours after smoking a single marijuana cigarette, long after the "high" is gone. If a person drinks alcohol, along with using marijuana, the risk of an accident greatly increases. Marijuana presents a definite danger on the road.
1.) It's illegal to drive inebriated.
2.) Complete bullshit.
Does marijuana affect the human reproductive system?
Some research studies suggest that the use of marijuana during pregnancy may result in premature babies and in low birth weights. Studies of men and women may have a temporary loss of fertility. These findings suggest that marijuana may be especially harmful during adolescence, a period of rapid physical and sexual development.
Couldn't care less...
How does marijuana affect the heart?
Marijuana use increases the heart rate as much as 50 percent, depending on the amount of THC. It can cause chest pain in people who have a poor blood supply to the heart - and it produces these effects more rapidly than tobacco smoke does.
People with heart problems shouldn't do a lot of things.. which apparently includes smoking pot. And?
How does marijuana affect the lungs?
Scientists believe that marijuana can be especially harmful to the lungs because users often inhale the unfiltered smoke deeply and hold it in their lungs as long as possible. Therefore, the smoke is in contact with lung tissues for long periods of time, which irritates the lungs and damages the way they work. Marijuana smoke contains some of the same ingredients in tobacco smoke that can cause emphysema and cancer. In addition, many marijuana users also smoke cigarettes; the combined effects of smoking these two substances creates an increased health risk.
Don't smoke it.
Can marijuana cause cancer?
Marijuana smoke has been found to contain more cancer-causing agents than is found in tobacco smoke. Examination of human lung tissue that had been exposed to marijuana smoke over a long period of time in a laboratory showed cellular changes called metaplasia that are considered precancerous. In laboratory test, the tars from marijuana smoke have produced tumors when applied to animal skin. These studies suggest that it is likely that marijuana may cause cancer if used for a number of years.
Don't smoke it.

Those aren't even good points and none of them address the subject of this thread: legalization.

[Danimal]

That research was in done in 1984, woudn't you think they would of done further research between then and now with different results?

[Glirk Dient]

That was the first thing I found on google.

The answer of well just don't do this and that won't work because people are stupid and will do those things.

[Ikerous]

The answer of well just don't do this and that won't work because people are stupid and will do those things.
How does that change anything?

[the_lone_wolf]

Don't smoke it.
that's the most sensible thing you're said so far

It's funny, if a little sad, how when people are confronted with evidence that what they are doing is harming them they just seem to say "i don't care":rolleyes:

@shadow6899 - you've completely missed the point, i'm not advocating refusal of treatment to people who chose to do damaging things to themselves, a public healthcare system should treat everyone who needs it, i just don't see why the people who do give a flying f... about how they live should foot the collective bill for those who lay about on the dole eating crap and smoking (and most likely watching trisha). perhaps it's cause i'm one of the ones who actually gives a flying f... and not some loser destined to a life working for that second star at mcdonalds:p

[Teh Pwned]

It's funny, if a little sad, how when people are confronted with evidence that what they are doing is harming them they just seem to say "i don't care":rolleyes:

So are we not allowed to do something because "we don't care?" I guess, in your opinion, that its sad how people eat fast food, or even having a freakin candy bar once in a while is pretty sad, knowing that it hurts us, and yet we don't care?

Human rights should not be governed by a persons health. Correct me if I'm wrong, but does not the the constitution state that every person has the right to "Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness"? So, isn't this kind of running against it?

And finally, yet we may be destined to a life of serving fried foods, you still remain destined to a life of endless internet forum chats. :)

[Ennui]

http://www.well.com/user/woa/fspot.htm
Don't you just love how the pro or neutral drug fact sheets tell ALL of the effects, while the anti ones act like there are only negative ones?

[kirovman]

Don't you just love how the pro or neutral drug fact sheets tell ALL of the effects, while the anti ones act like there are only negative ones?

Meh, just goes to show.

Other people's opinions suck.

[Teh Pwned]

Meh, just goes to show.

