EPTUser was warned for this post
Should weed be legalized? - Page 55
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
VIKING114
Denmark2 Posts
User was warned for this post | ||
|
Faizaji
Canada5 Posts
Neither Tabco, booze, or weed should be legal | ||
|
Maggost
Venezuela296 Posts
| ||
|
SnipedSoul
Canada2158 Posts
On September 06 2012 23:59 Faizaji wrote: No. It should not be legal The arguement that Drinking and smoking tabco is legal and thus weed should be legal is moronic. Neither Tabco, booze, or weed should be legal They tried to make booze illegal in the 1920s. Look how that turned out. | ||
|
Eloot
United States13 Posts
On September 07 2012 00:06 SnipedSoul wrote: They tried to make booze illegal in the 1920s. Look how that turned out. There's a huge difference in allowing a population to get hooked on a drug just to take it away cold turkey, and keeping weed illegal. | ||
|
sCCrooked
Korea (South)1306 Posts
On September 06 2012 23:59 Faizaji wrote: No. It should not be legal The arguement that Drinking and smoking tabco is legal and thus weed should be legal is moronic. Neither Tabco, booze, or weed should be legal Its not moronic at all considering there's such support for keeping alcohol and tobacco legal while keeping mary down. Its a simple case of people having double-standards which is in itself hypocritical. Whether or not its legal does not mean it becomes any more or less scarce. Any country or area that has decriminalized weed found that it doesn't result in some mysterious boom in users. All "legality" does is determine whether or not the public profits from it, or if the black market does. Any person arguing for illegality is arguing in favor of shady drug dealers, street gangs, etc. They should really be ashamed both at their stance on the matter as well as their lack of insight. Eloot wrote: There's a huge difference in allowing a population to get hooked on a drug just to take it away cold turkey, and keeping weed illegal. No, this statement suggests a lack of basic understanding of the history involved here. Weed was legal until the 20th century world-wide. It was still commonly used in the founding days of the United States. If anything, you can only refer to alcohol prohibition if you refer to MJ's prohibition since they both have been around for thousands of years and suddenly for no good reason other than corporate greed, they tried to make them illegal. Also the comparison of what happened to the places you could get your hands on whichever substance during their respective prohibition periods is accurate as well. Both times the substances immediately exploded upon the black market. Supplies did not decrease. Usage did not decrease. However quality control and many other things went down the toilet since that's often where liquor or beer was made (bathtubs, toilets, etc). | ||
|
maybenexttime
Poland5838 Posts
On September 07 2012 00:13 sCCrooked wrote: Its not moronic at all considering there's such support for keeping alcohol and tobacco legal while keeping mary down. Its a simple case of people having double-standards which is in itself hypocritical. Whether or not its legal does not mean it becomes any more or less scarce. Any country or area that has decriminalized weed found that it doesn't result in some mysterious boom in users. All "legality" does is determine whether or not the public profits from it, or if the black market does. Any person arguing for illegality is arguing in favor of shady drug dealers, street gangs, etc. They should really be ashamed both at their stance on the matter as well as their lack of insight. No, this statement suggests a lack of basic understanding of the history involved here. Weed was legal until the 20th century world-wide. It was still commonly used in the founding days of the United States. If anything, you can only refer to alcohol prohibition if you refer to MJ's prohibition since they both have been around for thousands of years and suddenly for no good reason other than corporate greed, they tried to make them illegal. Also the comparison of what happened to the places you could get your hands on whichever substance during their respective prohibition periods is accurate as well. Both times the substances immediately exploded upon the black market. Supplies did not decrease. Usage did not decrease. However quality control and many other things went down the toilet since that's often where liquor or beer was made (bathtubs, toilets, etc). No, it's not a case of double standards. It's been said on the first freaking page that it's pretty much impossible to ban alcohol now (see American history with prohibition). That doesn't change the fact that both weed and alcohol are bad. Just because you can't ban the latter without the society suffering even worse consequences than from alcohol being legal, does not mean weed should be... | ||
|
PourquoiPas
United States17 Posts
User was warned for this post | ||
|
sCCrooked
Korea (South)1306 Posts
On September 07 2012 00:19 maybenexttime wrote: No, it's not a case of double standards. It's been said on the first freaking page that it's pretty much impossible to ban alcohol now (see American history with prohibition). That doesn't change the fact that both weed and alcohol are bad. Just because you can't ban the latter without the society suffering even worse consequences than from alcohol being legal, does not mean weed should be... Yes it is. Go look up what a double-standard is before you embarrass yourself further. You also should look up facts on marijuana because your ignorant statement of "weed and alcohol are bad" is simply incorrect. | ||
