Marijuana vs. Cigarettes: Why Is One Illegal and Other Isn't?

[Storm]

I said I wouldn't legalize marijuana. I would not make beer illegal, however. Prohibition didn't work.

No it didn't. Not for alcohol, and not for marijuana.

 

[gnomon]

I said I wouldn't legalize marijuana. I would not make beer illegal, however. Prohibition didn't work.

Do you think it should be regulated to a lesser extent. Say at least to the same level as opium which is scheduled low enough for medical research and for use in medicines.

 

[Scott C.]

Do you think it should be regulated to a lesser extent. Say at least to the same level as opium which is scheduled low enough for medical research and for use in medicines.

I'm not fully decided on the issue of using marijuana for medicinal purposes. We use much stronger and more addictive drugs to treat ilnesses and rightfully so. In the case of my brother who died of an overdose 13 years ago (age 37), it was prescription medications - medications that he was addicted to and easily obtained in large quantities by manipulating doctors. I came to the conclusion back then that dangerous addictive drugs are too easily available through doctors and should be harder to get. - Again, they need to be avaiable to those who need them.

As far as marijuana goes for medicinal purposes, I think we need to be careful to not find more ways to legalize people getting high. That's why I feel marijuana should stay illegal, while I think alcohol should remain legal. Maybe marijuana is no more dangerous than beer or wine, but beer and wine are already legal and pot is not. I see no reason to add to the pool of legal highs.

Also, I'm not afraid to put tighter restrictions on alcohol, where I believe it will reduce alcoholism, drunk driving, and any other social ills caused by alcohol. These take a big toll on society at large and involve much more than just a guys right to drink a cold one at home during the game. In fact, I think the person who drinks responsibly should be on board to fight the problems of irresponsible drinking, even if it causes him/her some personal inconvenience in his/her access to liquor. That's a price they should be willing to pay.

Back to marijuana. If there really is medicinal value, that can't be had in another way, I would perhaps consider it for prescription use in limited severe cases.

 

[gnomon]

I'm not fully decided on the issue of using marijuana for medicinal purposes. We use much stronger and more addictive drugs to treat ilnesses and rightfully so. In the case of my brother who died of an overdose 13 years ago (age 37), it was prescription medications - medications that he was addicted to and easily obtained in large quantities by manipulating doctors. I came to the conclusion back then that dangerous addictive drugs are too easily available through doctors and should be harder to get. - Again, they need to be avaiable to those who need them.

As far as marijuana goes for medicinal purposes, I think we need to be careful to not find more ways to legalize people getting high. That's why I feel marijuana should stay illegal, while I think alcohol should remain legal. Maybe marijuana is no more dangerous than beer or wine, but beer and wine are already legal and pot is not. I see no reason to add to the pool of legal highs.

Also, I'm not afraid to put tighter restrictions on alcohol, where I believe it will reduce alcoholism, drunk driving, and any other social ills caused by alcohol. These take a big toll on society at large and involve much more than just a guys right to drink a cold one at home during the game. In fact, I think the person who drinks responsibly should be on board to fight the problems of irresponsible drinking, even if it causes him/her some personal inconvenience in his/her access to liquor. That's a price they should be willing to pay.

Back to marijuana. If there really is medicinal value, that can't be had in another way, I would perhaps consider it for prescription use in limited severe cases.

I respect your position.

My main point is that legal status is just a form of regulation and that regulations already exist in the same manner for alcohol as it does for most drugs we know. There are a few that trickle in once in and a while that are not regulated but for the most part, marijuana, alcohol and tobacco are all regulated and rather strictly.

That's why I asked if you would support a rescheduling of the drug. It is currently on one of the strictest Schedules. Dropping it from Schedule I to II would open up the legal avenues for medical research far more than exists now. That step would not be close to any form of legalization as defined by its general use.

 

[Scuba Pete]

Marijuana vs. Cigarettes: Why Is One Illegal and Other Isn't?

The Tobacco lobby is far more monetized than the Marijuana lobby. I think they got the munchies on the way to the Capitol.

 

[Scott C.]

That's why I asked if you would support a rescheduling of the drug. It is currently on one of the strictest Schedules. Dropping it from Schedule I to II would open up the legal avenues for medical research far more than exists now. That step would not be close to any form of legalization as defined by its general use.

If the medical community is pushing for marijuana to change from schedule I to II, because of the value they see in research and limited medical use, I would be in favor of the change. I haven't followed this issue very closely, to be honest.

 

[gnomon]

If the medical community is pushing for marijuana to change from schedule I to II, because of the value they see in research and limited medical use, I would be in favor of the change. I haven't followed this issue very closely, to be honest.

That's good to hear. I don't think the medical community has pushed for a schedule change explicitly. Actually, the DEA and Department of Justice do allow for some limited medical research which I think they do to avoid a scheduling change. A scheduling change, I'm not sure but just guessing, would prompt the legislative branch in adjusting current law.

edit: In other words, a big bureaucratic and political mess they wish to avoid. However, it is good to see that other regulatory options should remain open.

 

[Father Heathen]

I said I wouldn't legalize marijuana. I would not make beer illegal, however. Prohibition didn't work.

Well, interchange alcohol for marijuana in my post and my point still stands. Since you agree prohibition didn't work then you would agree with me, right? I mean alcohol is arguably more unhealthy, more harmful and more addictive than marijuana, so what not at least legalize weed and license, regulate, restrict and tax it just like alcohol? I don't see why the lesser of two "evils" is demonized while the greater is advertised on television.

 

[kai]

they lowered the criminal class of cannabis here a few years ago i believe because of the strength of the drug now ( skunk) they are talking of putting it back up again.

the cannabis of say my generation bears little resemblance to "Skunk", strength wise its a far more powerful drug than it used to be.(so i have heard)

 

[Father Heathen]

they lowered the criminal class of cannabis here a few years ago i believe because of the strength of the drug now ( skunk) they are talking of putting it back up again.

the cannabis of say my generation bears little resemblance to "Skunk", strength wise its a far more powerful drug than it used to be.(so i have heard)

The higher the THC content, the less you have to smoke, so it's easier on the lungs.

 

[kai]

The higher the THC content, the less you have to smoke, so it's easier on the lungs.

of course your tolerance levels increase with use , i know friends who smoke quite a lot of this stuff, and to be honest ("there not right in the head" as we say here) they wont touch ordinary cannabis they say its too weak

 

[Jeremy Mason]

of course your tolerance levels increase with use , i know friends who smoke quite a lot of this stuff, and to be honest ("there not right in the head" as we say here) they wont touch ordinary cannabis they say its too weak

Sounds like they know what they want. It's alot like buying produce at the market.

 

[Father Heathen]

of course your tolerance levels increase with use , i know friends who smoke quite a lot of this stuff, and to be honest ("there not right in the head" as we say here) they wont touch ordinary cannabis they say its too weak

Take alcoholic beverages, for example. People simply adjust the amount to drink to whatever level they want, regardless of the proof. The more potent, they less they drink. Even if they wanted to get totally smashed, regardless of how weak the drink is they would simply just keep drinking it. Same with the weed. If it's more potent then you simply smoke less to reach the same intake. Or if it's not quite as potent then you smoke more to reach the same intake. So potency is irrelevant when you can simply adjust the amount of one to match the other.

 

[Jeremy Mason]

Take alcoholic beverages, for example. People simply adjust the amount to drink to whatever level they want, regardless of the proof. The more potent, they less they drink. Even if they wanted to get totally smashed, regardless of how weak the drink is they would simply just keep drinking more. Same with the weed. If it's more potent then you simply smoke less to reach the same intake.

Gallagher once said,"Don't smoke pot when your stoned. You won't get any higher, just lower on dope."

 

[kai]

Take alcoholic beverages, for example. People simply adjust the amount to drink to whatever level they want, regardless of the proof. The more potent, they less they drink. Even if they wanted to get totally smashed, regardless of how weak the drink is they would simply just keep drinking it. Same with the weed. If it's more potent then you simply smoke less to reach the same intake. Or if it's not quite as potent then you smoke more to reach the same intake. So potency is irrelevant when you can simply adjust the amount of one to match the other.

i totally get what you mean , i was refeing to the fact that the new cannabis bears little resemblance to the drug they downgraded,

Skunk is not the "sixties type cannabis"that most of us older people think of when cannabis is mentioned , which is why they are thinking of putting it back up to class B.

its very powerful mind altering substance , i know long term users that are extremely paranoid.

 

[Father Heathen]

i totally get what you mean , i was refeing to the fact that the new cannabis bears little resemblance to the drug they downgraded,

Skunk is not the "sixties type cannabis"that most of us older people think of when cannabis is mentioned , which is why they are thinking of putting it back up to class B.

its very powerful mind altering substance , i know long term users that are extremely paranoid.

Well, I wasn't implying it was candy. Just that the criminalization of such is hypocritical when things equally bad or worse are openly sold and advertised. I also feel that what one consumes should be a personal choice and a personal freedom. I don't think people should be imprisoned for victimless crimes.

 

[Jeremy Mason]

Read this and there is a video at the end with links for more information concerning the topic at hand.

Why is Marijuana Illegal?

 

[kai]

and i dont mind people taking what they want as long as they dont hurt anyone and the national health service doesnt have to pick up the bill


this may be of interest

So how dangerous is skunk? - Health News, Health & Wellbeing - The Independent

 

[Jeremy Mason]

and i dont mind people taking what they want as long as they dont hurt anyone and the national health service doesnt have to pick up the bill


this may be of interest

So how dangerous is skunk? - Health News, Health & Wellbeing - The Independent

This is a joke, plain and simple. It's these care tactics that going to put innocent people, who did nothing more that use a plant into jail. The scales of justice have and are completely without discernment. Absolutely pathetic.

 

[feather]

I only ever used to smoke cigarettes, I gave them up a year ago. But I enjoyed smoking every single one of them.
But from what I know apparently the pot that is around these days is pretty weird stuff, that does lead to people being paranoid as someone mentioned earlier, and how many people around with mental illnesses that's cause from smoking pot. The statistics are quite high.
But the pot that was around say 20/30 years ago was much different, it was natural, the high itself was different and people didn't walk around like stunned mullets as some would put it. I am not speaking for myself just others that I have known.
But lets take a look at society today, how many people in their teens & twenty's can go out and have a great night without having any drugs or alcohol? Not very many of them, its actually quite sad that they need to take these mind altering substances that just causes damage to their bodies and minds.