Other people's opinions suck.

Haha, yes, this is true.

[Que-Ever]

that's the most sensible thing you're said so far
there's other ways of using pot besides smoking it, you know. It's jsut... the ay you said it made it sound final, like he had said "don't do it" or sommat.

[the_lone_wolf]

So are we not allowed to do something because "we don't care?" I guess, in your opinion, that its sad how people eat fast food, or even having a freakin candy bar once in a while is pretty sad, knowing that it hurts us, and yet we don't care?
LMAO, superb alanogy there:upstare: - the slight difference being that the occasional maccy d's and a bit of chocolate and a beer isn't going to make you psychotic or give you lung cancer:cheers:

Que-ever - it's called irony, but don't worry about it:thumbs:

[Reaktor4]

erm, no
Read the stuff at the bottom of the page, this 'study' is bunk.
errrm, yeah, are you high right now?
errrm, no.
It's tar that contains the carcinogens (which cause cancer). not being grown in "radioactive soil"
errrm, no. (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&rls=en&q=tobacco+radioactivity+cancer&btnG=Search)
Youre just another ten a penny hypocritical anti drug idiot, arent you?

[brink's]

LMAO, superb alanogy there:upstare: - the slight difference being that the occasional maccy d's and a bit of chocolate and a beer isn't going to make you psychotic or give you lung cancer:cheers:


What are you talking about? Thousands apon thousands of people smoke marjuana from all corners of the world, and a very very very small amount of them will never even have to think about getting schizophrenia, yet your acting like the two go hand in hand. Most people who smoke MJ do it in such small amounts (like once a week, a couple times a month) that lung cancer is at the very most an after thought. No ones smoking 2 pacs of Marryjane a day.

[the_lone_wolf]

errrm, no. (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&rls=en&q=tobacco+radioactivity+cancer&btnG=Search)
Youre just another ten a penny hypocritical anti drug idiot, arent you?
well you could have remained mature and chosen a rational reply with sound reasoning and facts but you chose not to, if you actually want to debate a subject and not simply force your own opinions on other people you will need to change your attitude.

was there meant to be anything useful in that link? perhaps an impartial view? as opposed to things like this:

http://www.cannabisculture.com/news/tobacco/

"oh noes, it's teh radi0active soil!!!" lol

perhaps you should ask google what "cigarette smoke contains" instead of entering three words that you desperately want to be linked to find obscure random conjecture?

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&rls=en&q=how+do+cigarettes+cause+cancer&spell=1

http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/overview/tobus_us.htm

Researchers have identified more than 4,800 chemical compounds in tobacco smoke; of these, at least 69 cause cancer in humans and animals

@brink's - no, i'm saying that there is evidence of a causal link between the two, perhaps i should have said "the slight difference being that the occasional maccy d's and a bit of chocolate and a beer hasn't been scientifically investigated and linked to psychosis or lung cancer":dozey:

[Ikerous]

THOUSANDS of more people die every year because of McDonald's than because of pot smoking...
Ban McDonalds? No. Obviously that'd be stupid. I really don't see what, if any, point you're trying to make about it being 'unhealthy'

[the_lone_wolf]

THOUSANDS of more people die every year because of McDonald's than because of pot smoking...
Source? Has any scientific study shown that eating Macdonalds has a causal link with premature death?

Couple of other articles from the BMJ:

"Cannabis and mental health" (http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/325/7374/1183?ijkey=22451a149148748fcab33812a00b4024b922aa9f&keytype2=tf_ipsecsha)
The evidence in relation to depression is growing. A 15 year follow up of an adult community sample of 1920 participants in the United States showed that use of cannabis increased the risk of major depression at follow up fourfold. Use of cannabis was specifically associated with an increase in suicidal ideation and anhedonia. Similar findings in an Australian study reported in this issue (p 1195) show a dose-effect relation between the use of cannabis and anxiety or depression in a large cohort of 14-15 year olds followed for seven years. This is reflected in higher rates of anxiety or depression according to the frequency with which cannabis was used.

