Marijuana 101 - One Thread to End Them All

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT
 

Marijuana is less toxic than alcohol. That's a fact. Sources are in the OP and in the other thread about pot.

Your dad is no less of a bumbling bufoon than any potsmoker and is no less lazy. There is such a thing as moderation in the case of pot. You just choose to ignore that because you don't have an open mind and choose to judge things based on what a few people have told you. You should reserve judgement for when you are better informed.

Smoking in my house harms noone else but me (or whoever I let in).

And yes, coffee is toxic, it can impair your ability to do many things too.

Try visiting some other areas. Don't consider alcohol safe, just because your dad and fellow bible thumpers partake in inbibing. If it was the other way around, that you had to have a toke at communion, and a bunch of lazy hippies were drinking alcohol, being all 'lazy and bumbling bufoons' and your dad visited grow-ops and smoked a little at home, your opinions would be exactly opposite. You basically let your surroundings dictate what's good and what's not, rather than your own rational thought.

BOOM headshot65:
Please bold the part where I said you could use DRUGS in moderation.

Go back and read what I posted again.

Cowpoo:
Your dad is no less of a bumbling bufoon than any potsmoker and is no less lazy.

*RAGE!*
YOU have the NERVE to call my dad lazy! when he is the assistant chief of the local volunteer fire department and literally saved a mans life the other day from a fire!

Smoking in my house harms noone else but me (or whoever I let in).

Fine, continue to poison yourself and I wont give a damn when you get black lung. Just STAY away from me, my friends, and my family with your death stick. "If you are on your own property and make it yourself, fine, just stay on your property."

Don't consider alcohol safe, just because your dad and fellow bible thumpers partake in inbibing.

Did I ever say I consider it safe? Please, quote where I said it was safe.

If it was the other way around, that you had to have a toke at communion, and a bunch of lazy hippies were drinking alcohol, being all 'lazy and bumbling bufoons' and your dad visited grow-ops and smoked a little at home, your opinions would be exactly opposite.

You know, These Guys take marijunia for religious purposes and I cant stand behind that.

You basically let your surroundings dictate what's good and what's not, rather than your own rational thought.

No, I let the people who are older than me, and thus my elde, tell me what to and not to do because they have more life experiance than me.

BOOM headshot65:

Cowpoo:
Your dad is no less of a bumbling bufoon than any potsmoker and is no less lazy.

*RAGE!*
YOU have the NERVE to call my dad lazy! when he is the assistant chief of the local volunteer fire department and literally saved a mans life the other day from a fire!

Totally not what he said, but whatever.

BOOM headshot65:
No, I let the people who are older than me, and thus my elde, tell me what to and not to do because they have more life experiance than me.

I remember when I accepted everything I was told by those older than me without question.

95% of the things you have said about marijuana in this thread are fractally wrong. That means wrong on every conceivable level, up to and including the metaphysical.

You. Have. No. Idea. What. You. Are. Talking. About.

BOOM headshot65:

hardlymotivated:
Nauseating as the phrase "unclench your pucker" is, you're pretty much on the money. "Any kind of recreational substance"? Guess that means I can't have a coffee or eat chocolate any more. Oh well.

*facepalm* Im sorry, are those substances toxic and/or have the ability to impair your judgement?

Your words, mate, not mine. If you're going to say things as ridiculous as...:

You:
"However, I am against ANY KIND of "recreational" substance."

...then you ought to be aware what sort of substances are inclusive under the "recreational" label. This is why it is good to be specific and avoid using terms like "recreational substances" to mean "substances I don't like".

And for what it's worth, caffeine is a drug with well-documented addictive properties, a multitude of withdrawal symptoms and toxicity in large doses.

Theobromine poisoning (theobromine being found in chocolate) is not unheard of in the elderly, either.

So "facepalm" indeed.

Suggesting that a pregnant woman smoking marijuana doesn't harm the baby seems quite misinformative to me. A lack of research would normally suggest 'don't do it.' For a start, heart rate is increased; a constantly high heart rate is neither good for an adult or a baby fetus (or anyone.) Heart attack, anyone?

Your opinion also seems to be mostly based on a couple of people you know who just so happen to be healthy smokers and high achievers, while ignoring the idea that most people whom it does effect negatively are not going to be found at a university or in any part of "normal society." Basically, you're quite biased.

Even if we assume there is no long term physical or neurological effects, the psychological effects of the mind and the social effects are quite evident.

Btw, I want marijuana fully legalized since it's no worse than alcohol--even less harmful. It's clearly one of the many stupid laws that has very little logic behind it. Although I'm still admitting that the "no long term effects at all" idea is rather flimsy. My best opinion would be to legalize it and put harsher penlties on the drugs that literally melt your brain within a very short time frame. I'd happily swap alcohol for marijuana too.

