Legalize Marijuana?

[Father Heathen]

Soo...Is it like Hydro? More potent, less? I've gotten out of the weed culture a bit since I stopped dating this one guy a couple years ago
As far as our little group went...you had strengths in ascending order like so:
schwag, popcorn, hydro. And King Buds were in there, depending on their own particular type and potency.
I'm a bit...exhausted. Sorry, brain isn't functioning properly :areyoucra.

Pretty much. It's called "skunk" because of it's strong odor, which is usually a good indication of potency.

 

[Stellify]

Pretty much. It's called "skunk" because of it's strong odor, which is usually a good indication of potency.

I guessed as much I remember that much from my crazy days, at least


My guess would be that it still has an incredibly high margin of safety, then. But that's just my opinion...I don't have formal studies to back it up...yet.

 

[kai]

Exactly. You can drink enough beer to get the same effect you would from whiskey, because it's all alcohol, so what's your point? You can have one shot of whiskey for a mild effect, or drink a whole case of beer and get trashed.

Yes both scenarios are bad for your health.

well i used to have an alcohol problem , my tolerance levels were so high , i wouldnt bother with beer "Ha childs play " straight onto the hardstuff,

my point is Skunk is Hardstuff, Its the absinthe to the beer that was cannabis,what exactly is your point ?





Due to the legality of marijuana, the Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) contents can be quite high. Therefore, it is recommended for judges to have a high tolerance to THC. Some of the stronger marijuana which comes in 'hash' form can have strengths of up to 75% THC.


seems to be a little warning there dont you think?

Cannabis Cup - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Father Heathen]

Its the absinthe to the beer that was cannabis

But absinthe isn't simply alcohol. It has wormwood oil in it.

seems to be a little warning there dont you think?

Well, no ****. As with anything else, of course you wouldn't recommend something that's considered high grade to a 'lightweight'.

 

[Zephyr]

Yes, some strains are way more powerful than others, but this is a good thing. Which do you think is better for the lungs, working your way through an eighth of brickweed, or getting all you need from just a hit or two of some BC Bud? Whether I'm chugging beers or just downing a few shots, I'm going to be aiming for the same level. The only difference is how much actual material is being used.

Now I don't want to end up breaking rule 6 again, but weed definitely has some valuable medical effects in small amounts. For instance, some people may (theoretically of course) not only have frequent panic attacks, but also be incapable of taking the standard anxiety medicines without severe nausea and other side effects even worse than the initial anxiety. You can even save your lungs using a vaporizer or edibles! There is really no reason for it to be illegal. At least not Schedule I.

 

[Father Heathen]

Yes, some strains are way more powerful than others, but this is a good thing. Which do you think is better for the lungs, working your way through an eighth of brickweed, or getting all you need from just a hit or two of some BC Bud? Whether I'm chugging beers or just downing a few shots, I'm going to be aiming for the same level. The only difference is how much actual material is being used.

:yes: Exactly what I was trying to say.

 

[gnomon]

No, actually, as far as my experience goes, the media is one-hundred percent accurate. And as far as science goes, the media is incredibly well substantiated. But since I've already told you this and you've just snubbed off what I had to say as fanatical story-telling, I probably shouldn't bring it up again. There's really no point, right?

In what matter has the MSM ever been accurate on reporting issues regarding marijuana. Usually all the MSM can muster are reports of drug busts.

We know the media was dismally ignorant during the times of Reefer Madness. It maintained the racist nature of drug prohibition.

Have you ever heard of the La Guardia Commisssion? Does the media ever bring up this commission's report on the possible medical uses of marijuana and their recommendation to not put marijuana in a class of restricted substances we now call Schedule I?

How often does the MSM report on cases of ...
Cory Maye?
Ryan Frederick?

The answer is not much at all.

Stating that the media is 100 percent accurate in an environment of regulation in which only a small amount of marijuan grown in one state that the DEA allows for a very small number of scientists to perform an occasional study, something the MSM does not actually report, is nothing more than a display of ignorance regarding the mutliple issues around marijuana, it's current use, it's possible medical benefits, the research conducted to determine it's medical benefits, etc.

 

[Sententia]

Marijuana should indeed be legalized.