"Cannabis Use and Psychosis: A Longitudinal Population-based Study" (http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/156/4/319?ijkey=817f767a06bd16bdf1d9188ff96989a7018b1d55)
Results confirm previous suggestions that cannabis use increases the risk of both the incidence of psychosis in psychosis-free persons and a poor prognosis for those with an established vulnerability to psychotic disorder

"Comparing cannabis with tobacco" (http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/326/7396/942)
Although the active ingredients of the cannabis plant differ from those of the tobacco plant, each produces about 4000 chemicals when smoked and these are largely identical....

[Ikerous]

This is why i hate debating online, people feel the need for me to cite everything isntead of just thinking about it logically.

Apparently, "obesity is responsible for at least 300,000 deaths each year." link (http://www.cdc.gov/HealthyYouth/AdolescentHealth/steps.htm)

How do people get that fat? Eating McDonalds. (I obviously don't mean McDonalds alone, but the entire fast food franchise it represents)

How many people die a year from smoking pot? Every statistic i've ever read says zero. Do i think thats true? Probably not. Hell, plastic bags kill like 50 people a year. But if it was even a remotely serious problem thered be a whole lot more documented cases of people dying because of it. And I can't find any.

[the_lone_wolf]

This is why i hate debating online, people feel the need for me to cite everything isntead of just thinking about it logically.
sorry, i'm not trying to be condescending but i come from a background of scientific study where if you make a statement you are expected to back it up with references or your own research

so ok, lets do this logically:

the primary cause of death in the US is heart desease

obesity gives an increased risk of heart desease, obesity can be caused by excessive consumption of fast food, however it's not the only cause. ironically enough a major cause of heart disease is smoking, about 23 percent of [American] adults age 18 and older smoke[1] (and many many more endure passive smoke), 31 percent (although probably more now) of adults 20 years of age and over are classified as obese[2]

i don't know which one, smoking or obesity, is more likely to result in heart desease (i suspect obesity is a greater risk factor) but i'm sure that whilst it's certainly a major factor, it's not just fast food that's giving Americans problems with their tickers...

1. http://www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifier=4731
2. 1999-2000 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey published in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

[shadow6899]

but when you say smoking your talking about tobacco figures, i know plenty of people, young to old to very old who smoke. None of them have gotten any illnesses from smoking marijuana, only cig's.

[Ikerous]

Lol, why are we argueing? Okay. Excessive smoking for long periods of time leads to death (Although the key word being excessive.). Even marijuana smoking. It's kind of odd to assume otherwise. I'll admit that.
(Btw, that's simply my opinion and i'm sure others may disagree)

Even if smoking killed as many people a year as bad food, it wouldn't make sense to ban it. I think you'd be pretty hard pressed to find someone who thinks banning fast food is a good idea. Why? Because most people believe that adults have the right to do w/e the hell they want to themselves

And, the great thing about weed is that you don't have to smoke it to get high. Weed itself isn't going to kill anyone (Well, not anymore than plastic bags :)) So this whole conversation about health issues is fairly unnecessary because one, its really not that unhealthy if you don't smoke it and two, being unhealthy doesn't mean it should be illegal.

[the_lone_wolf]

but when you say smoking your talking about tobacco figures, i know plenty of people, young to old to very old who smoke. None of them have gotten any illnesses from smoking marijuana, only cig's.
so they've been smoking both, but they know that their illnesses were caused by *just* the cigarette smoke?

http://www.ukcia.org/research/smoke-contents.htm

according to that reasearch by the Institute of Medicine, Marijuana and Health, Washington,D.C. cannabis contains more of the following carcinogens:

Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Benzene
Dimethylnitrosamine

and more of the following harmful/toxic substances

Toluene (Tri-Nitro Toluene = TNT)
Ammonia
Hydrogen Cyanide

as well as comparable levels of the carcinogen methylethylnitrosamine

Other research by Hoffman D, Brunnemann KD, Gori GB, et al: On the carcinogenicity of marijuana smoke. In: VC Runeckles, ed, Recent Advances in Phytochemistry. New York. Plenum, 1975. suggests that "marijuana smoke contains 50 to 70 percent more carcinogenic hydrocarbons than does tobacco smoke"

[Reaktor4]

well you could have remained mature and chosen a rational reply with sound reasoning and facts but you chose not to, if you actually want to debate a subject and not simply force your own opinions on other people you will need to change your attitude.
You say this after these comments:
" the slight difference being that the occasional maccy d's and a bit of chocolate and a beer isn't going to make you psychotic or give you lung cancer"
So, the occasional joint is going to give you lung cancer or make you psychotic?
"are you high right now?"
Sorry, but you are an utter ****tard.
was there meant to be anything useful in that link? perhaps an impartial view? as opposed to things like this:

http://www.cannabisculture.com/news/tobacco/

"oh noes, it's teh radi0active soil!!!" lol
Yeah, pick the one that looks the most biased out of the 78000 links and disregard everything else. Nobody will notice. Real sharp, you are.
I actually thought you might have the intelligence and initiative to look through some of the links and find the reason why weed doesnt cause cancer but tobacco, even low tar tobacco, does. Clearly you have no interest in anything that goes against your preconceived notions about drugs.
For those care, i have picked out a few relevant links:

link (http://www.cansar.org/RADON_ARPC_CANSAR.ppt)/link (http://66.249.93.104/search?q=cache:RbVDQicAxXAJ:www.cansar.org/RADON_ARPC_CANSAR.ppt+tobacco+radioactivity+cancer&hl=en)
link (http://www.webmd.com/content/article/23/1728_57309)
link (http://nepenthes.lycaeum.org/Drugs/THC/Health/cancer.rad.html)
link (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov:80/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=3003925&dopt=Abstract)
link (http://www.ead.anl.gov/pub/doc/polonium.pdf)
link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobacco_smoking#Radioactive_components_of_tobacco)
link (http://www.epa.gov/radiation/radionuclides/radon.htm)
link (http://www.lenntech.com/Periodic-chart-elements/Po-en.htm)
link (http://www.acsa2000.net/HealthAlert/lungcancer.html)
link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/background_briefings/smoking/289211.stm)

Now, let me get this straight. Do radioactive elements not damage dna and cause cancer, or are they not present in significant amounts (or any amount) in tobacco smoke?

[Ikerous]

Some researchers suggest that the degree of carcinogenicity of these radioactive elements is sufficient to account for most, if not all, cases of lung cancer related to smoking.
Wow, i never knew anything about any of that.
Pretty interesting

[the_lone_wolf]

you are an utter ****tard.
right... how old are you?.. 14?.. 15?.. or has all that pot retarded your mental age to around that level:P

of course radioativity causes mutations which lead to cancer, but the "research" that these few people are citing as proof of the radioactivity of cigarettes causing cancer concludes that it is a result of the use of phosphatic fertiliser, which is used extensively outside of the tobacco industry, why is it that it would appear to only contaminate the tobacco that makes it's way into cigarettes and not everything else? it certainly gives an inviting alternative to having the ~70 known carcinogens in cigarette and cannabis smoke actually cause cancer when introduced to the human body don't you think?

[OCybrManO]

Well, the_lone_wolf is completely ignoring the scientific research into the anti-cancer properties of marijuana in favor of focusing on the number of potential carcinogens. Several recent studies suggest that (despite the carcinogens) it can be used to fight existing cancers (including leukemia), glaucoma, depression, etc*... and possibly even spur growth of new brain cells. On the other hand... cigarettes are physically addictive, a well-known major cause of cancer, they seriously **** up your lungs, they have practically zero medicinal value... and yet, of the two, cigarettes are the legal substance. Doesn't that seem a bit odd? Still, this all means nothing because if I'm saying something in favor of it I must be a pothead... even though I've never touched it. Oh well, ignore it if you want. I don't really care whether or not it gets legalized. I won't use it either way.

