Legalize weed in America?

[Roland_Deschain]

See how we are both biased here? Because you support legalization of this drug means that all research supporting that it impairs a person's
driving is given the stigma of being a "fear" study. I could easily say that all research regarding people who smoke THC and drive slower is ridiculous, or etc...but I didn't. I was asked to research so MY argument against legalization was less biased regarding that people who are high "drive slower" so I found a study that states even if they do figure a way to compensate for being impaired they are still...impaired?

I never said they did really...it was an open ended question directed towards the part of the study that referenced that the rate of impairment was related to the amount "inhaled" "smoked" or etc... But you know, just like people who have 4 or 5 drinks and think they can handle the drive home, who is to say the same couldn't be said for someone who smokes 4 or 5 J's/bowls and can no longer realize their limit and goes out for a drive? Impairment is impairment. Decision making skills are degraded and the ability to reason could therefore be limited.


The study was done on "young males whose cannabis consumption is frequent and increasing." Which I would venture to guess might be teenagers/early 20's....and perhaps a lot of the demographic of this thread.

Uh ohhhh...I never said "better" I said "safer"...there's a difference I wanted someone to show me evidence/research that using THC makes them a safer driver. ...and I really don't think that slower equals safer.

Are you sure the words driving, impaired and less dangerous should be used in the same sentence? You might not think it matters HOW someone is impaired or to what extent...if this person is driving it does NOT make them any less dangerous on the road if they are driving slower. I'm sorry but if you drive under the speed limit on the interstate you become a bit of a road hazard, don't you agree? Even on the public roads... unless the people who are high only drive in the middle of the night when there's less traffic and its safer? :wtf:

Not everything I just find it hard to believe that everyone has hours/days/months/years of their lives to waste making complete nonsense and then publish it as a commonly referenced study, or etc... This is a debate thread. This is my view. ...and because we don't agree doesn't mean that anything needs to be "done" for me. :dave:

...again. I was asked to research the effects on driving so that my "bias" wouldn't be so "biased" I guess if I back it with some sort of study. I'm not going back to reference the performance of the drug...because I really don't care. I don't care if people want to perform outstandingly at home...when they get on the roads with a high level of THC and are impaired and are driving on the roads with me...then yeah its a problem for me...because I'm not going to feel safe ..and yes, you can say the same for the alcohol that is already legal today and aids people in driving drunk.

You might not think it does...but there wouldn't be so many studies relating to THC and driving if people didn't think it was an important issue with its use.


Yes, but I'm sure the amount will be less if it stays illegal.


...Then we get into the issue of second hand smoke...that was another of the reasons why I don't want it legalized. I'm not going to put it here..and I'm sure you won't bother...but I already posted my problems with the secondhand smoke in one of my previous posts in this thread.

Ok I will address you from beginning to end.

First of all its not the same as having four drinks and thinking your ok to drive. It is not "Just like.." When people are stoned..they know it beyond a doubt, hence the paranoia. These people usually know that they shouldn't be in a car to begin with. This is probably why you always hear about drunk drivers killing people and not stoned drivers. Alcohol on the other hand, the more you had to drink, the less aware you are that you even have been drinking. People become arrogant, dizzy, sick, violent, wreckless and loud. Its a completely different thing than Marijuana. There is no casual "going out for a drive." Until you have had plenty of both poisons you will not realize what I am saying. Also we have spoken previously about this topic and smoking pot while driving would remain just as illegal as it is now.


As for second hand smoke, obviously you will be able to avoid it. Most places dont let you walk down the street boozing unless your homeless. I do not think another drug will be any different. I am all for keeping it in smoking places...(that you need not enter.) Of course it would be more strict than ciggarettes. You would recieve no second hand smoke if done in the correct way.

So with those two things pushed out of the way I would say that your side seems to always be the most biased one in this argument because wether it affects you or not you still maintain your argument on your side.

Lets create a list of positives and negatives for you.

Positives :
Alternate material that is cheap too grow and can be used as almost anything, soap, clothing, roab, sunblock, lotion, medicine. (And to get people high, hungry, tired, or relaxed.)

A more ethical way to profit from it other than throwing a wrench into the honest lives of the many very smart people who do it.

Another strong market for the country that could be used in more than one if we were only allowed to farm it.

A huge decimation of drug dealers and the drug market, and elimination of the gateway drug.

Now here are your list of negatives :

People would drive stoned (which they do already and the threat numbers are not very real). Its like saying we should make cellphones illegal just because we use them while we drive and its dangerous.

You "could" get second hand smoke "if" the process of legalization disregards all of the people who do not smoke it...somehow.

And because they goverment said it should be illegal. (Did you even read the link I had posted on my very first post about its illegalization in the first place?)



Seems a little Biased as well to me =)

Also I think that one of the reasons you may be so Biased as to this side is because you think mainly people in their 20's and on this forum smoke. I can not begin to tell you how wrong you are. When I was in college I did my architecture homework with two middles aged married guys and we got stoned when we did it and they were nice dudes. Almost every generation is smoking, its the oldest drug in the world. Hell even my parents smoke on occasion, plenty of folks do from my home and its in the conservative midwest of America. After traveling to the west and east coast those numbers only rise. Even here in China people smoke it and do not even associate it with a drug because it seems common sense not to be. Its agaisnt the law but people do not notice it because its not affecting them.

And if that is not the real reason than let us kindly remind you again that it is our bodies and WE are awares already of what little risks it has to ourselves and we choose to smoke it. The people who argue for the legalization are not simpleton burn outs, and its legalization is not going to make the world less safe. It is actually in my strongest upheld opinion that it would make America in general a lot safer place. It has a very positive spin on peoples attitudes and people fear this crime for no real reason besides "black and white" its a drug. I think its time for that realization that there are bigger problems with america than abuse of marijuana and its legalization would only bring us more funds and attention to resolve those things. Let the people speak, and be heard....for once.

 

[Rapture]

So with those two things pushed out of the way I would say that your side seems to always be the most biased one in this argument because wether it affects you or not you still maintain your argument on your side.

That would seem the case...as would be the same with you.

I'm not going to dissect your entire post again but I would just like to say:

Also I think that one of the reasons you may be so Biased as to this side is because you think mainly people in their 20's and on this forum smoke.

I went with what the study I posted stated as young males...and guessed that meant teenagers/early twenties. I also said "which is perhaps a lot of the demographic of this thread." I never said the entire forum smokes THC...and how would that be an incorrect assumption since there are mainly people for the legalization posting here and a lot of you are males that are probably younger than your thirties? I just hate when people put words in my mouth. I am very careful when I post in these threads with my wording.

And if that is not the real reason than let us kindly remind you again that it is our bodies and WE are awares already of what little risks it has to ourselves and we choose to smoke it.

I already stated I agree

...So we've exchanged views... and etc, etc... I'm just going to agree to disagree. Not on all that has been said, because some valid points have been exchanged....but, my view hasn't changed. I didn't come in expecting it to. Its been fun :dave:

 

[Roland_Deschain]

I went with what the study I posted stated as young males...and guessed that meant teenagers/early twenties. I also said "which is perhaps a lot of the demographic of this thread." I never said the entire forum smokes THC...and how would that be an incorrect assumption since there are mainly people for the legalization posting here and a lot of you are males that are probably younger than your thirties? I just hate when people put words in my mouth. I am very careful when I post in these threads with my wording.


:dave:

I apologize if thats the way you took it, I did not mean to make you feel I was putting words in your mouth, I was merely clarifying two opinions you could "possibly" have leading you to feel the way you do, and underestimating the huge demographic of smokers was one of them.

I will also add that I think your side of the fence seems a little more Biased because its legalization contains more positives for those who do not smoke than its illegalization for those who smoke.

Yet your right, we have exchanged views, remotely your are the same you came in here with. Its too bad though, I would hope people would be willing to look at this without closed eyes. There have been plenty here who have done their research....on both sides, and understand the premis of what most of us are saying. Like you said agree to disagree.

 

[M1ghty Mous3]

...So we've exchanged views... and etc, etc... I'm just going to agree to disagree. Not on all that has been said, because some valid points have been exchanged....but, my view hasn't changed. I didn't come in expecting it to. Its been fun :dave:

I'm fine with this. Being on a marijuana forum, you get almost nothing but "pro legalization" so it's nice to hear a different side of the story that while has a different view, but isn't forcing it on you.

 

[Roland_Deschain]

I'm fine with this. Being on a marijuana forum, you get almost nothing but "pro legalization" so it's nice to hear a different side of the story that while has a different view, but isn't forcing it on you.

Yeah, for me its the other way around. I usually only hear iggnorant people bashing the the drug because they think its not different than any other drug. Most of the time I don't hear the pro sides form others who do not smoke.

Could you possibly send a link for this forum you speak about and maybe I will take a look at it.

 

[M1ghty Mous3]

Your not going to get alot of people who don't smoke on there. But can be a great place for learning.

MOD EDIT: Deleted the link to the forum, as it is advertising of another forum. You can send it by PM if you'd like. But please keep links to other forums off this one. Thank you.

 

[asm]

The problem with these pro/con legalization discussions is most people are just flat out wrong, regardless of the stance they take. Some of them are just a tad incorrect, but some of them are just flat out wrong and people shouldn't be posting and spreading such tripe.

First of all, while I smoked some a decade ago, and while the OP smokes some, and I guess we're both just healthy and fine with that, does most certainly ***not** mean that there ***isn't*** an active and demonstrable link between cannabis and psychosis. This is very well demonstrated through countless studies, and anyone saying otherwise is either putting on blinders to protect his smoking habits, or flat out lying. Saying cannabis is 100% healthy as a recreational drug is just as big of a lie than all that devil tobacco propaganda the "other side" spreads. There is a middle ground, and that middle ground is pretty much unambiguously true.

Second of all, people in general post benefits regarding cannabis and hemp products to justify their recreational use with it. That's flat out stupid. When it comes to pain medication, morphine comes to mind. It's pretty kickass to have some at hand if you break your legs. While morphine has a clear medical function and it's downright a blessing for the people that have a genuine medical need for it, does most certainly not mean it correlates in any way whatsoever towards anyone's "recreational" opioid usage. Neither does granpa Maurice having glaucoma while you smoke weed to enhance your xbox live-experience. Similar to hemp paper (not very practical and very expensive) or hemp clothing (not very functional either) ...unless you're planning on making a hemp pulp factory or perhaps starting up a hemp knitting business, it's hardly in any way relevant. It's similar to saying alcohol is a real blessing for everyone since it's used in many solvents. Most illegal drugs and chemicals and poisons and whatever you can think of most likely have a clear benefit in some way. That doesn't reflect in anyway whatsoever, towards recreational usage.


Personally, I don't smoke ...but, I'd be willing to legalize it. Through massive regulation of course. It's ridiculous how much resources are wasted in arresting, jailing and raiding people for what is essentially a victimless crime. It's not very wise to smoke though. It's kind of like alcohol in that sense ...it's a good slave, but a really bad master.

 

[M1ghty Mous3]

It's not very wise to smoke though.

That's why these were made.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wmixODIvAtM

Yea it kinda looks like your smoking crack but thats not what it's for. (posted vid in case of "don't have the money for a vape" excuse.)

And also. Your inhaling heated plant matter. I don't care what you smoke weather it be weed, tobacco, crack, meth, whatever. Inhaling "smoke" in general is a bad thing.

 

[Moogles]

It might as well be legal. At 23 years of age, I have never used the stuff and have no plans of ever doing so, but that's only my decision. If somebody wants to smoke up and escape from reality for a bit, then it should be up to them.

Hell, it's not like weed is any worse than alcohol. Alcohol can be linked with more health issues and more deaths than weed. Domestic violence, drunken driving, widespread underage consumption, poisoning--it goes on. I can name half a dozen kids from my graduating class who died from alcohol related events and issues. I can't name a soul who died from smoking marijuana. I have friends who are highly intelligent, good human beings who have criminal records simply because they smoked some pot. It's ridiculous, though they certainly should have known better. At the end of the day, they knew what they were doing was illegal.

 

[Stories]

Honestly, I don't find the point in illegalizing it (or any other drug/substance, including age limits) for that matter. It's not going to stop people from using it. They'll just be more sneaky about it.

Sure, you want people to stop using it, but me being the person I am, I always believe there's a better way to stop people from doing things, rather than just telling them you'll punish them if they do.

As a few people already brought up, we waste money busting people for it. Money we could be using to try to fix the economy, and do things of actual value. Instead, we worry about a teenager having a wee bit of drugs in wherever.

 

[asm]

That's why these were made.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wmixODIvAtM

Yea it kinda looks like your smoking crack but thats not what it's for. (posted vid in case of "don't have the money for a vape" excuse.)

And also. Your inhaling heated plant matter. I don't care what you smoke weather it be weed, tobacco, crack, meth, whatever. Inhaling "smoke" in general is a bad thing.

I know what a vaporizer is. Smoke it, eat it, vaporize it, incinerate it, doesn't matter.

 

[Roland_Deschain]

I know what a vaporizer is. Smoke it, eat it, vaporize it, incinerate it, doesn't matter.

But that is the difference, you would not be inhaling smoke, but inhaling the THC.

This only counters the second hand smoke theory, nothing more.

It is your right of OPINION to think it is "bad", but maybe you could explain exactly "why" you think so. Have you had much experience with it yourself?

So far this debate seems to have succesfully pointed out that while there are minor negative issues, they are smothered by potential benifits of legalization. Cars kill, guns kill, booze kills, but in general marijuana... does NOT kill. It is impossible to overdose and you are almost just as vulnerable to a car crash as being sober.....and even if you DID have a car crash, it falls upon the idiot who got in the car. And unless you have had experience with the drug itself, you cannot say that it impairs judgement for choices such as getting in a car, because I beg to differ.

When it all comes down to it, I believe there to be many more benifits in legalization for non smokers, then there are negative factors for them. If you are someone else reading this then you must scan through this thread to observe what benifits I have previously mentioned.

 

[Ethics]

To be honest, I don't think the question is as to whether or not weed should be legalized. It is more of a question on how logical we can actually be about breaking from our own history: retain our current knee jerk created stance from Nixon, or readjust our perspectives based on our own scientific value. In all cases, I agree weed is not something people should do. However, I am extremely pro-choice. If you want to do it yourself, who am I to stop you? To control a persons values?

Our current "pro-marijuana civilian stance" is only based loosely on our freedom to what we want, which is something I support. It's popularity is so uncanny, it matches beer even against when pot is illegal. This is obviously "the majority's" choice. However, the average person is unlikely to show up and vote for the legalization of such a thing or participate in an out speaking rally, so I find it hard to blame anyone but those who are crying for it's legalization.

Our government, however, is not too much more intelligent. It retains the flex against all drugs in the same manner than Nixon set in place with his war on drugs. If you partake in any drug, you are a pothead, a hippie or a junkie. In fact, we have taken it that much further, according to the DEA, marijuana (a gateway drug) is more dangerous than cocaine and meth, which completely destroys the logic of a gateway drug.

Since we're on the topic of gateway drugs, if there ever was a gateway drug to blame, it is NOT marijuana. You should turn your attention to alcohol, caffeine and sugar which are all available in body destroying quantities at the ready, without bars on the quantity one may purchase. In fact, American life partially runs off these things and the government has little want to step in and slap a law on these items (aside from the obvious 21 and over to drink).

More or less, I don't see why they bother wasting the money searching for and arresting individuals for pot. This is one of the situations where we need to be smarter then the precedences set before us.

 

[M1ghty Mous3]

To be honest, I don't think the question is as to whether or not weed should be legalized. It is more of a question on how logical we can actually be about breaking from our own history: retain our current knee jerk created stance from Nixon, or readjust our perspectives based on our own scientific value. In all cases, I agree weed is not something people should do. However, I am extremely pro-choice. If you want to do it yourself, who am I to stop you? To control a persons values?

Our current "pro-marijuana civilian stance" is only based loosely on our freedom to what we want, which is something I support. It's popularity is so uncanny, it matches beer even against when pot is illegal. This is obviously "the majority's" choice. However, the average person is unlikely to show up and vote for the legalization of such a thing or participate in an out speaking rally, so I find it hard to blame anyone but those who are crying for it's legalization.

Our government, however, is not too much more intelligent. It retains the flex against all drugs in the same manner than Nixon set in place with his war on drugs. If you partake in any drug, you are a pothead, a hippie or a junkie. In fact, we have taken it that much further, according to the DEA, marijuana (a gateway drug) is more dangerous than cocaine and meth, which completely destroys the logic of a gateway drug.

Since we're on the topic of gateway drugs, if there ever was a gateway drug to blame, it is NOT marijuana. You should turn your attention to alcohol, caffeine and sugar which are all available in body destroying quantities at the ready, without bars on the quantity one may purchase. In fact, American life partially runs off these things and the government has little want to step in and slap a law on these items (aside from the obvious 21 and over to drink).

More or less, I don't see why they bother wasting the money searching for and arresting individuals for pot. This is one of the situations where we need to be smarter then the precedences set before us.

To the bolded.

B1. Why do you think people should not use Marijuana? Should people not eat beef because of the fat it has? It has benefits. People have been smoking/eating Marijuana for THOUSANDS of years. There have NEVER been an illness or death associated with Marijuana usage.

B2. A general Majority of people who do smoke, smoke for recreational uses, and there is nothing wrong with that. However, there are thousands of people who use marijuana for medicinal purposes.

http://www.letfreedomgrow.com/index_se_cmu.htm

To say we WANT it legalized, instead of NEED it legalized, is kind of a dumb statment. Would you rather take a medication that has side affects such as headaches, ulcers, dizziness, lose of appetite. Or would you take a medication where the side affects are, hungry, sleep, happy?

Thought so.

B3. You shouldn't turn your attention to those drugs. turn your attention to the PERSON THEMSELVES and see how susceptible they might be to using other drugs. ANYTHING can be a gateway drug. And yes, it's true.

B4. Because the government makes so much fucking money off of it BEING illegal. tickets, jail time, court fees, probation, lawyers. it's not cheap. They make more money per Marijuana Annually then the ydo off of speeding tickets.

 

[Roland_Deschain]

To be honest, I don't think the question is as to whether or not weed should be legalized. It is more of a question on how logical we can actually be about breaking from our own history: retain our current knee jerk created stance from Nixon, or readjust our perspectives based on our own scientific value. In all cases, I agree weed is not something people should do. However, I am extremely pro-choice. If you want to do it yourself, who am I to stop you? To control a persons values?

I am going to agree with what mighty mouse said, and also point out that the illegalization of marijuana in not our history. In fact the have been marijuana laws a shorter period of time in our history then there have not been.

It became illegal when Randolph Hearst ran a smear campaign to protect the value and intrests of the timber industry. After that the laws have been kept alive by protection with utilization of fear campains and anti smoking promotion. Honestly when you tell people something enough they start to believe it. Thats why there are so many morons out there who say all drugs are bad (so black and white), are short sighted hypocrites. Because alchohol is a drug, cigs are, and all of the prescription pills and cough medicine. The fact of the matter is that most legalized drugs pose more harm to the human body then marijuana... even cough medicine if you have too much in your life. Those people who have never smoked pot and thinks its the devils root or some shit.

So to me its not my history, its simply the ignored lies of the past, for finacial intrests of the government. And this is only some of me and my parents generation. To be blunt... people smoking weed was NEVER a problem, until we made it a problem by making it a law. I think its a problem we created and the solution is blindingly obvious and possibly benificial.

 

[Ethics]

I'll start off, yet again, by explaining that I do not think weed should be illegal. I'm simply against smoking it myself.

Now, I would like to see some form of proof that the government actually makes "vast profits" from busting pot users. If not, I'm just going to assume this is some kind of "the government is soooo corrupt" kind of ordeal. Most of the state funds comes from taxes and federal funding, not the "pothead community".

You over estimate the value of most people nabbed for weed. When all added together with the salary of the cops, judges and state employees who file your cases, food provided while in jail and costs to house you for the night you quickly realize that most of what your paying back is simply to make the state break even.

Also, the simple fact that "it's not been illegal longer than it's been legal" is hardly a reason not to mark it off as an illegal product. New substances are constantly introduced into the world that need to be barred for considerable reasons.

The government doesn't need to be so secretive about fucking us out of our money, they've been doing it for the majority of America's history. If they wanted the rest of your money, I'm certain they'd be much more brazen about taking it.

Also, Kat Williams does a very poor job of explaining the full effect of weed. I'd highly suggest more research into the negative effects of weed if you are going to argue it's medical uses. If you can actually find me a respected, well known doctor who would advise you to smoke weed to counter what ever ailment you may have if only it were still legal then I would be more than happy to drop this and admit full on that you were right and I am mistaken. Most doctors won't do it. Why? Because they benefits of it so small that they would hardly out weigh the drawbacks of it, assuming they would at all.

HOWEVER

You're free to destroy yourself as you wish. I don't believe it's right to set weed aside from the other possible ways to destroy your bodies. It's not right for me to personally say what is wrong for me is wrong for everyone.

The only argument that the government has that actually holds water would be second hand smoke. As a non-smoker it's incredibly annoying to deal with inconsiderate people who feel the consistent need to smoke around me, albeit that most of these people are just smoking cigarettes, not weed.


Edit: There was a point I forgot to touch on. Saying there was never any death related to weed is like saying there has never been a death cause by bullets, merely organ failure. People do stupid things when they are high, shit happens. I've been witness to this many times over. It's just life.

 

[Tmoo]

I'm likely repeating what's already been said in various ways: Legalize? Sure. Regulate? Yes. Designate 'no weed' zones like non-smoking areas? Definitely.