Lets vote. You Obama president dude... While peeps are trying to say you authorized bombing of pakistan just because you read a brief about an operation already in progress can you likes takes breaks and legalize weed, reefer or whatever you call it.

I cast a vote of yes.

 

[gnomon]

So...I'm taking a Drugs and Behavior class (psych/bio), and my professor brought up something kind of interesting.
With drugs, you can compute what's called the "margin of safety", which is basically a ratio between the "effective dose" (how much it takes to have the desired effect), and the "lethal dose" (how much it takes to kill a person). The margin of safety shows just that: how safe the drug is.

My professor said that alcohol has a margin of safety that's somewhere between 5 and 10.

Marijuana has a margin of safety around 20,000. It's the "safest" drug ever found. The professor said the number may be even higher, depending on new research.

Just found it kinda cool

I've never read about margin of safety before but the comparison sounds correct. Given that there is still no recorded death of a marijuana overdose whereas alcohol can be lethal even within the withdrawal stage.

Sounds like an interesting class. I recommend asking your professor if he knows which drugs are known to be more dangerous during detox. As far as I know, while heroin is believed to be one of the more dangerous drugs to as far as its lethality during detox, alcohol and benzodiazepines (Valium) present a greater danger during detoxification.

Of course, this all ignores the social consequences such as operating motor vehicles under the influence of any of said substances. When one looks strictly at the physical effects upon the body marijuana definitely is one of the least dangerous drugs. At one point, prescribed medications accounted for more death and injury based solely on physical use, excepting alcohol. I believe that's correct. I just don't have the data in front of me at the moment.

 

[DarkSun]

Then why did you?

I'm not sure, really.

 

[DarkSun]

In what matter has the MSM ever been accurate on reporting issues regarding marijuana. Usually all the MSM can muster are reports of drug busts.

What's MSM? I take it that it's a news program that I don't watch, which doesn't exist in my country... M'kay. No, I do most of my research over the internet and out of text books. But that being said, there isn't any point in posting any of that because it will all be knocked off as biased sensationalism... Meh.

 

[gnomon]

What's MSM? I take it that it's a news program that I don't watch, which doesn't exist in my country... M'kay. No, I do most of my research over the internet and out of text books. But that being said, there isn't any point in posting any of that because it will all be knocked off as biased sensationalism... Meh.

The MSM refers to mainstream media. This means all your traditional networks, cable networks such as FOX, CNN and all the paper media such as New York Times, etc. here in the U.S. BBC News would qualify as well as the Irish Times, London Times, Al-Jazeera....any dominant, traditional news source.

Post what you want. I read non-MSM all the time such as Reason, Liberty, Wilson Quarterly, The Objective Standard, etc. Numerous blogs.

All of the above, even the NYT, are not known for even covering most developments in drug policy. Only highlighting major drug busts is what they concentrate on.

In the history of drug prohibition the MSM is known to have supported what is considered a conspiracy among certain companies to trump up stories of hyperbole regarding drugs in order to push new developments in paper. For there you need to research DuPont chemicals, Randolph Hearst (the Rupert Murdoch of his day) and the attitudes towards minorities during the late 19th and early 20th century.

 

[DarkSun]

The MSM refers to mainstream media. This means all your traditional networks, cable networks such as FOX, CNN and all the paper media such as New York Times, etc. here in the U.S. BBC News would qualify as well as the Irish Times, London Times, Al-Jazeera....any dominant, traditional news source.

Post what you want. I read non-MSM all the time such as Reason, Liberty, Wilson Quarterly, The Objective Standard, etc. Numerous blogs.

All of the above, even the NYT, are not known for even covering most developments in drug policy. Only highlighting major drug busts is what they concentrate on.

In the history of drug prohibition the MSM is known to have supported what is considered a conspiracy among certain companies to trump up stories of hyperbole regarding drugs in order to push new developments in paper. For there you need to research DuPont chemicals, Randolph Hearst (the Rupert Murdoch of his day) and the attitudes towards minorities during the late 19th and early 20th century.

Perhaps my main problem with that theory is actually understanding why a government or drug company would want to prohibit something that is relatively harmless. I mean, I can understand how they would stand to make money if marijuana were prohibitted, but is that really a valid reason for them to do so? Especially when there are other, cheaper alternatives to other medications that have been completely endorsed by major drug companies. From where I'm standing, it looks more as if the entire argument for the legalisation of marijuana is more of a conspiracy than the argument for its prohibition.