In fact, my ideal society would be a society where most people smoke just a little bit. What an artistic and creative world that would be.

Tyler Perry:
I remember when I accepted everything I was told by those older than me without question.

Oh, so your REBELLIOUS, huh?!

95% of the things you have said about marijuana in this thread are fractally wrong. That means wrong on every conceivable level, up to and including the metaphysical.

You. Have. No. Idea. What. You. Are. Talking. About.

People with far more life experiance than you(I am assuming you are under the age of 40) or me have said it is bad. I will take thier word for it.

BOOM headshot65:

Tyler Perry:
I remember when I accepted everything I was told by those older than me without question.

Oh, so your REBELLIOUS, huh?!

95% of the things you have said about marijuana in this thread are fractally wrong. That means wrong on every conceivable level, up to and including the metaphysical.

You. Have. No. Idea. What. You. Are. Talking. About.

People with far more life experiance than you(I am assuming you are under the age of 40) or me have said it is bad. I will take thier word for it.

Unless this "life experience" includes scientific research into the effects of marijuana, why should you take their word for it when it comes to the effects of marijuana? Why not ask my 91 year old grandmother how to fix your car even though she hasn't been within 30 feet of a garage in 40 years, or my 83 year old grandad who doesn't touch foreign food how to make the perfect Kung Pao chicken.

Seriously mate, don't just blindly believe in people just because they're old, believe in them because they can back up what they say with empirical and statistical evidence and support their claims through peer review.

Shpongled:

Seriously mate, don't just blindly believe in people just because they're old, believe in them because they can back up what they say with empirical and statistical evidence and support their claims through peer review.

This.

Sorry, Boom, but your parents don't know everything. Nobody's do.

Shpongled:
Unless this "life experience" includes scientific research into the effects of marijuana, why should you take their word for it when it comes to the effects of marijuana?

Because they are your elders. What ever happened to respect your elders, anyway? It probly died with patriotism and chivilry and respect for autority. Sad. Even if just my parents said "dont do that." I would listen. With a combination of parents, teachers, coaches, pasters, and sheriffs, any and all "scientific data" can go jump off a cliff.

That's kinda sad bro ..

I'm afraid this thread isn't really going anywhere with this level of discussion. Then again in every thread, time and time again, one POV has constantly been the dominant one.

BOOM headshot65:

Shpongled:
Unless this "life experience" includes scientific research into the effects of marijuana, why should you take their word for it when it comes to the effects of marijuana?

Because they are your elders. What ever happened to respect your elders, anyway? It probly died with patriotism and chivilry and respect for autority. Sad. Even if just my parents said "dont do that." I would listen. With a combination of parents, teachers, coaches, pasters, and sheriffs, any and all "scientific data" can go jump off a cliff.

"Respecting your elders" does not mean "blindly accept everything they tell you as fact." Fuckin' think for yourself, man.

BOOM headshot65:
With a combination of parents, teachers, coaches, pasters, and sheriffs, any and all "scientific data" can go jump off a cliff.

Holy shit. I mean, HOLY SHIT.

Are you actually saying that what your parents tell you trumps actual scientific fact? That's insane. That's beyond insane.

Pretty obvious it's pointless talking to you.

BOOM headshot65:

Shpongled:
Unless this "life experience" includes scientific research into the effects of marijuana, why should you take their word for it when it comes to the effects of marijuana?

1. What ever happened to respect your elders, anyway?

2. With a combination of parents, teachers, coaches, pasters, and sheriffs, any and all "scientific data" can go jump off a cliff.

Looks like you answered your own question.

BOOM headshot65:
With a combination of parents, teachers, coaches, pasters, and sheriffs, any and all "scientific data" can go jump off a cliff.

Wow.

I know I've been accusing you of being incapable of critical thought before, but damn boy... I never thought you'd openly admit it.
That's just very sad.
You make me sad.
You are a drone, and all the information to figure it out is available to you, yet you can't deduce it precisely because you are a drone.

I guess the generation before us should just have accepted what their parents said about black people and cigarettes as well.

Tyler Perry:

Jonluw:
The core of the issue, for me, is rather whether the government should be allowed to control what substances you ingest.

PROTIP: The government should not.

It is not the government's job to determine what I choose to poison, or benefit, myself with. That includes marijuana, sodium, transfats, or anything else. Even heroin. Not that I'd ever do it.

Should people be allowed to drive without seat belts and children allowed to cycle without helmets on the road too?

Where do you draw the line on what the government is and is not allowed to dictate? Is promoting safety not a concern of the government?

I'm curious here, I'm not arguing with you - I'm just asking.

taciturnCandid:
I would like to see alcohol and other drugs kept out of the hands of the mentally ill. It puts everyone else in danger along with the person's health.

