PDA

View Full Version : Should Weed be legal? 4/20



Spiritwind
20 Apr 2011, 03:06pm
Debate it up folks. Why or why shouldn't weed be legal?

Harry
20 Apr 2011, 03:11pm
Should be illegal, it's too easy to OD on.

Bad Dog
20 Apr 2011, 03:13pm
The most dangerous thing about weed is it pushes people who want to get the high to do riskier drugs, like K2 and other similar chemicals.

Spiritwind
20 Apr 2011, 03:19pm
I've never once heard of anyone ODing on Weed. Do you have any proof of this? If so I'd really like to see it.
I do know smoking weed over a long period of time can cause mental and psychological problems that would not be there should the user had not smoked.
Personally, I believe it should be legal but controlled, such as Alcohol and Tobacco.
To me personally it has no different effect than alcohol, I just feel like I had a few too many drinks, minus the hangover the next day.
Because it is possible to get a contact high I can see at least some reason as to why its illegal. If it ever were to be legalized it would have to be smoked at your residence or a residence that allowed it.
-----
Bad Dog, yes I could see how someone who smokes a lot of weed and got use to it would be much more likely to do a more serious drug just to get the better high. Good point.

Bad Dog
20 Apr 2011, 03:33pm
Bad Dog, yes I could see how someone who smokes a lot of weed and got use to it would be much more likely to do a more serious drug just to get the better high. Good point.

Not quite what I mean, but that is also a possibility. What I meant was people who smoke weed and then end up not being able to due to a job or being tested will sometimes resort to these fake weed chemicals, which is basically smoking pulperie (cant spell it, derp) sprayed with chemicals, which are actually dangerous. Case in point, a good friend of mine recently OD'd on one of these chemicals, a very concentrated dose of it.

Thats my main point really, that, as a user of pot for a few years now, the most dangerous thing I've seen is when pot users can't use pot, and resort to 'spice' or 'K2' or other synthetic forms of high.

But, yes, pot users generally will go on to other drugs. Not all of them, and not all the drugs they go on to will be crack or heroin, but from what I have seen, a lot of my friends have at least dabbled in, say, psychedelics.

Matt
20 Apr 2011, 03:35pm
Ok we have some brainwashed people in SG i want you guys to watch the Union its a movie about the legalization of marijuana and proven facts.

The Union: The Business Behind Getting High (2007) - IMDb (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1039647/)

Fact No one has never OD or been killed by smoking marijuana.

Suicide
20 Apr 2011, 04:23pm
To be honest, it should be allowed in most places, like maybe at home or something, but not at public places, people getting high and shit from 3rd hand smoking.

Spiritwind
20 Apr 2011, 04:23pm
Ah, yes I see what you mean now Bad, my brother use to smoke a spice that was similar to K2 because it was a lot cheaper and he could pass a UA. However, he quit once I showed him proof that there are a few known cases of death because of people smoking the particular spice he was - and in almost all cases people had some form of minute brain damage from smoking it.
---
Suicide, whats third hand smoking? *looked it up, I dont see how someone could get a contact high - I doubt very much THC stays on the outside of the body after smoking.*

Suicide
20 Apr 2011, 04:26pm
Ah, yes I see what you mean now Bad, my brother use to smoke a spice that was similar to K2 because it was a lot cheaper and he could pass a UA. However, he quit once I showed him proof that there are a few known cases of death because of people smoking the particular spice he was - and in almost all cases people had some form of minute brain damage from smoking it.
---
Suicide, whats third hand smoking? *looked it up, I dont see how someone could get a contact high - I doubt very much THC stays on the outside of the body after smoking.*

It's other people getting high from other people smoking it, might be 2nd hand smoke, correct me if I'm wrong.

fanatiik
20 Apr 2011, 04:28pm
weed should be legalise because it is good for the economy and it is not neurotoxic. Alcohol is worst then weed .(my opinion)

Bad Dog
20 Apr 2011, 04:32pm
Ah, yes I see what you mean now Bad, my brother use to smoke a spice that was similar to K2 because it was a lot cheaper and he could pass a UA. However, he quit once I showed him proof that there are a few known cases of death because of people smoking the particular spice he was - and in almost all cases people had some form of minute brain damage from smoking it.
---
Suicide, whats third hand smoking? *looked it up, I dont see how someone could get a contact high - I doubt very much THC stays on the outside of the body after smoking.*

Scary thing was that I smoked the exact same thing he was like a day before. Needless to say, I'm done with synthetics.

b0red
20 Apr 2011, 05:07pm
Weed needles will fuck up your life. Don't get into it.

BoM
20 Apr 2011, 06:53pm
weed should be legalise because it is good for the economy and it is not neurotoxic. Alcohol is worst then weed .(my opinion)

I agree that Alcohol is worse than Weed. I think it would be Ok to have Weed legalized, as long as it was handled properly by the government like they do with cigarretes and alcohol. It would probably help the economy, and you wouldn't have to waste the cops time hunting down a couple of stoners who just like to sit in their basement and smoke weed. lol.

NIKO
20 Apr 2011, 07:07pm
Wzw-wRMCqos

Wicked Pissah
20 Apr 2011, 08:19pm
Personally I don't care...
but if it was legal:
Economy may change, have illegal immigrants growing that shit everywhere
Kids may not smoke it, because it is now legal, so doing legal things is so uncool
Look at Amsterdam (everyone wants to go there, why... because of marijuana, and other things too...)

b0red
20 Apr 2011, 08:34pm
Personally I don't care...
but if it was legal:
Economy may change, have illegal immigrants growing that shit everywhere
Kids may not smoke it, because it is now legal, so doing legal things is so uncool
Look at Amsterdam (everyone wants to go there, why... because of marijuana, and other things too...)

prostitution should be legal if there are no pimps. honestly.

Vivian556
20 Apr 2011, 08:38pm
Wzw-wRMCqos
da-da-da-da-daaa, it's the mutha fuckin' d-o-double g!