And from some of the stuff I have witnessed; coupled with some things that my friends and family have experienced themselves, marijuana is every bit as harmful as most forms of media make it out to be. But I can't exactly prove any of that, so I'm afraid that you'll just have to call me a liar and we can move forward.

As for studies against the use of marijuana as a medicinal substance...

DEPRESSION AND SUICIDE

Beautrais, AL et al. Cannabis use and serious suicide attempts. Addiction, 94:1155-1164, 1999.
This study examined the relationship between cannabis abuse/dependence and risk of medically serious suicide attempts among 302 individuals attempting suicide and 1,028 random controls and found that marijuana use may be connected to the risk of a serious suicide attempt.

Brook, DW et al. Drug use and the risk of major depressive disorder, alcohol dependence, and substance use disorders. Archives of General Psychiatry, 59:1039-1044, 2002.
This longitudinal research of comorbid disorders found that early marijuana use during childhood and adolescence increased the risk of major depression by 17 percent. This study called attention to the importance of the psychiatric implications of early drug use.

Fergusson, DM et al. Cannabis use and psychosocial adjustment in adolescence and young adulthood. Addiction, 97:1123-1135, 2002.
This study of 1,265 New Zealand children over a 21-year period found that marijuana use, particularly heavy or regular use, was associated with later increases in depression, suicidal thoughts and suicide attempts.

Lynskey, M et al. Major depressive disorder, suicidal ideation, and suicide attempt in twins discordant for cannabis dependence and early-onset cannabis use. Archives of General Psychiatry, 61:1026-1032, 2004.
This study looked at 600 same-sex twins, one of whom was dependent upon marijuana and one of whom was not. It found that the twin who was dependent on marijuana was almost three times more likely to think about suicide and attempt suicide than his/her non-marijuana dependent co-twin. Additionally, cannabis dependence was associated with higher risk of major depressive disorder in fraternal but not in identical twins.

Patton, GC et al. Cannabis use and mental health in young people: cohort study. British Medical Journal, 325:1195-1198, 2002.
In this study, daily use of marijuana among girls increased the risk of depression five times. Weekly or more frequent marijuana use in teenagers doubled the risk of depression and anxiety.

Ramstrom, J. Adverse Health Consequences of Cannabis Use: A survey of scientific studies published up to and including the autumn of 2003. National Institute of Public Health, Sweden, 2004.
This is an extensive literature review of studies conducted worldwide on the detrimental effects of marijuana. It is an update of a review initially published in 1996 and covers studies through the fall of 2003. It finds a link between marijuana and depression and suicidal tendencies. The author points out that there is a growing body of evidence to support the claim that cannabis can provoke schizophrenia.

SCHIZOPHRENIA

Zammit, S et al. Self-reported cannabis use as a risk factor for schizophrenia in Swedish conscripts of 1969: historical cohort study. British Medical Journal, 325:1199-1201, 2002.
This report, a re-analysis of the Andreasson research (above), found that heavy marijuana users were
6.7 times more likely than non-users to be diagnosed with schizophrenia later in life. This was true for those who used marijuana only, as opposed to other drugs. The authors concluded that the findings are consistent with a causal relationship between cannabis use and schizophrenia and that self-medication with cannabis was an unlikely explanation for the association observed.

Arseneault L, et al. Cannabis use in adolescence and risk for adult psychosis: longitudinal prospective study. British Medical Journal, 325:1212-1213, 2002.
This longitudinal study agreed with the Andreasson results (above) and added new evidence: there is an increased risk of developing schizophrenia as a result of marijuana use, even among people with no prior history of a disorder, and that the earlier the use of marijuana (age 15 vs. age 18), the greater the risk of schizophrenia.

Arsenault L, et al. Causal association between cannabis and psychosis: examination of the evidence. British Journal of Psychiatry, 184:110-117, 2004.
This review of five studies from the United States, Europe and Australia found that all available population-based studies have concluded that cannabis use is associated with later schizophrenia outcomes and that cannabis use is a component cause of a variety of factors that lead to onset of schizophrenia.

