Trump administration rescinds policy of leniency towards cannabis legalization.

[Father Heathen]

Sessions ending federal policy that let legal pot flourish

So much for Republicans claiming to be pro states' rights, pro business, and pro freedom (but we already knew that last one was B.S.)

 

[Stanyon]

from the article:
"Sessions, who has assailed marijuana as comparable to heroin and has blamed it for spikes in violence"
I would love to see the data that he used to come to these conclusions but I have a feeling that there is no data to support it.

 

[Quetzal]

Legislation against cannabis is absurd. We cannot even pretend that this is not due to the lobbying and bribing of public officials to keep it this way. Alcohol has proven to be more dangerous and cigarettes, literally, cause cancer. To claim it as a public health risk is ridiculous when such double standards exist.

 

[Father Heathen]

from the article:
"Sessions, who has assailed marijuana as comparable to heroin and has blamed it for spikes in violence"
I would love to see the data that he used to come to these conclusions but I have a feeling that there is no data to support it.

Logic and evidence has never factored into the right's moral crusade.

 

[Quetzal]

Logic and evidence has never factored into the right's moral crusade.

A moral crusade I wouldn't mind as much if it were consistent. If they want to take that high ground, fine. But take booze, cigarettes, caffeine, high concentrate cough syrup, etc etc; with you. Then help me pack my bags because I would be gone by then.

 

[sun rise]

I'm no fan of cannabis but to insist that it's a "schedule 1" drug etc is utterly and completely dumb.

 

[Mindmaster]

Sessions ending federal policy that let legal pot flourish

So much for Republicans claiming to be pro states' rights, pro business, and pro freedom (but we already knew that last one was B.S.)

edit: and yes, spell check messed my title up. It's "rescinds".

Day 'um, you all will have to stop getting stoned then... It's so hard to live without being high. Honestly, to me weed just doesn't do enough to bother doing or fussing about... Alcohol is way more powerful...

Anyway, this effects nothing with medical marijuana. Sessions' disposition on the issue is not surprising, but honestly I just rather that Congress finally get together and remove Cannabis from schedule 1. Most of the drugs on schedule 1 are either mild, or used in shamanistic/religious practices and never hurt anyone. There is **** I think should be on there though like meth, heroin, cocaine, etc...

We keep parsing this as anti-cannabis but the real problem is the entirety of "Schedule One" has to be adapted to reflect specifically:

1) Habit forming addictive drugs.

2) Drugs that have been proven to damage the body.

3) Harmless drugs like shrooms, peyote, LSD, THC, etc, that are often less dangerous and have less long term effects than tobacco, alcohol, and the like. You should still be able to get a DWI while on these, but use is basically harmless in any normal quantity.

 

[Holdasown]

What a waste of time, money and resources.

 

[Altfish]

from the article:
"Sessions, who has assailed marijuana as comparable to heroin and has blamed it for spikes in violence"

Whereas guns are harmless????

 

[Father Heathen]

Most republican voters don't really care if a candidate ****s everything else up as long as they're toeing the line
on guns, gays, and abortion.

 

[Holdasown]

Whereas guns are harmless????

To be fair arms are specific in the Constitution. Pot not so much. But I get what you mean.

 

[sun rise]

We keep parsing this as anti-cannabis but the real problem is the entirety of "Schedule One" has to be adapted to reflect specifically:

1) Habit forming addictive drugs.

2) Drugs that have been proven to damage the body.

3) Harmless drugs like shrooms, peyote, LSD, THC, etc, that are often less dangerous and have less long term effects than tobacco, alcohol, and the like. You should still be able to get a DWI while on these, but use is basically harmless in any normal quantity.

I somewhat agree but... 2) Drugs that have been proven to damage the body or someone's mental state.

3) Those drugs are not "harmless" even in normal quantities (whatever that means) at least to some as I learned during the 1960's. If you want to argue that the harm is not proven to be significant to the majority of adults in "normal" quantities, that's a better argument but even there, age related effects have been noted although the evidence is mixed.

But other labs have found structural differences in the brains of less frequent users. Jodi Gilman, PhD, at Massachusetts General Hospital/Harvard Center for Addiction Medicine, and colleagues used MRI to look for brain changes in 18- to 25-year-olds who smoked marijuana at least once per week, but were not dependent on the drug. Compared with nonusers, the smokers had changes in the shape, volume and gray matter density of two brain regions associated with addiction: the nucleus accumbens (which plays a role in motivation, pleasure and reward processing) and the amygdala (a region involved in memory, emotion and decision-making). Participants who smoked more often had more significant differences

Marijuana and the developing brain

 

[Mindmaster]

I somewhat agree but... 2) Drugs that have been proven to damage the body or someone's mental state.

3) Those drugs are not "harmless" even in normal quantities (whatever that means) at least to some as I learned during the 1960's. If you want to argue that the harm is not proven to be significant to the majority of adults in "normal" quantities, that's a better argument but even there, age related effects have been noted although the evidence is mixed.

But other labs have found structural differences in the brains of less frequent users. Jodi Gilman, PhD, at Massachusetts General Hospital/Harvard Center for Addiction Medicine, and colleagues used MRI to look for brain changes in 18- to 25-year-olds who smoked marijuana at least once per week, but were not dependent on the drug. Compared with nonusers, the smokers had changes in the shape, volume and gray matter density of two brain regions associated with addiction: the nucleus accumbens (which plays a role in motivation, pleasure and reward processing) and the amygdala (a region involved in memory, emotion and decision-making). Participants who smoked more often had more significant differences

Marijuana and the developing brain

The danger with THC is to developing minds, of course few people wait until 25+ to start trying it. Anyway, a lot of things are toxic in frequent use but are otherwise harmless. If someone rarely smokes THC they aren't going to have these long term effects. Alcohol also causes brain damage with heavy use, but apparently it's perfectly OK to buy as much as you want - even enough to kill yourself with it. Personally, I just don't get it.

 

[Father Heathen]

Day 'um, you all will have to stop getting stoned then... It's so hard to live without being high. Honestly, to me weed just doesn't do enough to bother doing or fussing about... Alcohol is way more powerful...

It's a matter of principle and consistency. If we're going to crack down on cannabis, then we should also reinstate the prohibition of alcohol, which is far more dangerous, unhealthy, and addicting than cannabis. Also, I don't even smoke. "You'll just have to stop doing it." is a really stupid answer to irrational, unsubstantiated, and arbitrary laws that restrict personal liberty. Not a precedent you want to see set in a country that values its freedom.

 

[Holdasown]

It's a matter of principle and consistency. If we're going to crack down on cannabis, then we should also reinstate the prohibition of alcohol, which is far more dangerous, unhealthy, and addicting than cannabis. Also, I don't even smoke. "You'll just have to stop doing it." is a really stupid answer to irrational, unsubstantiated, and arbitrary laws that restrict personal liberty. Not a precedent you want to see set in a country that values its freedom.

The drug policy also effect hemp an almost benign cousin.As someone who is learning to spin it would be nice to grow flax and hemp to make cloth but I can't. It's an all or nothing policy and makes no sense when compared to alcohol or something worse like meth.

 

[suncowiam]

Don't care for weed. I'm fine if others want to use it. It can't be no worse than alcohol as others have already mentioned.

I just don't want to deal with the second hand smoke if anything.

 

[Mindmaster]

It's a matter of principle and consistency. If we're going to crack down on cannabis, then we should also reinstate the prohibition of alcohol, which is far more dangerous, unhealthy, and addicting than cannabis. Also, I don't even smoke. "You'll just have to stop doing it." is a really stupid answer to irrational, unsubstantiated, and arbitrary laws that restrict personal liberty. Not a precedent you want to see set in a country that values its freedom.

You guys are perfectly happy restricting freedoms of expression or speech for anything that triggers you, but you're all bent out when someone doesn't like THC because it "limits your freedom". Nah, it doesn't limit your freedom at all - you can have a nice happy life without ever having access to it, or needing it. This is like saying my right to bear arms is limited because I can't have an F-18 Hornet parked in my driveway. It's not necessary to have THC or the F-18 to enjoy your life... Medical uses notwithstanding...

There is no "right to dope" in the constitution, so the point is relatively moot. Personally, I am an anarcho-capitalist and have no interest in the government minding over anything but product safety in this realm, because I don't need another daddy... But, I realize that half the population falls under the median for base intelligence and cannot be left to fend for themselves.

 

[Quetzal]

Don't care for weed. I'm fine if others want to use it. It can't be no worse than alcohol as others have already mentioned.

I just don't want to deal with the second hand smoke if anything.

I think that is perfectly reasonable. Many places have banned indoor smoking and such.

 

[suncowiam]

I think that is perfectly reasonable. Many places have banned indoor smoking and such.

I've read somewhere that smoking weed is more dangerous than cigs as far as cancer is concerned. I don't know...

But since I'm not into it, I rather not take any chances.

 

[Nakosis]

Sessions ending federal policy that let legal pot flourish

So much for Republicans claiming to be pro states' rights, pro business, and pro freedom (but we already knew that last one was B.S.)