Alcohol requires ID to get to make sure minors can't receive it. I don't see why we can't have marks on your drivers licence that tell you that you can't buy any kind of alcohol or other drug.

It doesn't have to be limited to mentally ill being limited to access to things like alcohol and marijuana. People who have shown abuse and have required rehabilitation should be restricted until they can prove that they can control themselves.

Other than that, I don't see any reason to ban marijuana

What the hell are you talking about?

First off. Do you know what a mental illness is? It can be anything from schizophrenia, depression and autism to eating disorders and gender identity issues.

Do tell. Why shouldn't this broad spectre of people suffering from a very diverse list of illnesses not be allowed to consume drugs?

I'm going to guess: You believe that we are violent maniacs ready to snap at any moment ("It puts everyone else in danger").

People with Schizophrenia have a higher tendency to be violent (Mostly directed toward friends and family), than the healthy population. But only a small part of the violence can be attributed to schizophrenia itself - during psychosis, there's an increased chance of violence. The rest can be attributed pre-existing conditions (Such as anti-social behaviour and conduct disorder from childhood, or criminal behaviour before the onset of the dissease), cessation in taking medicine and substance abuse - But hold your horse, substance abuse increase the chance of violent behaviour in both mentally ill AND mentally healthy people.

Still, this violent group includes about 19% of all schizophrenics. The rest, in general, are more socially withdrawn, and prefer to be left alone.

The whole notion of the "unstable mentally ill who does unprovoked violence" doesn't really hold up in reality. It's a social stigmata that keeps hanging around. In fact, the opposite may be true - mentally ill people are NOT more likely to commit violence, rather, they have an INCREASED chance (compared to the mentally healthy) of being the victim of a violent crime.
A study done in the USA concluded that a schizophrenic living in a community is 14 times more likely to be the victim of a violent crime than being arrested for such a crime.

The greatest threat of violence amongst the mentally ill is, indeed, violence toward one self. A study done in the UK found out that 90% of the people who committed suicide was suffering from a mental illness.

Source: http://www.mind.org.uk/help/research_and_policy/dangerousness_and_mental_health_the_facts#_edn12

SillyBear:

Tyler Perry:

Jonluw:
The core of the issue, for me, is rather whether the government should be allowed to control what substances you ingest.

PROTIP: The government should not.

It is not the government's job to determine what I choose to poison, or benefit, myself with. That includes marijuana, sodium, transfats, or anything else. Even heroin. Not that I'd ever do it.

Should people be allowed to drive without seat belts and children allowed to cycle without helmets on the road too?

Where do you draw the line on what the government is and is not allowed to dictate? Is promoting safety not a concern of the government?

I'm curious here, I'm not arguing with you - I'm just asking.

Seat belts ... I'm mixed on. While I agree with one's freedom to be an idiot if they so choose, mandating a safety measure that will markedly reduce the chances of one ending up in the ER with a bad case of dead is not necessarily a bad thing.

Children wearing helmets absolutely should be mandated, since they are children and cannot have the reasonable expectation of acting responsibly.

Tyler Perry:

Seat belts ... I'm mixed on. While I agree with one's freedom to be an idiot if they so choose, mandating a safety measure that will markedly reduce the chances of one ending up in the ER with a bad case of dead is not necessarily a bad thing.

Why don't you see banning heroin as a safety measure too? Having worked in an ER I can tell you that heroin has an uncanny ability to hospitalise people and put a drain on resources. Should a government really legalise something that does this to so many people? What about the millions of pounds it would cost in maintaining the health of those who use it?

I think this issue is deeper than the "I should have the right to do what I want with my own body" argument like you made it out to be originally.

BOOM headshot65:

Shpongled:
Unless this "life experience" includes scientific research into the effects of marijuana, why should you take their word for it when it comes to the effects of marijuana?

Because they are your elders. What ever happened to respect your elders, anyway? It probly died with patriotism and chivilry and respect for autority. Sad. Even if just my parents said "dont do that." I would listen. With a combination of parents, teachers, coaches, pasters, and sheriffs, any and all "scientific data" can go jump off a cliff.

What the heck? Are you American? Because you sound an awful lot like... the TALIBAN.

That's right. With a mind as closed as yours, with "values" as extreme as yours, you are more like your enemies then your countrymen.

SillyBear:

Tyler Perry:

Seat belts ... I'm mixed on. While I agree with one's freedom to be an idiot if they so choose, mandating a safety measure that will markedly reduce the chances of one ending up in the ER with a bad case of dead is not necessarily a bad thing.

Why don't you see banning heroin as a safety measure too? Having worked in an ER I can tell you that heroin has an uncanny ability to hospitalise people and put a drain on resources. Should a government really legalise something that does this to so many people? What about the millions of pounds it would cost in maintaining the health of those who use it?

