|
On September 07 2012 12:42 calin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 12:38 Silidons wrote:On September 07 2012 12:00 calin wrote:
As someone who use to smoke about 3-4 times a week, definitely no. My friends who are still stoners are doing nothing with their lives, all you want to do when you're stoned is sit around, eat food and watch tv. You become completely unproductive and I know for a fact that I'm not as smart as I use to be, purely because I took drugs.
This isn't even bringing into account that weed has been proven to bring out psychosis, psychophrenia and schizophrenia in certain people. I know for myself personally I had a few episodes of psychosis when I smoked too much, lost track of reality, thought things were happening when they weren't/misread situations. I don't just mean being slightly paranoid either, I mean actually BELIEVING things are happening, that the situation is actually happening for real. It's not fun...at all, and from speaking to others who smoke they have told me similiar things. So these people should be in jail. Gotcha. Don't be a dumbass, you don't go to jail for smoking some weed..unless you actually are a dumbass and keep so much weed on you that you look like one of the biggest pushers in your area, then yeah. But honestly, if you're gonna argue don't put words into other peoples mouths.
God damn dude. People go to jail all the time for smoking some weed. Have you not noticed tha 99% of this thread is talking about the US? Are you high?
|
On September 07 2012 12:42 calin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 12:38 Silidons wrote:On September 07 2012 12:00 calin wrote:
As someone who use to smoke about 3-4 times a week, definitely no. My friends who are still stoners are doing nothing with their lives, all you want to do when you're stoned is sit around, eat food and watch tv. You become completely unproductive and I know for a fact that I'm not as smart as I use to be, purely because I took drugs.
This isn't even bringing into account that weed has been proven to bring out psychosis, psychophrenia and schizophrenia in certain people. I know for myself personally I had a few episodes of psychosis when I smoked too much, lost track of reality, thought things were happening when they weren't/misread situations. I don't just mean being slightly paranoid either, I mean actually BELIEVING things are happening, that the situation is actually happening for real. It's not fun...at all, and from speaking to others who smoke they have told me similiar things. So these people should be in jail. Gotcha. Don't be a dumbass, you don't go to jail for smoking some weed..unless you actually are a dumbass and keep so much weed on you that you look like one of the biggest pushers in your area, then yeah. But honestly, if you're gonna argue don't put words into other peoples mouths.
If you're on probation and smoke marijuana you go straight to jail. Don't be a dumbass.
But let's see - you're saying the people who actually smoke and sit around shouldn't go to jail, but the person selling this drug should. Why does that make sense?
Also - if you're on your third strike - and get caught smoking marijuana you're sent to jail for life.
|
On September 07 2012 12:43 mynameisgreat11 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 12:41 Azzur wrote:On September 07 2012 12:37 mynameisgreat11 wrote:On September 07 2012 12:34 Azzur wrote:On September 06 2012 18:42 gosuMalicE wrote:On September 06 2012 18:22 Poltergeist- wrote:
The biggest reason I see for weed not being legalized is that somewhere there must be a line drawn. Obviously we can't let the world's people turn into a bunch of drug addicts. Now I am not very familiar with the drug world but I feel that someone who smokes weed has a much higher chance of getting into heavier drugs which truly mess people up. What gives government the right to decide what people put into their bodies? If someone wants to indulge in amphetamines/opiates to the point where their life is in shambles than that should be their decision to make. If you argue this - then you would have to argue to govt refusing to treat drug addicts then Also, government treating people who are fat, smoke, and drink. I wish that were the case - but that will never happen in a PC world Also, people who are old. It's their own fucking fault they got so wrinkly and sick.
I don't know what you're trying to say? Your analogy is very weak - you can choose not to get fat, smoke or drink - but you can't choose to get old?
The point I'm making: if you want govt to legalise things, then you need to accept the consequences of bad decisions. You can't have govt allowing things and then expecting them to bear the costs of your bad choices.