Dean, B et al. Studies on [3H]CP-55940 binding in the human central nervous system: regional specific changes in density of cannabinoid-1 receptors associated with schizophrenia and cannabis use. Neuroscience, 103:9-15, 2001.
This study presented the first direct evidence that people with a predisposition for schizophrenia or other mental disorders are particularly vulnerable to the negative effects of marijuana on mental health. It showed that marijuana affects parts of the brain that are very closely related to those that may be responsible for schizophrenia.

Drewe, M et al. Cannabis and risk of psychosis. Swiss Medical Weekly, 134:659-663, 2004.
This literature review concludes that marijuana use is connected with schizophrenia and depression and drew the following conclusions: Cannabis consumption affects dopamine concentrations in the brain and can induce or modulate the development of psychotic symptoms, including schizophrenia, and that young age of cannabis use is an additional risk factor for psychosis. Cannabis consumption can also lead to other psychiatric disorders, including depression and cognitive disturbances.

Stefanis, NC et al. Early adolescent cannabis exposure and positive and negative dimensions of psychosis. Addiction, 99:1333-1341, 2004.
This study of 3,500 19-year-olds in Greece found that marijuana use, especially at a young age, contributes to psychotic symptoms. It reports that there are very high risks in individuals using in early adolescence, particularly below age 16.

van Os, J et al. Prospective cohort study of cannabis use, predisposition for psychosis, and psychotic symptoms in young people. British Medical Journal, 330:11-, 2005.
This analysis of 2,437 young people found that marijuana use moderately increases the risk of psychotic symptoms. The risk for those with a predisposition for psychosis was much higher.

van Os, J et al. Cannabis use and psychosis: a longitudinal population-based study. American Journal of Epidemiology, 156:319-327, 2002.
The research confirms previous suggestions that cannabis use increases the risk of psychotic disorders in people without a predisposition, and a poor prognosis for those with an established vulnerability.

Veen, N et al. Cannabis use and age at onset of schizophrenia. The American Journal of Psychiatry, 161:501-506, 2004.
This study found that men with a history of marijuana use experienced their first psychotic episode at a significantly younger age than those with no such history.

Verdoux, H et al. Effects of cannabis and psychosis vulnerability in daily life: an experience sampling test study. Psychological Medicine, 33:23-32, 2003.
This study of undergraduate students in France refutes the idea that people with psychotic symptoms self-medicate with marijuana. It found that people who are vulnerable to psychosis are more susceptible to the detrimental effects of marijuana than those without a predisposition. The authors conclude, “The public health impact of the widespread use of cannabis may be considerable.”

Click here for more studies:

http://www.unicri.it/wwk/publication...%20illness.pdf

 

[DarkSun]

And while this isn't exactly the best source, and even though the language and description is fairly rudimentary, this effectively sums up my view on THC:

InfoFacts - Marijuana

 

[gnomon]

The theory behind the conspiracy barely involves the pyschoactive ingredients of marijuana.

The theory maintains that DuPont chemicals had developed a method to produce paper from pulp wood. In order to push their new method of pulp wood manufacture they allied with groups that had presented marijuana as a dangerous drug in order to legislate against minorities. The dangers of marijuana were presented as a twofold front:
1) Control over minority groups such as Hispanics and African Americans
2) To allow a new product to overtake the use of hemp as a product

Thus the conspiracy maintains that the dangers of a once regular product within the U.S....hemp (paper, oil and food products) was demonized on its use at the time as an relatively unknown psychadelic substance at the time in order to enhance the profits of various companies as well as continued persecution of unaccepted minority groups. Given that the American Medical Association came out against the criminalization of marijuana at the time until they were threatened by law with the removal of licenses for doctors unless they supported the Marijuana Tax Act and that hemp was a regular staple crop gives support that there is some positive logic to the conspiracy to criminalize hemp production.

In the modern climate:
1) The La Guardia Committee was established to study the effects of smoke marijuana. This committee was formed based upon the Treasury Departments (historically the department over alcohol prohibition) claim that marijuana caused insanity. The findings of the Committee were that marijuana does not result in insanity. Points to know: The Committee was established by an anti-marijuana advocate. The Committees findings were that not only does marijuana not cause insanity as defined at that time but that the drug does not lead to chemical dependency as defined at that time.

