Legalize Marijuana? Why or Why not?

Thought...

There is no road-side test for medication which makes you drowsy. Even some non-prescription drugs makes you drowsy. Yet are these banned?

Ergo, there is clearly more to the issue than road safety.

0 Replies

Adrian wrote:

Because it could then be argued that the reason why illicit drugs kill less people than alchohol and nicotine is because they are illicit and that legalising them would cause the number of people they kill to rise...

Ah okay, I understand.

I disagree though. Or at least, if marijuana was legalised I think the number of deaths from its use would remain significantly less than the number of deaths from smoking or from drinking. This is because, although smoking marijuana essentially carries very similar risks to smoking cigarettes, users simply don't smoke as much of it as they would tobacco - there is no need, and it is nto physically addictive, as nicotine is. Also, whereas alcohol can make people violent and reckless and cause people to crash cars, climb lamposts, get into fights, etc., marijuana simply does not have that effect. Stoned people do not get into fights, do not run in front of cars or climb lamposts. So I think that marijuana does not have the potential to kill as many people as alcohol or nicotine.

0 Replies

Agrote-

A couple of issues;

Quote:

although smoking marijuana essentially carries very similar risks to smoking cigarettes, users simply don't smoke as much of it as they would tobacco

I can tell you that during the height of my usage I was smoking more marijuana than I was tobacco. There is also the issue that when smoking marijuana, users tend to draw more deeply and retain the smoke in their lungs for much longer than when smoking a cigarette. All in all, inhaling any sort of smoke is bad for you. Trying to quantify it exactly is next to impossible. (This does leave out the fact that marijuana can be taken in food or in tea, thereby avoiding the risks of smoking.)

Quote:

whereas alcohol can make people violent and reckless and cause people to crash cars, climb lamposts, get into fights, etc., marijuana simply does not have that effect. Stoned people do not get into fights, do not run in front of cars or climb lamposts.

Marijuana can act as a trigger for psychotic episodes. I've seen it happen. These can be extremely dangerous both for the user and those around them.

I'm not really trying to argue with you because I personally think that marijuana should be legal.

0 Replies

Adrian, I am for decriminalizing all narcotics--to destroy the illegal drug industry, but I too have misgivings about the use of mota. I've seen too many youths (in my youth) suffer a retardation in emotional growth (maturity) by avoiding all stressful situations (as opposed to learning how to deal with them) in favor of just turning on and tuning out. But boos and TV have the same negative consequence for many.

0 Replies

JLN-

I agree with all your points. In my opinion alchohol and TV are the absolute worst of the lot. Ethanol is a poison, in any quantity. It damages the body and mind far more than any other commonly used drug. TV is not as bad but certainly is responsible for a hell of a lot of the worlds fat and stupid people. Pot, when injested rather than smoked, and when used in moderation, is great. It also has quite a few valid medicinal uses that at the moment are restricted. For instance it is brilliant at easing period pain, (I've been told...I don't suffer from that particular affliction.)

0 Replies

Adrian wrote:

There is also the issue that when smoking marijuana, users tend to draw more deeply and retain the smoke in their lungs for much longer than when smoking a cigarette.

That's true, I didn't think of that.

Adrian wrote:

Marijuana can act as a trigger for psychotic episodes.

Only in the very small percentage of people who are susceptible to them, as far as I know - but yes, that is a health risk that I forgot to mention.

All in all though, and I'm sure you'll agree with me, marijuana still does not have the potential to be as big a killer as alcohol or nicotine, and it is probably generally less of a health risk.

0 Replies

Craven,
Alcohol and nicotene kill more people because of their chemical make-up, not availability.

0 Replies

If I may:

Nicotine is not "the killer," but rather the compounds intertwined with it to produce whatever desired effects the senior corporate officers decide on. To mention a few: formaldehyde, chlorine, and (modified) benzene.

As for marijuana (THC), I suppose it should be allowed for medical treatments if such treatments have been found to be the only viable alternatives. Otherwise, it is not a treatment, but only a pleasurable (mild) sedative masked as one.

In short, I have no problem with some pot, or some people taking a few drags from a doob :wink: Of course, it is a problem when it turns out to be habitual- chronic that is- and the user becomes an indolent organism over time. To consume it day in and out for over 15 to 20 years is not to use it "mildly," or for medical "treatments."

0 Replies

NobleCon wrote:

If I may:

Nicotine is not "the killer," but rather the compounds intertwined with it to produce whatever desired effects the senior corporate officers decide on. To mention a few: formaldehyde, chlorine, and (modified) benzene.

As for marijuana (THC), I suppose it should be allowed for medical treatments if such treatments have been found to be the only viable alternatives. Otherwise, it is not a treatment, but only a pleasurable (mild) sedative masked as one.

In short, I have no problem with some pot, or some people taking a few drags from a doob :wink: Of course, it is a problem when it turns out to be habitual- chronic that is- and the user becomes an indolent organism over time. To consume it day in and out for over 15 to 20 years is not to use it "mildly," or for medical "treatments."

THC is a mild hallucinogen. The only people who claim to use it medically are those that do use it medically and whose doctors prescribe it to them for medical purposes. Stoners are of course proud to admit that they smoke to get high.

0 Replies

Yes, come to think of it, it is a tad hallucinogenic. My experience with it (college days- not too long ago :wink: ) was that of a brief and mild sedation. In any case, we agree.

As for medical treatments, it seems that we agree on that as well.

Thanks for the reply.

0 Replies

NobleCon wrote:

My experience with it (college days- not too long ago :wink: ) was that of a brief and mild sedation.

I think it depends what kind of stuff you smoke. The first stuff I tried was skunk, I'm told, and that gave me the giggles, made music sound fantastic, and gave me very mild hallucinations of colourful little kalaidoscopic patterns when I closed my eyes and looked at a lightbulb. So that was very nice Laughing

. And then the next time I tried some apparently very strong herbal stuff called 'exile' and also some hash called 'pollem,' and they floored me. After just one drag of the hash my muscles felt very relaxed, and after lots and lots of both stuff I was on the floor feeling very dizzy, and half-convinced that the room was moving and that I could squish my head into different shapes. But anyway, glad we agree.

0 Replies

I am glad as well.

Gosh, sounds like you had quality "herbage," no? And as for hash, well, it is of a much higher quality than any grass; it is more pure, natural, and not as destructive if you know what I mean.

Sounds like you had a pleasurable experience, notwithstanding the "floored" part. :wink:

0 Replies

booman2 wrote:

Craven,
Alcohol and nicotene kill more people because of their chemical make-up, not availability.

I understood that this was what you were asserting, however you can't subtantiate this assertion.

0 Replies

Actually Craven, my learned brother, I didn't say this off the top of my head it is substatiated in books, and by health care professionals.
Are you perchance intimating that you can substantiate your theory of death by availability?

0 Replies

I do not propose death by availablity as "my" theory, I merely stated that you have not excluded it from available possibilities and that you can't do so.

0 Replies

What is this theory of death, Craven?

0 Replies

Bella Dea wrote:

There is no "road side" test for it. Which is another reason why i think they are hesitant to make it legal. Driving under the influence couldn't be an illegal offense because currently there is no test to see if you are high...other than blood or urine and they can't take that if you get pulled over.

Yes there is a test. Slowly but surely Peace Officers all over the US are becoming DRE's (Drug Recognition Experts). Marijuana show several involuntary signs (signs that no matter how hard you try, you cannot hid) that cops look for when they pull you over.

0 Replies

Re:

Cyracuz wrote:

I am from California and these answers apply to California for sure and most likely other states.

They allow you to drive under the influence of kaffeine or nicotine. Painkillers too. These drugs have so subtle effects that it's sometimes hard to know you're under the influence.

When taking certain painkillers you cannot be driving. Any painkiller you take that impairs you at all, you cannot be driving and take.

They let old people drive, people who need one half minute to move one foot in front of the other.

When people get old, they have to go in for mandatory reevaluations of their License. At that time, many of them lose there license. If they are involved in a traffic collision, they usually get a reeval and most the time lose there license.

They let epeleptics drive when there's no telling when they'll have a seizure.

Many Epeleptics cannot drive! They can only drive if they take their medication and if there epelepsy is not treatable with medication, they dont get to drive. If they dont take it and are involved in a traffic collison, they are arrested for DUI.

They let angry people drive, and we all know how dangerous that can be.

Very true! But you have to admit that you probably have gotten angry when driving.

The main reasons for outlawing pot and keeping alcohol legal is financial and political.

It is the same reason why the patent for a hydrogen engine was bought and buried by the petrolium companies almost twenty years ago. If people start smoking they start drinking less.

In a nightclub here in Norway they started charging people 20 kroner (approx. 4 $) for a glass of water. The reason was that so many people used exstacy that they made almost no money selling alcohol...

Possible, but I do not know to much about the financial aspect.

0 Replies

Cyracuz wrote:

Driving under the influence of marijuana is not as dangerous as driving on alcohol. When you smoke you become timid, and infinitely more concentrated on the road because you know you are high. You know that your response time is slower, so you take it into consideration. Besides, if I smoked an entire bush I might sink to the level of activity that is normal on the road. Most people, sober or not, are asleep behind the wheel...

On the contrary, DUI of Marijuana is just as dangerous, if not more dangerous. Marijuana causes several physical effects such as physical relaxation or sedation and loss in muscular coordination, among many other effects. The mental effects that are dangerous while driving are mild confusion, mental separation from the environment and a feeling of deja vu when everything seems familiar but really isnt. Additional effects include an aloof feeling, drowsiness and difficulty concentrating. Some of the stronger varieties produce giddiness, increased alertness and can cause major distortions of time, color and sound. Knowing that your response is slower does not help you at all. The fact is that your responses are slower.... therefore you shouldnt be driving. All of those physical effects and mental effects cause you to be unsafe on the road. When you smoke, you are not always aware of these effects... even if you think you know all about the way you react to the drug.

Do you honestly think you concentrate better because you know you are high? The only time you concentrate better is when you have become a long time heavy user. Eventually the drug begins to erode your short term memory, therefore you have a hard time remembering things and converting them to long term memory. In several cases, users have stated that "[they] feel dumber". In this situation, sometimes taking the drug makes you feel smarter, but that is only an illusion. You are not getting better, in fact only allowing the drug to further wreak havoc on your respiratory system, immune system and your ability to mature mentally. Marijuana use has been shown to slow learning and disrupt concentration.

0 Replies

Adrian wrote:

Quote:
It makes sense for something like heroin to be illegal, because it is highly addictive, life-threatening,...

Nicotine is more addictive than heroin.

If taken correctly, good quality heroin is not the least bit life threatening.

True, nicotine is, thats why so many people die from nicotine products. Good quality heroin is life threatening. If you take to much you OD. The fact is both nicotine and heroin are addicting and to much use will kill you. Just look at the heroin scene in San Francisco. People use black tar heroin, stop working, keep buying heroin and using, run out of money, either become prostitutes or turn to thefts and robberies for money, buy more heroin and use it. Eventually they die from overdoses, HIV/AIDS, got to jail or get killed while breaking the law.

0 Replies

Legalize Marijuana? Why or Why not?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know