|
NeMeSiS3
Canada2972 Posts
On September 07 2012 00:19 PourquoiPas wrote: This is just a huge circle jerk for stoners. And so this comment here negates anything this "jerk circle" is doing? Your post is just a huge pile of shit T.T It's one thing to disagree, it's another to plainly insult everyone posting in this debate on one side without providing anything to the conversation. Improve your posting please, for all of our sakes. BTW (ontopic) Since everyone is shitting with their own opinions can someone against legalizing it please put down the scientific evidence as to how marijuana is a public risk? I mean that's all anyone really ever asks for. I mean if it causes no public risk and no personal health risk (in some cases it actually acts as a healing agent) then why is it banned so harshly, especially hemp. Should it be anyones business what I do with my time and my recreation if it isn't hurting them or anyone for that matter? Short answer should be no right? | ||
|
maybenexttime
Poland5838 Posts
On September 07 2012 00:21 sCCrooked wrote: Yes it is. Go look up what a double-standard is before you embarrass yourself further. You also should look up facts on marijuana because your ignorant statement of "weed and alcohol are bad" is simply incorrect. You are the one embarassing yourself. You can't talk about double standards in two incomparable cases like this. | ||
|
sCCrooked
Korea (South)1306 Posts
On September 07 2012 00:22 NeMeSiS3 wrote: And so this comment here negates anything this "jerk circle" is doing? Your post is just a huge pile of shit T.T It's one thing to disagree, it's another to plainly insult everyone posting in this debate on one side without providing anything to the conversation. Improve your posting please, for all of our sakes. BTW (ontopic) Since everyone is shitting with their own opinions can someone against legalizing it please put down the scientific evidence as to how marijuana is a public risk? I mean that's all anyone really ever asks for. I mean if it causes no public risk and no personal health risk (in some cases it actually acts as a healing agent) then why is it banned so harshly, especially hemp. We're never going to get a straight answer out of those types. In order to believe that MJ is bad and all this other crap, you basically have to blindly follow propaganda while simultaneously making it a point to never ever research or think for yourself. Its like creationists when we show them fossils. You are the one embarassing yourself. You can't talk about double standards in two incomparable cases like this. Just for thinking they're incomparable, you've proven you aren't developed enough on basic analytical skills. Come up with some real evidence to support your statements instead of spouting what you heard in some pharmaceutical-industry-paid-for campaign please. can you both please stop measuring your dicks and stay on topic This is most definitely on topic. Also if you've read the thread enough I've posted a lot of videos and links to various articles even the OP and other posters on here hadn't seen/read. After so many pages and responses though, my patience with these baseless slurs has run out. | ||
|
NeMeSiS3
Canada2972 Posts
On September 07 2012 00:25 maybenexttime wrote: You are the one embarassing yourself. You can't talk about double standards in two incomparable cases like this. can you both please stop measuring your dicks and stay on topic... I asked a specific question above, you seem against the legalization, can you please refer to some scientific evidence as to how marijuana is a "public health risk" and frankly dangerous. When you link, please link either unbiased sources or sources that explain the way the experiment went down so we don't have a Ronald Reagan fiasco where he | ||
|
Steel
Japan2283 Posts
On September 06 2012 23:59 Faizaji wrote: No. It should not be legal The arguement that Drinking and smoking tabco is legal and thus weed should be legal is moronic. Neither Tabco, booze, or weed should be legal I can respect that POV because all are mind-altering drugs with the associated dangers. I cannot respect people who think that tabacco/alcohol is okay while marijuana isn't. However, as others have pointed out, the prohibition has failed in general. Weed will always be easily accessible (honestly when you're not 18 in Canada it's easier to get weed than alcohol, I can't imagine in the US with the 21 yo legal drinking age), at a decent price but exposes you to the underground drug trafficking world which facilitates the transition to other drugs. I think making weed legal and applying laws similar to tobacco and alcohol (age limit, no use in public places, no driving ect) would not significantly increase use and instead protect the users. Protect them from dealers, crime, spiked shit and all the dangers of the illegal drug world. It would also create a huge market (that is already present really) bringing much needed money into the economy. It would lower the non-violent crime rates...the advantages are endless. Of course there are challenges and regulations to enforce but I think it is easily worth it in the end. Drug trafficking is not a victim-less crime, so smoking marijuana isn't either, but it should be. Most people just want to relax...  | ||
|
D10
Brazil3409 Posts
Theres an industry for these products, taxation that fill the goverment coffers and helps kids go to school and poor people get health care, theres also laws that regulate production, transporation, distribution, and consumption, as to try to minimize the most the negative effects of having alcohol in society (for instance). What argument is being presented to say Weed shouldnt enjoy the same status of alcohol? All I hear is personal oppinions, and ignorant partial close minded comments such as "it shouldnt because it shouldnt, all your arguments are invalid because at the core no one should do shit, people shouldnt be able to get high! I dont get high why should you?" Stop living in an oister, no one here is asking people to subscribe to stoner hobo lifestyle and smoke weed all day, or even once in your life, all we are trying to say is that its illegality affect a shitload of people very negatively. And since so much people people suffer because of the fact that weed is illegal, we as people who care about people, policies, and society, want desperately to understand why and how do you people justify all this suffering ? Just because you believe getting high is wrong, no one in the world should be able to get high ? This line of thinking suggests that since we cant achieve the goal of eliminating the opportunity to get high, lets do second best and marginalize getting high, get all these people off my sight right?! Wrong! You dont need to stick your finger in other peoples pies, my 2 cents is that people who heavily advocate towards illegality are so insecure that they get angry over the fact that theres a lot of people out there "wasting their lives", because deep down he sees in them what angers him the most, a reflection of himself. PS: "wasting their lives" is the subjective oppinion of an hypothetical person. | ||
|
mynameisgreat11
599 Posts
2 - Total deaths caused from alcohol, tobacco, and prescription drugs: hundreds of thousands per year. 3 - Marijuana's current status as illegal does not prevent anyone from smoking it who cares to. Depending on what poll you look at, 40-60 percent of the US population under the age of 21 has smoked at least once, and about 10-15 percent smoke regularly. We've all heard anecdotal evidence that high school age children often have a harder time acquiring beer than marijuana. 4 - Hundreds of thousands of Americans suffer from disease for which marijuana can provide some relief, but are denied access. 5 - Marijuana laws typically prosecute marijuana users on a similar level to users of cocaine, heroin, and meth. 6 - Many professionals are marijuana users. The stereotype of a lazy fuck-up exists for smokers and non-smokers alike. Some notable smokers include Bill Gates, Rick Steves, Pablo Picasso, Steve Jobs, Carl Sagan, Stephen Jay Gould, Francis Crick, Andrew Weil, Kary Mullis, Oliver Sacks, Richard Feynman, and the list goes on and on if you care to look. 7 - If marijuana was legalized, the gateway drug argument would be rendered moot. It would separate its black market dealings from other drugs such as heroin and cocaine. It would be controlled and regulated, and would not lead to harder drugs any more than alcohol or tobacco would. 8 - Studies have shown that marijuana use does not negatively impact your brain, but it is a moot point when discussing legality. Alcohol is 100% proven to damage your brain, liver, and many other systems in your body, and yet it remains legal. Cannabis' negative physical side effects are at the worst controversial, and at best hardly existent. This is not a basis for prohibition. | ||
|
Zynart
United States1 Post
| ||
|
Barteh
Netherlands108 Posts
On September 07 2012 04:51 mynameisgreat11 wrote: 7 - If marijuana was legalized, the gateway drug argument would be rendered moot. It would separate its black market dealings from other drugs such as heroin and cocaine. It would be controlled and regulated, and would not lead to harder drugs any more than alcohol or tobacco would. I don't think you understand how this works; because marijuana is so easy to get and is the lowest on the bad-ness scale it functions as a gateway drug. People smoke it because it makes them feel good. Once they realize it's that easy to feel good about something, they'll want to feel even better. Of course this doesn't go for everybody, but I can assure you there are plenty of people who don't realize what harm they're causing themselves. Making it legal doesn't change anything about the fact that it's the first step on that ladder of feeling good for a while, under the influence. My mother runs a sort of shelter for people that are legally handicapped, most often through very low IQ. Most of them are completely hooked on marijuana, spending 100 euros a week easily while not working for any of that money. If they don't get their share of weed for the day they freak out completely. It might not instantly get them addicted after a one time use, but once the addiction is in place it is just as hard as any to get rid of. Also, if you think that legalizing marijuana will get rid of all the home growers and dealers, you should look at alcohol. To this day people make their own alcohol because it's cheaper, even though it's illegal without all the proper licensing. The problem is way more complicated than most people realize. | ||
|
sCCrooked
Korea (South)1306 Posts
On September 07 2012 11:08 Barteh wrote: I don't think you understand how this works; because marijuana is so easy to get and is the lowest on the bad-ness scale it functions as a gateway drug. People smoke it because it makes them feel good. Once they realize it's that easy to feel good about something, they'll want to feel even better. Of course this doesn't go for everybody, but I can assure you there are plenty of people who don't realize what harm they're causing themselves. Making it legal doesn't change anything about the fact that it's the first step on that ladder of feeling good for a while, under the influence. My mother runs a sort of shelter for people that are legally handicapped, most often through very low IQ. Most of them are completely hooked on marijuana, spending 100 euros a week easily while not working for any of that money. If they don't get their share of weed for the day they freak out completely. It might not instantly get them addicted after a one time use, but once the addiction is in place it is just as hard as any to get rid of. Also, if you think that legalizing marijuana will get rid of all the home growers and dealers, you should look at alcohol. To this day people make their own alcohol because it's cheaper, even though it's illegal without all the proper licensing. The problem is way more complicated than most people realize. Everything in your post there flies in the face of every finding of every study conducted in a civil and non-biased way. If you in fact have a family member that manages some run-down shack of chronic MJ addicts on the level of heroine rehabilitation clinics and their patients, its something that should be attracting major attention. Instead, noone has ever shown anything anywhere near the level you're claiming to exist. In fact, all studies point to the exact opposite. Also your comparison of it being your first "gateway" could be applied to just about anything and is therefore not a good thought. Sex could also be your first gateway to "good feelings" or perhaps simply being in relationships is your first "good feelings" gate. Should sex be banned too? You can abuse just about anything if you put enough conditions and ridiculousness into the scenario. tl;dr If what you say has any truth to it, you should be posting very large files full of information, pictures and documented facts from multiple respectable and reputable sources because no case of MJ addiction anywhere near what you're claiming your family deals with every day has ever been seen or recorded. | ||
|
mynameisgreat11
599 Posts
On September 07 2012 11:08 Barteh wrote: I don't think you understand how this works; because marijuana is so easy to get and is the lowest on the bad-ness scale it functions as a gateway drug. People smoke it because it makes them feel good. Once they realize it's that easy to feel good about something, they'll want to feel even better. Of course this doesn't go for everybody, but I can assure you there are plenty of people who don't realize what harm they're causing themselves. Making it legal doesn't change anything about the fact that it's the first step on that ladder of feeling good for a while, under the influence. My mother runs a sort of shelter for people that are legally handicapped, most often through very low IQ. Most of them are completely hooked on marijuana, spending 100 euros a week easily while not working for any of that money. If they don't get their share of weed for the day they freak out completely. It might not instantly get them addicted after a one time use, but once the addiction is in place it is just as hard as any to get rid of. Also, if you think that legalizing marijuana will get rid of all the home growers and dealers, you should look at alcohol. To this day people make their own alcohol because it's cheaper, even though it's illegal without all the proper licensing. The problem is way more complicated than most people realize. I don't think you know what the gateway drug argument is. 'Gateway drug', at least in the states, refers to an introduction to the black market of the drug trade. Often times people who sell pot also sell harder drugs like cocaine, heroin, etc. Buying weed forces you to associate with people who use and sell harder drugs, exposing you to them, and increases your chances of experimenting and getting hooked. If pot is legal, you don't have to associate with people like this, at least not any more than you would with people who drink or smoke cigarettes. I'm surpised you are arguing the gateway drug point, as its the problem most obviously solved by legalization. If we're talking about things that make you feel good being gateway drugs, you can include tobacco, alcohol, prescription drugs, and bacon into the list. All of those are legal, and cause far more deaths per year than pot (which causes zero, of course). Your story about people your mom knows is very sad, but proves nothing. For every homeless person she knows who smokes lots of pot, I will show you 10,000 homeless people who are addicted to alcohol, heroin, meth, or crack. All of their addictions are much more directly related to their situation than pot ever could be. Comparing addiction to weed to addiction to alcohol or heroin is ridiculous, and any medical doctor, social worker, or rational human being on the planet will agree. If weed is legal, people will still homegrow illegally. They will also drive while high, which will also be illegal. Both of these things will happen far less frequently than they do now. If you want to draw analogies to alcohol, think about the amount of illegally distilled/brewed alcohol during prohibition. It stil happens now, but it was rampant when alcohol was illegal. How about the other 7-8 or points that I raise? | ||
| ||