2) Given that the Committee was formed in the early part of the 20th century and the definition of dependency has changed since then further studies, while showing a psychological dependency (which people can possess over non-pscyhoactive substances) is still not close to the levels exhibited over all known illicit substances and that prescribed medications exhibit a higher level of dependency than marijuana.

3) The most publicized cases of marijuana leading to schizophrenia involved small groups that did not account for the fact that people with pre-existing conditions or that those with mental disorders will use a psychoactive chemical to treat that condition.

4) The modern scientific pursuits into marijuana involve a small group that must rely on one single source not made widely available from the DEA and grown within one State. In other words, a larger scale medical study of the medicinal benefits of marijuana are strictly limited by a federal organization that will not allow for a proper study.

5) The NIH, the ONDCP and the DEA are far more likely to maintain the status quo regarding marijuana considering that the very existence of these organizations rely on maintaining the status que of modern legislation which is heavily skewed in favor of criminalization based upon old precedents that are known to be racist in origin.

6) That those old studies did involve racist principles in highlighting Mexicans and African-Americans as dangerous psychotics under the influence of marijuana posing a threat to the white community as spelled out within such documentaries as "Reefer Madness".

7) That the legitimate use of marijuana as a medical substance is a separate debate over the value of modern criminal legislation of controlling the distribution, manufacture and use of marijuana. In other words, that the modern anti-drug laws may present a greater threat to personal liberty than the substance itself. This can be seen in the cases of Cory Maye, Ryan Frederickson, the massive incarceration rate within the United States involving marijuana drug busts and the increasing number of law enforcement, former judges and sitting judges over issues such as mandatory minimums, no-knock raids and foreign policy.

There are two separate issues here.
1) The medicinal value of cannabis.
2) The cost-benefit analysis of modern drug enforcement regarding cannabis.

The question to be reviewed in this thread is whether or not the law enforcement efforts to keep marijuana use from the public is a benefit or a inhibitor to the public.

I think the evidence clearly states that marijuana prohibition as it is practiced inhibts the individual liberty and lives of many Americans including those who are not personally affected by the use of marijuana.

 

[DarkSun]

The theory behind the conspiracy barely involves the pyschoactive ingredients of marijuana.

The theory maintains that DuPont chemicals had developed a method to produce paper from pulp wood. In order to push their new method of pulp wood manufacture they allied with groups that had presented marijuana as a dangerous drug in order to legislate against minorities. The dangers of marijuana were presented as a twofold front:
1) Control over minority groups such as Hispanics and African Americans
2) To allow a new product to overtake the use of hemp as a product

Thus the conspiracy maintains that the dangers of a once regular product within the U.S....hemp (paper, oil and food products) was demonized on its use at the time as an relatively unknown psychadelic substance at the time in order to enhance the profits of various companies as well as continued persecution of unaccepted minority groups. Given that the American Medical Association came out against the criminalization of marijuana at the time until they were threatened by law with the removal of licenses for doctors unless they supported the Marijuana Tax Act and that hemp was a regular staple crop gives support that there is some positive logic to the conspiracy to criminalize hemp production.

In the modern climate:
1) The La Guardia Committee was established to study the effects of smoke marijuana. This committee was formed based upon the Treasury Departments (historically the department over alcohol prohibition) claim that marijuana caused insanity. The findings of the Committee were that marijuana does not result in insanity. Points to know: The Committee was established by an anti-marijuana advocate. The Committees findings were that not only does marijuana not cause insanity as defined at that time but that the drug does not lead to chemical dependency as defined at that time.

2) Given that the Committee was formed in the early part of the 20th century and the definition of dependency has changed since then further studies, while showing a psychological dependency (which people can possess over non-pscyhoactive substances) is still not close to the levels exhibited over all known illicit substances and that prescribed medications exhibit a higher level of dependency than marijuana.

3) The most publicized cases of marijuana leading to schizophrenia involved small groups that did not account for the fact that people with pre-existing conditions or that those with mental disorders will use a psychoactive chemical to treat that condition.