PingPong
20 Apr 2011, 08:40pm
Wzw-wRMCqos
uzhPz3L_WUw
Smoke some weed :)

Tweezy
21 Apr 2011, 03:34am
I don't see alcohol as being more dangerous to ones self as weed. Just think, having two pints a day won't really have any long term effects on your liver, your liver will be able to push out the toxins. Lets go into really long term now, you've been drinking 2 pints a day for around 25/30 years. Imagine having 2 spliffs a day for that amount of time, you'll be fucked in the head, I can't even imagine how paranoid someone would be...

Though, weed does have medical attributes which can be counted as useful. I sort of agree with Spritwind here, if someone we could control the flow of weed to people then maybe, but within this day and age I think it would be impossible.

skitzophranic
21 Apr 2011, 08:56am
of course.

yardy
21 Apr 2011, 09:59am
Everything is OK to be consumed, it is just the amount, smokin cannabis once a week is ok I gues, but smoking it everyday isn't gd. I still say dont legalize it, because there are always people that do it 2 much.

(AGAINST)Yes ofcourse if you want weed you can get weed. But when you legalize it it is easier to get an people will consume more.

(FOR) People have to pay for their cannabis and get poor because they give aways all their money.

(FOR) Drug dealers won't get their illegal made money anymore.

But i am still against it because it has always been forbidden in the USA and i dont understand why do you want to legalize weed, there are many more important things than weed, and you dont have to do it.

If there is a vote I vote (DOnt legalize it), but if someone smokes it i dont care, its their health and problem (or not problem)

Hiphopopotomus
21 Apr 2011, 05:11pm
Americans are stupid enough, giving us another reason to be stupid is never a good idea.

Veggie
21 Apr 2011, 06:35pm
I dunno there is pros and cons to both sides of the debate, on the pro side there is the fact is used for medicinal reasons, needs to be a study on it in my opinion.

trakaill
21 Apr 2011, 11:06pm
I don't see alcohol as being more dangerous to ones self as weed. Just think, having two pints a day won't really have any long term effects on your liver, your liver will be able to push out the toxins. Lets go into really long term now, you've been drinking 2 pints a day for around 25/30 years. Imagine having 2 spliffs a day for that amount of time, you'll be fucked in the head, I can't even imagine how paranoid someone would be...

Though, weed does have medical attributes which can be counted as useful. I sort of agree with Spritwind here, if someone we could control the flow of weed to people then maybe, but within this day and age I think it would be impossible.

I was just gonna reply with of course but then I saw this dumb post and couldnt help myself.... read up on both and you'll find out that not only do you damage your liver by doing two pints a day but you also become dependent.. YES TO ALL THE PEOPLE OUT THERE THAT THINK ONE DRINK A DAY IS NOT A PROBLEM, IT IS IN FACT AN ALCOHOLIC BEHAVIOR AND DESTRUCTIVE!! read about it. eventually your body will act differently and require that drink a day to function normally.

Off topic but there was an FAA investigation that also showed/used that to show the cause of a crash.

Now talk about brain cells, everytime you drink you destroy some. Now alcohol has a certain effect and so does weed and they are both similar but nowadays you can find weed thats so concentrated that it would probably do more damage

So 2 drink a day vs 2 blunt a day is not only a stupid comparison but if anything the blunt is more healthy because all the blunt does is destroy your lungs and you brain cells a slight bit but does not create a physical/physiological need unlike alcohol does.

No ask anyone working in rehab or drug center and ask them which is they found causes the most damage out of MJ, cocain, crack, heroin, meth, ecstasy, acid, shrooms ..etc and alcohol and Ill bet you alcohol will be the answer. its legality might be the reason but still...

u egg
22 Apr 2011, 01:46am
It should be legalized with some restrictions (18+, id card required, stuff like that...). No more dealers. Security in neighborhood back. Like in the Netherlands.

Never saw/heard of OD on weed. If you need more feelings just go to an hospital 'cause you're addicted. Smoking weed is really cool when you do it 1 time/2 weeks. Not like you're going to be a total junkie. I still success at school, have a gf and a family... ;).

Tweezy
22 Apr 2011, 04:41pm
I was just gonna reply with of course but then I saw this dumb post and couldnt help myself.... read up on both and you'll find out that not only do you damage your liver by doing two pints a day but you also become dependent.. YES TO ALL THE PEOPLE OUT THERE THAT THINK ONE DRINK A DAY IS NOT A PROBLEM, IT IS IN FACT AN ALCOHOLIC BEHAVIOR AND DESTRUCTIVE!! read about it. eventually your body will act differently and require that drink a day to function normally.

Off topic but there was an FAA investigation that also showed/used that to show the cause of a crash.

Now talk about brain cells, everytime you drink you destroy some. Now alcohol has a certain effect and so does weed and they are both similar but nowadays you can find weed thats so concentrated that it would probably do more damage

So 2 drink a day vs 2 blunt a day is not only a stupid comparison but if anything the blunt is more healthy because all the blunt does is destroy your lungs and you brain cells a slight bit but does not create a physical/physiological need unlike alcohol does.

No ask anyone working in rehab or drug center and ask them which is they found causes the most damage out of MJ, cocain, crack, heroin, meth, ecstasy, acid, shrooms ..etc and alcohol and Ill bet you alcohol will be the answer. its legality might be the reason but still...

I do like my ass getting handed on a plate from time to time :)

Phonicz
22 Apr 2011, 05:40pm
lol

Bruce
22 Apr 2011, 08:45pm
No it acts a gateway drug and makes Americans even more stupid. Hence the term "dope."

b0red
22 Apr 2011, 11:09pm
I don't know if half the replies here are serious but honestly the drug should be legal. Its less harmful than alcohol & tobacco and even cancer.gov says it is helpful in cancer patients. There have been no cases of lung cancer because of marijuana smoke but it has been shown to cause precancerous cells but smoking stuff will do that. It does affect memory in short term but has not been studied close enough to show any results for longterm but marijuana has more positives than negatives. I'm pretty sure washington state is going to legalize it pretty soon. I really think the government shouldn't have a say in what I do in the privacy of my own home that does not affect other people. Really all drugs should be legal, people should be able to freely choose what they do to their bodies.

SgtJoo
23 Apr 2011, 06:14am
No it acts a gateway drug and makes Americans even more stupid. Hence the term "dope."

Uhh dope is heroin smart guy.

Neme
23 Apr 2011, 11:49am
Yes, as long as it's regulated like every other narcotic.

Bad Dog
23 Apr 2011, 01:50pm
No it acts a gateway drug and makes Americans even more stupid. Hence the term "dope."

Haha, pro tip buddy, don't quote Family Guy in an attempt to sound smart.

SilentGuns
24 Apr 2011, 03:42am
yea, make it legal but not allowed in public.

Bruce
24 Apr 2011, 07:18pm
Uhh dope is heroin smart guy.

Yea because the term "dope" is limited to just heroin and marijuana totally makes you smarter, smart guy.

Bruce
24 Apr 2011, 07:21pm
Haha, pro tip buddy, don't quote Family Guy in an attempt to sound smart.

Family guy? Yea I totally quoted family guy right there.

b0red
24 Apr 2011, 07:27pm
yea, make it legal but not allowed in public.

like alcohol.

b0red
24 Apr 2011, 10:03pm
its funny because heroin is less addictive than cigarettes

SgtJoo
25 Apr 2011, 07:51am
its funny because heroin is less addictive than cigarettes

True.


Approximately 4.5 million American children under eighteen now smoke, and every day another three thousand adolescents become regular smokers. Seventy percent of adolescent smokers say they would not have started if they could choose again. In excess of 400,000 people die every year from smoking-related diseases -- more than from alcohol, crack, heroin, murder, suicide, car accidents, and AIDS combined.

b0red
25 Apr 2011, 11:28am
I remember reading most people get hooked on cigarettes by there second stick. Heroin takes more than 2 times to get hooked.

SgtJoo
25 Apr 2011, 12:09pm
That's not to say heroin still isn't bad.

Bad Dog
25 Apr 2011, 03:10pm
I remember reading most people get hooked on cigarettes by there second stick. Heroin takes more than 2 times to get hooked.

Not that I'm doubting you read that, but I do doubt its accuracy. I've had more than 2 cigs, I'm not addicted, nor am I a regular smoker, and I've gone through phases where I did smoke somewhat regularly, and could then stop whenever I wanted to. I can say the same for quite a few of my friends as well. And I've read multiple accounts of people claiming one hit of heroin was all it took for them to get hooked.

I guess the point is that, ya smoking is very addicting, but I've smoked and I'm not addicted, but I'd imagine that just trying heroin once or twice and then walking away would be much harder to do.

Sander Cohen
25 Apr 2011, 11:29pm
I'm divided on legalizing weed, on one hand I think it's okay for personal use, but on the other I hand I personally believe that all drugs such as weed and alcohol have become too unstigmatized in our culture, and makes it seem okay for kids to do it.

Kraze182
26 Apr 2011, 08:22am
Lol, troll thread, you really expect a straight answer on this?

PingPong
26 Apr 2011, 09:45pm
Tons of reasons
Hemp-strongest natural fabric in the world, be a lot better for clothes and stop using wood for paper stopping things like deforestation etc
Tons of medical purposes
Hightens brain cell activity
There's tons of reason and one of the main reasons it won't be legal soon is because alcohol companies and company's that produce pills etc are making TONS of cash.
Also in earlier years people were forced to grow it. Funny how some guy got it to be illegal because he wanted to make money
Watch the union for gods sakes people

SgtJoo
27 Apr 2011, 10:52am
Tons of reasons
Hemp-strongest natural fabric in the world, be a lot better for clothes and stop using wood for paper stopping things like deforestation etc
Tons of medical purposes
Hightens brain cell activity
There's tons of reason and one of the main reasons it won't be legal soon is because alcohol companies and company's that produce pills etc are making TONS of cash.
Also in earlier years people were forced to grow it. Funny how some guy got it to be illegal because he wanted to make money
Watch the union for gods sakes people

Citations needed.

PingPong
27 Apr 2011, 09:27pm
Citations needed.

It was late at night and i was on the ipod touch. Get @ me joo :)

Chrixz
28 Apr 2011, 04:31am
Weed Should be legal

Delirium
29 Apr 2011, 05:11am
I don't think it should even be an issue.

It's every ones own business whether they partake or not, and, It shouldn't be regulated by ANY government.

We have the right to do whatever we want to our own body and it no one should have the right to tell us otherwise.

HZK
30 Apr 2011, 07:35pm
I don't think it should even be an issue.

It's every ones own business whether they partake or not, and, It shouldn't be regulated by ANY government.

We have the right to do whatever we want to our own body and it no one should have the right to tell us otherwise.

I disagree because excessive use of harmful drugs actually leads to crime, therefore many drugs are banned in certain to prevent crime that roots back to drugs.

Delirium
30 Apr 2011, 11:58pm
I disagree because excessive use of harmful drugs actually leads to crime, therefore many drugs are banned in certain to prevent crime that roots back to drugs.

Incorrect, the crime comes from the money involved with the drug, not the drug itself.

seeing as this conversation applies to weed and not other "hard" drugs such as cocaine or meth, you don't see to many pot heads committing crimes to get a fix as apposed to meth/heroin/coke junkies.

Flying Spaghetti Monster
1 May 2011, 01:04am
I have smoked for 35 years.
I have stolen to get weed money. But, that is more a psychological issue than anything, and ancient history..
I can never accept anyone telling me what to do with my body, within my
home. Public use is a different issue...

Team Norway
15 May 2011, 12:03am
I think weed is still illegal because that 1 dude out of 1,000 did nothing but smoke weed and got extremely addicted(mental addiction) and therefore got his life destroyed and then the media made a fuzz about it and then pointed out like 2 other cases like that world wide and then said because those 3 people destroyed their lives then anybody who smokes weed will destroy their lives. This eventually involved into a lot of fear in the media which then hightens the pressure to keep weed illegal because the public is mostly inogrant people which knows nothing about the matter and therefore blindly believes the media. And now because of the pressure from the media the government has made all drugs in school sound really bad and made the teaching of drugs into a 1 sided and biased opinion with barely any facts.

Lux
15 May 2011, 08:54am
I don't think it should even be an issue.

It's every ones own business whether they partake or not, and, It shouldn't be regulated by ANY government.

We have the right to do whatever we want to our own body and it no one should have the right to tell us otherwise.

If we lived in society where the government wasn't subsidising everything we do and needing us to be productive citizens so that we can pay "our fair share" back I'd agree.

But that's not how it is....if you want take advantage of the system then that's up to you, but you can't expect the government to encourage/allow it.

But if you're going to be more specific (i.e. just about weed) then it's more appropriate to say what you're saying...but then again being stoned all the time is hardly something that contributes to society...I guess it depends on how much you use it, what effect it has on you etc.

Drox
15 May 2011, 09:40am
but then again being stoned all the time is hardly something that contributes to society...I guess it depends on how much you use it, what effect it has on you etc.

Well if abuse is a issue why isn't alcohol banned as much as weed? I don't know about any of you that have posted here (Nor did I read all of this thread to see if it was already mentioned) but more people die from alcohol related incidents than weed.

The real issue here is the government doesn't know how to handle the substance and make money out of it. It's the same where the FDA will raid people who have unregulated farms because they don't like the idea of you going around official products. If people grew there own tabacco, or made their own alcohol (Which is against the law) then the government isn't making money off of it. I think weed should be legal but at the same time I can see it causing more problems then fixing them by just giving officials a different reason for putting people in jail for growing it.

Matt
15 May 2011, 09:55am
I honestly think the Marijuana should be Decriminalized. Not legal decriminalized.

Talk to me about keeping marijuana illegal after watching the documentary "the Union".

Facts are given straight with no twists to it.

The Union: The Business Behind Getting High (2007) - IMDb (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1039647/)

In my honest opinion that it will be legal in the coming years(for medicinal purposes). The reason being is that it can help so many cancer patents as a example who have trouble eating.

Marijuana is still illegal when Tobacco kills over 4 million people each year. Yet it remains legal. Alcohol kills over 100,000 people a year but remains legal. Marijuana has killed 0 people but remains illegal. You tell me what should be illegal and legal now.

Yes I smoke pot but it has not done any physical harm to me. There isnt much more to say then and hope you guys actually end up watching the film.

You can actually watch this documentary for free if you sign up for netflix you can get a free month trail.

http://www.netflix.com/

for people that have Netflix here you go no need to look for it :P

http://www.netflix.com/Movie/The-Union-The-Business-Behind-Getting-High/70118444?strkid=88816123_0_0&lnkctr=srchrd-sr&strackid=337d256fb3797d32_0_srl&trkid=222336

A. Wesker
15 May 2011, 10:50am
yes,we should be able to buy them like cigarettes.of course restrictions would apply,but it would save me the annoyance of unreliable dealers who never have what i want when i want it,or jack up the price because it's "dry".

Lux
15 May 2011, 02:24pm
Well if abuse is a issue why isn't alcohol banned as much as weed? I don't know about any of you that have posted here (Nor did I read all of this thread to see if it was already mentioned) but more people die from alcohol related incidents than weed.

Because banning cigarettes and alcohol (especially) would cause huge unemployment, probably financial turmoil and huge public disapproval....riots...etc.

It's more about damage limitation than anything else. Having one undesirable drug in the market doesn't mean others should be added.

Drox
15 May 2011, 02:28pm
Because banning cigarettes and alcohol (especially) would cause huge unemployment, probably financial turmoil and huge public disapproval....riots...etc.

It's more about damage limitation than anything else. Having one undesirable drug in the market doesn't mean others should be added.

So you're saying even though those items are worse than weed, they shouldn't be removed because people will resort to losing money and committing crime...like they do with weed. lol

Lux
15 May 2011, 03:44pm
So you're saying even though those items are worse than weed, they shouldn't be removed because people will resort to losing money and committing crime...like they do with weed. lol

Well, weed being illegal doesn't particularly make people lose that much money.....as it's cheap......and I dunno about the USA but the UK would tax the fuck out of it anyway....so I wouldn't exactly say that a legal product would be cheaper.

Committing crime...well yeah alcohol is particularly a part of our culture.....if it was taken away from us the populace would generally not be happy....and like I said before especially those who would lose their jobs due to it becoming illegal. It would cause massive protests and unrest....where as weed just isn't something anyone (worthwhile anyway) is dependent on job wise, the economy isn't financially dependent on it, and it's not as popular either. What crime (other than dealing and smoking weed) is there in the weed market? I'm assuming it's hardly as violent or hard core as some more serious drug markets.....

It would also lead to a massive black market.....and amateurs making alcohol from who knows what.

But yeah...I really don't understand what your point is.....it doesn't make sense. Justifying the legalisation of something based on it being better than harmful drugs is hardly a great selling point....

Zopy
15 May 2011, 04:13pm
Well, weed being illegal doesn't particularly make people lose that much money.....as it's cheap......and I dunno about the USA but the UK would tax the fuck out of it anyway....so I wouldn't exactly say that a legal product would be cheaper.



I consider that to be a pro rather than a con. I don't smoke marijuana, nor do I plan to, but the economic benefits could be great. Taxing weed would just bring in added income to the state, which isn't a bad thing. Also, there could be many new jobs created with legalization.

Drox
15 May 2011, 04:20pm
But yeah...I really don't understand what your point is.....it doesn't make sense. Justifying the legalisation of something based on it being better than harmful drugs is hardly a great selling point....