* There's a reason it was known for its medicinal value thousands of years ago. Some even suggest that the "miracles" performed by Jesus (including their religious visions) were actually the result of a concoction of various psychoactive drugs, including marijuana, used in the annointing processes of contemporary religion(s).

[shadow6899]

so they've been smoking both, but they know that their illnesses were caused by *just* the cigarette smoke?

http://www.ukcia.org/research/smoke-contents.htm

according to that reasearch by the Institute of Medicine, Marijuana and Health, Washington,D.C. cannabis contains more of the following carcinogens:

Acetaldehyde
Acrolein
Benzene
Dimethylnitrosamine

and more of the following harmful/toxic substances

Toluene (Tri-Nitro Toluene = TNT)
Ammonia
Hydrogen Cyanide

as well as comparable levels of the carcinogen methylethylnitrosamine

Other research by Hoffman D, Brunnemann KD, Gori GB, et al: On the carcinogenicity of marijuana smoke. In: VC Runeckles, ed, Recent Advances in Phytochemistry. New York. Plenum, 1975. suggests that "marijuana smoke contains 50 to 70 percent more carcinogenic hydrocarbons than does tobacco smoke"

yes they do know, thats how they know. B/c no one who smokes just marijuana gets lung cancer, only when they combine it w/ the many thousands of toxins in cigs that is not in marijuana.

EDIT- Guess Reaktor covered what i was trying to say, just actually wasn't lazy and provided many links :D

[Sulkdodds]

OCybermanO = win. Every damn time.

LMAO, superb alanogy there - the slight difference being that the occasional maccy d's and a bit of chocolate and a beer isn't going to make you psychotic or give you lung cancer

The occasional joint isn't going to do that either, now is it?

[the_lone_wolf]

Several recent studies suggest that (despite the carcinogens) it can be used to fight existing cancers
so can chemo, and we all know that's good for you with no downsides:
http://www.bigbruno.com/celebrities/graphics/stills/ross-chemo.jpg

it's becoming obvious you can't stand in the middle of a room of alcoholics and tell them they're more likely to get liver disease, so how about this:

i'll just say to you that pot obviously has no downsides, only good sides, there are no consequences to smoking it and it should be 100% legalised and encouraged, you keep on smoking it for the obvious health benefits and ignore any research that links it with mental health problems because that research doesn't agree with your point of view

keep on :smoking: - might clean up the gene pool a little:cheese:

[Sulkdodds]

i'll just say to you that pot obviously has no downsides, only good sides, there are no consequences to smoking it and it should be 100% legalised and encouraged, you keep on smoking it for the obvious health benefits and ignore any research that links it with mental health problems because that research doesn't agree with your point of view

Nobody is suggesting anything like that. I'm not susually so brazen in my disdain but I suggest you stop being an arse/stupid.

[the_lone_wolf]

Nobody is suggesting anything like that. I'm not susually so brazen in my disdain but I suggest you stop being an arse/stupid.
you misunderstand me, i really do think it's great, in fact we should be giving it to our kids as there's no downsides, it's fine:smoking:

[Sulkdodds]

well you could have remained mature and chosen a rational reply with sound reasoning and facts but you chose not to, if you actually want to debate a subject and not simply force your own opinions on other people you will need to change your attitude.

\o\ /o\ /o/

[the_lone_wolf]

what else is there to try when sound reasoning fails, you guys are obviously so convinced that your cannabis is fine and there's no possibiity of it having any downsides, might as well be talking to a wall

[Sulkdodds]

'Our' cannabis? I smoked a joint once. I didn't like it. Anyway - I don't see anyone at all claiming that there's no possibility of cannabis having any downsides at all. Rather, people are claiming it has far less downsides than most people think, or that it has far less downsides than many other things that are currently legal. Or they're claiming that they have a right to use it despite the downsides...freedom and civil liberty and all of that. You're casting yourself as the only logical person in this entire debate..."what e;se is there to try when sound reasoning fails?" you ask. Well, I'm sure many of your opponents in this thread are asking the same question.