4) The modern scientific pursuits into marijuana involve a small group that must rely on one single source not made widely available from the DEA and grown within one State. In other words, a larger scale medical study of the medicinal benefits of marijuana are strictly limited by a federal organization that will not allow for a proper study.

5) The NIH, the ONDCP and the DEA are far more likely to maintain the status quo regarding marijuana considering that the very existence of these organizations rely on maintaining the status que of modern legislation which is heavily skewed in favor of criminalization based upon old precedents that are known to be racist in origin.

6) That those old studies did involve racist principles in highlighting Mexicans and African-Americans as dangerous psychotics under the influence of marijuana posing a threat to the white community as spelled out within such documentaries as "Reefer Madness".

7) That the legitimate use of marijuana as a medical substance is a separate debate over the value of modern criminal legislation of controlling the distribution, manufacture and use of marijuana. In other words, that the modern anti-drug laws may present a greater threat to personal liberty than the substance itself. This can be seen in the cases of Cory Maye, Ryan Frederickson, the massive incarceration rate within the United States involving marijuana drug busts and the increasing number of law enforcement, former judges and sitting judges over issues such as mandatory minimums, no-knock raids and foreign policy.

There are two separate issues here.
1) The medicinal value of cannabis.
2) The cost-benefit analysis of modern drug enforcement regarding cannabis.

The question to be reviewed in this thread is whether or not the law enforcement efforts to keep marijuana use from the public is a benefit or a inhibitor to the public.

I think the evidence clearly states that marijuana prohibition as it is practiced inhibts the individual liberty and lives of many Americans including those who are not personally affected by the use of marijuana.

Thank you for the information.

So would you have the use of marijuana prohibitted at all, or would you be inclined to say that the policies should be altered?

 

[methylatedghosts]

And, many also prefer it because it doesn't muddle their mind as much as huge amounts of morphine do...They say they like that about weed, because they're going to die soon, and they want to be coherent enough to actually talk to friends, grandchildren, etc..

.. If a little slow, perhaps

 

[methylatedghosts]

Medical Marijuana: (this is a very good website indeed)
Medicinal Marijuana - erowid.com
Things pot doesn't do and stuff

 

[gnomon]

Thank you for the information.

So would you have the use of marijuana prohibitted at all, or would you be inclined to say that the policies should be altered?

I believe in small changes to current policy.

First, remove all federal criminal legislation from every aspect of marijuana policy. This includes a rescheduling of marijuana form Schedule I to Schedule III or IV. This would allow more appropriate studies into the medicinal qualifications of cannabis.

Second, revoke mandatory minimums. These laws allow for nothing more than an overcrowding of prison populations with non-violent offenders among more violent prison population.

Third, a decriminalization in marijuana laws would allow for a greater control of the gang and black market control over marijuana.

Fourth, a repeal of current marijuana laws within the federal code would allow for legitimate uses of hemp. There is evidence that allowing for hemp production in the marketplace would be beneficial to the economy. Hemp derived paper products are also superior to pulp wood not to mention that cannabis is a crop that can be grown in multiple environments, multiple times per year and reduce the demand on carbon sinks that are removed from the environment in pulp wood production. Hemp also has multiple uses beyond paper products.

The last point is security. Current laws allow for a great amount of corruption. The common phrase in my county is that the county police have the greatest marijuana supply. Diverting law enforcement from enforcing marijuana laws would free up resources for more serious crimes as well as reducing the instances of tragedies as we saw in Atlanta a couple of years ago.

I'm not a big fan of the often seen liberalized use of marijuana. I'm more focused on the reduction of law enforcement activities to reduce the number of arrests and reduce the number of instances that endanger the lives of police officers and innocent civilians.

I would recommend checking out LEAP. LEAP - Law Enforcement Against Prohibition - Cops Say Legalize Drugs

An organization of law enforcement officers and judges who find that the drug war is currently ineffective and serves a greater harm than good.

One of the impending crisis facing Obama's presidency is the drug war in Mexico. Drug cartels have expanded the use of kidnappings among border towns along the Arizona, Texas and New Mexico borders that have shown incidences of drug cartels kidnapping American citizens. It has been established that the black market for drugs allows for these drug cartels to fund their operations. The legalization of marijuana alone may allow for a dramatic reduction in income sources for illegal drug operations. Also, for a dramatic reduction in funding for terrorist operations.