I prefer a world where things are allowed but ppl face consequences - but in a PC world, I know that will never happen. Hence, I prefer the side where the govt bans harmful things. However, I'm on the side of legalisation for medicinal purposes. If to get it allowed for medicinal purposes it is legalised, then I would grudgingly agree.
|
On September 07 2012 12:50 Azzur wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 12:43 mynameisgreat11 wrote:On September 07 2012 12:41 Azzur wrote:On September 07 2012 12:37 mynameisgreat11 wrote:On September 07 2012 12:34 Azzur wrote:On September 06 2012 18:42 gosuMalicE wrote:On September 06 2012 18:22 Poltergeist- wrote:
The biggest reason I see for weed not being legalized is that somewhere there must be a line drawn. Obviously we can't let the world's people turn into a bunch of drug addicts. Now I am not very familiar with the drug world but I feel that someone who smokes weed has a much higher chance of getting into heavier drugs which truly mess people up. What gives government the right to decide what people put into their bodies? If someone wants to indulge in amphetamines/opiates to the point where their life is in shambles than that should be their decision to make. If you argue this - then you would have to argue to govt refusing to treat drug addicts then Also, government treating people who are fat, smoke, and drink. I wish that were the case - but that will never happen in a PC world Also, people who are old. It's their own fucking fault they got so wrinkly and sick. I don't know what you're trying to say? Your analogy is very weak - you can choose not to get fat, smoke or drink - but you can't choose to get old? The point I'm making: if you want govt to legalise things, then you need to accept the consequences of bad decisions. You can't have govt allowing things and then expecting them to bear the costs of your bad choices.
My point is that you're a heartless bastard if you think that everyone who is fat, drinks, or smokes deserves to die because they made a 'bad choice'. Everybody who pays taxes ends up paying for shit that doesn't directly benefit them.
But this is beyond this thread. Legalizing weed would not produce an undue strain on the health care system. As I've said before, people already smoke it in droves. If you legalized it, you could tax it, and actually make some money.
|
Ok ok ok, my bad. I didn't realise you actually get thrown in jail for smoking in the US. It's not like that in Australia..
So if you're on probation and you get caught with a joint how long are you looking at spending in jail? What about an ounce?
About who should go to jail, I think the lines for that are really blurred; there's no black and white. Someone who is just smoking isn't hurting anyone but themselves, but the person who is dealing is. They're also making money off these people too. I guess if you look at 'harder' drugs it becomes more clear. Heroin for example, do you think the person who is using and the person who is selling are equal in terms of wrong doing..I don't..
Didn't mean to be so hostile by the way!
|
On September 07 2012 12:55 calin wrote:
Ok ok ok, my bad. I didn't realise you actually get thrown in jail for smoking in the US. It's not like that in Australia..
So if you're on probation and you get caught with a joint how long are you looking at spending in jail? What about an ounce?
About who should go to jail, I think the lines for that are really blurred; there's no black and white. Someone who is just smoking isn't hurting anyone but themselves, but the person who is dealing is. They're also making money off these people too. I guess if you look at 'harder' drugs it becomes more clear. Heroin for example, do you think the person who is using and the person who is selling are equal in terms of wrong doing..I don't..
Didn't mean to be so hostile by the way!
It's not just if you're on probation. It varies by state, your criminal record, the amount you have, and the mood of your arresting officer. That's why its fucked up, and partly why so many people are up in arms that its illegal.
|
So, I think that anyone who looks at the argument of legalizing weed with a rational and open mind would agree that weed should be legalized. But what now? Where do we go from here? Can we do anything to help pass legislation to legalize weed or should we just light up haha? I think this thread in itself is a good start in that it educates and gives strong arguments for the legalization of weed but knowledge only goes so far. So guys where do we go from here?
|
On September 07 2012 12:57 ChiknAdobo wrote:
So, I think that anyone who looks at the argument of legalizing weed with a rational and open mind would agree that weed should be legalized. But what now? Where do we go from here? Can we do anything to help pass legislation to legalize weed or should we just light up haha? I think this thread in itself is a good start in that it educates and gives strong arguments for the legalization of weed but knowledge only goes so far. So guys where do we go from here?
Wait for a change in the hearts and minds of your average American. I'm guessing 20 years.
|
On September 07 2012 12:53 mynameisgreat11 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 12:50 Azzur wrote:On September 07 2012 12:43 mynameisgreat11 wrote:On September 07 2012 12:41 Azzur wrote:On September 07 2012 12:37 mynameisgreat11 wrote:On September 07 2012 12:34 Azzur wrote:On September 06 2012 18:42 gosuMalicE wrote:On September 06 2012 18:22 Poltergeist- wrote:
The biggest reason I see for weed not being legalized is that somewhere there must be a line drawn. Obviously we can't let the world's people turn into a bunch of drug addicts. Now I am not very familiar with the drug world but I feel that someone who smokes weed has a much higher chance of getting into heavier drugs which truly mess people up. What gives government the right to decide what people put into their bodies? If someone wants to indulge in amphetamines/opiates to the point where their life is in shambles than that should be their decision to make. If you argue this - then you would have to argue to govt refusing to treat drug addicts then Also, government treating people who are fat, smoke, and drink. I wish that were the case - but that will never happen in a PC world Also, people who are old. It's their own fucking fault they got so wrinkly and sick. I don't know what you're trying to say? Your analogy is very weak - you can choose not to get fat, smoke or drink - but you can't choose to get old? The point I'm making: if you want govt to legalise things, then you need to accept the consequences of bad decisions. You can't have govt allowing things and then expecting them to bear the costs of your bad choices. My point is that you're a heartless bastard if you think that everyone who is fat, drinks, or smokes deserves to die because they made a 'bad choice'. Everybody who pays taxes ends up paying for shit that doesn't directly benefit them. But this is beyond this thread. Legalizing weed would not produce an undue strain on the health care system. As I've said before, people already smoke it in droves. If you legalized it, you could tax it, and actually make some money.
It is a fact that "bad lifestyle choices" places a big strain on the healthcare system. I've seen many statistics and estimations that show this.
It is also a fact that smoking weed has proven side-effects and is a "bad lifestyle choice". I've no problems with legalisation if the individual bears the cost of the bad decision. Similarly to smoking and drinking, I wish the individual bears the cost as well.
Similar to drinking, smoking weed will reduce your cognitive ability. What happens if someone gets behind a wheel and kills someone? What then? Who is responsible?
So, to those here arguing for legalisation, are you willing to foot the bill? If not, then effectively you want your cake and eat it to. If you're willing to, then I agree with you.
|
On September 07 2012 13:03 Azzur wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 12:53 mynameisgreat11 wrote:On September 07 2012 12:50 Azzur wrote:On September 07 2012 12:43 mynameisgreat11 wrote:On September 07 2012 12:41 Azzur wrote:On September 07 2012 12:37 mynameisgreat11 wrote:On September 07 2012 12:34 Azzur wrote:On September 06 2012 18:42 gosuMalicE wrote:On September 06 2012 18:22 Poltergeist- wrote:
The biggest reason I see for weed not being legalized is that somewhere there must be a line drawn. Obviously we can't let the world's people turn into a bunch of drug addicts. Now I am not very familiar with the drug world but I feel that someone who smokes weed has a much higher chance of getting into heavier drugs which truly mess people up. What gives government the right to decide what people put into their bodies? If someone wants to indulge in amphetamines/opiates to the point where their life is in shambles than that should be their decision to make. If you argue this - then you would have to argue to govt refusing to treat drug addicts then Also, government treating people who are fat, smoke, and drink. I wish that were the case - but that will never happen in a PC world Also, people who are old. It's their own fucking fault they got so wrinkly and sick. I don't know what you're trying to say? Your analogy is very weak - you can choose not to get fat, smoke or drink - but you can't choose to get old? The point I'm making: if you want govt to legalise things, then you need to accept the consequences of bad decisions. You can't have govt allowing things and then expecting them to bear the costs of your bad choices. My point is that you're a heartless bastard if you think that everyone who is fat, drinks, or smokes deserves to die because they made a 'bad choice'. Everybody who pays taxes ends up paying for shit that doesn't directly benefit them. But this is beyond this thread. Legalizing weed would not produce an undue strain on the health care system. As I've said before, people already smoke it in droves. If you legalized it, you could tax it, and actually make some money. It is a fact that "bad lifestyle choices" places a big strain on the healthcare system. I've seen many statistics and estimations that show this. It is also a fact that smoking weed has proven side-effects and is a "bad lifestyle choice". I've no problems with legalisation if the individual bears the cost of the bad decision. Similarly to smoking and drinking, I wish the individual bears the cost as well. Similar to drinking, smoking weed will reduce your cognitive ability. What happens if someone gets behind a wheel and kills someone? What then? Who is responsible? So, to those here arguing for legalisation, are you willing to foot the bill? If not, then effectively you want your cake and eat it to. If you're willing to, then I agree with you.
1- Lots of people already smoke pot. The latest study that has been thrown around a lot in this thread, the one referencing 8 point IQ drop in teens who smoke, states that 7% of high school seniors smoke every day. Depending on what polls you consider, 40-60 percent of people under 21 have smoked, and 10-15 percent smoke regularly. Any 'burden on the health care system' already exists.
2- If pot is legalized, it can be taxed, and heavily. Any burden that exists (of which there is virtually none) can be paid for, and more, with marijuana tax.
3- I don't want to get into a constant posting battle over whether pot is healthy or not. The undeniable fact is that it is much, much safer than alcohol, tobacco, prescription drugs, and red meat. All of these things create a burden on our health care system that is orders of magnitude larger than marijuana ever could be. If you want to make a serious impact on health costs caused by poor lifestyle choices, start with bacon.
4- Driving while impaired by weed would always be illegal, just like alcohol. You get a DUI, just like you do now if you get caught driving while stoned.
EDIT: It's a proven fact that smoking weed is a bad life-style choice? Sounds fishy, seeing as how its a purely subjective question.
|
On September 07 2012 13:14 mynameisgreat11 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 13:03 Azzur wrote:On September 07 2012 12:53 mynameisgreat11 wrote:On September 07 2012 12:50 Azzur wrote:On September 07 2012 12:43 mynameisgreat11 wrote:On September 07 2012 12:41 Azzur wrote:On September 07 2012 12:37 mynameisgreat11 wrote:On September 07 2012 12:34 Azzur wrote:On September 06 2012 18:42 gosuMalicE wrote:On September 06 2012 18:22 Poltergeist- wrote:
The biggest reason I see for weed not being legalized is that somewhere there must be a line drawn. Obviously we can't let the world's people turn into a bunch of drug addicts. Now I am not very familiar with the drug world but I feel that someone who smokes weed has a much higher chance of getting into heavier drugs which truly mess people up. What gives government the right to decide what people put into their bodies? If someone wants to indulge in amphetamines/opiates to the point where their life is in shambles than that should be their decision to make. If you argue this - then you would have to argue to govt refusing to treat drug addicts then Also, government treating people who are fat, smoke, and drink. I wish that were the case - but that will never happen in a PC world Also, people who are old. It's their own fucking fault they got so wrinkly and sick. I don't know what you're trying to say? Your analogy is very weak - you can choose not to get fat, smoke or drink - but you can't choose to get old? The point I'm making: if you want govt to legalise things, then you need to accept the consequences of bad decisions. You can't have govt allowing things and then expecting them to bear the costs of your bad choices. My point is that you're a heartless bastard if you think that everyone who is fat, drinks, or smokes deserves to die because they made a 'bad choice'. Everybody who pays taxes ends up paying for shit that doesn't directly benefit them. But this is beyond this thread. Legalizing weed would not produce an undue strain on the health care system. As I've said before, people already smoke it in droves. If you legalized it, you could tax it, and actually make some money. It is a fact that "bad lifestyle choices" places a big strain on the healthcare system. I've seen many statistics and estimations that show this. It is also a fact that smoking weed has proven side-effects and is a "bad lifestyle choice". I've no problems with legalisation if the individual bears the cost of the bad decision. Similarly to smoking and drinking, I wish the individual bears the cost as well. Similar to drinking, smoking weed will reduce your cognitive ability. What happens if someone gets behind a wheel and kills someone? What then? Who is responsible? So, to those here arguing for legalisation, are you willing to foot the bill? If not, then effectively you want your cake and eat it to. If you're willing to, then I agree with you. 1- Lots of people already smoke pot. The latest study that has been thrown around a lot in this thread, the one referencing 8 point IQ drop in teens who smoke, states that 7% of high school seniors smoke every day. Depending on what polls you consider, 40-60 percent of people under 21 have smoked, and 10-15 percent smoke regularly. Any 'burden on the health care system' already exists. 2- If pot is legalized, it can be taxed, and heavily. Any burden that exists (of which there is virtually none) can be paid for, and more, with marijuana tax. 3- I don't want to get into a constant posting battle over whether pot is healthy or not. The undeniable fact is that it is much, much safer than alcohol, tobacco, prescription drugs, and red meat. All of these things create a burden on our health care system that is orders of magnitude larger than marijuana ever could be. If you want to make a serious impact on health costs caused by poor lifestyle choices, start with bacon. 4- Driving while impaired by weed would always be illegal, just like alcohol. You get a DUI, just like you do now if you get caught driving while stoned. EDIT: It's a proven fact that smoking weed is a bad life-style choice? Sounds fishy, seeing as how its a purely subjective question.
It would be really nice if people actually read the thread. This stuff has been posted like 10 times already and every time it gets shut down and then a page or two later someone comes and posts it again.
|
Ha, its mostly been me just reposting my original over and over again.
|
I can't even tell you how many times I've had to re-quote my own posts to answer the same damn questions. People just don't bother to read anymore.
|
I looked at some studies:
marijuana was involved in 376,467 ED visits
http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/drug-related-hospital-emergency-room-visits
As I said, weed already places strain on the health system.
I also don't dispute alcohol, tobacco and perscription drugs are just as dangerous. However, what I'm disputing is adding more allowable dangerous substances because in the end, the taxpayer will be ones footing the bill.
The reality is that people who abuse substances end up in emergency departments and are treated. I wish they will bear the costs of that. People who engage in disorderly conduct in public because of drunkeness, being high, etc, should be fined appropriately.
Taxation doesn't work because if it's high enough, people will just grow their own. How will a emergency department distinguish between those who have paid and those who haven't?
If you're arguing that people should bear the costs for "substance abuse" hospital visits, then I'm ok with legalisation.
|
On September 07 2012 13:48 Azzur wrote:I looked at some studies: http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/drug-related-hospital-emergency-room-visitsAs I said, weed already places strain on the health system. I also don't dispute alcohol, tobacco and perscription drugs are just as dangerous. However, what I'm disputing is adding more allowable dangerous substances because in the end, the taxpayer will be ones footing the bill. The reality is that people who abuse substances end up in emergency departments and are treated. I wish they will bear the costs of that. People who engage in disorderly conduct in public because of drunkeness, being high, etc, should be fined appropriately. Taxation doesn't work because if it's high enough, people will just grow their own. How will a emergency department distinguish between those who have paid and those who haven't? If you're arguing that people should bear the costs for "substance abuse" hospital visits, then I'm ok with legalisation.
http://norml.org/library/item/your-government-is-lying-to-you-again-about-marijuana
The emergency room statistic is bad propaganda courtesy of our fantastic fucking government, the stategy in the war on marijuana is and always will be misinformation
|
On September 07 2012 13:48 Azzur wrote:I looked at some studies: http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/drug-related-hospital-emergency-room-visitsAs I said, weed already places strain on the health system. I also don't dispute alcohol, tobacco and perscription drugs are just as dangerous. However, what I'm disputing is adding more allowable dangerous substances because in the end, the taxpayer will be ones footing the bill. The reality is that people who abuse substances end up in emergency departments and are treated. I wish they will bear the costs of that. People who engage in disorderly conduct in public because of drunkeness, being high, etc, should be fined appropriately. Taxation doesn't work because if it's high enough, people will just grow their own. How will a emergency department distinguish between those who have paid and those who haven't? If you're arguing that people should bear the costs for "substance abuse" hospital visits, then I'm ok with legalisation.
Huge flaw in that link, here is their source: http://www.oas.samhsa.gov/2k10/DAWN034/EDHighlights.htm
Notice nicotine and tobacco aren't listed in the source. This means that people who go to the ER for lung problems who smoke both cigarettes and marijuana may be getting classified under marijuana only for their lung and breathing problems.
|
The problem with this particular issue, is that there are many different "grey positions", and not all of them overlap.
My issue is that marijuana, along with other substances, places strain on the health care system. If ppl come here claiming that marijuana will have no impact on the health system, then you are wrong.
There are many people in this thread who argue that govts shouldn't be allowed to tell others what they should be doing. Many argue that govts are "picking sides" by allowing dangerous substances (tobacco, alcohol) but banning other substances (marijuana). I also agree that this is double standards.
However, I can see the effects of substance abuse (not just marijuana but others as well) and the costs to society. And the way health is setup at the moment, the costs are beared by society not the individual. I don't want the legalisation of marijuana to be a slippery slope where other (more destructive drugs) are allowed in the future.
However, as I mentioned earlier, if the costs are paid by the individual, then I believe people should have the right to live how the want to.
|
On September 07 2012 04:43 D10 wrote:
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.
i also wonder what the motivation behind these sentiments are.
and azzur, surely there is no doubt that it is easier to regulate the alleged strain on the healthcare system if it was legalized?
edit:
also i disagree that healthcare costs (whatever the reason, and however you feel about the cause) should be paid by an individual! but i don't know if that really is on-topic.
|
On September 07 2012 14:38 nunez wrote:Show nested quote +On September 07 2012 04:43 D10 wrote:
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. i also wonder what the motivation behind these sentiments are. and azzur, surely there is no doubt that it is easier to regulate the alleged strain on the healthcare system if it was legalized?
I see the effects of alcohol abuse and its strain on the healthcare system. It's got worse and worse even though it's regulated. The same thing will happen to marijuana.
|
can you back this up?
edit:
and i guess it's not about the trend of the costs, but more how the total cost vs profit weighs up against how it would be if it was illegal?
i need to think through my posts better in the future! edits are easily avoidable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