My point is, you can't justify one/two wrongs yet demonize a lesser evil. I wasn't saying weed really should be legalized, like I said in my original post even though I have no problem with it being legal it wouldn't really change anything and it will still have ways for people to go to jail if they did legalize it.

So in a way people can't support alcohol or tobacco and at the same time try to convince the world that weed is harmful as other drugs such as heroine and cocaine without looking kind of stupid. Since in our world today facts speak for themselves, even if we built such a franchise behind alcohol and tobacco it doesn't make it right we sell these products to our populations yet claim we care when we make something illegal that is less harmful. Seems kind of ignorant in my opinion, yet it seems money is more a factor than public health.

Lux
16 May 2011, 01:33am
My point is, you can't justify one/two wrongs yet demonize a lesser evil. I wasn't saying weed really should be legalized, like I said in my original post even though I have no problem with it being legal it wouldn't really change anything and it will still have ways for people to go to jail if they did legalize it.

So in a way people can't support alcohol or tobacco and at the same time try to convince the world that weed is harmful as other drugs such as heroine and cocaine without looking kind of stupid. Since in our world today facts speak for themselves, even if we built such a franchise behind alcohol and tobacco it doesn't make it right we sell these products to our populations yet claim we care when we make something illegal that is less harmful. Seems kind of ignorant in my opinion, yet it seems money is more a factor than public health.

I'm not justifying it, it's just making the best of a difficult situation.

Cigarettes could probably be slowly banned (which I'd say has already been happening over the years) but I think it'd be very hard to ban alcohol.

You also have to take into account that, money is what pays for public health.....you could say that without the tax income from these products that some way or other a service is going to suffer cuts and that could cost lives. That alone isn't a good enough reason but, as already said it's making the best of a bad situation.



I consider that to be a pro rather than a con. I don't smoke marijuana, nor do I plan to, but the economic benefits could be great. Taxing weed would just bring in added income to the state, which isn't a bad thing. Also, there could be many new jobs created with legalization.

It is to an extent, but that's just one point in the argument. I was referring more to the suggestion that weed being illegal makes users worse off money wise.

Lux
16 May 2011, 12:58pm
Meh, I still stand by my points but I'd love cigarettes to be banned.

I'd also not want weed to be legalised, because well.....I'm never going to smoke it and I'm going to be a selfish cunt and not want anyone else to either. The amount of people I know who have gone from cigarettes.....to weed........liked the high and then gone on to worse drugs is countless. For me, it's the stepping stone drug that a lot of people want to try, and then end up searching for better highs.

Sure that's not everyone, but I think weed stinks of shit and makes people annoyingly zombie like.....so for me there's no reason for me to want it, even if "as claimed" it would not have any affect on me. It would have an affect on me anyway, as it would probably make the drug more available and more popular so whilst it "may be used in private property/bar etc so it doesn't affect you" I'd probably be at that private property partying and losing out because I don't want to get high (and let's face it not being high around people who are isn't that much fun). Yeah I don't expect any of you to give a shit, but meh...each to his own.

In the end it's going to come down to a popularity contest (i.e. Democracy) and well.....how many people (besides the typical young adults who smoke weed who would probably be too high to even go and vote) would want it? It's pretty much why gay marriage was discontinued in California......it doesn't really affect anyone but end of the day.....does that mean we want it in society anyway?

Before people say "It doesn't matter what you think only the facts do".....well you'd be wrong there.

Lux
16 May 2011, 03:14pm
All drugs have tolerances, I could also say that alcohol is a terrible drug because it makes people loud, careless, often aggressive and anti-social. I personally prefer "zombie-like" to that.

Alcohol pretty much is a shitty drug if I'm going to think of it without bias.



Also, please don't use the gateway drug argument because it is rubbish - you yourself just suggested that by the same logic tobacco is a gateway drug, just like you could say that alcohol is, or even Calpol.

It's not rubbish, I've known enough people get into those kinds of drugs due to it. You could say alcohol is maybe.....but then again I'm not arguing against alcohol being bad, only that it's impossible to ban. Calpol?....lol.



I feel like your opinions are based on personal experiences of a few people - you need to remember that there are a lot more people who smoke cannabis than layabouts/chavs/whoever obviously has had an effect on you.

How often you say this. If my opinions are not based on personal experiences, then what would they be based on? At the same time you try to hint that I get opinions from the newspaper. Like I said, I'm not going to base my opinion on whether I would want weed to be legal (which for me is a much more relevant question than whether it should be legal) on some "bigger picture" where I should ignore all my experiences where weed's impact (if any) on my life is negative. What do I care if some random good citizens who have nothing to do with me smoke it in their own home? I don't hang around just with layabouts/chavs/whoever is supposedly poisoning my mind (or so you think)...and sure that would pretty much sum up the majority of people who I've been around/encountered where this argument is relevant, but then that just makes my point all the more valid.

If I was thinking "Well it doesn't really benefit me but there's some fine chaps who like to partake in some pot who I have no care or connection to so why not let them?"...with everything I've just said taken into question I'd think myself a moron. I'm not particularly selfish, I signed up for organ donation because (unlike weed) there's no down side of it to me, I'm not just being spiteful.

But to bring that point to an end, it's not even "a few occasions". Usually it's not been a problem but there's those few times where I've regretted weed exists at all.



Also, the decriminalisation argument is not about "letting it into society" because it IS already in our society, and it has been for hundreds of years - it's about not criminalising young, ill or simply responsible people from smoking something that is factually less dangerous than many legal drugs.

Letting it legally into society....especially with weed...would easily make it more popular in society. Is that something I'd like? No way.

I wouldn't have them criminalised because it's not particularly bad enough in any way to warrant it. That said I'd want it banned anyway :/

I'm (principally) against harmful drugs anyway. I wouldn't allow more drugs into the market because dangerous ones are there, I'd move to remove the dangerous ones.



If our society was defined by the rag newspapers and conservatively-minded people then I'd want out.

Me too, though I wouldn't say everything a newspaper says is wrong. Exaggerated, sure....but if it wasn't no one would buy them.

Conservatively minded people? Depends...if I couldn't cherry pick I'd take conservative over Liberal anyway.

Chaos2611
16 May 2011, 03:22pm
Na just do it in ur house

Lux
16 May 2011, 05:44pm
Explain to me why cannabis is a gateway drug and Calpol (or even any other drug) is not.

Because no one drinks Calpol to get high? Does it even get you high? I remember loving that shit as a kid, it was the highlight of being ill.....but still it's hardly comparable to weed. Some people would never have thought to take Ecstasy....Cocaine etc but they get offered some weed and because it's pretty well known that weed isn't particularly that harmful....(and because most people these days are suckers for peer pressure) they take it, possibly enjoy it and once they get used to it think "what next...". I wouldn't say anyone goes from drinking alcohol, calpol or smoking cigarettes to high class drugs.



When I talked about newspapers I wasn't referring to you, I was just reasoning as to why a majority of people would want drug reform and all talk about drugs swept under the carpet and not discussed. (Also, opinions can be based on facts, which is what mine are from in this particular thread).

Facts mean very little unless you have a personal experience of some sort to make them relevant.



I didn't say you DO just hang about with people like that, I'm saying that if I'm correct then you have experience and therefore have that perspective. I could be wrong, but I've personally have met people who don't treat weed responsibly, but they're still a minority.

Who said anything about not treating weed responsibly making you a layabout/chav? If you're smoking it for any non-medical reason then you're pretty much not using it responsibly anyway.

Anyway, I wouldn't say misuse of weed is my issue anyway....because I can't really think of many ways to use it irresponsibly (if we're assuming that smoking it at all isn't irresponsible). Driving whilst high......being high when you should be somewhere else?? Smoking nonstop till you die or something? It's more that it even being used to smoke and get high isn't something I'm that happy with (at least when it's affecting me somehow anyway). So I think you've jumped to some sort of conclusions here.....where I don't like weed because some street chavs smoked it and tried to run me over with a car or something.



That's a very irresponsible way of thinking about things, yes, but at the very least surely you should be for at least some kind of political debate in which drug laws can be analysed without people being scrutinised or forced to resign (as they have been in the past)?

It's an opinionated way of thinking about it. I'm not a politician...so I don't have to think about it on behalf of the people......

I'm for drug laws being analysed....I just don't like most drugs anyway....so if it came down to weed being made more available to the public if it was "properly analysed" rather than banned under naivety....I'll just take the naivety...be happy that it's how I want it and move on.



That's what I advocate, not legalisation.

If you don't really have an opinion either way...then it really seems a bit pedantic what you're looking for. For drugs generally it's a fair point.....but this thread is about whether weed should be made legal....so what you want doesn't really support either argument.



Firstly I think if there was any substantial impact (which I doubt there would be) on "legalising" it in a practical form (IE Dutch) then its popularity would stand to decrease if anything - a lot of people who smoke it are young and are just looking for things to get thrills out of (not that I'm saying that legalising something is a sensible way of removing irresponsibility).

I'd wager that if it was decriminalised then the VAST majority of people who would smoke it from that point on were people who had smoked it before. I doubt many people would read the news and decide to get into smoking it.

Maybe, maybe not. People "just" smoking weed to get thrills out of it is....well.....the whole point of it? There's no other reason to smoke it (non medically) than to get high.....and I don't particularly buy into the "smoke it because it's illegal and so cool" thing either. It's just something that some people like...so they smoke it. Maybe for the first few times people will do it for random reasons.....but that's not really relevant to making it legal or not.

Alcohol and cigarettes are legal and yet they still get taken up by so many young people because they're easily available and people like them....or even are just peer pressured into them.



Which is the situation we are in at the moment, which is (in my opinion) unacceptable considering the amount of police effort, money and time put into petty drug use and criminalising people.

Most police don't care about it......I know a few and if they're not dealing they just tell them to keep it off the streets. There's money wasted everywhere.....I wouldn't particularly put it down to anything other than useless politicians.



I'm not saying that we should, nor do I think anyone is; I just think that the government should have legislation on drugs that reflects their actual properties, effects and harm from objective scientific study - which is not what our laws are.

Laws are hard to change and implement though. Some drugs like alcohol and cigarettes had already dug their claws into the economy before it was known what health issues they posed. I'm all for objective scientific study, it just depends on how relevant it is. Sometimes, opinion is just as (if not more) important.....you can't sell the public something they don't want.



Nor do I, but the ones I'm referring to are simply poorly written and examples of some of the worst journalism around (including internet journalism).

Well I think it's obvious that there's a lot of poor journalism out there..but it's subjective to an extent. There's lots of influences out there for everyone.....you can't just assume that the majority are brainwashed by it all though.



A prime example of what I'm talking about is the government's decision to rush through legislation to ban MCAT despite it being understudied (and still we don't truly know much about it). Not only was it a poor way to deal with its presence but it had an adverse effect in popularising it.

People have died of MCAT have they not? Drugs aren't going to be kept legal until proven unsafe.....it was basically a similar drug to many that are illegal.....but due to it not being exactly the same/the tardiness of bureaucracy it wasn't immediately banned.

MCAT was gathering popularity even before it was banned......I'd probably say the negative publicity it received curved the popularity of it dramatically. It's main selling point was that it was legal.

b0red
16 May 2011, 07:49pm
cigarettes have proven to be extremely unsafe yet they remain legal.
marijuana has no contribution to lung cancer at all. smoking the bud may eventually cause precancerous cells but you can also eat marijuana brownies remember.

Frank White
19 May 2011, 12:01pm
yes!! 420 smoke weed!1

Bad Dog
19 May 2011, 03:35pm
yes!! 420 smoke weed!1

http://www.thecitrusreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/citizen_kane_clapping_gif_RE_If_The_Internet_Sudde nly_Disappeared_How_Wed_Get_Laid-s480x360-132744.gif

Forester155
19 May 2011, 04:32pm
Weed is still lillegal because our government is run by bafoons.

you see, weed is very profitable and even healty [YES, HEALTY] when taken in moderation.

Cigarettes and alchohol, the two legal highs of our generation, are very dangerous. these two give you a high based upon damaging your body, alchohol your liver and digestive track, cigarrets your lungs and air tract.

Weed is like the human version of catinp. its only negitave is smoke inhalation when smoked. nomm it up in a pot brownie or sniff it up in an air freshener every now and again, and its very healthy. it alleviates stress and helps relax, and lets face it, who doesnt like getting high?!

there are dangers, but the majority of the population can handle it. and those who cant, let em get selected naturally. shit happens.

agreed and disagreed lux:
-agreed, ban smokes. those are the NASTIEST shit for you
-disagreed, weed is not a gateway drug.
People who smoke weed and look for higher highs dont know how to control themseves. gossherz.

and yeah, i understand where your coming from with the whole high/stinky thing. i was over at salt spring, and the room 2 down and one left with a right blowing wind (as per direction facing out the door) was getting high. it was annoying as fuck, and smelled like shit.

SgtJoo
19 May 2011, 07:52pm
Inhaling smoke into your lungs isn't healthy, regardless of whether it's marijuana or tobacco.

BlackEagle
19 May 2011, 10:10pm
It isn't healthy it just isn't harmful and doesn't carry any negative effects. While it can be used to cure some things and help with some medical treatments, it isn't like a vitamin. It isn't healthy is can just be used for healing processes.

The thing I don't like about your logic Forester is that you basically say those that don't like the weed, well forget you. The general idea (while not always true) over making laws is trying to help society as a whole. Again, it isn't always the case but that is the general idea.

Bad Dog
19 May 2011, 10:33pm
It isn't healthy it just isn't harmful and doesn't carry any negative effects. While it can be used to cure some things and help with some medical treatments, it isn't like a vitamin. It isn't healthy is can just be used for healing processes.

The thing I don't like about your logic Forester is that you basically say those that don't like the weed, well forget you. The general idea (while not always true) over making laws is trying to help society as a whole. Again, it isn't always the case but that is the general idea.

Why do the people that dont like weed matter, at all? No, seriously. What about the people who don't like cigs, or alchohol? Guess what: They deal with it. They arent forced to use/come into contact with either if they so choose, and they wouldnt be forced to deal with weed either.

Supa
19 May 2011, 10:57pm
I just want to add this...

6ZrrQoME56U

Harry
19 May 2011, 11:02pm
They arent forced to use/come into contact with either if they so choose
But that's incorrect... second-hand smoke, drunk drivers, etc... I wouldn't consider myself pro-, nor anti-weed, but it's incorrect to say that it won't affect others.

SgtJoo
20 May 2011, 10:21am
Tar is in the majority of plant material, so yes, cannabis is also harmful to the throat cilia and have the same effect of smoking cigarettes on the lungs (IE build up of mucus and greater risk of harmful bacteria and cancer), HOWEVER unlike smoking cigarettes it's not usually a frequent habit so the throat and lungs can recover (provided you don't smoke very frequently IE every day or two - not just one spliff/whatever a day, I mean "session").

Plus there's the whole filter thing, but it's still probably nicer for your lungs anyway than just tobacco (and, as always, the second hand smoke harm is blown way out of proportion).

Inhaling ANY smoke isn't particularly healthy - but responsible cannabis use is leagues more healthy than a tobacco addiction.

Well no shit, but calling it healthy (whoever did) is simply fallacious.

Elleon
20 May 2011, 05:11pm
Personally, I think it should stay a controlled substance as with any other drug.

Users are stupid in general and most abuse it to the point in which it inflicts damage upon others. I could care less about what it does to the individual itself, but when it starts effecting others, then it's a problem which should be dealt with.

Elleon
21 May 2011, 12:49am
There are many questions which come to mind from that single sentences but I'll start with the most basic:

wat

Put the joint down and think it through.

Drox
21 May 2011, 12:56am
Personally, I think it should stay a controlled substance as with any other drug.

Users are stupid in general and most abuse it to the point in which it inflicts damage upon others. I could care less about what it does to the individual itself, but when it starts effecting others, then it's a problem which should be dealt with.

This argument goes back to if we ban these things that effects others in some way then why is tobacco and alcohol still legal? Since they effect others the most than any other substance, a lot more than weed does. The reason weed was made illegal in the first place has very small roots to public safety, if anything that was used to get most people on the side of banning it just like they tried to do with alcohol in the 1920's with prohibition.

The only difference was weed wasn't that popular as tobacco and alcohol in it's use, so it was easier to ban and stay banned. Weed isn't heroine or cocaine so I don't see how it effects other people besides crime rates?

Elleon
21 May 2011, 01:02am
Crimes rates isn't a good enough reason for you Drox?

Elleon
21 May 2011, 01:05am
Crimes rates isn't a good enough reason for you Drox?

EDIT: "As with any other drug" - Alcohol & cigarettes are still considered a drug unless I missed some memo suggesting otherwise.

Drox
21 May 2011, 01:06am
Crimes rates isn't a good enough reason for you Drox?

High Crime rates is only due to it being illegal, look at prohibition of the 1920's and the crime that cause due to making alcohol illegal. Crime still happens for legal substances today aswell, so crime isn't a good reason when people will commit crimes for anything. That's more a issue within our society than the substance in which these crimes are about, since our prison system doesn't help people but only turns them into harder criminals.


EDIT: "As with any other drug" - Alcohol & cigarettes are still considered a drug unless I missed some memo suggesting otherwise.

Alcohol and Tobacco are hardly controlled substances, since they are easy to obtain and easy to abuse legally. Only controlled part of those is age requirements which aren't hard to bypass.

Elleon
21 May 2011, 01:18am
Alcohol and Tobacco are hardly controlled substances, since they are easy to obtain and easy to abuse legally.

Yeah, was meaning to change that once i wrote it. Expected people to think I would actually mean something that incredibly stupid.

What I meant is that all drugs should become a controlled substance.

Believe it or not, there are plenty of victims out there and this is why people generally keep these things under lock and key or try to put them there.

EDIT: I am a bit tired so things may appear to make less sense than what i imagine them to be initially. Anyways, aside from medicinal reasons, nothing productive becomes of this and that's the entire premise behind using it. That itself is a decent enough reason to control it.

Drox
21 May 2011, 01:27am
Yeah, was meaning to change that once i wrote it. Expected people to think I would actually mean something that incredibly stupid.

What I meant is that all drugs should become a controlled substance.

Believe it or not, there are plenty of victims out there and this is why people generally keep these things under lock and key or try to put them there.

Just because you think all of these substances should be controlled doesn't mean they will be or most people will support it. Our government can barely support it's "War on drugs" let alone a full blown substance control project for legal items. Yes the're also plenty of victims of a lot of substance abuse, but mostly because people don't use stuff responsible such as driving while high or drunk which tends to hurt innocent people. This can't be blamed on the substance itself but the ignorant people who use it aswell.

I see nothing wrong with intaking something into your own body aslong as it doesn't effect others like what you're trying to get across so I agree with you on that. The real control here should be controlling what people do while using these products than controlling the products themselves. Since lets be honest, it hasn't worked in the past, it hasn't worked today, and it won't work in the future to control these substances.

Elleon
21 May 2011, 01:44am
No offense Drox, but the stupidity of that post and this thread leaves me wondering why the hell I even bother.

These substances will be controlled in the future and the usage will become almost non existant on a recreational basis. It's just ridiculous to assume that as a whole, people aren't going to simply realize that these things are completely unnecessary and understand how completely useless and unproductive they are.

They don't offer anything substantial and when it comes to progressing, it will be a very easy decision.

Drox
21 May 2011, 01:53am
No offense Drox, but the stupidity of that post and this thread leaves me wondering why the hell I even bother.

These substances will be controlled in the future and the usage will become almost non existant on a recreational basis. It's just ridiculous to assume that as a whole, people aren't going to simply realize that these things are completely unnecessary and understand how completely useless and unproductive they are.

They don't offer anything substantial and when it comes to progressing, it will be a very easy decision.

Well glad a debate can start with "Well your opinion is stupid, big stupid head". :P

Anyway, you're assuming they will be controlled without any evidence to support your theory. What part of we barely can support the war on drugs didn't you get? People can someday move pass these things but it is unlikely it will happen in our lifetimes. Most people use these substances as a way to getaway from whatever issues they may have. I doubt they will give up a drink or 2, or a smoke just so you feel better about humanity. lol

Elleon
21 May 2011, 02:20am
Big doodoo head as well.

It's not really a war on drugs, but a war on stupidity. Humans are greedy by nature and with a little education thrown into the mix, we are simply going to look at drugs one day and say "What the hell is the point? I can be doing something more productive with my time".

cakeshark
21 May 2011, 12:46pm
If we lived in society where the government wasn't subsidising everything we do and needing us to be productive citizens so that we can pay "our fair share" back I'd agree.

But that's not how it is....if you want take advantage of the system then that's up to you, but you can't expect the government to encourage/allow it.

But if you're going to be more specific (i.e. just about weed) then it's more appropriate to say what you're saying...but then again being stoned all the time is hardly something that contributes to society...I guess it depends on how much you use it, what effect it has on you etc.

being stoned all the time is hardly something that takes away from society either.

also, just cause you smoke weed doesnt mean you automatically smoke weed all day every day.

Psyche
24 May 2011, 07:22pm
weed is good because it is natural we should unban it because its good and stuff. huuuuuuuuuuuur

$moneyboy98$
25 May 2011, 09:37am
anything that make moneyboy fell god is ok i nmy bookk

Purplefire
26 May 2011, 05:40am
I agree with suicide.
Weed is legal in The Netherlands =D

Harry
26 May 2011, 05:51am
Weed is legal in The Netherlands
Common misconception. No, marijuana is not legal in Holland. It's illegal, just unenforced ("gedogen"). It's a weird setup they have.

Purplefire
27 May 2011, 02:10am
Common misconception. No, marijuana is not legal in Holland. It's illegal, just unenforced ("gedogen"). It's a weird setup they have.

D:, You can smoke it in coffee shops.
The rules are : You gotta be 18+, You can ONLY smoke it in Coffee shops and areas made for it, and you can only buy it in a package of 5 gram.
Its a really weird setup. The whole setup of the politics in Holland is shit.

EDIT : Ohyeah, you can only buy it in coffee shops to. or you can plant it with three plants in your own home.

trakaill
3 Jun 2011, 05:43pm
Common misconception. No, marijuana is not legal in Holland. It's illegal, just unenforced ("gedogen"). It's a weird setup they have.

its illegal but you can buy it in vending machines....

thats makes a lot of sense..

Frostbyte
8 Jun 2011, 02:06pm
It should be legalized, hell the only reason it's illegal in the first place is because of some anti-Mexican immigration doctrine in the early 1900s.

Plus I believe the money spent fighting against the sale/production/trafficking of weed could be spent better elsewhere.

SgtJoo
8 Jun 2011, 05:59pm
It should be legalized, hell the only reason it's illegal in the first place is because of some anti-Mexican immigration doctrine in the early 1900s.

Plus I believe the money spent fighting against the sale/production/trafficking of weed could be spent better elsewhere.

No?

Frostbyte
8 Jun 2011, 07:59pm
No?

It was something along the lines of that, I apologize for not being entirely accurate.

Nom noms
10 Jun 2011, 08:17pm
hmm i seem to remeber it was made illegal because hemp was threatening to replace lumber as the major source of paper and such. i may be wrong though.

as for it should be legal, yea i think it should be i mean it isnt addictive, at least not in the way heroin is. is less harmfull then cigarettes and beer and such. and if taxed coudl bring in so much revenue for the us.