[the_lone_wolf]

...people are claiming it has far less downsides than most people think, or that it has far less downsides than many other things that are currently legal.
the fact that people have tried scaremongering tactics before like saying it'll make you infertile or it suppresses the immune system, or that there are other more damaging things out there which are legal is a moot point, in the end you'll have to weigh up your own personal ups and downs and make a choice... i've simply got better things to spend my money on and the links to mental health problems are far too great when compared to any benifits i might get from smoking it. again it's a decision up to the individual but i wouldn't start ingesting, inhaling or injecting known cancer causing chemicals into my body through choice, whether the effects they have are proven or not.

[Ikerous]

in the end you'll have to weigh up your own personal ups and downs and make a choice
I completely agree :)

[Ennui]

the fact that people have tried scaremongering tactics before like saying it'll make you infertile or it suppresses the immune system, or that there are other more damaging things out there which are legal is a moot point, in the end you'll have to weigh up your own personal ups and downs and make a choice... i've simply got better things to spend my money on and the links to mental health problems are far too great when compared to any benifits i might get from smoking it. again it's a decision up to the individual but i wouldn't start ingesting, inhaling or injecting known cancer causing chemicals into my body through choice, whether the effects they have are proven or not.
you do understand we're exposed to carcinogens all the time from different sources?

[Ikerous]

Lol, not to mention that there are probably zero carcinogens in unburnt weed

[the_lone_wolf]

you do understand we're exposed to carcinogens all the time from different sources?
yeah, it sucks doesn't it, there's even carcigonens in every day toiletries and 3,4 benzopyrene is a product of roasting coffee beans

but would you go around rolling it asbestos for a laugh or sitting next to a running diesel motor cause you like to smell the fumes if you had the choice not to? why expose yourself to extra, avoidable, carcinogens?

[Ikerous]

why expose yourself to extra, avoidable, carcinogens?
Because I enjoy it :)

[shadow6899]

lone wolf i see where youre coming from, everyone here does. And we do hear you and we do listen. But to us everything you have said is just scare tactics or research with numbers that are very inaccuarte. You may not believe it, but we do, to each his own.

Regardless of the fact of what you think is true, we believe something alot different, and have real research that shows both sides of the arguement. Every major pro site out their lists the positives and negatives. And the positives out weigh the negatives greatly, and im not talking about just using the substance to get high.

You may be able to contract a mental disease easier, but your far more likely to get depression over schizophrenia. You would also have to smoke alot of marijuana for anything to be triggered. Can we all at least agree it should be legal, if not for just the benefits it has besides getting high?

[the_lone_wolf]

LMAO, if that's what you believe then there's not a lot of point in arguing the toss, you can read and believe what you like, research is very rarely ever conclusive so you have to take a step back and observe the larger picture, and if you do that then you will see the truth

and no, it shouldn't be legal

[Ikerous]

and no, it shouldn't be legal
lol XD

[Sulkdodds]

What's your opinion on cigarettes and alcohol being legal?

[shadow6899]

LMAO, if that's what you believe then there's not a lot of point in arguing the toss, you can read and believe what you like, research is very rarely ever conclusive so you have to take a step back and observe the larger picture, and if you do that then you will see the truth

and no, it shouldn't be legal

i have observed the larger picture, and i have concluded that their is no harm done in letting marijuana be legal. Every country who has decriminalized pot is much better off then we are in terms of crimes and especially jail situations. You know how much space in jails we would save, and tax payers dollars. You wanted to talk about taxpayers dollars... well imagine how much we would save if pot was decriminalized.

Plus imagine how much the gov't would get in taxes from the marijuana industry. You are right, you do have to step back and see the whole picture. Except you cannot have a narrow mind about it... this is about the long run and the future. Not just one persons vision of the future.

[Ikerous]

Hey, just out of curiosity

I was cleaning my pipe earlier. If you've ever done this you know the inside gets covered in some nasty sticky gooey shit. Is that what my lungs are like? Cuz thats absolutely ****ing gross if they are.

[Ennui]

that's resin
your lungs might look like that if you smoke a TON of pot (or a normal amount of cigarettes) for a few years.

[shadow6899]

^what ennui said :D

[Psychism]

not going to read the 10 pages of this because I honestly don't care that much will respond to whats probably in them based on discussions with others in the past.

-no
-no
-yes
-no
-42

marijuana is harmful it's about on par with pure tobacco
you only have 2 options all drugs legalized or all drugs illegal as the food industry pushes stimulants and narcotics and the medical industry pushes painkillers and mood stabilizers I'm going to say all drugs aren't going to be made illegal anytime in the near future so anyone fighting for making certain drugs illegal while leaving worse drugs legal is quite simply a complete moron

now for my favorite medical problem terminally ill patients are left suffering on morphine which does little to nothing for their pain heroin however in it's weakest form is 8 times as effective as morphine yet the U.S.A. surgeon general will not allow heroin to be used on terminally ill patients because it's more addictive than morphine many of you are probably seeing the same problem with this that I do... and currently going double-u tee ef?

[Teh Pwned]

that's resin
your lungs might look like that if you smoke a TON of pot (or a normal amount of cigarettes) for a few years.

And, resin is some pretty powerful Shit. But I have to agree with Ennui (If this is his point anyway.) watch how much you smoke, don't go binge everday.

[Reaktor4]

Umm.. the lungs do clean themselves out you know, smoking would probably make you suffocate pretty quickly if they didnt.

[AzzMan]

But Doesn't marijuana lead to bigger drugs?
Yes, its been shown that around 50% big time addicts of higher level drugs (I.E., Meth, Herion, Cocain.) started with marijuana. But, amazingly, the other 50% achieved it through alcohol

Just about everyone I know has drank before doing ANY other drugs. Alcohol->marijuana->other stuff

If anything alcohol should be banned. Also I dont know anyone who tries to start fights or beats up their spouse while high....

[Cormeh]

If anything alcohol should be banned. Also I dont know anyone who tries to start fights or beats up their spouse while high....
That depends on who's drinking it.

I like a drink, never get violent. Nor do I feel the urge to jump into a car and kill myself or any passengers. Unfortunately this doesn't reign true with everyone, but the fact is alcohol is highly taxed and generates a lot of money, just like tobacco.

[Teh Pwned]

Just about everyone I know has drank before doing ANY other drugs. Alcohol->marijuana->other stuff

If anything alcohol should be banned. Also I dont know anyone who tries to start fights or beats up their spouse while high....


Well, that would be stereotyping, because there are people that begin drinking, and never try anything else.

Alcohol rakes in to much profit, and people are always demanding it, so its not about to get banned anytime soon. And if it was, think of huge underground trade that would spring up, bringin the safety of liquor way down, as it will now be brewed in backwater distilleries with god-knows-what in it, instead of in regulated tanks. The same goes for weed, if it was legal, then its quality would actually become better/safer.

And weed is an emotional intensifier. Although it does make you feel happy, it intensifies whatever mood you were feeling when the high gets to you. If your scared, you get paranoid as shit, if you were happy, you become a regular clown, ect.

[Max35]

Just about everyone I know has drank before doing ANY other drugs. Alcohol->marijuana->other stuff

If anything alcohol should be banned. Also I dont know anyone who tries to start fights or beats up their spouse while high....


Violent tendencies have more to do with genetics, than alcohol. Of course the latter can increase such tendencies, but is has nothing to do with the larger picture.

[shadow6899]

Teh-Pwned, from personal experience that is not true. I only get 2 different kind of moods, no matter what mood i was in before i got high. Either happy, or tired :/

[Teh Pwned]

Teh-Pwned, from personal experience that is not true. I only get 2 different kind of moods, no matte