I think this issue is deeper than the "I should have the right to do what I want with my own body" argument like you made it out to be originally.

I'm all for legalizing marijuana, but I agree with you on heroin. In the Netherlands, there's a distinction between "soft" drugs and "hard" drugs, hard drugs being illegal in any situation. Heroin is one of them.
Alcohol qualifies as a hard drug too, but you know how society is with alcohol.

Jonluw:
I guess the generation before us should just have accepted what their parents said about black people as well.

Thats different. That is a HUMAN BEING, not a PLANT!

Seriously people, why is this so hard to understand. They drill it into you since you are toddlers "No, dont do drugs." Then you decide they are suppressing your "right to your body" or "scuashing free thought". Why whould they steer you wrong?! They want you to be safe, thats all.

BOOM headshot65:

Jonluw:
I guess the generation before us should just have accepted what their parents said about black people as well.

Thats different. That is a HUMAN BEING, not a PLANT!

Seriously people, why is this so hard to understand. They drill it into you since you are toddlers "No, dont do drugs." Then you decide they are suppressing your "right to your body" or "scuashing free thought". Why whould they steer you wrong?! They want you to be safe, thats all.

Actually, where I come from, thought control is looked down on.

Bassik:

BOOM headshot65:

Jonluw:
I guess the generation before us should just have accepted what their parents said about black people as well.

Thats different. That is a HUMAN BEING, not a PLANT!

Seriously people, why is this so hard to understand. They drill it into you since you are toddlers "No, dont do drugs." Then you decide they are suppressing your "right to your body" or "scuashing free thought". Why whould they steer you wrong?! They want you to be safe, thats all.

Actually, where I come from, thought control is looked down on.

So you would rather rebel against what your parents told you than listen to them because they are "controlling your thoughts". My God. That is the stupidest reason I have ever heard for doing that.

Drugs are a plauge on society, and I would gladly take a tax hike if it ment we could get more police or DEA agents going after drugs.

BOOM headshot65:

Bassik:

BOOM headshot65:

Thats different. That is a HUMAN BEING, not a PLANT!

Seriously people, why is this so hard to understand. They drill it into you since you are toddlers "No, dont do drugs." Then you decide they are suppressing your "right to your body" or "scuashing free thought". Why whould they steer you wrong?! They want you to be safe, thats all.

Actually, where I come from, thought control is looked down on.

So you would rather rebel against what your parents told you than listen to them because they are "controlling your thoughts". My God. That is the stupidest reason I have ever heard for doing that.

no-ooooo, but is it so hard to believe that some people might, I don't know, use critical thinking?

BOOM headshot65:

So you would rather rebel against what your parents told you than listen to them because they are "controlling your thoughts". My God. That is the stupidest reason I have ever heard for doing that.

Drugs are a plauge on society, and I would gladly take a tax hike if it ment we could get more police or DEA agents going after drugs.

Disagreeing with your parents isn't rebelling against them. It's disagreeing with them. You can respect your elders and still disagree on certain subjects.

I take it you aren't old.

I used to be EXACTLY like you when I was younger. Hell, I even wanted to join our local 'DEA'.

If you want to know what it's like living in a drug free country, visit eastern europe pre-1989. No pot, no acid, all the conventional drugs you know were pretty much nonexistent. People still drank like crazy and took various 'medicinal' drugs.

Edit: Now we have decriminalized every drug. From shrooms, to coke, to heroine...and don't forget weed. That means all you can get is a fine up to something around 700$ if you have any drug on you under the limit. Anything above that will put your ass in prison for 5 years. This allows policemen to arrest drug dealers more easily, cooperation with the police in return for some financial award is not uncommon. Decriminalization allowed the police to arrest a MAJORITY of major drug dealers. 17 kingpins were arrested from 3 drug circles in the first two weeks(which is good in a city of 1 million). It was tough trying to get hold of weed. But this policy drastically changed the drug problem.

Just legalize it already, add it to the long list of socially accepted and addictive "drugs". Same as alcohol, sugar, nicotine and caffeine.
Ofcourse they aren't health none of them are, it's still my choice. Other then that legalizing marijuana would considerably cut costs and if properly regulated even make a good fund raiser. That and keeping a insane amount of people who quite honestly don't deserve to be there, out of jail. Giving the cops a chance to catch "real" criminals, pushers of harddrugs, rapists and murderers, instead of chasing kids smoking their occasional joint.

BOOM headshot65:

Jonluw:
I guess the generation before us should just have accepted what their parents said about black people as well.

Thats different. That is a HUMAN BEING, not a PLANT!

No, the principle is exactly the same.
The people who tell their children to "not go near that negro, he will rape you" only wanted to protect their children as well. Doesn't make them any less retarded.
The people of the previous generation decided to "disrespect" and rebel against their elders when they found out that what the elders were telling them was going against their principles, scientific research, and their common sense.

I see you chose to omit the words "and cigarettes" from that sentence by the way.
Speaks volumes about your willingness to debate this honestly.

If it wasn't for previous generations not insisting that "scientific fact go jump of a cliff" when science disagreed with their elders, we'd still be at this point:
image
image


Well, actually, to be fair: We'd be at the point where we still thought diseases were judgement from god.

Before you reply to this, be aware:
I have no intention to debate this topic with you. You have repeatedly shown yourself to be incapable of rational, critical, and constructive thinking.
I'm merely speaking up because I want you to know that the things you write in this thread make me very sad.

BOOM headshot65:

Bassik:

BOOM headshot65:

Thats different. That is a HUMAN BEING, not a PLANT!

Seriously people, why is this so hard to understand. They drill it into you since you are toddlers "No, dont do drugs." Then you decide they are suppressing your "right to your body" or "scuashing free thought". Why whould they steer you wrong?! They want you to be safe, thats all.

Actually, where I come from, thought control is looked down on.

So you would rather rebel against what your parents told you than listen to them because they are "controlling your thoughts". My God. That is the stupidest reason I have ever heard for doing that.

Drugs are a plauge on society, and I would gladly take a tax hike if it ment we could get more police or DEA agents going after drugs.

I always go with the advice of my parents when they give it regarding drugs, and they've always been right. My dad was the one that first told me that acid was overrated and shrooms were a lot more fun. That ended up being some great advice.

Personally I can't even remember the last time I met someone around the same age as my parents that said all drugs were bad, it's a goofy position to hold and most people from the Baby Boomer generation that made it to 2012 know perfectly well that their kids and grandkids are going to experiment just like they did. All of the people I meet that think "all drugs are bad" are people my age and younger with next to no life experience that don't have the guts to step into the unknown and cover that up with pretentions of religion or higher morality.

Niflhel:

taciturnCandid:
I would like to see alcohol and other drugs kept out of the hands of the mentally ill. It puts everyone else in danger along with the person's health.

Alcohol requires ID to get to make sure minors can't receive it. I don't see why we can't have marks on your drivers licence that tell you that you can't buy any kind of alcohol or other drug.

It doesn't have to be limited to mentally ill being limited to access to things like alcohol and marijuana. People who have shown abuse and have required rehabilitation should be restricted until they can prove that they can control themselves.

Other than that, I don't see any reason to ban marijuana

What the hell are you talking about?

First off. Do you know what a mental illness is? It can be anything from schizophrenia, depression and autism to eating disorders and gender identity issues.

Do tell. Why shouldn't this broad spectre of people suffering from a very diverse list of illnesses not be allowed to consume drugs?

I'm going to guess: You believe that we are violent maniacs ready to snap at any moment ("It puts everyone else in danger").

People with Schizophrenia have a higher tendency to be violent (Mostly directed toward friends and family), than the healthy population. But only a small part of the violence can be attributed to schizophrenia itself - during psychosis, there's an increased chance of violence. The rest can be attributed pre-existing conditions (Such as anti-social behaviour and conduct disorder from childhood, or criminal behaviour before the onset of the dissease), cessation in taking medicine and substance abuse - But hold your horse, substance abuse increase the chance of violent behaviour in both mentally ill AND mentally healthy people.

Still, this violent group includes about 19% of all schizophrenics. The rest, in general, are more socially withdrawn, and prefer to be left alone.

The whole notion of the "unstable mentally ill who does unprovoked violence" doesn't really hold up in reality. It's a social stigmata that keeps hanging around. In fact, the opposite may be true - mentally ill people are NOT more likely to commit violence, rather, they have an INCREASED chance (compared to the mentally healthy) of being the victim of a violent crime.
A study done in the USA concluded that a schizophrenic living in a community is 14 times more likely to be the victim of a violent crime than being arrested for such a crime.

The greatest threat of violence amongst the mentally ill is, indeed, violence toward one self. A study done in the UK found out that 90% of the people who committed suicide was suffering from a mental illness.

Source: http://www.mind.org.uk/help/research_and_policy/dangerousness_and_mental_health_the_facts#_edn12

I would like to say that I have both schizophrenia and bipolar

Marijuana exacerbates existing conditions. I should have stated it different.

When mental illness is worse, it causes harm to society. I really was referring to emotional damage, especially when suicide is present. It causes lost productivity. It causes others to have to take care of the person and be less productive themselves.

Mental illness is dangerous. Physcially dangerous? no. Very rarely it is physcially dangerous.