All over a chemical substance which has been well established to be less dangerous physically and psychologically than alcohol. It all comes down to appropriate regulation. There is no reason to overburden the economy by trying to criminalize and incarcerate individuals in this nation for the use of a substance such as marijuana. A more reasonable approach can be undertaken that will allow for the reduction in corruption, less state spending and greater for liberty.

Prohibitions that mirror current alcohol regulations could be maintained with the use of marijuana to a far more beneficial extent than current federal guidelines.

 

[DarkSun]

I believe in small changes to current policy.

First, remove all federal criminal legislation from every aspect of marijuana policy. This includes a rescheduling of marijuana form Schedule I to Schedule III or IV. This would allow more appropriate studies into the medicinal qualifications of cannabis.

Second, revoke mandatory minimums. These laws allow for nothing more than an overcrowding of prison populations with non-violent offenders among more violent prison population.

Third, a decriminalization in marijuana laws would allow for a greater control of the gang and black market control over marijuana.

Fourth, a repeal of current marijuana laws within the federal code would allow for legitimate uses of hemp. There is evidence that allowing for hemp production in the marketplace would be beneficial to the economy. Hemp derived paper products are also superior to pulp wood not to mention that cannabis is a crop that can be grown in multiple environments, multiple times per year and reduce the demand on carbon sinks that are removed from the environment in pulp wood production. Hemp also has multiple uses beyond paper products.

The last point is security. Current laws allow for a great amount of corruption. The common phrase in my county is that the county police have the greatest marijuana supply. Diverting law enforcement from enforcing marijuana laws would free up resources for more serious crimes as well as reducing the instances of tragedies as we saw in Atlanta a couple of years ago.

I'm not a big fan of the often seen liberalized use of marijuana. I'm more focused on the reduction of law enforcement activities to reduce the number of arrests and reduce the number of instances that endanger the lives of police officers and innocent civilians.

Personally, I agree with everything you've suggested, except your third point. Just because marijuana can be used to benefit people doesn't make it entirely safe. I mean, really, should morphene use be allowed without a doctor's direct supervision?

And removing laws just so that crime is reduced isn't entirely sensible. The crime would still be enacted, the only difference is that it would be legal. Heh... Making crime legal is the same as advocating anarchy in the end.

And even though there is a significant amount of evidence which suggests that Marijuana may be used as such to "correct" the make-up of some people, there are still studies which suggest an opposite effect on some people. Perhaps that is a reason why marijuana should be harshly scrutinised if it ever is used as an alternative anti-depressant.

The point I agree with most, though, would be your first one. I agree that we need to know a whole lot more about THC than we do now before it should be considered on the same level as morphene, pain-killers, prozac, respiradol or whatever other drug it could replace.

On another note, I've heard that a Harvard study suggests that marijuana allegedly reduced the size of a tumour by half. If such things are true then we really do need more research to be inducted into the medicinal properties of marijuana. We wouldn't want to legalise it blindly, now, would we?

I would recommend checking out LEAP. LEAP - Law Enforcement Against Prohibition - Cops Say Legalize Drugs

An organization of law enforcement officers and judges who find that the drug war is currently ineffective and serves a greater harm than good.

One of the impending crisis facing Obama's presidency is the drug war in Mexico. Drug cartels have expanded the use of kidnappings among border towns along the Arizona, Texas and New Mexico borders that have shown incidences of drug cartels kidnapping American citizens. It has been established that the black market for drugs allows for these drug cartels to fund their operations. The legalization of marijuana alone may allow for a dramatic reduction in income sources for illegal drug operations. Also, for a dramatic reduction in funding for terrorist operations.

All over a chemical substance which has been well established to be less dangerous physically and psychologically than alcohol. It all comes down to appropriate regulation. There is no reason to overburden the economy by trying to criminalize and incarcerate individuals in this nation for the use of a substance such as marijuana. A more reasonable approach can be undertaken that will allow for the reduction in corruption, less state spending and greater for liberty.

Prohibitions that mirror current alcohol regulations could be maintained with the use of marijuana to a far more beneficial extent than current federal guidelines.

No, just no. :no: