First off - I think marijuana should be legal. Now for the details -
Pozessed :
I believe marijuana to be a harmless plant.
Shuddhasattva :
Mostly harmless.
No form of
smoking is harmless, lungs are not oil filters, and if it is mixed with tobacco it is probably more harmful than either alone, because it is deeply inhaled and held, which tobacco is not.
It is much healthier, more enjoyable and far more economical to cook and eat it.
It is psychologically harmful in some ways - when people use it from a young age, it becomes habitual to use it whenever there is stress, anger etc, and as a result a lot of people's psychological development is badly affected, because instead of learning to deal with these feelings, they get stoned.
]Pozessed :
It does make you high, but not incompetent.
It does demotivate most people; I have seen some very dangerous driving by people who were very stoned; it has powerful negative effects on memory function, because it inhibits vasopressin.
On the other hand, many people perform some complex tasks as well or better on marijuana - though others do not. For example, some musicians play very well when stoned - but most don't, unless the musical form is very simple, like reggae or basic blues ( they may enjoy it more though).
Studying on marijuana is near impossible for many people. That said - people affected by marijuana are not belligerent and generally stupid like those on alcohol, and do not become anti-socially psychotic like speed and crack users. Marijuana users generally have fun, are amiable and peaceful, and often enjoy moments of meditative introspection and insight.
Shuddhasattva :
Depends on:
1. Mentality of the person using it
2. Type of cannabis - some types are heavily narcotic. A powerful indica will put most people out of commission for hours. Day-wrecker.
True. Some of the JWH synthetics would be much better for people who want to get very high for a very short period - but they are dangerously more-ish, and, I suspect, quite liver toxic.
Marijuanas legal status is based on racial slander as opposed to scientific fact.
More or less true; what are the motives behind the racial slander used as one of the primary incentives to criminalization?
The original race issue was that marijuana was mostly used by blacks and Hispanics.
I believe that was a smokescreen for the real issue - DuPont had two major inventions set to give them huge profits, both of which were threatened by marijuana
1. Dupont had developed chemicals to make paper from wood pulp. Marijuana is a
far more efficient and environmentally friendly way to make paper.( I think the figure is 5 times more paper per year per acre, and considerably cheaper).
2. Dupont invented nylon about the same time as a machine was invented which could make cloth
as fine as silk from hemp fibre. That machine was ignored by the world, as nylon became the new 'wonder textile',
Think about the value of the paper and nylon industries - it is no wonder there was a lot of money available for anti-marijuana lobbying.
There are no deaths related to marijuana overdose.
However, marijuana is implicated in a lot of road accidents, many of which are lethal.
So I think a way of determining accurately how affected a person is, and setting a legal limit for drivers, would be a good idea. Current saliva tests are hopelessly inaccurate, and cannot be used that way.
Marijuana is no more of a gateway drug than cigarettes and beer if they were put on the black market.
Less so, as it's not addictive.
I don't agree that it is not addictive. I always heard that, but my observation is that chronic users have moderate to severe withdrawal effects, including severe mood swings, and various physiological effects like nausea, headaches and insomnia.
Having said that - the effects of withdrawal are about the same intensity as caffeine withdrawal - not in the same league as say heroin or methamphetamine, and it takes a lot of regular use for that to become an issue anyway.
But is decriminalization a political possibility? Probably not. Even though the states could tax and regulate it. Legalization/decriminalziation will destroy the blackmarket and cut organized crime and terrorist organizations off from a key source of funding, and also give the states enough tax revenue to stop closing hospitals, schools and libraries.
Legalization makes incredible sense. But does it make political sense?
I don't think so.
And that's sad.
It is already more or less legal as medical marijuana in many US states.
I think ( and hope ) it will be further legalised. Clearly, the 'war on drugs' has been an overwhelming failure, and led to the invention and distribution of many new and more dangerous drugs. This will continue ( there are gazillions of options still to explore) unless a law is passed making
any substance which people enjoy illegal !
The people of the western world have made it abundantly clear that they will not respect drug laws, and they want substances which are a form of enjoyment and relaxation. Marijuana not only fills that need very safely and enjoyably, but the plant is also extraordinarily useful for making textiles, medicines and food ( marijuana seed is one of the most nutritious foods on earth, probably only stinging nettle seed is more nutritionally valuable).
