4 More States Legalize Cannabis - who's next?
- Thread starter randomshenans
- Start date
Technically there is no 'point' to life; it's simply chance that life exists. It's also likely quite hard to enjoy life with depression, schizophrenia and bi-polar disorder, just a few of the known effects of cannabis use. You can find some information about it here; http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/healthadvice/problemsdisorders/cannabis.aspx
Also I don't see anywhere in my post where I'm 'laughing at people', so not fully sure where you got that from. Please don't misquote me.
Billions? So 1 in 7 people worldwide use cannabis? It seems your grasp on numbers might be rather off. Millions I will accept though.
From smoking it on its own plus with other substances. This is an inevitable eventuality; not everyone would just be eating brownies. Although we're still not 100% sure smoking cannabis on it's own causes cancer, the research is pointing in that direction. So the two are still absolutely linked I'm afraid.
We're not discussing the merits of other, already legal substances. This has little to no relevance to the current debate. My argument for tobacco wouldn't be 'tobacco is legal so lets legalise cannabis', it would be 'tobacco is a harmful substance, lets ban it'. It's ludicrous to use the legality of one harmful substance to argue for the legalisation of another harmful substance.
A sweeping statement with little merit. You might see my above points show I actually have a pretty good understanding of the matter.
These are good points, but one might still question whether legalising cannabis simply to alleviate the strain on society from the criminal underworld is justified. Crime will always exist, if not for cannabis then for something else.
This is the same argument as tobacco. And again, a counter argument would be not to legalise cannabis to remove another harmful substance, but to actually manage the legal substances and associated businesses and clamp down using legislation. You could legalise cannabis, but dangerous and legal highs will continue to be pushed out to willing participants.
I just gave you several good reasons.
Do you have any evidence to back this up? I wasn't able to find anything.
Pretty sure that's the point of making things illegal. If there were no consequences, people would have no reason to fear doing them. Also your 98% statistic is clear nonsense. I'm not even going to provide you any evidence because this entire post negates your point.
No it shouldn't and won't anyway. It won't improve the economy; most people would end up growing it at home. Obviously it would reduce crime; you're legalising a substance which accounts for a notable percentage of crime statistics. And alcohol again is a separate debate. Find any evidence that alcohol use would drop if cannabis was legalised. Not a chance.
I also think you've taken my first points too much to heart. I'm assuming you're unaware of what 'playing devils advocate' means. Even more amusing given I've smoked a lot of cannabis in my time.
Last edited:
That argument makes no sense whatsoever
You can walk to any shopping center or log on to amazon and buy kits for making beer and wine.
But people dont.
If you legalise weed people arent going to start growing it, they're just going to pick up a 20 pack of Malborough greens from the off license.
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Jan 2009
- Posts
- 4,590
Drugs are bad and you should feel bad.
Unless it's for medical use.
Unless it's for medical use.
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2011
- Posts
- 22,506
- Location
- ST4
When a pack of your "Marlboro Greens" costs £25 at the shops due to government taxation, of course people will grow it themselves.
So why dont they for vodka?
And also youre forgeting most places you go to socialise won't let you take your own product's.
And not to mention most people arent going to invest in costly indoor grow set ups to get a harvest every 3 months and noones gonna grow it outside becaus eof effort and seasons.
Beyond a few die hard pot heads and people who just like growing plants people wont do it..
But if you think about 25 quid for 20 joints would be seriously epic value.
Id be expecting a 20 deck to be closer to like 60 (even assuming for economies of scale ro utterly crush the price of weed because industry beats backroom growers)
Just got to wait for all the old farts to die off.
Then wait for all the young ones to go off their heads.
Associate
- Joined
- 22 Sep 2012
- Posts
- 664
It boils down to this.
Do the government/anyone have the right to dictate what the individual can ingest to effect their OWN consciousness? How can any of you claim we live in a 'Free' society when it against the law to alter your OWN state of mind with what you choose. That's worse than thought police, that's behavior control.
