M
Majikthise
Guest
It should be treated just like alchohol. :149:
Draka, is that really true that you can't grow your own tabacco?
Draka, is that really true that you can't grow your own tabacco?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
legalization of Marijuana
- Thread starter jewscout
- Start date
Fat Old Sun
Active Member
It was racism and corporate greed that made it illegal.
Even if it was not completely legalized, I would be in favor of radical decriminalization. I would have no issue with a civil infraction being charged in some cases, as long as I can twist one up on friday night in my own living room without worrying about having my front door kicked in. As long as it stays on private property, I don't feel it should be an issue.
Dealing with the impact of stoned people in public does worry some, but we already deal with drunk people. Which ones are easier to deal with? Pot heads will do just about anything you want as long as there are nachos involved. They are not confrontational.
Even if it was not completely legalized, I would be in favor of radical decriminalization. I would have no issue with a civil infraction being charged in some cases, as long as I can twist one up on friday night in my own living room without worrying about having my front door kicked in. As long as it stays on private property, I don't feel it should be an issue.
Dealing with the impact of stoned people in public does worry some, but we already deal with drunk people. Which ones are easier to deal with? Pot heads will do just about anything you want as long as there are nachos involved. They are not confrontational.
M
Majikthise
Guest
You must spread karma.....Fat Old Sun said:
Draka
Wonder Woman
Technically it is a controlled substance and therefore if the government finds out you are growing your own then they can confiscate it and fine you for evasion of taxes and no legal permit to grow or distribute...even if it is for your own use. You would have to have a drug stamp with marijuana as well. To legally grow your own you would have to apply for a drug permit and pay taxes on whatever you grow. It would become yet another market for the government...one wonders why they haven't already legalized it.:bonk:Majikthise said:It should be treated just like alchohol. :149:
Draka, is that really true that you can't grow your own tabacco?
armageddon
Member
pot should definitely not be legal. it is a bad drug that can cause a person to go mad or do things they don't mean to, which can later lead to trouble.jewscout said:
also, marijuana should be made to the public if, and only if, it used for medical reasons because besides that, it can have the same effects to a person that pot does.
Draka
Wonder Woman
Unfortunately yes. This is what most people aren't looking at. Once it were to become legal it would have to be regulated, farmed, owned, distributed, and paid taxes on just like the cigarettes you buy. Like anything which contains a drug according to the FDA it would be highly regulated, with a minimun age limit and specific places to buy it, smoke it, and so on. It would be owned and sold by major corporations just like cigarettes.Cr0wley said:You serious?! So even if we DID legalise it we'd have to choose between Malboro Brownies and Peter Styversen Swazi...
I voted for legalization only for medical use. I've seen programmes where doctor have declared that the earlier you start taking Marijuana, you increase the likelyhood of suffering from depression, schizophrenia, psycosis.
Look at it this way; pretend no one had ever heard of tobacco so far. Not a single cigarette in the whole world. Someone now (2005) says "Hey, I've just discovered this stuff I'm going to call tobacco, and market it."
Before he could do so, it would have to undergo tests to see what the effect are of taking tobacco. It probably would'nt make it to the first hurdle.
I remember hearing someone saying (some while back) that if the potatoe had been siscovered at that time, no lab on Earth would have supported the use of it as food.
Look at it this way; pretend no one had ever heard of tobacco so far. Not a single cigarette in the whole world. Someone now (2005) says "Hey, I've just discovered this stuff I'm going to call tobacco, and market it."
Before he could do so, it would have to undergo tests to see what the effect are of taking tobacco. It probably would'nt make it to the first hurdle.
I remember hearing someone saying (some while back) that if the potatoe had been siscovered at that time, no lab on Earth would have supported the use of it as food.
Fat Old Sun
Active Member
Don't believe everything you hear.armageddon said:
As for the gov't. regulating growth and sale because it is a controlled substance, I can make my own beer and wine as long as I don't distribute it. I would like to see the same standards for marijuana.
Part of the legalization or decriminalization for personal use process would have to be the reclassification of marijauna under the 1970 Controlled Substance Act. It is currently classified as a schedule 1 controlled substance meaning it is an illegal drug with no known medical use. It is placed in the same category as Heroin and LSD. It is more strictly regulated than Morphine or Cocaine. :banghead3
CaptainXeroid
Following Christ
Mostly false. This article is a couple of years old, but the points are still valid. One snippet from it.Druidus said:
Though, it would be logical to assume that marijuana smokers engage in other activities that might have a more deleterious effect, i.e. alcohol consumption.