However, stress caused by dealing with an unstable mentally ill patient is very dangerous to health. Stress is a killer, literally. It ruins relationships. It causes health problems.

Marijuana makes depression worse. It can cause mania in individuals with bipolar. It might possibly help people with anxiety disorders. Though it would be terrible for someone with a panic disorder due to the paranoia that often accompanies marijuana. OCD, it temporarily helps, but in the long run worsens.

It may help with PTSD. Mood disorders and schizophrenia is a big no for use. Personality disorders are probably not affected. ADHD is probably helped by it.

So it really requires clarification. But when people hear mental illness they automaticlly think of mood disorders and schizophrenia.

And why should saying it is a harm to other people's health mean violence? I certainly did not intend it to be that way. I just chose a poor word choice i guess. Harm to someone's emotional health is harm to their health. Harm to their relational health is harm. Stress is very much harmful.

Further more. Autism is a developmental disorder. It is not a mental illness. Gender identity issues is something that doesn't truly exist. It is just slander against a sexuality. It is a mental illness in the same way that homosexuality is a mental illness, IE, it isn't.

Cowpoo:
Disagreeing with your parents isn't rebelling against them. It's disagreeing with them. You can respect your elders and still disagree on certain subjects.

Yes, if it is something that really has meaning behind it, like civil rights. But really, WHY would you want to poison yourself smoking...anything. Seriously, why?!

I take it you aren't old.

No, I am not. I am only 18. But from what some of my teachers have said...oh, how did my english teacher put it...oh yes, that in terms of the majority of values I hold, "I have the mind/maturity of a 40 year old stuck in the body of an 18 year old." And my government teacher once said I have an "incorruptable moral compass". So take those for what they are worth.

I used to be EXACTLY like you when I was younger. Hell, I even wanted to join our local 'DEA'.

I have considered DEA, or maybe DARE. Something where I can convice teens and children to just say no to drugs.

Edit: Now we have decriminalized every drug. From shrooms, to coke, to heroine...and don't forget weed. That means all you can get is a fine up to something around 700$ if you have any drug on you under the limit. Anything above that will put your ass in prison for 5 years. This allows policemen to arrest drug dealers more easily, cooperation with the police in return for some financial award is not uncommon. Decriminalization allowed the police to arrest a MAJORITY of major drug dealers. 17 kingpins were arrested from 3 drug circles in the first two weeks(which is good in a city of 1 million). It was tough trying to get hold of weed. But this policy drastically changed the drug problem.

Ive got to tell you, I would be ok with decriminalization. But that is AS CLOSE AS I WANT TO GET TO LEGALIZATION! PERIOD!

BOOM headshot65:
snip

Dear BOOM, I hope you won't hold it against me, but I checked out your profile, and it says you have Asperger Syndrome (since you put it in your description I thought it'd be fine to post it here). Is that something we should be aware of when talking about these things? If I were to take a guess, I'd guess that you get a lot of your support from your family and pastor and sheriff etc, and valuing their advice and teachings is important for you to have a happy, stable life, is that correct?

The only thing thing many posters are trying to tell you is that these important, wonderful people in your life are humans too, and they can make mistakes, no matter what great people they undoubtedly are. And in the case of marijuana, there is a big difference between what they've told you, and what scientific studies have discovered.

It does not belittle their efforts or their role in your life to admit that they can be mistaken, and you disagreeing with them based on your own discoveries or research would not be disrespectful to them. Nor does this one inaccuracy mean that you can't rely on them or trust them.

Don't think we're bashing the people you care about, because that's not it at all. We're just saying it's fine, and sometimes right, to make up your own mind.

TheMatsjo:
Dear BOOM, I hope you won't hold it against me, but I checked out your profile, and it says you have Asperger Syndrome (since you put it in your description I thought it'd be fine to post it here).

Of course it is ok. I like telling people I have it because I think it is interesting

If I were to take a guess, I'd guess that you get a lot of your support from your family and pastor and sheriff etc, and valuing their advice and teachings is important for you to have a happy, stable life, is that correct?

Understatement.

In my view, society needs loyalty, order, respect for the law, and respect for authority. Without those, we are nothing. I dont like people going against the status quo unless they have a VERY good reason. For instance, I LOVED the civil rights movement of the '60s, but I HATED the counter-culture/hippie movement of the '60s (I wonder why? I mean, one of the hallmarks of it was experimenting with drugs? Why would I hate that movement). Or for a more modern case, I stand behind the Gay Rights movement (even though I think marriage should be one man, one woman) but I wanted to beat my head against a wall when Occupy Wall Street showed up (it was just the second coming of the counter-culture in my eyes). I am not against free thought, theres just some things that when you really think about it, you should really be thinking, "Wait, WHY am I doing this?" Drugs are one of those. The problem with our society is too many people think in the Here and Now, rather than 20 years from now. I, on the other hand, think in the 20 years from now.

The only thing thing many posters are trying to tell you is that these important, wonderful people in your life are humans too, and they can make mistakes, no matter what great people they undoubtedly are. And in the case of marijuana, there is a big difference between what they've told you, and what scientific studies have discovered.

But science isnt perfect either. What if they messed up a study? What if they had a personal bias? What if there was some outlier that threw the whole set of data out of wack? While its rare, what if they were paid off by activist groups pushing legalization? We dont know the long term effects of marijunia and other drugs yet. We know what alcohol and tobacco does because those have mainstream for hundreds of years, and now studies are showing that those are bad for you. There are some places that are actually reinstating alcohol prohibition (and actually enforcing it this time) and my town has banned smoking indoors at public places and within 15 feet of the doors for buildings. You cant even smoke in a bar. What if 20 years down the road, they find out that marijunia is just as bad as alcohol and tobacco? Anyone who used it and died from it would have been killed because of faulty evidence saying it was actually safe. No, that is not ok.

BOOM headshot65:

Seriously people, why is this so hard to understand. They drill it into you since you are toddlers "No, dont do drugs." Then you decide they are suppressing your "right to your body" or "scuashing free thought". Why whould they steer you wrong?! They want you to be safe, thats all.

That's why I stopped making that face. Because mommy told me my face would stay that way.

BOOM headshot65:

In my view, society needs loyalty, order, respect for the law, and respect for authority. Without those, we are nothing.

Hello BOOM, I don't think I've responded to you yet. I'm going backwards in this thread here so forgive me if some things I say are out of context.

I agree with you that authority is important; the French have a theory that authority is derived from reason - meaning that authority isn't inherent but rather is something gained by showing a use of reason in thought, action, etc. A reasonable person has earned his or her authority. Reasonable laws deserve to be followed.

On the other hand, if people blindly followed the laws of society and reason was never questioned, Gandhi wouldn't have said:

You assist an evil system most effectively by obeying its orders and decrees.
An evil system never deserves such allegiance.
Allegiance to it means partaking of the evil.
A good person will resist an evil system with his or her whole soul.

If people blindly followed society and law we would still have slavery. Women wouldn't have the right to vote. Alcohol would still be prohibited in the US. The Arab Spring uprising that gave millions their freedom wouldn't have happened.

Society and authority are important, though it is also important to have your own moral center. I understand what is right and wrong, I don't need a set of laws to define this for me. Generally I avoid harming other people and try to do as much good as I can - and I'd do that under the laws of any country I lived in. I find it to be a good policy.

The marijuana laws in this country are, I believe - and many believe - unjust. The people believe they have a right to medicate with marijuana or use it recreational way. They believe they aren't harming anyone by doing so - and so they don't follow a law that they believe to be unjust. It's the one way, really, that laws get changed - when enough people stop following a law that society scratches its collective head and goes, "Wow, that was a silly law. It's stupid to imprison people for smoking a plant. This is ridiculous."

That is why people question the authority of the law on this matter. Also, in other countries, the legal status of marijuana is different. So depending on where you live, it might be legal for you to smoke in which case this argument is, well, moot.

I dont like people going against the status quo unless they have a VERY good reason. For instance, I LOVED the civil rights movement of the '60s, but I HATED the counter-culture/hippie movement of the '60s (I wonder why? I mean, one of the hallmarks of it was experimenting with drugs? Why would I hate that movement).

The counterculture movement of the 60's was actually fascinating; you'd learn a lot about it (and the reasons for it) by studying it instead of dismissing it as a "blanket excuse to experiment with drugs" or whatever you think it was.

http://www.amazon.com/Imagine-Nation-American-Counterculture-1960s/dp/0415930405 - that book alone contains 13 essays from some very thoughtful people.

And just look at what was going on during this time:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counterculture_of_the_1960s

So dismiss this with a "I hate the movement because the hippies experimented with drugs" is a rather narrow and unfortunate view to take.

Or for a more modern case, I stand behind the Gay Rights movement (even though I think marriage should be one man, one woman) but I wanted to beat my head against a wall when Occupy Wall Street showed up (it was just the second coming of the counter-culture in my eyes).

People rising up against rising wealth inequality of the like never seen before in the US bothered you? Interesting. A lot of people find the movement to be a very positive sign of people getting fed up.

I am not against free thought, theres just some things that when you really think about it, you should really be thinking, "Wait, WHY am I doing this?" Drugs are one of those. The problem with our society is too many people think in the Here and Now, rather than 20 years from now. I, on the other hand, think in the 20 years from now.