Do the government/anyone have the right to dictate what the individual can ingest to effect their OWN consciousness? How can any of you claim we live in a 'Free' society when it against the law to alter your OWN state of mind with what you choose. That's worse than thought police, that's behavior control.
No it doesn't. Because when people use those substances they frequently affect other people too. Look at the relationship between alcohol and violence. Or second hand smoke. The two most common drugs in use and they have hideous side affects on other people, not just the users.
I think it boils down not to whether Cannabis causes harm, but whether legalisation increases/decreases, or has no effect on the harm from the drug.
Prohibition era in the USA is accepted to have been a negative effect on health, with people moving to harder spirits, unregulated supplies, increase in drinking venues, increased attractiveness for the young etc.
Prohibition era in the USA is accepted to have been a negative effect on health, with people moving to harder spirits, unregulated supplies, increase in drinking venues, increased attractiveness for the young etc.
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 14,064
- Location
- France, Alsace
Exactly, as there was no way of getting it, where you did get it was completely unregulated.
It'll be interesting for the US now, as Trump may support medical use, but the person he was citing as his head of whoever manages federal law (I forget, I read a piece on it) is completely anti cannabis use, and as such, no matter what is in place state wide, if federal law throws it all out, that's it.
Because I'm quite fed up of it being a taboo that I smoke. It makes no sense that cannabis is illegal yet alcohol is legal. Absolute zero sense at all.
I find it funny when people who like to drink have a problem with it and their argument always comes back to "it's illegal so its bad". I've had many arguments with my partner over this. She likes to have a drink whereas I have a smoke.
Some people unwind with a glass of wine at the end of the day, I do it with a joint. Yet some people demonise that just because I have a different vice to the majority.
Your argument is invalid in so many ways.
Cannabis should be legalised because you don't like the stigma associated with smoking it? There's a stigma for a reason...This is like saying 'shoplifting should be legalised because I'm quite fed up of it being taboo that I steal'.
To an extent you are right. It doesn't make that much sense when alcohol and tobacco are probably more harmful than cannabis. But you can't base an argument on legalising something because something else is legal.
It's demonised because it's illegal; it make no different that it happens to be your vice. What if my vice was killing people? 'It's so unfair that some people unwind with a glass of wine at the end of the day, I do it with a murder. Yet some people demonise that just because I have a different vice to the majority.' Where should the line be drawn? Don't forget your smoking IS having a negative impact on your partners health, especially if you do it indoors. She has the choice to damage her own health with alcohol, but has no choice if you smoke. That's just plain selfish.
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 May 2011
- Posts
- 12,314
- Location
- Woking
Yup, and without paying through the nose. And so we can know exactly what we're getting. And so we can not be persecuted for doing something that only harms ourself, really.
Also, cannabis isn't a gateway drug. None of the other drugs that I've ever tried have been in any way, shape, or form, like cannabis. Trying them just meant that I would never have them again because I didn't like the affects.
Most people don't turn from cannabis to ecstasy, which is probably next up the ladder, for example. They have such different affects - the gateway drug to almost any other drug that's not cannabis is alcohol.
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 May 2011
- Posts
- 12,314
- Location
- Woking
Indeed, as does every other thing that exists on the planet 
Soldato
- Joined
- 15 Feb 2012
- Posts
- 3,308
- Location
- 2
Skunk-type weeds with high levels of Delta 9-THC are associated with an increased risk of first-episode psychosis. Other types of cannabis with less D 9-THC show no such association. In case you didn't know, association does not imply causation.
You don't have to believe me, it is the experts' opinion as published recently in The Lancet
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 May 2011
- Posts
- 12,314
- Location
- Woking
We're both taking this to the nth degree, though. Everything has a perceptible outcome, it's just on different scales. The biggest external affect a stoner is likely to have on the outside world is being forgetful.
That's not a great comparison. I don't know anyone who just has 1 pint a week. 1 joint per week is more believable.
I don't smoke weed and I'm not a huge drinker but I imagine if I swapped the odd boozy weekend for a more chilled night in with a joint I doubt it would do any harm. It might even be beneficial!