I too was surprised by this article and the study's findings. I think we've all heard of someone with the nickname Burn-Out, who looked like he stumbled out of a Cheech-n-Chong movie. Someone who smoked so much pot that his brain was permanently high.
Anyway, it's interesting that the research does not seem to support the stereotype.
Fluffy
A fool
Caffeine can also have lasting negative effects on the body yet this is not even on the same stage as the legal drugs of alcohol and nicotine. What about eating too much fatty foods? That is harmful to our bodies yet it is perfectly legal. Extreme sports? etc. etc.
Your argument is as follows:
I believe pot does a certain amount of harm to the user.
Therefore it should be made illegal.
I counter this with the following:
Surely any substance or action which creates roughly the same amount of harm to the user should also be made illegal? Such as some of the activities I have listed above?
Surely if the purpose of making this illegal is to prevent people to harm themselves then ALL actions which endanger oneself should be made illegal?
Lastly, surely if one person wishes to endanger themselves through a particular course of action, they will do so whether that action happens to be illegal or not?
Therefore I propose 2 solutions: Ban all actions that endanger ourselves or legalise all things which might potentially harm ourselves.
I don't know about you but I would prefer the latter. Some caveates I would include though:
Anyone unable to understand the implications of a given action should be prevented from doing that action (such as children or mentally disabled people)
Education about the consequences of a given harmful action must be made available to those people wishing to take such an action.
If a harmful action is ALSO harmful to other people (such as drink driving for example) then it should be made illegal to prevent the infringement of other peoples rights whilst protecting ones own.
jamaesi
To Save A Lamb
http://www.talktofrank.com/azofdrugs/C/Cannabis.aspx
Because it appears some people don't understand what cannabis is.
Because it appears some people don't understand what cannabis is.
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
Actually, marijuana is one of the safest drugs you can use, or smoke in this case. When I'm high, if someone is trying to anger me, I will just laugh at them (as will most people who are high on pot), and walk off. What marijuana generally does is makes a person relaxed, and feeling great. Not good, GREAT. And then a strong case of the munchies will follow. Which eating a whole can of lays stacks isn't something I would normally do, but I exercise alot and it really doesn't matter.
But like fuzzy said, caffiene is far much more dangerous than pot, yet it is legal. High doses of caffiene can actually make the heart stop beating, it can also cause high blood preasure and hyper tension. Nicotine is one the deadliest drugs, yet it is legal. If you can extract the nictotine out of a pack of cigarettes, just a couple of drops in someones drink can kill them.
The sun, which causes skin cancer and sun burns, is even more dangerous to be exposed to than smoking a joint. One cigarette can hurt lungs, One hour in the direct sunlight can burn, but one good sized joint will leave you happy.
Mr Spinkles
Mr
Not according to the American Cancer Society....http://www.cancer.org/docroot/NWS/content/NWS_1_1x_Smoking_Marijuana_May_Increase_Cancer_Risk.aspDruidus said:
"The tars in marijuana smoke are unquestionably carcinogenic," notes Dawn Willis, PhD, MPH, director of research communication for the American Cancer Society (ACS). "And studies have found that compared with tobacco smoke, marijuana smoke contains four times as much tar."
http://www.cancer.org/docroot/NWS/content/update/NWS_1_1xU_Experts__Pot_Smoking_Is_Not_Best_Choice_to_Treat_Chemo_Side_Effects.asp
"Marijuana contains more tar than cigarettes. Marijuana is also inhaled very deeply and the smoke is held in the lungs for a long time. Marijuana is smoked all the way to the end where tar content is the highest. Many of the cancer-causing substances in tobacco are also found in marijuana."
http://www.cancer.org/docroot/CRI/c...t_are_the_risk_factors_for_lung_cancer_26.asp
Which goes to follow the reason why I said legalize it for use in medication, but no way for 'public use'. Thank you Mr Spinkles, for coming out with written evidence - which no doubt those who are hell-bent on smoking the stuff will say is fabricated nonsence.Mr_Spinkles said:
An idea - say the drug was allowed for the use of the public for recreational use; I wouldn't be surprized if they weren't first in the queue to sue when something does go wrong !:banghead3
Knowing 'the public' , those who are 'hell bent' on smoking it will continue to do so, whether the 'drug' is legal or illegal - unfortunately I have a microcosm of that in my own family, with one son who insists that:-"There's nothing wrong with the odd one, I'll probably die of some other man made stuff if the marijuana doesn't get me first....."
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.
Mr Spinkles
Mr
The real issue at hand is, should stupidity be legalized?