Well, sure. Some people are natural risk-takers and some people are naturally more cautious. Psychological testing shows just recently that people who tend towards a more progressive/liberal thought process are responsible for a lot of the risk-taking behavior that allows society to progress. On the other hand, conservatives and those who wish to preserve the status-quo tend to be more fearful of change; for any number of genetic and environmental reasons.

Steve Jobs, arguably a very successful man, once said that Bill Gates "Should drop some acid" and that taking LSD was instrumental in his life and creativity. Many artists and musicians have stated that their music wouldn't be possible without drugs and/or alcohol. Many writers have said the same thing.

My point is while you can make an informed decision to not take psychedelic drugs, other people have taken psychedelic drugs - including marijuana - and said that it enhanced their life. Why would you deny their right to enjoy life as they see fit?

But science isnt perfect either. What if they messed up a study? What if they had a personal bias? What if there was some outlier that threw the whole set of data out of wack? While its rare, what if they were paid off by activist groups pushing legalization? We dont know the long term effects of marijunia and other drugs yet.

Well, we have hundreds of studies that have been done involving marijuana and other drugs and we have a very good idea of how toxic it is - which is to say, less toxic than any known recreational substance used by man. We have cancer patients and senior citizens using it for pain management, and these people aren't exactly paragons of health. Marijuana is one of the oldest (some argue THE OLDEST!) cultivated plant on the face of the Earth, it's been used for LONGER than alcohol - look at this study about marijuana used 2700 years ago for shamanistic purposes:

http://jxb.oxfordjournals.org/content/59/15/4171.full

Point is, while there *might* be things about marijuana we don't know, it's a risk/reward scenario everyone should be able to decide for themselves. For example, I think tobacco is disgusting - absolutely useless as a substance and more harmful than all the pot smoked in the world. However, I'd never want to deny another adult his or her right to smoke tobacco and to purchase it legally. If I want my kids to stay away from it, it is MY job as a parent to keep my kids away from it - not society's job to make it illegal just so that it never accidentally falls into the precious hands of a child. Adults have an equal right to their freedom to enjoy recreational substances as children do to be safe from them; as a society we should treat marijuana like alcohol - make it legal for adults only and when its use it discovered in the under age set; punish it. Period.

As an adult, you'll be faced with many decisions in life. Whether or not to drink alcohol and if you do, whether or not to drink to excess. Whether or not to have casual sex. Whether or not to have children or get married. Whether or not to own a house pet. Whether or not you want to eat a healthy diet and exercise every day.

When you are faced with these decisions, believe me - you will want to be the one to make them for yourself. Not the government, not your parents, teacher, sheriff, or the DARE program. If you are a typical adult you will make decisions based on a risk vs. reward scenario and carefully research things before you do them if they might be dangerous.

This includes what kind of car you drive, what kind of people you date, and what kind of drugs - if any - you do.

Very few people, on their death bed, lay there going, "I wish I had fewer choices in life and that more of my decisions were made up for me." I can say this - at 33 years old, I've made some bad decisions and some good ones; but at least I can say I'm responsible for the outcome of both.

Side note - this post took me 45 minutes when my average takes 5 or so... I am training a 14 week old Red Heeler puppy. This is driving me nuts, and this is why I am childfree. Potty training a puppy is bad enough.

Jonluw:

Tyler Perry:

Jonluw:
The core of the issue, for me, is rather whether the government should be allowed to control what substances you ingest.

PROTIP: The government should not.

It is not the government's job to determine what I choose to poison, or benefit, myself with. That includes marijuana, sodium, transfats, or anything else. Even heroin. Not that I'd ever do it.

Exactly.
However, I do believe there should exist a government organ to educate on, and disincentivize, the use of detrimental and addictive drugs.
If the heavy drugs are to be made legal, it is important that people are educated on the risks, and that it is very strictly controlled so that underage people will not have access to them.

I agree with Jonluw on this. I think that all recreational drugs should be strictly regulated and studied. Tobacco and alcohol have warnings and we continue to study the negative (and in the case of alcohol, perhaps sometimes positive) effects of both. The same should be done with marijuana.

Then, just like with poisoned alcohol in the 1920's causing people to go blind due to poor production, prohibition of marijuana makes it more likely that a kid wanting to experiment with weed - or worse, a cancer patient who tries to get medicine on the street - will end up with pot laced with meth, cocaine, or worse.

Regulating marijuana like they do medical marijuana in Colorado makes it very safe - people know if they buy pot from the licensed medical centers here that a state regulator has inspected the plants, the grow operation, the owners, and every step of production.

If pot did fall into the hands of my kid I would want it to be that kind of pot. Same as if my kid wanted a bottle of vodka I hope to GOD he wouldn't get it from a homemade still in some other kid's basement.

But in relation to your main point, yes, with legalization comes responsibility to educate.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked