Legal Marijuana

[tonywalt]

I have seached and not found a thread on legal Marijuana.

What is everyone's view on the use of it if it were legal in the Area where you resided. Is it something that improves your ability to write, relax, relieve stress?

Would it be incorporated in your weekly or even daily(say the evening) routine?

I know a friend who uses it too relax some evenings. This friend finds it helps on single task projects at home, writing, music, a movie, chatting with a friend. Does anyone else else have a similiar friend?

[Darcy88]

I can't smoke that stuff anymore because it gives me bad anxiety. Three-quarters of the people I know smoke it at least somewhat regularly, and a lot of people here grow it.

[LitNetIsGreat]

I hate it! I hate the smell of it, it reeks. It should be banned for this reason alone let alone its links with paranoia.

There's so much of this stuff around council estates that I thought it was legal in these areas anyway!

I haven't got a problem with people who use it, as people do what they like, but just don't go smoking it within 10 miles of me please.

[Darcy88]

I hate it! I hate the smell of it, it reeks. It should be banned for this reason alone let alone its links with paranoia.


They indeed have proven that marijuana can induce psychosis in persons genetically susceptible to certain mental illnesses, something the pro-legalize crowd (in which I include myself) never mentions.

And the smell is awful. I have to deal with it everywhere - on the bus, in the streets, at parties.

[JuniperWoolf]

In Canada, it's "decriminalized," which is the most evasive legal term you'll ever encounter. The legality has been "under dispute" for I'm thinking about ten years now, the whole issue seems to be in a perpetual state of grey. If you're found holding something like five grams or less then you're good, a cop can't take it away from you. The majority of Canadians think that marijuana should be legal (and a lot of them are under the impression that it already is), we have almost no disciplinary action for the posession of marijuana yet attempts to pass bills making it technically legal always fail. It's so pointless, if the government made it legal then they could control the quality (otherwise the consumer can't guarantee what's in it) and they could tax it.

Anyway, I like it. The people who smoke instead of drink or who smoke while drinking are way less of a hassle to deal with, they have a much lower tendancy towards violence. Also, personally it slows me down. I like that, it makes boring things seem more interesting which is very useful to me right now, as I have to deal with many boring things. I don't really like the smell, but it doesn't make me nauseous like cigarette smoke does.

[tonywalt]

Yes, it's odd how it can make you intensely interested in certain things, could be a film or a book or drawing or a conversation. It really enhances the senses, certainly taste and feeling, and taste, mmmm, so many yummy things that one can eat. My friend tries to not pig out though.

It is strictly enforced in Cayman, as it is very conservative and religious here.

[Alexander III]

Meh, it doesn't need to be lagalized, just decriminalized. Getting weed is very easy, most people at universities smoke it. I prefer it to alchohol, it is safe unlike alchohol. With weed I feel like a child, alchohol makes me feel like an adult -

Neely, besides the smell, which for me is a lot like roast chicken, may I ask what your problem with the drug is? Also have you ever tried it, as most people who rail against it have never tried it. Also yes it may induce paranoia, but then again comapred tto the majority of pharmacutic drugs for various conditions it is far healthier for the body - it makes one happy, sleepy, hungry. Happy sleepy hungry, I hardly see a problem there.

[Darcy88]

That alcohol is legal and marijuana illegal in many countries is a greatly absurd hypocrisy. I heard that the war on weed in America began when the cotton industry lobbied to get hemp, a superior fibre, banned. People who smoke joints like they're heavy cigarette smokers are often lazy and stupid, but it doesn't shut down your liver or cause irreperable harm to the brain as does severe alcoholism.

[Lokasenna]

I have a cousin, a great childhood playmate of mine, who now resides permanently in a psychiatric institution. She suffers from severe paranoid schizophrenia, and is a danger to herself and those around her.

As has been pointed out, there is an element of genetic predisposition to it - and it is certainly true to say that mental illness is rather prevalent in that half of my family, and her mother is a confirmed sociopath. But it is also true that she never exibited any mental problems until she went to university, and it is there that she began to heavily abuse marijuana.

It has destroyed her life, and robbed us of a family member.

There are very few issues I'm burningly passionate about, but drugs are one of them. I cannot abide cannabis, and anyone who uses it in my presence will be remonstrated with.

As for the argument that it is hypocritical that alcohol is legal, but cannabis is not: it is very hard to ban something which has been legal for centuries, and become a part of the culture. Cannabis is still illegal (barely), and should be kept so - because once it becomes accepted, it can never realistically be re-censured.

[LitNetIsGreat]

Neely, besides the smell, which for me is a lot like roast chicken, may I ask what your problem with the drug is? Also have you ever tried it, as most people who rail against it have never tried it. Also yes it may induce paranoia, but then again comapred tto the majority of pharmacutic drugs for various conditions it is far healthier for the body - it makes one happy, sleepy, hungry. Happy sleepy hungry, I hardly see a problem there.

No, the smell is plenty enough to put me off alone - which to me doesn't smell remotely like roast chicken by the way! I do know somebody who smoked it heavily and for him it took a long time to get his life back together, he's even still not right because of it. It is not due to this that I am against it or even the smell solely, I also don't like the surrounding image that is attached to this drug - I dislike the whole package.

I even smell this when I am walking to work sometimes. I just can't believe it. Do people get up in the morning and feel the need to smoke drugs? It's just not in any way civilized.

[Darcy88]

I have a cousin, a great childhood playmate of mine, who now resides permanently in a psychiatric institution. She suffers from severe paranoid schizophrenia, and is a danger to herself and those around her.

As has been pointed out, there is an element of genetic predisposition to it - and it is certainly true to say that mental illness is rather prevalent in that half of my family, and her mother is a confirmed sociopath. But it is also true that she never exibited any mental problems until she went to university, and it is there that she began to heavily abuse marijuana.

It has destroyed her life, and robbed us of a family member.

There are very few issues I'm burningly passionate about, but drugs are one of them. I cannot abide cannabis, and anyone who uses it in my presence will be remonstrated with.

As for the argument that it is hypocritical that alcohol is legal, but cannabis is not: it is very hard to ban something which has been legal for centuries, and become a part of the culture. Cannabis is still illegal (barely), and should be kept so - because once it becomes accepted, it can never realistically be re-censured.

I'm sorry to hear about your cousin and its quite sad the doctors have found no means to treat her symptoms. I also have a family member who fell ill with that particular illness after a period of heavy marijuana use. He's recovered remarkably but remains nowhere near the same. A lot of people don't know about this potential side-effect.

[JuniperWoolf]

Marijuana use has been correlated to schizophrenia, but it's also safe to say that alchohol has been correlated to drunk driving accidents (and the correlation is exponentially higher). I personally have had one close family member and twelve friends die, and one friend severely brain damaged, in drunk driving incidents on the icy roads, yet I understand the irrationality of making a law to prohibit people from drinking. You can't just tell people how to treat their own bodies, not only do I find the very idea quite immoral but doing so will only force people to break the law (and if they're forced to do so, they will no longer respect the law and may take the consideration of breaking other laws with less weight) Also, obvioulsy, it will take money away from legitimate suppliers and put it in the hands of shady folks who are willing to profit through criminal activity.

And then there's the conventional social hypocrisy - the diseases associated with alchohol are more numerous and often more lethal than those associated with alchohol (of course, you can get a lethal disease from marijuana - lung cancer comes to mind). And yet, how many people here drink? How openly is drinking discussed by people of every nationality (and not just by we Canadians and Dutch people), how often do the gentlemen around here talk about various forms of alchohol? We have entire threads dedicated to the stuff. No one bats an eye, they are not thought to have a cold-hearted disregard for human life by drinking or supporting the legality of alchohol, which seems to be the impression I get from the anti-legalization people on American tv. I argue that "marijuana is detrimental to human health" is not a sufficient argument for lobbying that smoking it be considered a criminal act.



Cannabis is still illegal (barely), and should be kept so - because once it becomes accepted, it can never realistically be re-censured.

It cannot realistically be censored now, it is not. I used to think that since Canada was one of the only countries in the world in which smoking weed isn't a criminal act, that we were among the only people to do so. I was obviously very wrong, and if I didn't know that for a certainty before now, then this thread would be proof.

[OrphanPip]

I'm for legalization of course, but I don't smoke it. I can count the number of drinks I have in a year on one hand anyway, meh. It's all the same to me.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

See, I don't really get Lok's comment, because how many lives has alcohol destroyed? How many lives has cigarettes taken away? Hell, over-eating had crippled many a person. Plus, in many cultures, marijauna is just as a part of history as alcohol, so I'm not sure how that argument is supposed to work.

Frankly, I have a problem when someone uses a personal anecdote to lambast others for something that really isn't anyone else's business. It's like that person who'll complain when someone tells a joke, "My cousin's gay, so don't go there," or some such BS. Seriously, just shut the **** up. Once, in an episode of South Park, they had a character called "Gross Skin-disease Guy," and you know what I did? Laughed, because I'm adult enough to accept that my personal experience doens't dictate how others should act or think.

As far as I'm concerned, if alcohol and cigarettes are legal, so should marijuana. The statistics for the damage that cigarettes and alcohol do far outweigh the statistics for marijuana. Personally, I've never done it, only because I'm afraid of the damage it would do to my throat. I've always wanted to try brownies or something, though. And, for some reason, I like the smell.

[Alexander III]

See, I don't really get Lok's comment, because how many lives has alcohol destroyed? How many lives has cigarettes taken away? Hell, over-eating had crippled many a person. Plus, in many cultures, marijauna is just as a part of history as alcohol, so I'm not sure how that argument is supposed to work.

Frankly, I have a problem when someone uses a personal anecdote to lambast others for something that really isn't anyone else's business. It's like that person who'll complain when someone tells a joke, "My cousin's gay, so don't go there," or some such BS. Seriously, just shut the **** up. Once, in an episode of South Park, they had a character called "Gross Skin-disease Guy," and you know what I did? Laughed, because I'm adult enough to accept that my personal experience doens't dictate how others should act or think.

As far as I'm concerned, if alcohol and cigarettes are legal, so should marijuana. The statistics for the damage that cigarettes and alcohol do far outweigh the statistics for marijuana. Personally, I've never done it, only because I'm afraid of the damage it would do to my throat. I've always wanted to try brownies or something, though. And, for some reason, I like the smell.

Love the second paragrapgh truley much love from me on that

As to the third paragrapgh if I ever findmyself in Illinoise I will bake you a btach :)

[Lokasenna]

Frankly, I have a problem when someone uses a personal anecdote to lambast others for something that really isn't anyone else's business. It's like that person who'll complain when someone tells a joke, "My cousin's gay, so don't go there," or some such BS. Seriously, just shut the **** up. Once, in an episode of South Park, they had a character called "Gross Skin-disease Guy," and you know what I did? Laughed, because I'm adult enough to accept that my personal experience doens't dictate how others should act or think.

Fair enough - that's your opinion, and you're entitled to it. But I cannot discount my personal experiences - I'm simply not capable of being that dispassionate about it. As a direct result of marijuana abuse, I have know personal sorrow and loss. I have been fortunate never to suffer anything similar as a result of alcohol - perhaps if I had, I would feel differently about it. You may discount the nature of anecdotal evidence, but surely it is better to be able to speak from a position of some experience, rather than none?

As for it being none of my business, it is if they do it in a public place. If they want to drug themselves in their own private spaces, then I have no means of remonstrating with them, even if I might think such behaviour foolish. Where I have issues is when people use drugs in communal spaces that are meant for everyone. I used to get so angry with my stoner flatmates in my first year for constantly smoking marijuana in the kitchen where I and other non-users were trying to cook - that's not only foolish, it's downright rude and inconsiderate.

And I stand by my statement about the difficulty of latterly prohiniting something once you have at some point allowed it. With alcohol and tobacco, it's far too late to really do anything - but why bring yet another addictive and potentially dangerous substance into easy reach? And where does it stop - surely the same argument (that self-determination is the only thing that matters) can be used of heroin, cocaine, ecstasy, and so on?

[Delta40]

I don't smoke it. I used to when I was younger. Now I look at the long term effects it has had on my brother and I'm glad I stopped when the responsibilies of life stepped in. His kids have grown up with a guy who thought he was cool but really, he was never emotionally available for them, never participated in their lives (although he took credit for their accomplishments) thanks to the delusions he lived under. Ultimately, he placed the parental responsbility completely in the hands of his wife. He suffers from increased bouts of depression now and yeah, I guess he would qualify as a contender for medical marijuana (ha ha ha) to deal with it!

Personally, I don't think dope is going to go away. I don't see how the law can encourage the responsbile use of it in the home since they fail to do this with the use of alcohol. My opinion is legal or not, it's a lost cause and children especially will pay for the substance abuse their parents engage in.

[tonywalt]

I really wanted to open discussion on primarily the use of it for creativity or relaxation. Secondly, the legalisation issue which has increasing volume in many countries.

I did not envisage alot of backlash - some backlash yes, but fair enough. I suppose I am a member of an art forum where it is treated with little friction on the usage and a handful of dissent regarding legalisation. This is probably why I miscalculated the result.

That said, it only makes it more interesting to have diversity of opinion. Living in the Caribbean, where it is part of the culture, certainly effects my view.

Tony

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Love the second paragrapgh truley much love from me on that

As to the third paragrapgh if I ever findmyself in Illinoise I will bake you a btach :)
I'll hold you to that.

Fair enough - that's your opinion, and you're entitled to it. But I cannot discount my personal experiences - I'm simply not capable of being that dispassionate about it. As a direct result of marijuana abuse, I have know personal sorrow and loss. I have been fortunate never to suffer anything similar as a result of alcohol - perhaps if I had, I would feel differently about it. You may discount the nature of anecdotal evidence, but surely it is better to be able to speak from a position of some experience, rather than none?
Of course, and you're entitle to your opinion. If you hate marijuana, that's fine. It only when you're at a party and you decide to "remonstrate" someone at a party--that's when I have a problem.


As for it being none of my business, it is if they do it in a public place. If they want to drug themselves in their own private spaces, then I have no means of remonstrating with them, even if I might think such behaviour foolish. Where I have issues is when people use drugs in communal spaces that are meant for everyone. I used to get so angry with my stoner flatmates in my first year for constantly smoking marijuana in the kitchen where I and other non-users were trying to cook - that's not only foolish, it's downright rude and inconsiderate.

Well, that'd different. I was responding to your comment where you didn't specify context, when you said that you would remonstrate anyone smoking in your presence. Well, that could mean anything. Like I said, if you're at a party (and you're not the one hosting it, of course), I would find it extremely rude for someone to start scolding someone smoking pot. It's really not your problem. Leave the party; problem solved.


And I stand by my statement about the difficulty of latterly prohiniting something once you have at some point allowed it. With alcohol and tobacco, it's far too late to really do anything - but why bring yet another addictive and potentially dangerous substance into easy reach? And where does it stop - surely the same argument (that self-determination is the only thing that matters) can be used of heroin, cocaine, ecstasy, and so on?
And you don't think it's too late for marijuana?

[Darcy88]

I have suffered immensely because of marijuana. It made my brother go psychotic when he was 16 and I was 11. He would scream in madness day after day, night after night. We did not know about schizophrenia so for a couple months we just endured it. He convinced me that someone was poisoning our food and so I simply stopped eating except at friend's houses. I went from being a popular kid and top student put ahead a grade to an outcast with all Fs on my report cards. This was also when my issues with depression began, issues which have persisted for over a decade and have greatly impacted my life.

Also, my father was sent to jail not once but twice for growing marijuana, in addition to being fined tens of thousands of dollars the third time the idiot was busted. I watched him handcuffed and put in the back of a cop-car when I was 7 years old.

All that said, I am not against marijuana. In 99.9 percent of cases its moderate use is entirely harmless. In America especially thousands of lives have been ruined as a result of people, often young adults, being sentenced to prison for years just for mere possession of small amounts. The cost of policing illicit drugs runs in the billions of dollars, money that could be better spent housing the indigent or feeding the starving, not to mention paying down the nation's debt.

The destruction alcohol unleashes upon society is a thousand-fold that which marijuana does. I've known people who have died in car accidents when they or the other driver were drunk. I've met people whose livers have shut down. I've met people so desperate for a drink they'd steal from their best friend. If alcohol is to be legal, then marijuana should be as well. I don't even smoke the stuff but I see how innocuous the smoking of it is and am aware of how pernicious can be the policing and controlling of it.

Anyway. Rant over.

[smerdyakov]

Sorry to hear that Darcy. I'm like you, I can't smoke it anymore - it just makes me paranoid as hell, and I can't get my brain to shut up. It's horrible. The funny thing is, I used to smoke it no problem and actually used to enjoy a joint after work or whatever to unwind. I'm not against legalising it tho. I know people who get great enjoyment from it and no side effects like I do.

[YesNo]

The cost of policing illicit drugs runs in the billions of dollars, money that could be better spent housing the indigent or feeding the starving, not to mention paying down the nation's debt.

If they legalize it, they can also tax it and certify its quality and the police who get laid off because they are not chasing people who use marijuana anymore can earn a living growing and distributing it.

I somewhat doubt that marijuana actually causes things like paranoid schizophrenia. But it might. It is possible that people with mental disorders just like to smoke it more than others.

Having said that, I've only inhaled 4 times when I was offered something that looked and smelled like marijuana. I had no clue what it was. I passed out two of those times so it must have been some really good ****, whatever it was, or my body must have had a very low tolerance for it. It's amusing coming to while people are frantically trying to wake you up. You want to say, "Hey, it's alright. I'm not dead yet," but coming to takes some time. You can't say or do anything for a few moments. In any case, it took probably more trials than was necessary, but I learned my lesson.

[BienvenuJDC]

The destruction alcohol unleashes upon society is a thousand-fold that which marijuana does.

Maybe that is because it was legalized.

[Delta40]

Maybe that is because it was legalized.

Excellent point!

[Darcy88]

I somewhat doubt that marijuana actually causes things like paranoid schizophrenia. But it might. It is possible that people with mental disorders just like to smoke it more than others.



You have to be genetically susceptible to it, but yes, marijuana can cause paranoid schizophrenia. Scientist have done brain scans of people under its influence. Parts of the brain light up and stay lit up that shouldn't be.

[Darcy88]

Maybe that is because it was legalized.

Not an excellent point. A terrible point. Nations that legalize drugs do not see spikes in rates of drug use. And even if in an alternate universe they did, the difference in destructiveness between alcohol and marijuana has nothing to do with their opposing rates of consumption. It has everything to do with the fact that alcohol is highly addictive and debilitating. Alcoholism is fierce and tenecious, I've seen people's lives destroyed by it, in come cases literally. Marijuana is not the same. In 99.9% of instances a heavy user just loses the sharpness of their long term memory and also their initiative. An alcoholic can lose their liver and their life. The difference between the two is chasmic and profound. I am surrounded by pot-heads. I know.

[stlukesguild]

To be perfectly honest, I am all for the legalization, not that I use the stuff myself. I won't say anything one way or the other about having experimented with the stuff when I was younger considering my current employment does not look kindly upon anything illegal. I will say that I am all for legalization on several grounds. Most importantly, I feel that "we" as a nation waste far too much money upon this futile "War on Drugs" that is as doomed to failure as was the attempt at prohibition. A vast majority of the gang violence in our urban streets is directly attributable to illegal drugs. We waste millions if not billions housing individuals in prison for using or selling drugs. A great majority of the violence in Mexico and South America can be directly attributed to the criminalization of drugs. Rather than waste efforts upon attempts to snuff out such drugs, I think educational efforts that spell out the dangers of abuse (such as those that have slowly stigmatized cigarette smoking in the US) are far more effective. At the same time, it seems absurd to be wasting money in a vain attempt to eradicate something that might be better controlled and taxed... and even grown and marketed here (like alcohol).

My second problem with the criminalization of marijuana is the hypocrisy. We waste millions or billions in housing individuals in prison for using or selling marijuana (or other drugs) while Budweiser and Miller Lite openly make millions and are free to advertise at family gatherings such as concerts and sporting events. Our "royal family"... the Kennedys... made their fortune smuggling illegal alcohol during prohibition. I cannot, for the life of me, see how they are different from today's smugglers trying to smuggle in marijuana or cocaine from Mexico and Latin-America. Nor do I buy into the argument that alcohol (as opposed to other drugs) has a longer history. We can't be ignorant of the fact that marijuana and hashish and opium have long histories in other cultures. I suspect the alcohol industry itself is more responsible for portraying the evils of drugs while ignoring the "evils of drink".

I'll not question Loka's personal dislike of the drug. Again, it personally does nothing for me. My drugs of choice are caffeine and alcohol... but I'll not deny others their preferences. I agree that the use of marijuana... just like that of tobacco... is something that engaged in publicly for the simple reason that others rights to enjoy themselves without being exposed to second hand smoke should not be encroached upon.

Ultimately, none of the reasons for criminalizing marijuana (and yet not alcohol, caffeine, etc...) make any logical sense to me.

[JuniperWoolf]

But I cannot discount my personal experiences - I'm simply not capable of being that dispassionate about it.

Eh, I am. My uncle is now dead because he was t-boned by a drunk woman, but I'm not going to turn around and say "that's it, everyone stop drinking!"

I do hate alchohol though, it rips up my stomach and it gives me a headache, and drunk people are so gross and stupid, I'm tired of holding people's hair and bringing them glasses of water. Also, you have to drink so much of it to feel an effect, whereas with weed, as long as you don't smoke every day to develop a resistance, you get three puffs into you and you're good.


I can't smoke it anymore - it just makes me paranoid as hell, and I can't get my brain to shut up.

I like it when my brain won't shut up. I smoke on my days off in the wee hours of the morning (which is the late evening to me, on my work schedule) when I'm by myself in my room. It helps me sort things out which are festering in my subconscious, I recognize and solve problems that I didn't even know were there by following trains of thought around and dealing with what I find. It's sometimes scary and intense, especially if I haven't smoked for a long stretch, but I've consistantly been better for it in the long run. I am steadfast in my conviction that it has made me emotionally and psychologically stronger.


I somewhat doubt that marijuana actually causes things like paranoid schizophrenia. But it might. It is possible that people with mental disorders just like to smoke it more than others.

I believe that marijuana helps to uncover hidden fears. If, underneath it all, you have a tendancy towards psychosis, then marijuana may bring that to the surface. I think it would have come out on it's own eventually anyway, but maybe not as soon.


My opinion is legal or not, it's a lost cause and children especially will pay for the substance abuse their parents engage in.

That "won't somebody PLEASE think of the children?!?" argument always bugged me, because my dad smokes sometimes. Who cares if a dad has the occasional glass of scotch (or whatever stereotypes are drinking nowadays)? No one, that's who. Well, marijuana is less harmful to one's health and, unlike alchohol, it doesn't cause people to beat their children.


Maybe that is because it was legalized.

You don't read a lot of history books, do you?

[Bluehound]

I have known alot of, and infact come from a family of , artistic people, many of whom have also had drink and drug problems . I lump them together because for me both are equally enjoyable and safe or destructive and harmful depending on how they are used, I don't completely get this idea of defending one by slagging off the other.

I can see how drinking and drug taking can help you artisticly, when you are drunk or high , you become devorced from reality. Time has little meaning, you stop worrying about "work tommmorow" or how you are going to pay the bills, your mind is free to focus on a new song or a poem.

In my experience though the trouble is that eventually you end up too far into your own world and frankly dissapear up your own ***.
I like a drink these days but I smoked a bit when I was young and I quite enjoyed it. I think the quality or strength has changed though, or my tolerance to it, because over the years I have noticed it just makes me feel sick and tired and the next day a bit on the paranoid side, It certainly doesn't help me relax one bit.

As for legalising dope ? I think I would have to say no, I am sure I would feel the same if alcohol was illegal. I have seen too much harm done by both.

[LitNetIsGreat]

Nations that legalize drugs do not see spikes in rates of drug use.

I must say I'm very surprised at this and wonder if it is a cultural thing or if it is indeed accurate. I am positive that if you could easily get marijuana at every corner shop or supermarket in the UK that the use as it would absolutely rocket. It might be fairly easy to get hold of now illegally, but it's certainly not as easy to get hold if this were the case. I would not like to see it legalised in the UK for this reason.

As I say I don't care what people get up to in their own homes (though I can still smell it on my way to work) but I am certainly with Loka on the smoking it in public places. On this I was glad on the tobacco ban too, pubs and restaurants have never been cleaner since and we can all potentially live a little longer because of it.

[Lokasenna]

Of course, and you're entitle to your opinion. If you hate marijuana, that's fine. It only when you're at a party and you decide to "remonstrate" someone at a party--that's when I have a problem.

Well, that'd different. I was responding to your comment where you didn't specify context, when you said that you would remonstrate anyone smoking in your presence. Well, that could mean anything. Like I said, if you're at a party (and you're not the one hosting it, of course), I would find it extremely rude for someone to start scolding someone smoking pot. It's really not your problem. Leave the party; problem solved.

Actually, that would depend on the context of the party - I would be highly unlikely to go to a party that was liable to be full of people using cannabis. In which case, should the event arise at a party I would go to, then those who began smoking marijuana would be very much a small minority - and, thanks to the stink and fumes of the stuff, would be inflicting it on the rest of us. That, in my opinion, would be rude, and I would have absolutely no qualms about going over and making my feelings known, regardless of the host's sentiments. Much like Neely's comment in regard to how clean and fume-free our pubs and restaurants are now that public smoking has been banned, why should I or anyone else be driven away from a party we've been invited to by the actions of a small group?


And you don't think it's too late for marijuana?

Almost, but not quite.

[JuniperWoolf]

I have yet to see someone smoke weed in a public place. No one wants to be high and paranoid in the middle of town surrounded by nosy, morally superior old ladies who know your grandma, and strangers are to be avoided like plague carriers. Weed is a by yourself/small group drug (unlike alcohol, where your annoying drunkenness is in everyone's face).

[Alexander III]

I must say I'm very surprised at this and wonder if it is a cultural thing or if it is indeed accurate. I am positive that if you could easily get marijuana at every corner shop or supermarket in the UK that the use as it would absolutely rocket. It might be fairly easy to get hold of now illegally, but it's certainly not as easy to get hold if this were the case. I would not like to see it legalised in the UK for this reason.

As I say I don't care what people get up to in their own homes (though I can still smell it on my way to work) but I am certainly with Loka on the smoking it in public places. On this I was glad on the tobacco ban too, pubs and restaurants have never been cleaner since and we can all potentially live a little longer because of it.

Holland where in Amsterdam pot is legal - 5% of its population smoke marijuanan daily

America where pot is illegal - 9% of its population smoke daily.


If we have learned anything from the american prohibition, it is that what is idelogicaly right is often horribly wrong in reality.

By keeping it inlegal nations are choosing to keep huge amounts of money in the hands of drug cartels, and gangs which in turn use that money to fuel more crime and violence, instead of normal tax paying bussineses.

Imagine if ever alchohol label was a mafia group, imagine the bloodniness and criminality and money that would foster - well for roughly a decade in america that is what happened -and in all the world the same is happening.

To be honest a vote for maintinng it inlegal, is a vote for maintaining the powers of the drug cartels - like in the 20's a choosing to keep alchohol inlegal was a vote for maintaining the power of the mafia.

[Alexander III]

I have yet to see someone smoke weed in a public place. No one wants to be high and paranoid in the middle of town surrounded by nosy, morally superior old ladies who know your grandma, and strangers are to be avoided like plague carriers. Weed is a by yourself/small group drug (unlike alcohol, where your annoying drunkenness is in everyone's face).

Yes when you are stoned you want a couch, some food, and some really good friends to talk to - that is the best bit having truley beautifull conversaton with people and reaching levels of intimacy which are nigh in impossible to reach. Also the things you see are incredible.

Everyone thinks of it as some disgusting drug, but what it is most often is a highly spiritual and metaphysical experiance.

Once when stoned I cried for 15 minutes when I saw one of Carravagio's paintings, beacuse i thought it so sad.

Yet no one seems to think of it like that, but as a asty ugly drug - and the only reason people do think of it that way is beacuse they have never tried it and they believe all the goverment instigated fear of pot. It is propaganda that is it.


And also to all the personal anectdotes, has no one evere considered that these people were just douches/mental ilnesses ec.t and the weed had about as much to do with it as alchohol or tv or lack of friendship or heck even that pizza they ate the night before. It is just a typical case of defending somone you care about triugh a scapegoat.

No No, Johny used to be a great father but then the weed made him a bad father - maybe Johny was a douche all along and he smoked weed and negltected his children because he was a douche, not the otherway round.

[LitNetIsGreat]

Holland where in Amsterdam pot is legal - 5% of its population smoke marijuanan daily

America where pot is illegal - 9% of its population smoke daily.


If we have learned anything from the american prohibition, it is that what is idelogicaly right is often horribly wrong in reality.

By keeping it inlegal nations are choosing to keep huge amounts of money in the hands of drug cartels, and gangs which in turn use that money to fuel more crime and violence, instead of normal tax paying bussineses.

Yes I know there is that argument, which is a fair one, but I wonder if the numbers are a cultural difference, in the same way that the use of alcohol is on the continent vs yob/binge drinking culture in the UK. I just do not buy the argument that if cannabis were readily available in Tesco (buy an ounce get an ounce free?) or available in corner shops that drug use would do down. This is clearly nonsense. Here at least.

[JuniperWoolf]

Yet no one seems to think of it like that, but as a asty ugly drug - and the only reason people do think of it that way is beacuse they have never tried it and they believe all the goverment instigated fear of pot. It is propaganda that is it.

Exactly. They try these stupid anti-drug commercials in Canada to sway people because old politicians don't want people to get high for some reason, even though we live in a democratic society and the people say otherwise. It's just so sad it's funny, here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0NZGPVBCrjY)'s one. It was clearly written by someone who doesn't know what the hell they're talking about, all they ever succeeded in doing is uniting people together in the opinion that the government is stupidity incarnate. Also, those kids look nine. Wrong target audience, idiots (unless they're using the image of little children doing drugs to get overprotective moms on their side, in which case that's just kind of underhanded).

Haha, oh yeah, have you ever seen the This Is Your Brain On Drugs (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qyXFN4ocN_o) ad? It's American, but it's f'ing classic. Reeeeal informative like.


Yes I know there is that argument, which is a fair one, but I wonder if the numbers are a cultural difference, in the same way that the use of alcohol is on the continent vs yob/binge drinking culture in the UK. I just do not buy the argument that if cannabis were readily available in Tesco (buy an ounce get an ounce free?) or available in corner shops that drug use would do down. This is clearly nonsense. Here at least.

Who cares if more people smoke recreationally? You like being able to go to the liquor store and pick up a bottle of wine, don't you? I think Darcy (or Alex, whoever originally posted that legalization doesn't cause a spike in drug use) was getting his information a bit mixed up: it isn't drug/alcohol use in general that stays at the same rate, it's excessive drug/alcohol abuse which remains relatively constant whether it is legal or illegal. Sometimes abuse is higher in countries where it's illegal because people consider themselves criminals for doing it in the first place, they already feel like they've done something wrong, so why not run with it? If it were fully legal then there would obviously be more normal people picking up a few grams when they're out grocery shopping or something, just like people do now with alcohol. Why shouldn't they?

[smerdyakov]

If the government did legalize it the revenue stream from taxation would be colossal. It would be billions for Ireland anyway. I read in a study, (although since no hard data is available it is merely speculative) and they calculated it from the amount of people who smoke and how much they smoke, that the potential revenue from taxation is the States would be anywhere from 50-110 billion a year! and near enough the same for Canada (study from The Fraiser Institute). Couple that with the money saved against the war on drugs and you are talking about some serious money for the country's exchequer. Free eduaction/ Free health for all-stuff that any self respecting nation should have, and certainly one that's the richest nation on the planet. People could then be assessed by their doctors and only given it by prescription like in Calif at the moment, the difference being a normal healthy person can avail of it but if you are genetically disposed to schizophrenia or have any other adverse reactions from it, you would be excluded from having the choice to avail of it--proper regulation. Clinics could be opened for people who develop problems.

How difficult is this? The governments don't want to know because they are not progressive and basically couldn't care less what people want. It is a minority rule-the minority being a rich plutocracy who makes decisions for the many based on the desire and benefit of the few.

[JuniperWoolf]

The governments don't want to know because they are not progressive and basically couldn't care less what people want. It is a minority rule-the minority being a rich plutocracy who makes decisions for the many based on the desire and benefit of the few.

:yesnod: Not only are they a small rich plutocracy, but they're an ineffectual small rich plutocracy. Every year on April 20th (ugh, lame) the people of Edmonton gather at the parliament building and smoke weed right on the lawn. Good luck trying to control that, GoC.

[LitNetIsGreat]

Who cares if more people smoke recreationally? You like being able to go to the liquor store and pick up a bottle of wine, don't you? I think Darcy (or Alex, whoever originally posted that legalization doesn't cause a spike in drug use) was getting his information a bit mixed up: it isn't drug/alcohol use in general that stays at the same rate, it's excessive drug/alcohol abuse which remains relatively constant whether it is legal or illegal. Sometimes abuse is higher in countries where it's illegal because people consider themselves criminals for doing it in the first place, they already feel like they've done something wrong, so why not run with it? If it were fully legal then there would obviously be more normal people picking up a few grams when they're out grocery shopping or something, just like people do so with alcohol now. Why shouldn't they?

I'm not sure that I would like people 'drugging it up' everywhere. You've already pointed out the problems with alcohol and public use, imagine opening that up to a whole host of drugs, I wouldn't like it. Also alcohol is perfectly safe within limits, even beneficial, as in a little red wine with meals, I'm not sure if the same can be said for marijuana or crack cocaine.

[Bluehound]

But were do you draw the line - there must be some people who are hooked on heroin and live a happy productive life, so should that be available at Tescos too ?

[smerdyakov]

Cool. I don't like weed or hash cos it make me very anxious, and that's only happened over the last few years. Don't know why. Methamphetamines, or a very close lab variant, were legal here afew years ago to buy in head shops. You could buy weed too but it wasn't strong. The government closed them all down cos people were havin too much fun :)

[JuniperWoolf]

I'm not sure that I would like people 'drugging it up' everywhere. You've already pointed out the problems with alcohol and public use, imagine opening that up to a whole host of drugs, I wouldn't like it. Also alcohol is perfectly safe within limits, even beneficial, as in a little red wine with meals, I'm not sure if the same can be said for marijuana or crack cocaine.

Haha, they're not "drugging it up everywhere." Like I said, smoking weed in public would not be a fun adventure, it would be terrifying. You don't tear the cork out of a bottle of wine and start chugging it at aisle three, do you?

Also, marijuana has many medical benefits (http://www.medicalmarijuanacure.com/benefits-of-marijuana/#12). It stimulates appetite, cures nausea and it's a painkiller. Beyond that, for people who don't go crazy (and I've never met or even heard of someone who personally knows one of those until this thread, despite the fact that I live in a country where the people don't see much of a difference between weed and alcohol and consume both regularly, so something tells me it's not very common), it helps them relax which is good for mental health.

[smerdyakov]

Yeah Neely, give the weed smokers a bit of credit - they aren't drug addled zombies! :)

[LitNetIsGreat]

Haha, they're not "drugging it up everywhere." Like I said, smoking weed in public would not be a fun adventure, it would be terrifying. You don't tear the cork out of a bottle of wine and start chugging it at aisle three, do you?

Ha, it seems that one out of every two/three 'hoodies' I pass on the streets, morning or night, are smoking drugs. At least on the council estates. The stuff reeks. Imagine opening that up to every corner shop and Tesco, trust me, people will be drugging it up all over and then we'll have drug packets to go alongside the cans of Stella and packets of fags that we have now littering up the streets and parks. No thanks.


Yeah Neely, give the weed smokers a bit of credit - they aren't drug addled zombies!

Until Tesco does a Buy Two, get Two Free offer. You should see the lines of mouthwash I have on top of the bathroom cupboard. Crazy!

[Bluehound]

Haha, they're not "drugging it up everywhere." Like I said, smoking weed in public would not be a fun adventure, it would be terrifying. You don't tear the cork out of a bottle of wine and start chugging it at aisle three, do you?

Also, marijuana has many medical benefits (http://www.medicalmarijuanacure.com/benefits-of-marijuana/#12). It stimulates appetite, cures nausea and it's a painkiller. Beyond that, for people who don't go crazy (and I've never met or even heard of someone who personally knows one of those until this thread, despite the fact that I live in a country where the people don't see much of a difference between weed and alcohol and consume both regularly, so something tells me it's not very common), it helps them relax which is good for mental health.

The UK has a real problem with moderation, I see people drinking cans of lager and smoking weed all the time on my way to work at 9 in the morning.
So yeah we have loads of people over here that do/would go crazy because of weed.
I know a guy who put his girlfriend in hospital because she couldn't lend him a tenner to get some smoke, he has to have it everyday, doesn't really care what he has to do to get it, criminal or otherwise, and he has no motivation to get a job.

[LitNetIsGreat]

The UK has a real problem with moderation, I see people drinking cans of lager and smoking weed all the time on my way to work at 9 in the morning.
So yeah we have loads of people over here that do/would go crazy because of weed.

I know a guy who put his girlfriend in hospital because she couldn't lend him a tenner to get some smoke, he has to have it everyday, doesn't really care what he has to do to get it, criminal or otherwise, and he has no motivation to get a job.

Yep, that's what I'm on about. More of that? No thanks.

[Alexander III]

I'm not sure that I would like people 'drugging it up' everywhere. You've already pointed out the problems with alcohol and public use, imagine opening that up to a whole host of drugs, I wouldn't like it. Also alcohol is perfectly safe within limits, even beneficial, as in a little red wine with meals, I'm not sure if the same can be said for marijuana or crack cocaine.

Sorry but this post is ridicoulous, did you just put weed in the same category as crack cocaine?

Weed has been proven to be usefull as a medicine, in fact it orginaly started as a medicine. Alchohol on the other hand has never been used for medical therapy.

Also you keep using that word "drug" - marijuanna is not a drug, I repeat this because 70 odd years of goverment propaganda have made people think it is a drug, marijuana is no more a drug than literature.

Here is a nice graph http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_17Asmi0tNh4/TKkgLCgTaMI/AAAAAAAAAAM/MnTjTXKFcg4/s1600/1284362404684.jpg



The general ignorance on this thread is astounding. But let me point somethign out. Everyone who has tried marrijuana on this thread also show support for it's decriminalization. All the people who have never smoked are the ones who share those anecdotal stories and horrors and declaim this drug.

Anyone consider that the problem here is ignorance?


You guys sound like all the old Italian mothers who say "dont take my children out of europe, the world is dangerous they will get sick and you will get robed if not killed!"

When in truth the world outside of europe is perfectly normal just like europe. But then again the old Italian grandmothers have never beeen outside of europe, and they once heard that tale of that daughter who went to South America and was killed and raped. So everythign outside of europe is dangerous.

To be honest if we were in 1860 - all the people who preach the dangers of this drug marrijuana would be the same preaching the dangers of negros as a free people.

Because the common factor is, trusting your ignorance isntead and ingorant tradition isntead of trying to branch out ones views.

[Alexander III]

Mind you that graph does not include drink/driving fatalities, just those who die due to side effects of alcholism.

Here are a few more anti-propaganda ones

http://iloveweed.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/Legalize_Marijuana___Rogen_by_Rigo14-687x1023.jpg

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_2IcIq_OTlfc/TJug3i7QS0I/AAAAAAAACDg/OVWayh4w0so/s1600/Legalize_Marijuana_by_Rigo14.jpg

(yes those are james franco and seth rogen, launching a public campaine against the ignorance of the masses)

http://iloveweed.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/Legalize_Marijuana___Schwarzen_by_Rigo14-687x1023.jpg

http://pull.imgfave.netdna-cdn.com/image_cache/1294617226637787.jpeg

[Bluehound]

Sorry but this post is ridicoulous, did you just put weed in the same category as crack cocaine?

Weed has been proven to be usefull as a medicine, in fact it orginaly started as a medicine. Alchohol on the other hand has never been used for medical therapy.

Also you keep using that word "drug" - marijuanna is not a drug, I repeat this because 70 odd years of goverment propaganda have made people think it is a drug, marijuana is no more a drug than literature.



The general ignorance on this thread is astounding. But let me point somethign out. Everyone who has tried marrijuana on this thread also show support for it's decriminalization. All the people who have never smoked are the ones who share those anecdotal stories and horrors and declaim this drug.

Anyone consider that the problem here is ignorance?


You guys sound like all the old Italian mothers who say "dont take my children out of europe, the world is dangerous they will get sick and you will get robed if not killed!"

When in truth the world outside of europe is perfectly normal just like europe. But then again the old Italian grandmothers have never beeen outside of europe, and they once heard that tale of that daughter who went to South America and was killed and raped. So everythign outside of europe is dangerous.

To be honest if we were in 1860 - all the people who preach the dangers of this drug marrijuana would be the same preaching the dangers of negros as a free people.

Because the common factor is, trusting your ignorance isntead and ingorant tradition isntead of trying to branch out ones views.

I have already said that I have tried and even enjoyed smoking in the past, and that , even though I enjoy it,I consider alcohol to be a dangerous drug that would not be made legal now if the situation was reversed.
Both are bad for you in excess!

All chemicals that alter your body or mind in some way are drugs.You talk about ignorance, but you are displaying a great deal of self delusion, if you think smoking anything does not have harmful effects.

You have completely bought the myth that smoking makes you a cool militant while drinking is for the Neanderthal masses.
I would have thought you would want it to stay illegal, its more hip that way.

[Alexander III]

All chemicals that alter your body or mind in some way are drugs.You talk about ignorance, but you are displaying a great deal of self delusion, if you think smoking anything does not have harmful effects.



Yet every morning when I wake up, and take 3-4 shots of drugs, no one calls it drugs, they just call if cofee.

And yes it has some harmfull effects, but more or less the same harmfull effects as aspirin or caffeine.

Crack cocaine and aspirin are both drugs - the words drugs in this context which you use it in, makes it usless.

[Alexander III]

You have completely bought the myth that smoking makes you a cool militant while drinking is for the Neanderthal masses.
I would have thought you would want it to stay illegal, its more hip that way.

Seriously...well ain't that some peice of newt-gingrigian moon base rethroic.

I drink and smoke weed and also have tried with heavier substances. My experiances with drugs and those around me is what shapes my views.

Would I ever want to legalize cocaine or heroin? No, I have tried they are amazing but some things are best never tried.

Is weed better than alchohol? Yes, in a dark alley at night I would feel safe if arpuched by a group of stoners, if aporched by a group of drunks I would be scared ****less. If I ever have any kinds I would rather they smoke weed every weekend rather than alchohol. Weed makes you feel, love and sadness and beauty and spirituality - alchohol makes you for the most part think you are superman.

Does that mean I don't drink, no.

I have not heard a single argument defending the current state of war on weed, which was actualy valid, and not some anectdotal story.

[LitNetIsGreat]

Sorry but this post is ridicoulous, did you just put weed in the same category as crack cocaine?

It is not ridiculous and I did not put either in any category. If we are opening to the doors for cannabis with the taxation arguments or freedom arguments then we are opening the doors to every drug. And yes cannabis is a drug.



Also you keep using that word "drug" - marijuanna is not a drug, I repeat this because 70 odd years of goverment propaganda have made people think it is a drug, marijuana is no more a drug than literature.

Ha, ha you talk about propaganda and then you put a table up with a huge cannabis leaf on it! I would say that that’s pretty good propaganda!

I am well aware of the deaths due to drink, driving and everything else, which is why I don’t want to open the flood gates. More than that, as I said earlier, I don’t want drug paraphernalia everywhere and people drugging up everywhere, it is bad enough as it is.

Oh and I don't like those posters glorifying drug use much either. No harm from cannabis? Not in many people's experience.

[Alexander III]

I know a guy who put his girlfriend in hospital because she couldn't lend him a tenner to get some smoke, he has to have it everyday, doesn't really care what he has to do to get it, criminal or otherwise, and he has no motivation to get a job.

Bull****! I have to call you out on this, if that is true it is not weed he is after. Absolute bull****. This is the problem with anecdotal evidence it is mostly old wives tales which if actualy tought trough are just bull****.

[Alexander III]

It is not ridiculous and I did not put either in any category. If we are opening to the doors for cannabis with the taxation arguments or freedom arguments then we are opening the doors to every drug. And yes cannabis is a drug.




Following that logic, every starbucks is the equivalent of a meth lab....

How can you argue for somethign that you know nothing about? As you said before you never tried the stuff, so you dont know it's effects.

If a man came to tell me that Afganistan was one of the most beautifull countries in the world, but I tought that is was ugly I would argue with him. But the second where he tells me he has been reptedly to the country and explored it and all I can say Is I once saw a documentary on it, I know to stop arguing, forat that point I no longer argue like a man of reason but as a fanatic.

[Delta40]

That graph is fine in terms of mortality. In the meantime individuals without so much as considering the bigger picture choose to smoke pot for various (but like alcohol, mostly self indulgent) reasons. Where's the graph that shows the correlation between children of pot smoking parents and their performance/attendance at school? Instead of showing some pro-dope poster, let's see some documented sociological data for example. What a lot of tosh showing a self-serving death graph when a particularly pressing issue is the social impact substance use has upon us while we're living. But why bother? While everyone is unwinding, feeling less pain, having insightful, meaningful thoughts and getting the munchies, the world is just dandy.

[LitNetIsGreat]

How can you argue for something that you know nothing about?

I know it stinks vile and I know that I don’t want to see made legal for the reasons I have already given. As I also said before, I know someone whose life was pretty screwed up by it, in terms of paranoia, so I don’t buy the completely harmless argument either. In fact the so called anecdotal evidence seems pretty overwhelming to me.

[tonywalt]

Does anyone else find that Marijuana enhances their creativity and use it for relaxation?

[Bluehound]

Sorry if the old wives tale of my sisters pain offended anyone.
It is not BS , her ex is psychologically dependant on weed and completely paranoid and full of rage when he doesn't have it.

edit : Sorry your thread didn't turn out how you hoped Tony, I have known alot of really nice creative people who enjoyed a smoke to relax them and I went to some excellent pot parties as a kid , with my hippy Dad. People sitting round the fire strumming guitars and making up songs while passing a joint, are some of my treasured memories of him.

But I am not sure that would justify legalising it due to the idiots who can't control their intake of substances in general.
And I get frustrated by the myth that its completely harmless, when clearly it isn't.

[LitNetIsGreat]

Sorry if the old wives tale of my sisters pain offended anyone.
It is not BS , her ex is psychologically dependant on weed and completely paranoid and full of rage when he doesn't have it.

That's something they forgot to put on the posters...

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_2IcIq_OTlfc/TJug3i7QS0I/AAAAAAAACDg/OVWayh4w0so/s1600/Legalize_Marijuana_by_Rigo14.jpg

[Bonsai Ent]

The claimed links between weed and psychosis were based on a report from keele university that was only recently made public, on the quiet.

It turns out the researchers themselves rejected any link between the two, but just as they routinely reject the advice of their scientific advisors when it contradicts the dominant ideology, they ignored the conclusions of the researchers.

Whilst cannabis use is higher amoung the mentally ill, so is tobacco use (70% - exponentially higher than the general population), and this is explained by current medical theory, namely it is likely the result of self-medication. Schizophrenics are also prone to alcohol abuse.

Literally the entire hypothesis rests on the observation that drug use is higher amoung the mentally ill. That's it, the sum of the evidence.

There is at the present time no proven medical link between cannabis and schizophrenia.

[Darcy88]

http://www.schizophrenia.com/prevention/streetdrugs.html

David Suzuki did a great doc showing the evidence behind the link between marijuana and psychosis. The link is proven. But again, this is valid only in relation to a small genetically predisposed subset of the population.

People who think marijuana is generally evil or destructive are just wrong. And anyone who drinks alcohol has no right to preach against the legalization of weed. Alcohol is worse. Drink a micky of whisky everyday for 10 years and behold the degradation unleashed upon your health. Smoke several joints a day for 10 years and you might be lazy and apathetic, but your skin won't be yellow, you won't be hooked up to a dialysis machine. You could have a lung disorder, but even that is rare amongst hardcore stoners.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

I wish medical marijuana was legal. I have a suspicion that it would work better than all of the narcotics I've tried and used

[Shalot]

I am lazily not bothering to read all posts in this thread before I post so I don't know if anyone else has answered my question already, but here it goes. This post has to do with the varying effects of marijuana. Sometimes smoking marijuana is very pleasant. A pleasant high might be one in which the marijuana intensifies the senses and changes perception in an interesting way. And then there are the scary-as-hell experiences induced by marijuana. You shake, you shiver, you open your mouth to speak but you drool instead. Then you say something totally incoherent, and the the most routine tasks are suddenly impossible, and everything is terrifying, and they are all talking about you and there is all this background noise that no one can hear but you and the only thing to do at that point is to go pull the covers over your head until all of it stops. Why is that? Is it the kind of weed? I know there are different varieties... Maybe some is laced maybe some is old maybe it's a defect of the brain and maybe it is a little bit of all of it. If someone could answer these questions and guarantee that the product you get isn't going to make you afraid to answer the phone then I think legalizing is probably a good idea.

[Varenne Rodin]

Shalot, I have to think that reaction would be induced by something laced with something else.

[Darcy88]

I am lazily not bothering to read all posts in this thread before I post so I don't know if anyone else has answered my question already, but here it goes. This post has to do with the varying effects of marijuana. Sometimes smoking marijuana is very pleasant. A pleasant high might be one in which the marijuana intensifies the senses and changes perception in an interesting way. And then there are the scary-as-hell experiences induced by marijuana. You shake, you shiver, you open your mouth to speak but you drool instead. Then you say something totally incoherent, and the the most routine tasks are suddenly impossible, and everything is terrifying, and they are all talking about you and there is all this background noise that no one can hear but you and the only thing to do at that point is to go pull the covers over your head until all of it stops. Why is that? Is it the kind of weed? I know there are different varieties... Maybe some is laced maybe some is old maybe it's a defect of the brain and maybe it is a little bit of all of it. If someone could answer these questions and guarantee that the product you get isn't going to make you afraid to answer the phone then I think legalizing is probably a good idea.

The weed grown nowadays is often 20 times more potent than that produced back in the 60's. Growers often use nasty chemicals. And like Varenne said, it could have been laced with something.

I've had similar experiences with un-laced weed before. It felt like everyone in the room were thinking bad thoughts about me. When I would smoke it by myself I would feel fine. Some people just react that way to it. Friends have told me they've felt that way too. I stopped smoking it for just that reason. Then last summer I partook with a few friends and it was a pleasant experience. I can't explain it. There's probably a bunch of complex neuro-chemistry going on there.

[Varenne Rodin]

Darcy makes great points. Pesticide free organics are probably the safest bet. The shaking could depend on a few other factors, like how much sleep a person has gotten before getting high, and what and/or when they may have eaten last. I'm pretty sure weed effects the hypothalamus. The hypothalamus controls body temperature (chills or warm fuzzies), hunger (munchies), thirst (dry mouth), sleep (disturbed circadian rhythms). Different people have a greater or lesser flow of hormones from the hypothalamus to begin with. If marijuana decreases or increases the flow in someone already experiencing a flux, well yeah. Adverse reaction time, probably.

[JuniperWoolf]

Yes, isn't it just dastardly when the media portrays harmful substances in a cool, sexy way?

http://files.coloribus.com/files/adsarchive/part_1341/13413205/file/dewars-whiskey-poker-quentin-tarantino-small-41348.jpg

I mean, they are practically forcing people to harm themselves, it's almost murder.

http://derekkinzel.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/The-Most-Interesting-Man-in-the-World1.jpg

We as a society must not stand those pro-weed monsters who corrupt our children and harm our nations' health by pushing their decadent lifestyle!

http://www.anorak.co.uk/wp-content/gallery/revolution-calendar/april.jpg

IS EVERYONE TAKING CRAZY PILLS?!?

It's the exact. Same. Thing.

Questions:

1. Have you ever drank alcohol?
2. Are you comfortable with permitting the legality of alcohol?

If the answers to both or either of these questions is "yes," and yet you still insist that smoking marijuana should be a criminal act, than you must be wearing hypocrisy blinders which in all likelihood were given to you courtesy of government propaganda.


Ha, it seems that one out of every two/three 'hoodies' I pass on the streets, morning or night, are smoking drugs. At least on the council estates. The stuff reeks. Imagine opening that up to every corner shop and Tesco, trust me, people will be drugging it up all over and then we'll have drug packets to go alongside the cans of Stella and packets of fags that we have now littering up the streets and parks. No thanks.


Oh come on, don't you know anything about teenagers? They will get high and drunk whether it's legal or not, because that's what they do. I can not see how making weed legal will increase the rate at which teenagers smoke it, many of them already smoke it every day as an expression of rebellion (and by the way, you've gotta admit rebellion is much more fun if it's illegal - the illegality of weed is bound to attract teens to it). I strongly suspect that teenagers wouldn't smoke any more or less if the law were changed, because they don't give a sh*t about the law anyway; but normal, work-a-day adults would have less of a deterrent to smoke might see a pack at the convenience store and they might give it a go, and it should be their damn choice whether they want to put a comparatively mild mind-altering substance into their own body. Honestly, Canadians and Brits are from the same species. Last month I smoked weed with a few of my old highschool teachers at a hockey fundraiser and no one cares, it doesn't have all of this stigma associated with it. Occasionally someone might get too high and behave like an irritating hysterical pre-teen girl, but again, it's just like drinking: their friends take care of them, or if they don't have any friends with them you aren't allowed to be drunk in public to the point where it causes a disturbance so people call them a cab, or if that doesn't work they try the cops.

Seriously, to Canadians (and especially we libertarian-like Albertans), the big deal that Brits and Americans are making over weed is unbelievably childish. Quick fix: act like grown ups and not nail-biting doomsday predictors, stop trying to boss everyone around based on a future which has already been proven a fallacy by countries like Canada and The Netherlands in which weed is already decriminalized and things are working just fine. Making decisions based on an imaginary dystopia is causeing a lot of harm: societies in which weed isn't fully legal get no money out of weed consumption (money which they could certainly use right now), it all goes to criminals; people who are caught holding a joint are sentenced to prison in some places, INSANE; quality isn't controlled, shady drug-dealers cut their weed with chemicals which lead to experiences like the one Shalot described above; disallowing domestic crops literally funds terrorism (look it up); police resources are spent chasing around hippies instead of actually doing good; tax dollars are poured into those ineffectual "don't do drugs" commercials, or in the case of America, the psychotically expensive War On Drugs. Seriously, how could the alternative be any worse, you might have to smell marijuana smoke once or twice more often/week as you're walking past someone's house?

[YesNo]

Maybe some is laced maybe some is old maybe it's a defect of the brain and maybe it is a little bit of all of it.

I don't use marijuana, although I have had a handful of experiences, none of which were positive, when I was an undergraduate. One of the advantages of legalizing it is to be able to certify its quality for public safety. There still would be the illegal stuff that might be laced, but hopefully what one would get wrapped in plastic with an FDA label on it would serve one's needs.

I can't believe that anyone would be so trusting as to take a hit from a joint that was passed around at a party, although I've done it myself. That's sort of like drinking out of someone's bar glass without knowing what was in the drink.

Anyway, I know there are people who get addicted to whatever, legal or illegal, and cause an immense amount of harm to those around them as a result. They probably would cause harm anyway even without the substance, but it can make the damage worse. I could list a couple of relatives in that situation, but we probably all have similar stories.

I don't think there is any positive connection between creativity and marijuana use. I'm more inclined to believe in an inverse correlation, however, but I don't have any statistics to back that up either.

[Darcy88]

It's the exact. Same. Thing.

Questions:

1. Have you ever drank alcohol?
2. Are you comfortable with permitting the legality of alcohol?



I think its even worse, even more hypocritical than that. It can easily be argued and likely even proven that alcohol is way, way, way more harmful and destructive than marijuana. I know of one person whose life was negatively affected by marijuana, but countless come to mind whose lives have been wrecked by alcohol. I think both should be legal. If they want to ban something they should ban the junk food that`s making us fat and sick and is going to bankrupt our medical system. The new omnibus crime bill will crack down on marijuana, its cultivation and possession, instituting minimum sentences. A big step backwards.

[JuniperWoolf]

I think its even worse, even more hypocritical than that. It can easily be argued and likely even proven that alcohol is way, way, way more harmful and destructive than marijuana. I know of one person whose life was negatively affected by marijuana, but countless come to mind whose lives have been wrecked by alcohol.

:yesnod: Thanks for saying that, I was going mention this but I thought it might send me on a seperate train of thought which would detract from my main point.


The new omnibus crime bill will crack down on marijuana, its cultivation and possession, instituting minimum sentences. A big step backwards.

They're doomed to fail, they always do. Did you take the DARE program? I lol'd. Our politicians are caving to pressure from the south, because if weed is openly accepted up here American citizens might start thinking "why not us?" It's such a pain in the ***, Canadians won't tolerate it.

[BookBeauty]

I think a wise solution is to legalize marijuana. Heck, all hard drugs that are causing a great deal of harm.

I've been told that in the Netherlands, where they have legalized questionable activities and the like, they have backed up this reasoning with the practical solution of having the government supervise, regulate, and have healthcare workers on hand to ensure the safety of these practices. For instance, making certain that prostitutes are in top bills of health, without any STDs, so that 'customers' are not harmed, and disease doesn't spread.

It can be argued by some that tax-payers should not be putting hard earned money into such institutions and filth.

However, it seems clear that it will continue.

Behind closed doors on the black market, which is considerably more dangerous, even in the case of marijuana, where drugs have a tendency to be mixed. Or out in the open where it can be monitored. If it is monitored, there is a higher chance of better hygiene and less casualties, and these people can be offered help, and can approach help without being overly scrutinized.

Regardless: I don't drink, or smoke. Anything.

[LitNetIsGreat]

Questions:

1. Have you ever drank alcohol?
2. Are you comfortable with permitting the legality of alcohol?

If the answers to both or either of these questions is "yes," and yet you still insist that smoking marijuana should be a criminal act, than you must be wearing hypocrisy blinders which in all likelihood were given to you courtesy of government propaganda.

There is no question of permitting the legality alcohol because alcohol is already legal. If something is legalised there is no going back. Opening the door to a whole host of other drugs is not something I think is a good idea.


Oh come on, don't you know anything about teenagers? They will get high and drunk whether it's legal or not, because that's what they do. I can not see how making weed legal will increase the rate at which teenagers smoke it, many of them already smoke it every day as an expression of rebellion (and by the way, you've gotta admit rebellion is much more fun if it's illegal - the illegality of weed is bound to attract teens to it).

Exactly, so your approach is to legalise cannabis so the teenage taboo can then move onto crack cocaine or something like that? If you open the door and embrace cannabis then you are opening the door to everything else which is dangerous. I’m telling you if you legalise the stuff in the UK, and make it readily available, there will be a massive boom in drug taking. Not something any politician is seriously going to back here.


I strongly suspect that teenagers wouldn't smoke any more or less if the law were changed, because they don't give a sh*t about the law anyway; but normal, work-a-day adults would have less of a deterrent to smoke might see a pack at the convenience store and they might give it a go, and it should be their damn choice whether they want to put a comparatively mild mind-altering substance into their own body.

You are kidding. If the stuff were legal and readily available (and therefore cheaper) there would be a massive increase in consumption. It would also encourage people who wouldn’t otherwise smoke to do so as you say, I can’t see this being a terribly good idea myself as the harmful anecdotes about the drug keep rolling in (see above) despite claims that it is as pure as milk. Again I’m not that bothered what people do and I wouldn’t go on a march against it, I just wouldn’t sign my name on a petition to legalise it either.


Seriously, to Canadians (and especially we libertarian-like Albertans), the big deal that Brits and Americans are making over weed is unbelievably childish. Quick fix: act like grown ups and not nail-biting doomsday predictors, stop trying to boss everyone around based on a future which has already been proven a fallacy by countries like Canada and The Netherlands in which weed is already decriminalized and things are working just fine. Making decisions based on an imaginary dystopia is causeing a lot of harm: societies in which weed isn't fully legal get no money out of weed consumption (money which they could certainly use right now), it all goes to criminals; people who are caught holding a joint are sentenced to prison in some places, INSANE; quality isn't controlled, shady drug-dealers cut their weed with chemicals which lead to experiences like the one Shalot described above; disallowing domestic crops literally funds terrorism (look it up); police resources are spent chasing around hippies instead of actually doing good; tax dollars are poured into those ineffectual "don't do drugs" commercials, or in the case of America, the psychotically expensive War On Drugs. Seriously, how could the alternative be any worse, you might have to smell marijuana smoke once or twice more often/week as you're walking past someone's house?

Yes I know and have said that some of those are fair arguments, but just the same I wouldn’t want to give the green light to further drug use; I just don’t think it is the right idea and I don’t think that as a government decision it would send out the right messages to the public. It's a dead argument anyway as it's not going to happen here for at least the next ten years or beyond any time in the future, in fact I'm pretty sure that canabis has moved up the drug rating here recently by the previous government, not down.

[JuniperWoolf]

There is no question of permitting the legality alcohol because alcohol is already legal. If something is legalised there is no going back. Opening the door to a whole host of other drugs is not something I think is a good idea.

It's not a "whole host," it's a comparatively mild plant which is less harmful than alcohol by far. Alcohol is not legal because "it's always been that way," it's legal because the consequences of making it illegal are stongly detrimental to society. Those same consequences are going on right now in terms of marijuana: gang activity, unjust prison sentences, ect. Also, it's legal because it should be. You should not be allowed to tell another fully grown adult not to put a mild brain-altering chemical into their system, citizens can not be treated like children or else they'll start to act like children (trust me, in Canada we have native reservations - BAD idea). This is especially if you're telling them not to smoke weed while at the same time sipping a glass of wine, that's not alright.


Exactly, so your approach is to legalise cannabis so the teenage taboo can then move onto crack cocaine or something like that? If you open the door and embrace cannabis then you are opening the door to everything else which is dangerous. I’m telling you if you legalise the stuff in the UK, and make it readily available, there will be a massive boom in drug taking. Not something any politician is seriously going to back here.

That argument falls flat immediately. Alcohol is legal in the UK, yet do teenagers turn up their nose at it for being "not bad*ss enough?" No, they drink their faces off. Teens drink and they smoke weed and cigarettes and sometimes they do non-addictive hallucinogens like mushrooms or salvia (which is fully legal in Canada) for a laugh so they can have a story to tell about "that b*tchin Canada day when I thought Jason was turning into a werewolf." That's what they do, that's the level they're at. Maybe when they get older, say mid-twenties, they'll take a little sample of the harder drugs and 99% of the time they'll come to learn through experience that hard drugs are to be done very sparingly if not at all because they are WAY different from weed and alcohol. Teenagers don't do meth, not because of the cops (who are quite impotent), but because of this:

http://investigation.discovery.com/resources/meth/before-after/images/f-4.jpg

All drugs are not equal. Weed is not meth, and kids are not stupid.

I'm sorry to pull this card on you, but if you have no experience with any of this, then really, you don't understand it. People who push or support anti-drug legislation are always people who have never so much as tried weed. Why? Because people who have tried it know what it's like, it makes you hungry, sleepy and paranoid (as long as you're not a schizophrenic, apparently). Nothing to rage about.


You are kidding. If the stuff were legal and readily available (and therefore cheaper) there would be a massive increase in consumption. It would also encourage people who wouldn’t otherwise smoke to do so as you say, I can’t see this being a terribly good idea myself as the harmful anecdotes about the drug keep rolling in (see above) despite claims that it is as pure as milk. Again I’m not that bothered what people do and I wouldn’t go on a march against it, I just wouldn’t sign my name on a petition to legalise it either.

Readily available to teenagers? No. Age restrictions, my friend, just like alcohol. And hey, if it's still has that "not allowed" status, kids will just like it more. Sneaking around to drink was one of the funnest parts of being a teenager. It would really be almost exactly the same as alcohol, which means it would be like things are now. In today's world, what happens when you bust someone underage with alcohol? You confiscate it, suspend them and call their parents. What happens when you bust someone underage with a joint? You confiscate it, suspend them and call their parents. Legalization would have very little effect the lives of teens.

Also, if it were legal there would be more open information about it. Right now, we're like Catholic school kids trying to muddle through the murky world of pre-marital sex on an abstenance-only education, where they teach "just don't have sex or you will get aids and die."

Public service commercials: "Oh, you want to know about the harmful effects of weed? It will kill your father and rape your mother!!! It will make you a psychopath! After you smoke weed, the next morning you will wake up in a pool of baby blood, or maybe you'll jump off a roof and you won't wake up at all! JUST DON'T DO IT!!!!!"

Then of course we have the people who KNOW they're being lied to but they don't know anything else besides. My friend Steve lost his mind once at a party on a pregnant woman for smoking a joint, to which the pregnant woman responded: "oh don't worry, weed is natural, it's good for baby. I smoked with all my kids, it just makes them more relaxed children."

Politicians lie to people to keep it illegal, but people know they're being lied to so they assume that the opposite is true. Don't you see how screwed up that is? If it were legal, there would be no reason to manipulate and lie, the honest bare facts could be known. People could arrive at their own informed decisions, which is how it should be.


It's a dead argument anyway as it's not going to happen here for at least the next ten years or beyond any time in the future, in fact I'm pretty sure that canabis has moved up the drug rating here recently by the previous government, not down.

I guess so, you guys have more important things to worry about over there. In my country at this time, marijuana/the rising number of head injuries in hockey/staying above the rest of the world's economic **** storm/dangerous winter storms and death, that's what's news.

[Emil Miller]

. Occasionally someone might get too high and behave like an irritating hysterical pre-teen girl,

:iagree:

[JuniperWoolf]

:iagree:

Not now, kitten.

[Emil Miller]

[QUOTE=JuniperWoolf;1112138]Not now, kitten.


:smilielol5:

[LitNetIsGreat]

Oh boy, I’m not going to hack my way through all of that rant but you’ll just have to trust me on this, opening the doors to drugs is not a good idea and it’s not going to happen any time soon anyway, thankfully. There’s no government conspiracy propaganda theory at play here either, that’s just paranoia, probably caused by smoking that stuff in the first place.

[Emil Miller]

There’s no government conspiracy propaganda theory at play here either, that’s just paranoia, probably caused by smoking that stuff in the first place.


:lol:

[JuniperWoolf]

:smilielol5:

*sigh* Oh Emil, you're just so witty and elucidated. <3


Oh boy, I’m not going to hack my way through all of that rant but you’ll just have to trust me on this, opening the doors to drugs is not a good idea and it’s not going to happen any time soon anyway, thankfully. There’s no government conspiracy propaganda theory at play here either, that’s just paranoia, probably caused by smoking that stuff in the first place.

Right, I guess Stlukes, Darcy, Alexander, Pip, Mutatis, smerdyakov, YesNo, and myself should just shut our childish little mouthes and listen to the infallible wisdom of our elders (aka. you, Loka and Emil) who won't even bother to read our posts.

Also, I have a 3.8GPA from one of Canada's leading universities so don't you start in on my brain! She's workin' just fine.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eu3_1N6t6vw&feature=related

Also, no one mentioned conspiracy, you're just being a jerk to kill my credibility (which is exactly what I knew would happen if I came out in favor of legalization and admited that I smoke on the weekends on a forum populated by conservative British men). I'm referencing real commercials that were played regularly on television. Hold on I'll look for some, they're funny.

...Actually, not one of my five work computers have sound. I'll look when I get home.

But just a sec:


and it’s not going to happen any time soon anyway, thankfully.

Iiiiiiits already happened in my country and The Netherlands. We're doing quite well (better than the UK in most respects) so maybe we know what we're about.

[smerdyakov]

Neely, You're beginning to sound like a retired copper who voted for Cameron and reads the Daily Mail everyday...are you? :D

[Emil Miller]

:iagree:

[QUOTE]Right, I guess Stlukes, Darcy, Alexander, Pip, Mutatis, smerdyakov, YesNo, and myself should just shut our childish little mouthes and listen to the infallible wisdom of our elders (aka. you, Loka and Emil).

It's always nice when the penny finally drops.

[Alexander III]

I'm starting to realize that some things such as relligion and politics and various other things are impossible to argue.

Some of you anti-weed guys just seem like religious fanatics, who ignore all evidence because it conflicts with their pre-concieved notions.

But I and Juniper and others probably sound like equal relligious fanatics on the other end.

Because sometimes reason and logical argument are usless, to win a debate you have to not make the other think as you do, but feel, it is the emotion which must be transfered.

I leave this conversation quietly, with a quote

"I would make any sacrifice but this; twenty times I can stake my life, even my honour, but my freedom I shall never sell. Why do I prize it so much? ... What am I aiming at? Nothing, absolutely nothing."

[JuniperWoolf]

It's always nice when the penny finally drops.

Stlukes should be simply flabbergasted to hear that, especially since I'm pretty sure he's older than you.

[Emil Miller]

Stlukes should be simply flabbergasted to hear that, especially since I'm pretty sure he's older than you.

I'm sure Stluke's will know who it was meant for.

[JuniperWoolf]

I'm sure Stluke's will know who it was meant for.

Oh no, I'm perfectly aware that your awkward aggression was directed at me (that does seem to be what gets you hard nowadays), I'm simply pointing out that your assertion of our point of view as the result of our being young (and therefor idiots, for you are to be held above all and worshiped as a god for your ability to not fall under a bus - even if you don't fully grasp how to operate the forum quote tags) falls flat once you realize that one of the pro-legalization posts on this thread was made by someone who is, in fact, older than you.

[LitNetIsGreat]

Right, I guess Stlukes, Darcy, Alexander, Pip, Mutatis, smerdyakov, YesNo, and myself should just shut our childish little mouthes and listen to the infallible wisdom of our elders (aka. you, Loka and Emil) who won't even bother to read our posts.

Also, no one mentioned conspiracy, you're just being a jerk to kill my credibility (which is exactly what I knew would happen if I came out in favor of legalization and admited that I smoke on the weekends on a forum populated by conservative British men). I'm referencing real commercials that were played regularly on television. Hold on I'll look for some, they're funny.

I have read all of your posts and have replied respectfully and without hysteria. I’ve said that there are a few arguable points on the legalise side in the whole tangle which I have conceded to, but overall, as I’ve said, the perceived positives of this are far outweighed by the negatives in my opinion, to my tastes. Also as far as I am aware, no politician in this country takes the argument seriously anyway. It probably wouldn’t be the end of the world if the vile stuff were made legal, but I wouldn’t like to see it happen either. Either way I’m not going to lose sleep over it. I also don't make preconceived judgements regarding those who do smoke it or do anything that doesn't have to do with me; the truth is I don't really care, it's not my business.


Iiiiiiits already happened in my country and The Netherlands. We're doing quite well (better than the UK in most respects) so maybe we know what we're about.

With respect, Canada and The Netherlands are not the UK and I know what would happen if they opened the doors here with it, as I have said twice at least.


Neely, You're beginning to sound like a retired copper who voted for Cameron and reads the Daily Mail everyday...are you?

Ha, ha, I have a picture of him by my bed.

No, neither, I’m not Conservative (I’m not any party really...I don't believe that the complexities of politics and life can conform to a neat left/right dichotomy) and I don’t think I’ve ever read the Daily Mail! The Guardian online is my choice of daily news (depression).

[JuniperWoolf]

Now that I'm home, here are some commercials:

Thaaat's (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jhjwUR2SeAE&feature=related) right, dog's talk to you when you're high.

Also (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0NZGPVBCrjY&feature=related), weed is the same thing as ecstacy! (which could kill you!)

If your children see you smoking weed, glowing lights (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpy4kzAkXNQ&feature=related) will grow on their body!

It's the same thing as putting leaches (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FqG18lTZapg&feature=related) in your mouth!

Bloody classic (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXDg-BhMrjU) American ad, seriously one of the funniest things I've ever seen. "When it's smoked, it produces more nightmares than opium!" My friend Rosie has this on dvd.

And this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9zkgWHnqJ1I&feature=related), well, that just makes people want to get high, and is probably the best thing I've ever seen (hahahaha, "and a sudden urge to wear sunglasses at night").

[JuniperWoolf]

Also as far as I am aware, no politician in this country takes the argument seriously anyway.

Wow, that is behind the times. In Canada, most of the parties are pro-legalization except for the conservatives (and those stupid on-the-fence liberals who are neither for nor against, they have NO balls) who are currently in office. They're the ones who released that commercial with the nine year olds smoking weed that pissed everyone off. Most of our commercials are nice, rational "don't smoke and drive" bits, like these:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uuc7sAcmzXY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k133BL5YOWY&feature=related


I also don't make preconceived judgements regarding those who do smoke it or do anything that doesn't have to do with me; the truth is I don't really care, it's not my business.

Okay, I'm sorry for getting defensive.


With respect, Canada and The Netherlands are not the UK and I know what would happen if they opened the doors here with it, as I have said twice at least.

Okay, but wouldn't that imply that people in the UK are inherently different than us?

[papayahed]

~

W a r n i n g

Please do not personalise your arguments.

Off-topic or inflammatory posts will be removed and/or thread without further reminder.

~

[LitNetIsGreat]

In Canada, most of the parties are pro-legalization except for the conservatives (and those stupid on-the-fence liberals, they have NO balls) who are currently in office, they're the ones who released that commercial with the nine year olds smoking weed. Before, we used to have nice, rational, helpful, "don't smoke and drive" commercials, like these:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uuc7sAcmzXY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k133B...eature=related

I'm pretty certain that it is not even an topic for discussion for all major parties here, I can't even remember the last time someone mentioned the legalise debate, it just doesn't seem to be an issue.

That's the first don't drink and smoke ad I've ever seen in my life, you just will not see one here, there has never been one as far as I am aware. The only drugs adverts I've seen here are for harder drugs and the Frank helpline like this one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LnA-xCz5U8

(Though I've actually never seen that one before.)


Okay, but wouldn't that imply that people in the UK are inherently different than us?

I don't think people are inherently many things, rather it's a matter of the culture. For example look at the way the French, Italian, Greek etc youth handle alcohol Vs the way UK youth does - the difference is massive, astronomical.

Here's just a typical programme on UK binge drinking as an example:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hw-dC4YITqU&feature=related

I have a work friend who is Greek and just cannot understand this "let's get hammered" attitude that is so much part of UK life, it is just so much different on the continent where alcohol is given more respect. So anyway, I know what would happen if they did legalise drugs here and I wouldn't like it, we've enough to contend with already.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Neely, how do you know pot belong legalized would be so detrimental to the UK.

I think it's just a matter of time before it's legalized in the states. A long matter if time, but I think it'll happen eventually. All public poles I've seen on the issue are for legalization, and the people who are for it just keeps growing.

For me, it comes down to this. When we're talking about pot, a drug scientifically shown to be no more dangerous than cigarettes or alcohol, I think people should be allowed to decide for themselves whether or not they want to use it. End of story.

[smerdyakov]

I think the above poster has got to the knub of it. It's about choice, pro or anti.
Ok, maybe some people binge smoke cannabis, teenagers for example and they might develop problems from it. But if the thing is regulated properly like the medicinal cannabis project in California right now (to all intents and purposes this is unreserved legalisation) I don't see a problem. And besides, all the tax money being repatriated back into the economy, isn't it better than criminals getting the money? Don't buy into the fear mongering that the world will go to hell in a hand basket if it is legalised. It won't. People will just have the choice to smoke if they want or not rather than being criminalised over it (remember 10 for 2 in the States - that guy got a bigger custodial sentence than a rapist would get - for two joints - 10 years, what an absolute insanity is that?).

And no, it won't be sold in Tesco... :D

[Darcy88]

I've met hardened criminals, one a likely murderer, who derive much of their income from marijuana. Anti-marijuana legislation is responsible for far more suffering than the drug itself. Those Mexican cartels deal not only with cocaine but with marijuana as well, and the rivers of blood they spill can in part be traced back to the laws prohibiting the free and legal cultivation and trade of a relatively harmless naturally occurring PLANT.

Oil companies annihilate the pristine natural beauty of entire regions, natural gas companies that frack pump toxic chemicals into the groundwater, tobacco companies profit from pushing a lethal poison, alcohol companies sell a substance linked to 75000 deaths each year in America alone, and the government throws people in prison for cultivating a plant that God himself sowed in the earth.

[BienvenuJDC]

I've met hardened criminals, one a likely murderer, who derive much of their income from marijuana. Anti-marijuana legislation is responsible for far more suffering than the drug itself. Those Mexican cartels deal not only with cocaine but with marijuana as well, and the rivers of blood they spill can in part be traced back to the laws prohibiting the free and legal cultivation and trade of a relatively harmless naturally occurring PLANT.

Oil companies annihilate the pristine natural beauty of entire regions, natural gas companies that frack pump toxic chemicals into the groundwater, tobacco companies profit from pushing a lethal poison, alcohol companies sell a substance linked to 75000 deaths each year in America alone, and the government throws people in prison for cultivating a plant that God himself sowed in the earth.

I didn't think that you believed in God.

[Darcy88]

I didn't think that you believed in God.

I don't know. You're right, I really don't. I try. Most often to no avail. Sometimes I manage to pretend, but that's not really belief. I meant its natural and if you believe in God you have to wonder why he'd spread the seed of this supposedly wicked herb. Its seeds are incredibly nutritious, full of healthy proteins and fatty acids, and you better believe our early ancestors ate the bud right off the stem.

[BienvenuJDC]

I don't know. You're right, I really don't. I try. Most often to no avail. Sometimes I manage to pretend, but that's not really belief. I meant its natural and if you believe in God you have to wonder why he'd spread the seed of this supposedly wicked herb. Its seeds are incredibly nutritious, full of healthy proteins and fatty acids, and you better believe our early ancestors ate the bud right off the stem.

I do believe that everything has its purpose. I also believe that it is our responsibility to use all things responsibly. You just have to be careful with using that argument consistently. Just as the old man in The Count of Monte Cristo philosophized that everything in moderation was profitable. I can't remember how exactly he said it though.

[Paulclem]

I think the above poster has got to the knub of it. It's about choice, pro or anti.
Ok, maybe some people binge smoke cannabis, teenagers for example and they might develop problems from it. But if the thing is regulated properly like the medicinal cannabis project in California right now (to all intents and purposes this is unreserved legalisation) I don't see a problem. And besides, all the tax money being repatriated back into the economy, isn't it better than criminals getting the money? Don't buy into the fear mongering that the world will go to hell in a hand basket if it is legalised. It won't. People will just have the choice to smoke if they want or not rather than being criminalised over it (remember 10 for 2 in the States - that guy got a bigger custodial sentence than a rapist would get - for two joints - 10 years, what an absolute insanity is that?).

And no, it won't be sold in Tesco... :D

There will definately be problems if cannabis is legalised. There is anecdotal and medical evidence that it causes the onset of serious mental illness that renders the person incapable of an unsupported life - as has been discussed. Having said that, this is happening anyway. The war on drugs cost us with no effect, and you're right; the illegality of the drug merely opens the markets to criminals, as prohibition did.

So how to proceed? Legalisation would put criminals out of business. Revenues could be taxed and put into support for those who be will and who are already adversely affected by the drug, and others. It might seem that this would be a rocky road to the decriminalisation of all drugs. It might, and that might be the better option for the same reasons.

I don't think you're going to end up with a society full of dope headed no hopers. There are those anyway. Most people try stuff, but then leave it. It might just be the better option of the two, but then society would have to become more responsible for those who do suffer from it.

I don't support drugs, nor do I want legalisation for my own use. It just seems that illegality leads to a market for criminals, whilst the rest of us pay for its effects. Anti drug publicity in the past has failed because it lied. More recent campaigns have been more honest. An honest description of why people take drugs - because it's fun - is a better approach than the demonisation. But then the opportunity presents itself to explain the real risks - paranoia, mental illness etc. I also think decriminalisation would remove the mystique around them - forbidden fruit and all that.

There are x factors though. New drugs are being developed all the time to circumvent the law. Legalisation might just open the door to a range of new drugs that could enhance whatever. Sport battles with this. Could it cause more problems than it solves?

[BookBeauty]

I direct all attention to my prior post. It kinda got swallowed up with the debate, I think.

[JuniperWoolf]

There will definately be problems if cannabis is legalised. There is anecdotal and medical evidence that it causes the onset of serious mental illness that renders the person incapable of an unsupported life - as has been discussed.

Careful, anecdotes aren't evidence. I have seen many impartial studies claiming that marijuana isn't as detrimental as the North American governments have been saying for the last century (there's a classic one done in the 40's which I could give a link to, after that there was really no doubt anymore - at least, no educated doubt), but I have yet to see an impartial report claiming that marijuana is even as harmful as alcohol or cigarettes.


I don't think you're going to end up with a society full of dope headed no hopers. There are those anyway. Most people try stuff, but then leave it. It might just be the better option of the two, but then society would have to become more responsible for those who do suffer from it.

I smoke pot, and not to brag like a tool but simply to prove a point, I have a 3.8GPA from the U of A, I donate 10% of my paycheques to charity and I've been co-running an animal rehabilitation center for six years. My dad smokes, and he's a politician and union leader plus a prison guard. My classics prof smokes weed, and he's... well... a professor (a classics professor, but still). Also, since my highschool graduation, I've come to learn that at least six of my teachers smoke weed. Alcohol drinkers and hard drug users are often supported by the state, but marijuana really isn't that debilitating (unless you're a schizophrenic, apparently).

[LitNetIsGreat]

I think the above poster has got to the knub of it. It's about choice, pro or anti.

But there's always a fine line between choice and government legislation. The same could be argued for seatbelts in cars, the use of crash helmets, smoking in public places and so on, it's a circular debate. It could be argued that giving people information and leaving them to decide is not always enough.


And no, it won't be sold in Tesco...

Why not if it's made legal?


...tobacco companies profit from pushing a lethal poison, alcohol companies sell a substance linked to 75000 deaths each year in America alone, and the government throws people in prison for cultivating a plant that God himself sowed in the earth.

Tobacco is a plant too and alcohol is as natural as they come so I don't see the argument there.

Those oil companies will be fined for polluting the environment. Sure, it will be a fraction of their profits and so they are probably better of polluting the environment and paying the fine, but that is the power of big corporations for you and is a different story.


Neely, how do you know pot belong legalized would be so detrimental to the UK.

Because there would be a massive boom in consumption of the vile stuff which is not something I would want to see. It would also give the green light to further drug use, with the same arguments of 'freedom of choice' then becoming applicable to other drugs like heroin and cocaine. People have a right of choice yes?

On a personal level though I just can't be doing with the stuff reeking the whole estate up and groups of people smoking it in public, at the bus stop in gangs around the shops etc - do I really want to see an increase in this? I would have to move to the middle of nowhere if it was foolishly pushed through government. That might sound dramatic or petty but I really can't stand it. What about my rights not to have to be subjected to the smell of it?

[JuniperWoolf]

But there's always a fine line between choice and government legislation. The same could be argued for seatbelts in cars, the use of crash helmets, smoking in public places and so on, it's a circular debate.

What's a "crash helmet?"


Why not if it's made legal?

I'm going to assume that a Tesco is like a grocery store. You can't buy alcohol at a grocery store in North America.


Tobacco is a plant too and alcohol is as natural as they come so I don't see the argument there.

Tobacco and alcohol are legal.


Those oil companies will be fined for polluting the environment. Sure, it will be a fraction of their profits and so they are probably better of polluting the environment and paying the fine, but that is the power of big corporations for you and is a different story.

It's nice to think that they will, isn't it? I live in Alberta. This is us:

http://zeglarskiesq.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/410px-athabasca_oil_sands_map1.png

They were fined one time in the last decade for getting oil on ducks.


On a personal level though I just can't be doing with the stuff reeking the whole estate up and groups of people smoking it in public, at the bus stop in gangs around the shops etc - do I really want to see an increase in this? I would have to move to the middle of nowhere if it was foolishly pushed through government. That might sound dramatic or petty but I really can't stand it. What about my rights not to have to be subjected to the smell of it?

Seems like a pretty selfish reason for supporting a legislation which causes extremely high levels of gang activity, supports terroism on an international scale and costs the state billions of dollars to maintain unjust prison sentences (thereby not only ruining lives, but also soaking up funding which could be used to support public services).

[LitNetIsGreat]

What's a "crash helmet?"

A motorcycle helmet, it's illegal to ride one without it. Is it not so in Canada?


I'm going to assume that a Tesco is like a grocery store. You can't buy alcohol at a grocery store in North America.

Yes it's a large supermarket. I'm surprised you can't buy alcohol at your version of the same, making two trips to get some wine or beer seems silly.


They were fined one time in the last decade for getting oil on ducks.

Ha, ha. Those oil spaces look massive.


Seems like a pretty selfish reason for supporting a legislation which causes extremely high levels of gang activity, supports terroism on an international scale and costs the state billions of dollars to maintain unjust prison sentences (thereby not only ruining lives, but also soaking up funding which could be used to support public services).

It seems to me that there is a lot of fuss over these drugs. It's not a selfish reason either in one respect because the way things stand I'm in the right, as cannabis smoking is illegal. There would be no gang activity and terrorism over this if people didn't smoke it, so I won't be held to ransom over it. It sounds like when a kid says if I can have this or that, I'll be good, the real world doesn't work like that, even if there are points for the legalisation of it.

The way it stands I'm happy because there is less of the stuff clogging up the streets and to give this drug the green light is to open up the floodgates to a whole host of other problems for sure.

[smerdyakov]

If you read my earlier posts, I stipulated that if it were to be legalised it could not go down the same road as alcohol. Serious regulation would be needed, and perhaps people could be assessed by their doctors as to their suitability for smoking it.

I think you are failing to see the bigger picture here from a utilitarian perspective. The greater good is achieved by legalising it: it greatly reduces crime and the adherent misery it brings to society, taxation money would be repatriated back into the country, people having a choice (the seat-belt analogy is a good one - and it was an information campaign with shocking advertisements that made people think to do it rather than the small mandatory fines - information campaigns in schools and TV on the dangers of binge smoking would have to happen). After all, people who work hard, pay taxes or are in training/education etc should not be deprived of the option of a recreational joint just because some people don't like the smell of it.
Anyway, teenagers could smoke it at home if it were legal without their parents flipping out because of the stigma it carries due to being illegal, and it could be done in a safe, controlled environment.

Weed doesn't make people aggressive like alcohol does, and it is not addictive like alcohol, and there is simply no argument for saying it's a gateway drug. Maybe people would drink less as well, which wouldn't be a bad thing.

[LitNetIsGreat]

If you read my earlier posts, I stipulated that if it were to be legalised it could not go down the same road as alcohol. Serious regulation would be needed, and perhaps people could be assessed by their doctors as to their suitability for smoking it.

Yes I've read your posts, I've read all the posts. I don't quite follow this point though, as it seems that most people are arguing for the drug as a recreational thing and not something to be used for medical purposes. Little Jonny wants to get high while listening to Korn is not going to pass the medical inspection. Also if it is so harmless why the need for such tight regulation? Either it is legal or it is not.


I think you are failing to see the bigger picture here from a utilitarian perspective. The greater good is achieved by legalising it: it greatly reduces crime and the adherent misery it brings to society, taxation money would be repatriated back into the country, people having a choice (the seat-belt analogy is a good one - and it was an information campaign with shocking advertisements that made people think to do it rather than the small mandatory fines - information campaigns in schools and TV on the dangers of binge smoking would have to happen). After all, people who work hard, pay taxes or are in training/education etc should not be deprived of the option of a recreational joint just because some people don't like the smell of it.
Anyway, teenagers could smoke it at home if it were legal without their parents flipping out because of the stigma it carries due to being illegal, and it could be done in a safe, controlled environment.

I can see the bigger picture and I can understand the point but my opinion remains the same.


Weed doesn't make people aggressive like alcohol does, and it is not addictive like alcohol, and there is simply no argument for saying it's a gateway drug. Maybe people would drink less as well, which wouldn't be a bad thing.

It absolutely does open the door for greater drug use. What sort of message does it send out to the population from a political perspective if a government official gives the green light on a drug? Also what of the rights of cocaine users? Of heroin junkies? Don't they have rights too? Individual choice has limits and implications that impact upon everybody in society.

[BookBeauty]

The bottom line is: People will continue to take drugs whether they're illegal or not.

It's far more dangerous for marijuana, and other drugs, to be taken on the black market.



If the government is selling the drugs rather than shady drug dealers on the streets, they will have to be clean and not mixed, as marijuana often is on the black market.

As I have said, at least with legalization, healthcare is more approachable and no hardcore drug addicts are going to jail if they want help for their addictions.

I think turning a blind eye to the problems that society has is not the solution. We have to admit we have a problem, and that the laws aren't making the crimes go away.

If legalization is not the solution, which, of course, I'm willing to admit if another viable solution is given, then something else must supplement the law.

In any case, I would trust the scientific method. Make a trial run, see if it's better than the way things are now. If it is, implement it temporarily, until a better solution is reached.

[Emil Miller]

It would seem that there's a certain lack consistency here.


Careful, anecdotes aren't evidence.


I smoke pot, and not to brag like a tool but simply to prove a point, I have a 3.8GPA from the U of A, I donate 10% of my paycheques to charity and I've been co-running an animal rehabilitation center for six years. My dad smokes, and he's a politician and union leader plus a prison guard. My classics prof smokes weed, and he's... well... a professor (a classics professor, but still). Also, since my highschool graduation, I've come to learn that at least six of my teachers smoke weed. Alcohol drinkers and hard drug users are often supported by the state, but marijuana really isn't that debilitating (unless you're a schizophrenic, apparently).

[stlukesguild]

I'm going to assume that a Tesco is like a grocery store. You can't buy alcohol at a grocery store in North America.

Since when? I buy the majority of my alcohol at Giant Eagle... the large local grocery store chain. I can get beer and wine (and a good selection of each) in the beverage sections of the store. If I'm up for the harder stuff, there is a state operated liquor store within the Giant Eagle where I can buy whiskey, rum, vodka, vermouth, bourbon, etc...

[Darcy88]

But there's always a fine line between choice and government legislation. The same could be argued for seatbelts in cars, the use of crash helmets, smoking in public places and so on, it's a circular debate. It could be argued that giving people information and leaving them to decide is not always enough.



Why not if it's made legal?


Tobacco is a plant too and alcohol is as natural as they come so I don't see the argument there.

Those oil companies will be fined for polluting the environment. Sure, it will be a fraction of their profits and so they are probably better of polluting the environment and paying the fine, but that is the power of big corporations for you and is a different story.



Because there would be a massive boom in consumption of the vile stuff which is not something I would want to see. It would also give the green light to further drug use, with the same arguments of 'freedom of choice' then becoming applicable to other drugs like heroin and cocaine. People have a right of choice yes?

On a personal level though I just can't be doing with the stuff reeking the whole estate up and groups of people smoking it in public, at the bus stop in gangs around the shops etc - do I really want to see an increase in this? I would have to move to the middle of nowhere if it was foolishly pushed through government. That might sound dramatic or petty but I really can't stand it. What about my rights not to have to be subjected to the smell of it?

This is full of straw men and misconceptions. You seem well-intentioned but your facts are just wrong. There's a big deal of difference between marijuana and harder drugs like cocaine and heroin. The latter two are highly addictive, marijuana is not. My co-worker who for 10 years smoked 5 joints a day just quit cold-turkey four months ago, hasn't touched the stuff since, with little to zero grief. I have a highly addictive personality but I've completely stopped marijuana use several times after long stretches of using it heavily, and quitting was a breeze.


Tobacco is a plant too and alcohol is as natural as they come so I don't see the argument there.

They add hundreds of carcinogenic chemicals to tobacco before its sold. Alcohol has to sit and ferment for weeks or months or longer. Marijuana you can pick right off the stem and enjoy. Its not a significant point, but its a point. I also can't see why you are not for the banning of alcohol and tobacco, two substances which wreak drastically more harm than cannabis.

Also, I think the myth of marijuana being a gateway drug has been debunked, but if it still has any credence its because the person who sells marijuana also often has access to other drugs. Anti-marijuana laws keep its sale criminal and underground.

And wanting it to remain illegal mostly because you can't stand the smell is not the best motivation, especially when people are dying from organized crime and others are languishing in prison cells as a direct result of anti-marijuana legislation.

[tonywalt]

As marijuana is so readily available in the Caribbean, there is very little argument on the topic but if I were to make arguments they would be:

1. Marijuana isn't more harmful than alcohol or tobacco if used in moderation.

2. Limiting the use of the drug intrudes on personal freedom.

3. There are medical benefits such as the those for cancer patients. Just explore youtube for much content on this area.

4. Street justice related to drug disputes would be reduced.

5. Police and court resources would be freed up for more serious crimes.

6. The government drug control agencies could regulate the quality and safety of marijuana.

7. Aside from recreational drug use, Cannabis has several industrial and commercial uses, as over 25,000 products can be made from the crop.

[YesNo]

What about my rights not to have to be subjected to the smell of it?
It would probably be restricted to areas where cigarette smoking is permitted which would thankfully exclude it from most public places where I live.

One group of people who study market conditions based on social mood believe that there is a correlation between government attitudes toward banning marijuana or legalizing it and what one can expect from the stock market. According to this speculation, if the government promotes banning marijuana it is a bullish sign for the market. If it considers legalizing it, it is a bearish sign. Of course, that speculation might be all a pipe dream of their own.

http://www.elliottwave.com/press_room/media/archives/2011/06/02/Just-Say-No-to-the-Drug-War.aspx

[Paulclem]

Careful, anecdotes aren't evidence.

I smoke pot, and not to brag like a tool but simply to prove a point, I have a 3.8GPA from the U of A, I donate 10% of my paycheques to charity and I've been co-running an animal rehabilitation center for six years. My dad smokes, and he's a politician and union leader plus a prison guard. My classics prof smokes weed, and he's... well... a professor (a classics professor, but still). Also, since my highschool graduation, I've come to learn that at least six of my teachers smoke weed. Alcohol drinkers and hard drug users are often supported by the state, but marijuana really isn't that debilitating (unless you're a schizophrenic, apparently).

The anecdotes are from healthcare professionals. As for educated doubt, there's also the matter of common experience. How many educated scientific studies have you noticed that confirm what you thought anyway? I've met a few people who were clearly affected advsersely by their use. It's a moot point.

As for your second paragraph, I wasn't clear. I meant the point to follow on from

It might seem that this would be a rocky road to the decriminalisation of all drugs. It might, and that might be the better option for the same reasons.


Dope clearly doesn't have the negative effects that heroin and crack use has, and I didn't intend it that way.

My point was that decriminalisation of dope may lead to deciminalisation of hard drugs too. It is from these that the worst effects are felt, but I was advocating legalisation as the better of the two options. If we do that, then society has to deal with the casualties better.

[Emil Miller]

It would probably be restricted to areas where cigarette smoking is permitted which would thankfully exclude it from most public places where I live.

One group of people who study market conditions based on social mood believe that there is a correlation between government attitudes toward banning marijuana or legalizing it and what one can expect from the stock market. According to this speculation, if the government promotes banning marijuana it is a bullish sign for the market. If it considers legalizing it, it is a bearish sign. Of course, that speculation might be all a pipe dream of their own.

http://www.elliottwave.com/press_room/media/archives/2011/06/02/Just-Say-No-to-the-Drug-War.aspx

Whilst being wholly in agreement with the antis on this subject, I don't think the chart shows a direct correlation between bull/bear markets and banning/legalising. Most of the bearish movements are, in any case, too small to be of great significance and those that aren't, are probably due to other factors.

[LitNetIsGreat]

This is full of straw men and misconceptions. You seem well-intentioned but your facts are just wrong. There's a big deal of difference between marijuana and harder drugs like cocaine and heroin. The latter two are highly addictive, marijuana is not.

You misunderstood my point. I’m not saying that the drugs are alike, I’m saying that if you legalise one you are setting a harmful precedent for the others to follow. At the very least you are sending a message out to the public that drugs are OK. No sane (or insane) politician in this country is going to do that any time soon.


And wanting it to remain illegal mostly because you can't stand the smell is not the best motivation, especially when people are dying from organized crime and others are languishing in prison cells as a direct result of anti-marijuana legislation.


Well it’s not like the British government is keeping the stuff illegal just because of me. I’m sure they have their own motivations as well. I’m sorry but if people don’t want to be sat in prison cells then don’t break the law, even if some of the sentences seem harsh. People who smoke marijuana are the ones feeding organised crime, come to think of it, not the ones who don’t. It’s a bit of a ransom argument as I said earlier.

[Darcy88]

You misunderstood my point. I’m not saying that the drugs are alike, I’m saying that if you legalise one you are setting a harmful precedent for the others to follow. At the very least you are sending a message out to the public that drugs are OK. No sane (or insane) politician in this country is going to do that any time soon.




Well it’s not like the British government is keeping the stuff illegal just because of me. I’m sure they have their own motivations as well. I’m sorry but if people don’t want to be sat in prison cells then don’t break the law, even if some of the sentences seem harsh. People who smoke marijuana are the ones feeding organised crime, come to think of it, not the ones who don’t. It’s a bit of a ransom argument as I said earlier.

You support the continued legal status of alcohol yet resist the legalization of marijuana. One estimate attributes 1 in 25 deaths worldwide to the consumption of alcohol. I've known at least half a dozen who have died as a result of liquor. Two thirds, maybe three-quarters of people around here smoke marijuana and I have yet to hear of a single related fatality. I've also been witness to countless acts of violence coming as a result of alcoholic inebriation, not a single one as a result of marijuana.

Be consistent and either support the criminalization of alcohol or the decriminalization of cannabis.

The standard by which something is legalized or not shouldn't be its status as a "drug" but rather its actual impact on the well-being of individuals and society. By that standard marijuana is less harmful than white sugar and should be legalized.

[Emil Miller]

You support the continued legal status of alcohol yet resist the legalization of marijuana. One estimate attributes 1 in 25 deaths worldwide to the consumption of alcohol. I've known at least half a dozen who have died as a result of liquor. Two thirds, maybe three-quarters of people around here smoke marijuana and I have yet to hear of a single related fatality. I've also been witness to countless acts of violence coming as a result of alcoholic inebriation, not a single one as a result of marijuana.

Be consistent and either support the criminalization of alcohol or the decriminalization of cannabis.

The standard by which something is legalized or not shouldn't be its status as a "drug" but rather its actual impact on the well-being of individuals and society. By that standard marijuana is less harmful than white sugar and should be legalized.

The estimation of deaths from alcohol should read 'excessive alcohol' and I would be prepared to lay money that virtually every single person who dies of heroin or other hard drug addiction started on the drug route by smoking some form of cannabis resin.
As Neely points out, if people didn't take it there wouldn't be a problem so the blame for it's consequences both social and criminal lies squarely with the users.

[Darcy88]

The estimation of deaths from alcohol should read 'excessive alcohol' and I would be prepared to lay money that virtually every single person who dies of heroin or other hard drug addiction started on the drug route by smoking some form of cannabis resin.
As Neely points out, if people didn't take it there wouldn't be a problem so the blame for it's consequences both social and criminal lies squarely with the users.

Excessive alcohol or not, its still alcohol. And no, the consequences of cannabis' criminality lie in the laws that make it criminal. Here you are defending alcohol, which causes an estimated 1 in 25 deaths worldwide, and condemning marijuana, a comparatively harmless substance. Your position has its footing in sand. As I said before, if marijuana is a gateway drug its mostly because it has been criminalized and left in the hands of dealers who push other drugs. It has been classed along with heroin and ecstasy and cocaine not because of any inherent commonality with them that alcohol does not too share. Alcohol and cannabis are both drugs. One is legal, the other is not, despite the latter being less harmful, and therein lies the only difference. Something wrong there.

[LitNetIsGreat]

You support the continued legal status of alcohol yet resist the legalization of marijuana. One estimate attributes 1 in 25 deaths worldwide to the consumption of alcohol. I've known at least half a dozen who have died as a result of liquor. Two thirds, maybe three-quarters of people around here smoke marijuana and I have yet to hear of a single related fatality. I've also been witness to countless acts of violence coming as a result of alcoholic inebriation, not a single one as a result of marijuana.

Be consistent and either support the criminalization of alcohol or the decriminalization of cannabis.

The standard by which something is legalized or not shouldn't be its status as a "drug" but rather its actual impact on the well-being of individuals and society. By that standard marijuana is less harmful than white sugar and should be legalized.

I am consistent because one is legal and the other isn't. As soon as something is legalised it becomes impossible criminalise. The bottom line is that no politician wants to be remembered for giving the green light to greater drug use.

[Darcy88]

If marijuana is to be kept illegal based on its harmfulness then alcohol should be prohibited as well. One can't have it both ways and avoid hypocrisy.

[Emil Miller]

If marijuana is to be kept illegal based on its harmfulness then alcohol should be prohibited as well. One can't have it both ways and avoid hypocrisy.

Well it would be impossible to criminalise something that has been around for thousands of years, despite the fact that in excess it is dangerous to health, but the British Medical Association repeatedly warns of the danger. On the other hand, Cannabis Resin has been a comparatively recent arrival in developed countries and as far as I know has remained illegal since its arrival in the UK.
The BMA also warns of it's uncontrolled use and has recently had this to say about it according to a national daily newspaper:

Doctors' leaders said they were "extremely concerned" that the imminent downgrading of cannabis would make the public believe it was a "safe" drug to use.
The substance is due to be reclassified from a class B to a class C drug on January 29, ranking it alongside bodybuilding steroids and some anti-depressants.
But the British Medical Association said it was worried how this move would affect potential drug-users who might be led to believe the drug was now safe to use.
Dr Peter Maguire, deputy chairman of the BMA's board of science, said they welcomed the Government's campaign to highlight the dangers of cannabis.
He said: "The public must be made aware of the harmful effects that we know result from smoking this drug.

[Darcy88]

Well it would be impossible to criminalise something that has been around for thousands of years, despite the fact that in excess it is dangerous to health, but the British Medical Association repeatedly warns of the danger. On the other hand, Cannabis Resin has been a comparatively recent arrival in developed countries and as far as I know has remained illegal since its arrival in the UK.


I suppose then that you support legalized prostitution.

[Emil Miller]

I suppose then that you support legalized prostitution.

I probably would actually, but we are not comparing like with like, because sexual desire is inherent and hardly to be compared with wanting to smoke cannabis.

[Paulclem]

I am consistent because one is legal and the other isn't. As soon as something is legalised it becomes impossible criminalise. The bottom line is that no politician wants to be remembered for giving the green light to greater drug use.

I think you're right Neely - no political party will legalise it because they don't have the right fibre. They'd rather polarise the issue along with the press and throw money at a problem that won't go away.

My main concern is the criminality it promotes. Users have been using whether legal or not. I can't see that changing. Legalisation might take away the forbidden fruit aspect of it and puncture the egoism of users.

Society is completely ambivalent about drugs anyway. They are illegal, and yet celebrities and rock stars flaunt its use. Ozzy Osbourne is feted because he didn't manage to kill himself with his excess. Yet some poor geezer with a disease is prohibited from legal use. Double standards? Certainly.

We know that cannabis isn't too much of a problem for most people, though I suspect that users are all too keen to say it's safe when there are people who have suffered from it, and to deny that it is a gateway drug when it does open those doors. It's the other hard drugs that cause the social problems. Yet by criminalising the whole lot, these people can be left on inadequate methodone programmes whilst their poor kids suffer.

Lets legalise the whole lot - take the trade away from criminals, and use the revenue to support those who may have made the wrong choices, but more especially inform kids better and try to give them the heads up about the real dangers of all the drugs - alcohol included.

It won't happen though.

[Delta40]

I think what you say is interesting Paulclem. What about people who develop an addiction to prescription drugs? These drugs are already legal.

[Emil Miller]

[QUOTE]Legalisation might take away the forbidden fruit aspect of it and puncture the egoism of users.

You have just highlighted the the nub of the problem.

[Paulclem]

I think what you say is interesting Paulclem. What about people who develop an addiction to prescription drugs? These drugs are already legal.

Some of it must be down to the doctors who prescribe them and acceptable practice. There are always people who can subvert the system though. Michael jackson did, and he would have legal or illegal no doubt. It's difficult as it's not about rationality.

[Darcy88]

Some of it must be down to the doctors who prescribe them and acceptable practice. There are always people who can subvert the system though. Michael jackson did, and he would have legal or illegal no doubt. It's difficult as it's not about rationality.

I've heard that the only proven therapeutic benefits to be had from the use of Cannabis are the alleviation of nausea and loss of appetite.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Because there would be a massive boom in consumption of the vile stuff which is not something I would want to see. It would also give the green light to further drug use, with the same arguments of 'freedom of choice' then becoming applicable to other drugs like heroin and cocaine. People have a right of choice yes?

No. I didn't say that. I said if alcohol and cigarettes are legal, so should pot, a drug scientifically chosen to be no worse than alcohol or cigarettes (something the non-supporters seem to make a point of not addressing). Heroine and cocaine are definitely shown to be worse for someone than those three drugs.

I'm just for consistency. Alcohol and cigarettes are legal, why not pot? I've seen no rational argument here again it being legalized (I may have missed something). Alcohol and tobacco have been a part of cultures for thousands of year while pot hasn't. So? What does that even matter?

Someone, I think a non-supporter, said that if it was legalized that use may go down because the forbiddenness of it is a drawing da ore for many people, especially the young. I agree . . . which is another reason it should ne legalized.

[Paulclem]

I've heard that the only proven therapeutic benefits to be had from the use of Cannabis are the alleviation of nausea and loss of appetite.

It's supposed to help alleviate the pain of...MS I think. There have been court cases where a chap with it wanted to be able to take it legally. There have been experiments since. I don't know lot about it though.

[Emil Miller]

It's supposed to help alleviate the pain of...MS I think. There have been court cases where a chap with it wanted to be able to take it legally. There have been experiments since. I don't know lot about it though.

The available evidence seems to point to alleviating certain medical conditions. But there is a wealth of difference in someone taking it for medical purposes and youthful vanity taking it because pop singers take it illegally.

[Darcy88]

But there is a wealth of difference in someone taking it for medical purposes and youthful vanity taking it because pop singers take it illegally.

Hahaha. What?

Do you drink Emil? Have you ever? Its the same thing. Or I guess some would have us obey the law even when that law is irrational and unjust.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

. But there is a wealth of difference in someone taking it for medical purposes and youthful vanity taking it because pop singers take it illegally.

I can almost see Emil sitting on his porch in a rocking chair, yelling at the neighbor kids because their ball rolled into his yard.

[JuniperWoolf]

It would seem that there's a certain lack consistency here.

I also offered to provide evidence. Want some?

It's safer:

http://hempnews.tv/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/comparingdangers1.png

People are rotting in jail for it:

http://norml.org/share/marijuana_arrests_chart468.gif



A motorcycle helmet, it's illegal to ride one without it. Is it not so in Canada?

I don't think so, sometimes people wear helmets and sometimes they don't. If it is a law, it's one of those ones that's impossible to enforce in Canada because we have too few people (which also means too few cops) over such a large area.


Ha, ha. Those oil spaces look massive.

They're hideous too:

http://daerangall.ca/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/tarsands3.jpg


Yes it's a large supermarket. I'm surprised you can't buy alcohol at your version of the same, making two trips to get some wine or beer seems silly.

It's annoying, usually there's a liquor store at least near the grocery store, but sometimes there isn't and you have to trek to the other side of town.


There would be no gang activity and terrorism over this if people didn't smoke it, so I won't be held to ransom over it.

That's just not reality. I'm pro-abortion for the exact same reason: if you make a law against it, people will do it anyway and they will f*ck it up and cause a lot of damage. If it isn't illegal, it's safer. Since it isn't illegal here, the police don't turn too heavy an eye on the growers so we buy from people we know (haha, one of the ladies who sells it in town owns a flower shop and grows weed in her greenhouses), however in other countries where it's far more strict people want to smoke anyway so they'll buy from shady freaks and that money will eventually find it's way to very dangerous people to fund horrible things. Saying "well they shouldn't do it anyway" is meaningless, that's a fantasy world.


Since when? I buy the majority of my alcohol at Giant Eagle... the large local grocery store chain. I can get beer and wine (and a good selection of each) in the beverage sections of the store. If I'm up for the harder stuff, there is a state operated liquor store within the Giant Eagle where I can buy whiskey, rum, vodka, vermouth, bourbon, etc...

Looks like Canada is getting gyped.


The anecdotes are from healthcare professionals. As for educated doubt, there's also the matter of common experience. How many educated scientific studies have you noticed that confirm what you thought anyway?

Lots. I'm at work right now, but I'll dig around tomorrow night when I'm at home.


Well it’s not like the British government is keeping the stuff illegal just because of me.

He's got a point, all of the anti-legalization people on this thread happen to be British. It's possible that Britain isn't there yet. Yaaay, cultural differences on litnet!


My main concern is the criminality it promotes. Users have been using whether legal or not. I can't see that changing. Legalisation might take away the forbidden fruit aspect of it and puncture the egoism of users.

I don't think so, it's not a "forbidden fruit" here, we smoke it because we like it. The stigma that seems to be attached to marijuana in the UK isn't the same as in Canada, neither are considered "drugs." People who drink at parties and smoke on weekends don't usually think to themselves "whelp, guess it's heroin next."


But there is a wealth of difference in someone taking it for medical purposes and youthful vanity taking it because pop singers take it illegally.

:smilielol5: Oh my god, I almost died. Those damn kids with their Cyndi Lauper! *shakes fist*

There are vast multitudes of older people who are pro-legalization, litnet simply has a high number of 18-25 posters. So far, we've got two older people and one younger person anti-legalization, and we've got two older and maybe five younger people who are pro-legislation. As I've said multiple times, the "young people are stupid!" argument does not hold a drop.

[Emil Miller]

Hahaha. What?

Do you drink Emil? Have you ever? Its the same thing. Or I guess some would have us obey the law even when that law is irrational and unjust.

In democratic countries, governments and their advisers decide what is going to be legal or illegal. Once a law has passed onto the statute, it remains until it is changed. If someone disagrees with it they are duty bound to obey it until it is repealed. It's the basis of western civilisation, without which, all our freedoms would be undermined.


As I've said multiple times, the "young people are stupid!" argument does not hold a drop.

Methinks the young lady doth protest too much. Nevertheless, young people, with notable exceptions, aren't stupid but they are impressionable and therein lies the cause of this particular problem.
As for those rotting in jail for it, the answer's clear: if you don't want to do the time, don't commit the crime.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Juniper, it's obviously not worth the time to make good arguments backed by facts, at least for Emil's sake, because he doesn't seem to want to acknowledge them.

[Alexander III]

Once a law has passed onto the statute, it remains until it is changed. If someone disagrees with it they are duty bound to obey it until it is repealed. It's the basis of western civilisation, without which, all our freedoms would be undermined.



Ok I knew I said adieu to this conversation but --- seriously emil?

Maybe that is why you critisize so much democracy, because you actualy don't get it?

For nations (the E.U and America) that relish and use the word Freedom so often, I am astounded by how suprisingly litttle our general populations know of what actual freedom is.

[JuniperWoolf]

Methinks the young lady doth protest too much.

Methinks Emil doth seek attention. I'm starting to seriously think that these poorly-constructed jibes from the sidelines are simply how you get your rocks off. Still, you're not very good at it, so there's no harm in it I suppose - although you do continuously detract from the topic of discussion.


For nations (the E.U and America) that relish and use the word Freedom so often, I am astounded by how suprisingly litttle our general populations know of what actual freedom is.

Yeah, I agree completely. I used to get into all sorts of debates about the definition of "freedom." I don't get why, it seems like a very straightforward concept to me.

[Emil Miller]

Ok I knew I said adieu to this conversation but --- seriously emil?

Maybe that is why you critisize so much democracy, because you actualy don't get it?

For nations (the E.U and America) that relish and use the word Freedom so often, I am astounded by how suprisingly litttle our general populations know of what actual freedom is.

My criticism isn't aimed at democracy but at 'liberal democracy' which leads to people breaking the laws drawn up by their elected representatives after due consultation with those who have the available information on the subject.

[My2cents]

The fact that it isn't illegal to possess and use pot in California so long as you have a doctor's authorization is a concession by the Federal Gov't that pot's Schedule 1 status, that pot is addictive and has no medicinal value, is somewhat dubious. I don't know how else you read that.

Which means, that the issue has to be economic and cultural. Science has little to do with it, IMO.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Ten pages before Emil had to throw that dirty word "liberal" in there. A new record?

[Emil Miller]

Ten pages before Emil had to throw that dirty word "liberal" in there. A new record?

Unfortunately there are those who don't know the difference between liberty and license.

[Alexander III]

My criticism isn't aimed at democracy but at 'liberal democracy' which leads to people breaking the laws drawn up by their elected representatives after due consultation with those who have the available information on the subject.

So were we born a hundred years ago, you would be the man sending me a white feather in the mail, because I refused to die for king and country?

[Darcy88]

In democratic countries, governments and their advisers decide what is going to be legal or illegal. Once a law has passed onto the statute, it remains until it is changed. If someone disagrees with it they are duty bound to obey it until it is repealed. It's the basis of western civilisation, without which, all our freedoms would be undermined.


No, that line of reasoning does not hold, for then you'd be required to obey any law, no matter how unjust, and we know that governments pass unjust laws all the time. A man is entitled to act in accordance with his conscience, nothing else. If obeying an unjust law makes no impact on one's life, then sure, go ahead and submit. But people really enjoy marijuana, its a prominent part of my nation's culture, and as Juniper illustrated with that graph - the drug is as harmless as caffeine 99 percent of the time.

[Darcy88]

Since it isn't illegal here, the police don't turn too heavy an eye on the growers so we buy from people we know (haha, one of the ladies who sells it in town owns a flower shop and grows weed in her greenhouses)

Damn. Here they be having helicopters flying all around. They check the hydro-meter. If you get caught with a significant amount you go to jail.

Wikipedia says that its cultivation is currently illegal in Canada and it says the overall legal status of marijuana is in dispute.

[smerdyakov]

I think the neo-cons have beat a hasty retreat :D Now pass that over here....

[tonywalt]

Damn, you pro-marijuana people sure are robust and forceful in argument, rather than lethargic. Damn, "Reefer Madness" was wrong!

[Paulclem]

I don't think so, it's not a "forbidden fruit" here, we smoke it because we like it. The stigma that seems to be attached to marijuana in the UK isn't the same as in Canada, neither are considered "drugs." People who drink at parties and smoke on weekends don't usually think to themselves "whelp, guess it's heroin next."
:

I think the attitudes to Cannabis are probably the same here as Canada. Smokers in the past - when I was out and about-had much the same attitude, and use is more widespread now.

What I meant by forbidden fruit is the initial attraction - but not just cannabis, but harder drugs too. I'm thinking of younger people than you - kids - later teens, who are perhaps more impetuous/ less informed.

People who drink at parties and smoke on weekends don't usually think to themselves "whelp, guess it's heroin next."

The fact is that drug use opens circles of people to each other. My experience is that once you start, you naturally come into contact with people who smoke and can offer you other stuff. There's nothing mysterious about it, and it doesn't remove choice, but it is there and it is an influence.

Where advertising in the past has gone wrong is again to demonise users/ drug use. When you meet ordinary people who are fine, and who have experience of these things, it can have a powerful effect in contrast to the expectations engendered by popuar perceptions. I met nice, interesting people. With little experience, it is very easy to equate "nice" and "interesting" with right.

When I look back, I see these egotistical people revelling in their "experience" and doling out cod advice and spouting product descriptions as well as any car salesman, when in actual fact they knew little. There was also an odd transitoryness to those relationships, which now makes me question the nature of the friendships that arose out of them. One of the reasons I'd suport legalisation is to get rid of these self appointed experts, who actually have no interest in the well being of the people they deal with. (I'm not talking about friendships that have arisen in the usual way, but these drug circle friendships).

[Darcy88]

My criticism isn't aimed at democracy but at 'liberal democracy' which leads to people breaking the laws drawn up by their elected representatives after due consultation with those who have the available information on the subject.

Laws are influenced by lobbyists and very often drafted by those lobbyists. Your description comes across as incredibly naive.

[LitNetIsGreat]

As I thought cannabis has recently moved up a category in fear that the government were sending out the wrong message regarding this smelly drug.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7845023.stm

On 29th January 2004, cannabis had been reclassified from a Class B to a Class C drug in the UK, but as of Jan 26th 2009, it was reclassified it back to Class B.

NOW: CLASS B CANNABIS
Illegal.
If you are under 18, you will be arrested and given a formal warning.
Up to 5 years in jail for possession
Up to 14 years in jail for supplying or dealing

Before: CLASS C CANNABIS
It's still illegal
If you are under 18, you will be arrested and given a formal warning
Up to 2 years in jail for possession
Up to 14 years in jail for supplying or dealing



I'm just for consistency. Alcohol and cigarettes are legal, why not pot? I've seen no rational argument here again it being legalized (I may have missed something). Alcohol and tobacco have been a part of cultures for thousands of year while pot hasn't. So? What does that even matter?

It matters simply because alcohol and tobacco have legal status and cannabis doesn’t. It is quite possible, even likely, that that tobacco would not be legal given what we know about it now. This just highlights the dangers of legalisation. For once the door is open that’s that.


I also offered to provide evidence. Want some?

It's safer:...

It ultimately doesn’t matter, if it is safer, it is still a drug and no sensible person/government minister is going to open it up and encourage people to smoke it, no matter how safe people claim it is.

If the government here have reclassified the drug in order to send out a more powerful message, which in my opinion is the right decision, then why on earth are they likely to legalise it completely, for what sort of line does that take on other drugs too?

Besides there are plenty of contrasting reports on cannabis. Here's a segment from the BBC Health page:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/health/emotional_health/addictions/cannabis.shtml


Risks of cannabis

There's increasing evidence that cannabis use is linked to a number of health risks. It damages the ability to concentrate, decreases motivation and more than occasional use in teenagers can affect psychological development. Users can become anxious, suspicious and even paranoid. Heavy use increases the risk of serious psychiatric illness.

Users of skunk, a stronger and increasingly more available form of cannabis, are seven times more likely to develop a psychotic illness, such as schizophrenia, than people not using cannabis or using the more traditional forms. Cannabis also interferes with coordination, causing problems with balance, walking and driving.

There are other side effects of the drug, but they vary considerably and are less predictable, partly because cannabis has more than 400 active ingredients. They may include effects on the heart, such as increased heart rate and blood pressure, and damage to fertility. People who smoke cannabis are also exposed to the toxic chemicals in tobacco smoke.

People may become dependent on cannabis and find it difficult to stop using it, experiencing unpleasant withdrawal symptoms if they do stop such as cravings, agitation, mood changes, sleep problems, appetite disturbance and other symptoms.

Not something the health secretary is going to push forward.


I think the neo-cons have beat a hasty retreat Now pass that over here....

:lol: Neo-con, if you would believe it I do work sometimes too, I can't just sit around all day like you potheads smoking dope and surfing litnet!

[Emil Miller]

No, that line of reasoning does not hold, for then you'd be required to obey any law, no matter how unjust, and we know that governments pass unjust laws all the time. A man is entitled to act in accordance with his conscience, nothing else. If obeying an unjust law makes no impact on one's life, then sure, go ahead and submit. But people really enjoy marijuana, its a prominent part of my nation's culture, and as Juniper illustrated with that graph - the drug is as harmless as caffeine 99 percent of the time.

Which governments are you referring to? Here in the UK, laws have to receive a majority vote in parliament before they can be enacted so there is nothing unjust about it. While some teenagers of various ages may take cannabis, it is not a major part of the UK's culture and I don't see the medical advisers to the government recommending something that will merely exacerbate a problem with smoking that they have successfully been campaigning against for decades.


Laws are influenced by lobbyists and very often drafted by those lobbyists. Your description comes across as incredibly naive.

No, laws are drafted by the government's lawyers regardless of lobbyists. The situation might be different in other countries but not here.
If you are interested, you might do well to read my book, it will tell you a good deal about the way politics and the law operated in the UK up until the last Labour government that made certain structural changes to the legal system.

[JuniperWoolf]

Damn. Here they be having helicopters flying all around. They check the hydro-meter. If you get caught with a significant amount you go to jail.

I've read about how they've been quite humourless on the BC coast (even though it grows wild in many places). Apparently, most of the Canadian weed in the United States was traced back to BC. Political pressure, blah blah blah.


Wikipedia says that its cultivation is currently illegal in Canada and it says the overall legal status of marijuana is in dispute.

It's been f'ing "in dispute" for like, ten years now. People don't even know what's legal and what isn't, and the legality of certain actions vary from province to province. What a clown show.


It ultimately doesn’t matter, if it is safer, it is still a drug and no sensible person/government minister is going to open it up and encourage people to smoke it, no matter how safe people claim it is.

No one said anything about "encouraging" people to do anything (except for when you said that the gov't should "encourage" people not to smoke, which is comparable). You never answered my question, by the way - do you drink?


No, laws are drafted by the government's lawyers regardless of lobbyists. The situation might be different in other countries but not here.

Haha, suuuuure... Britain: home of the world's only honorable politicians.

[LitNetIsGreat]

No one said anything about "encouraging" people to do anything. You never answered my question, by the way - do you drink?

Well what do you think legalising something is going to do, of course it is going to encourage drug use, especially if Tesco's get hold of it?

I thought that was a rhetorical question, of course I drink, what do you think I do in all of those pubs I'm always posting pictures of?

Also see the Belgian Beer thread - art in a glass. (All legal)

[JuniperWoolf]

Well what do you think legalising something is going to do, of course it is going to encourage drug use, especially if Tesco's get hold of it?


That's not "encouraging" use, that's simply commerce. Do they "encourage" you to buy string cheese? I bet you could pick up a can at Tesco. It's your choice whether to buy it or not (as it should be).


I thought that was a rhetorical question, of course I drink, what do you think I do in all of those pubs I'm always posting pictures of?

Buy why? Isn't it "damaging to your health?" Doesn't drinking cause problems for society? What value is there in it? (besides that wishy-washy "one glass of red wine a day" argument)

Basically, why should you be allowed to indulge YOUR drug of choice, but if I indulge mine, I could get sent to prison for fourteen years? Where's the justice in that?

Marijuana is just better, no hangovers, no vomiting, no violence, no headaches, no loss of inhibition (aka. slutty drunk people), no passing out, you can't OD and the addiction factor is practically nil. There's absolutely no sane reason why a person should be sent to prison for over a decate for having a joint on them. If you can't see that, then I simply don't understand your point of view. What you seem to be saying is "it's smelly." So... okay then. You're pushing for social stagnation and promoting a nanny state, which doesn't bother me as much because you're not in my country, but I still don't get it.

Also, it sounds like you're trying to make it seem like this is all some fringe idea. According to an impartial poll (http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/31964/canadian_majority_would_legalize_marijuana/), the majority of Canadian adults believe that marijuana should be officially legal. We do live in a democratic country, and government efforts to influence the views of the general public on this issue have failed miserably, so I think the law will change (as laws often do - I can't believe I have to say that, but apparently I do). Americans smoke a lot of marijuana too, and they're very liberal in terms of the stuff (even though they could go to prison for it, for some profoundly stupid reason). I'd say they're not far behind us.

[Alexander III]

Well what do you think legalising something is going to do, of course it is going to encourage drug use, especially if Tesco's get hold of it?

I thought that was a rhetorical question, of course I drink, what do you think I do in all of those pubs I'm always posting pictures of?

Also see the Belgian Beer thread - art in a glass. (All legal)

Do you seriously believe that the law always equalls justice ?

Anyway, if I posted pictures of me smoking weed in a caffe in amsterdma, would you view it more or less like you posting pictures of you with a beer in a pub, or would you view the former as ilicit behavior and the latter as normal behavior?

[Alexander III]

Am I the only one who in this thread has suddenly realized just how the majority of Italian and German people went along with what their goverments did in the late 30's

[BienvenuJDC]

Am I the only one who in this thread has suddenly realized just how the majority of Italian and German people went along with what their goverments did in the late 30's

No you are not, but that is a far cry from making a drug illegal. There are some good arguments on both sides, but that statement is far from a good argument. I'd leave that one out of this.

[JuniperWoolf]

Am I the only one who in this thread has suddenly realized just how the majority of Italian and German people went along with what their goverments did in the late 30's

Haha, that thought nagged at my brain part way down the last page, but Bien's right in that it is somewhat hyperbolic.

[WyattGwyon]

I have a cousin, a great childhood playmate of mine, who now resides permanently in a psychiatric institution. She suffers from severe paranoid schizophrenia, and is a danger to herself and those around her.

As has been pointed out, there is an element of genetic predisposition to it - and it is certainly true to say that mental illness is rather prevalent in that half of my family, and her mother is a confirmed sociopath. But it is also true that she never exibited any mental problems until she went to university, and it is there that she began to heavily abuse marijuana.

Lokasenna,
I would be surprised if someone else hasn't mentioned this (I am not going to read hundreds of posts on this issue but was struck by your comments), but have you considered that the late teens and early twenties is a common age for the onset of schizophrenic symptoms with or without drug use? Given the family history, is there some special reason you believe there is a causal connection between the onset of the disease and the marijuana use? Couldn't this just be a fortuitous correlation?

[Emil Miller]

Haha, suuuuure... Britain: home of the world's only honorable politicians.

You seem unable to understand a simple statement of fact. I'll repeat it:
Laws are drafted by the government's lawyers.

I did not say that there aren't lobbyists in the UK but they do not draft laws.
In any case, if their influence was that strong, the tobacco companies would be queuing up to promote legalisation of cannabis for the reasons that Neely has rightly stated.

[LitNetIsGreat]

That's not "encouraging" use, that's simply commerce. Do they "encourage" you to buy string cheese? I bet you could pick up a can at Tesco. It's your choice whether to buy it or not (as it should be).
If the government gave the green light on cannabis and made it available for general use in the UK tomorrow, then yes there would be a massive boom in consumption of the stuff. This irresponsible act would be akin to encouraging drug use, absolutely.


Buy why? Isn't it "damaging to your health?" Doesn't drinking cause problems for society? What value is there in it? (besides that wishy-washy "one glass of red wine a day" argument)

Yes drinking and smoking (I don’t smoke) causes massive problems for society which is why I don’t think it is a good idea to introduce a third in cannabis, which may also lead onto harder drugs too.


Basically, why should you be allowed to indulge YOUR drug of choice, but if I indulge mine, I could get sent to prison for fourteen years? Where's the justice in that?

It’s hard luck ultimately. It is because alcohol and tobacco (especially alcohol as the vast majority of people in the UK drink) are so imbedded in the culture here and cannabis isn’t.


Marijuana is just better, no hangovers, no vomiting, no violence, no headaches, no loss of inhibition (aka. slutty drunk people), no passing out, you can't OD and the addiction factor is practically nil. There's absolutely no sane reason why a person should be sent to prison for over a decate for having a joint on them. If you can't see that, then I simply don't understand your point of view. What you seem to be saying is "it's smelly." So... okay then. You're pushing for social stagnation and promoting a nanny state, which doesn't bother me as much because you're not in my country, but I still don't get it.

I’m not pushing for anything I’m merely going about my business. Though if I were an angst teen at the moment I would be pushing for far more important things, like university fees, education cuts, healthcare reforms, youth unemployment, state pension age, etc, etc, though there would be little point anyway, ultimately.


Also, it sounds like you're trying to make it seem like this is all some fringe idea. According to an impartial poll, the majority of Canadian adults believe that marijuana should be officially legal. We do live in a democratic country, and government efforts to influence the views of the general public on this issue have failed miserably, so I think the law will change (as laws often do - I can't believe I have to say that, but apparently I do). Americans smoke a lot of marijuana too, and they're very liberal in terms of the stuff (even though they could go to prison for it, for some profoundly stupid reason). I'd say they're not far behind us.

As far as I’m aware in the UK it might as well be a fringe idea. This might be because I’m ‘out of the loop’ with the whole debate, because I don’t have much interest in it, or it could genuinely be because it is a fringe argument here. I know that the current position is ‘no way’ though, so that suits me fine.


Do you seriously believe that the law always equalls justice?

In most cases yes, in this case yes.


Anyway, if I posted pictures of me smoking weed in a caffe in amsterdma, would you view it more or less like you posting pictures of you with a beer in a pub, or would you view the former as ilicit behavior and the latter as normal behavior?

I don’t know, strange question, but I wouldn’t think like that. I would see if you looked like I imagined and be interested in the background view of Amsterdam, that's all probably.

[WyattGwyon]

I have seached and not found a thread on legal Marijuana.

What is everyone's view on the use of it if it were legal in the Area where you resided. Is it something that improves your ability to write, relax, relieve stress?

Would it be incorporated in your weekly or even daily(say the evening) routine?


I will respond to the original intent of your post. I have found occasional marijuana use to be helpful in the composition of music. This is probably not due to the enhancement of creative faculties or to any specific effect of the drug itself, but merely to the change in perspective it affords. You see, sometimes, after hearing the same themes and ideas over and over again it becomes impossible to hear them objectively or to adopt a purely aesthetic stance toward them—that is, to hear them afresh as a listener might rather than as a craftsman. I have found that being able to step out of the latter role and to hear my work from the outside, as it were, opens up my thought processes. After a few tokes it sometimes happens that a passage that has stumped me all week, one for which I can't conceive a satisfying continuation, suddenly completes itself in my imagination as if it is playing itself. When this happens the drug also seems to help in focusing rapt concentration on the problem of capturing what I have heard.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Wow, are the Nons really resorting to the "gateway drug" argument? Smells of desperation.

[Lokasenna]

Lokasenna,
I would be surprised if someone else hasn't mentioned this (I am not going to read hundreds of posts on this issue but was struck by your comments), but have you considered that the late teens and early twenties is a common age for the onset of schizophrenic symptoms with or without drug use? Given the family history, is there some special reason you believe there is a causal connection between the onset of the disease and the marijuana use? Couldn't this just be a fortuitous correlation?

Normally I bow out of threads when the banter starts getting rather personal, but I'll duck back in for this.

We cannot discount the possibility that my cousin's debilitation is entirely genetic, though according to her doctors and carers this is unlikely. In all probablity, her heavy marijuana use served to grossly exacerbate the underlying psychological problems - the timing matches perfectly (though I'll concede it is possible, though not probable, that it could be coincidenc) and my cousin's illness is amongst the worst in our family. Though we cannot know for 100% certain (as the pro-cannabis lobby so often points out) that drugs are to blame, I cannot help feeling that the circumstantial evidence is weighty.

[Darcy88]

In most cases yes, in this case yes.


I don't understand. You admit that marijuana being illegal and alcohol being legal is just bad luck for the stoners, but then you say that the illegality of marijuana is just? How is it just? From what I can gather your position is a pragmatic one. You think marijuana being legal would be bad for society. I hope you are not arguing that it would be worse than alcohol, because that would be absurd. Maybe its practical, but its certainly, definitely, 100 percent no-doubt-about-it not just.

[Darcy88]

You seem unable to understand a simple statement of fact. I'll repeat it:
Laws are drafted by the government's lawyers.

I did not say that there aren't lobbyists in the UK but they do not draft laws.
In any case, if their influence was that strong, the tobacco companies would be queuing up to promote legalisation of cannabis for the reasons that Neely has rightly stated.

Again, this is naive. In America lobbyists openly draft legislation. In Great Britain they influence legislation. A legislator has two primary concerns. One is to placate the voters and facilitate re-election. The other is to satisfy the interests of the corporations or perhaps to a lesser degree the unions who helped finance their election. The second of these two concerns has little to do with justice or democracy.

Anyway. This is kind of off topic I suppose.

[Emil Miller]

Again, this is naive. In America lobbyists openly draft legislation. In Great Britain they influence legislation. A legislator has two primary concerns. One is to placate the voters and facilitate re-election. The other is to satisfy the interests of the corporations or perhaps to a lesser degree the unions who helped finance their election. The second of these two concerns has little to do with justice or democracy.

Anyway. This is kind of off topic I suppose.

Yes I agree that in the USA lobbyists do sometimes draft legislation. A case in point being Henry Paulson who as a former chief executive of Goldman Sachs became Secretary of State to the US treasury and was openly instrumental in drafting legislation favouring that organisation; not to mention Dick Cheney and Halliburton. However, compare that to the recent scandal in the UK whereby the Secretary of State for Defence, Liam Fox, was forced to resign over his links to a lobbyist for defence contracts. Lobbying in the UK is subject to the eagle eye of the press and it's not so easy to achieve its objectives.

[Darcy88]

Yes I agree that in the USA lobbyists do sometimes draft legislation. A case in point being Henry Paulson who as a former chief executive of Goldman Sachs became Secretary of State to the US treasury and was openly instrumental in drafting legislation favouring that organisation; not to mention Dick Cheney and Halliburton. However, compare that to the recent scandal in the UK whereby the Secretary of State for Defence, Liam Fox, was forced to resign over his links to a lobbyist for defence contracts. Lobbying in the UK is subject to the eagle eye of the press and it's not so easy to achieve its objectives.

In America lobbyists in the direct employ of corporations draft legislation. I don't know much about Great Britain, but from what I've heard its not as immaculate as you make it out to be.

[Darcy88]

Also, people are saying that marijuana should be illegal for the same reasons that alcohol should be illegal. The reasons for outlawing the latter are even more persuasive. Arguing that alcohol should be allowed because its been legal forever is like saying we should continue a wrong because we've been wrong for so long. The logic is unsound.

[PMLondonderry]

The social aspect of marijuana smoking has completely skewed my views on this. I associate marijuana with laziness, dirtiness, and people who want to stop me on the street and bother me with religious and philosophical conversations that don't make a lick of sense. I know this is unfair and entirely untrue, but those are the people that come into my head when I think of marijuana. I also think it smells absolutely horrid.

Doesn't matter what I think of it in the end because I don't smoke it and I never have. I guess it's not something I care about because it doesn't apply to me in the least. My world wouldn't change with or without marijuana.

I will say, however, that I believe alcohol to be far more dangerous than marijuana and, if marijuana is illegal, alcohol should be as well. Alcohol has directly affected me and my family's well being (many of my family members have been in car accidents because of drunk drivers and I was physically assaulted by a drunk person) so I DO have many thoughts on alcohol. Marijuana doesn't bother me as much as alcohol does.

[Emil Miller]

Also, people are saying that marijuana should be illegal for the same reasons that alcohol should be illegal. The reasons for outlawing the latter are even more persuasive. Arguing that alcohol should be allowed because its been legal forever is like saying we should continue a wrong because we've been wrong for so long. The logic is unsound.

If the British Medical Association had its way, it would certainly like to ban alcohol for the reasons that have been stated, just as it would like to ban cigarettes, but they know from the experience of the USA between 1919 and 1933 that it would be impossible, so they continue to warn people of the harmful effects of smoking and drinking. They also advise the government that cannabis is harmful and should not be legalised. So the bottom line is that, regardless of some people wanting to use it anyway, it remains an illegal substance and that's the current position which may change in due course but at this point in time it would seem unlikely.

[YesNo]

The social aspect of marijuana smoking has completely skewed my views on this. I associate marijuana with laziness, dirtiness, and people who want to stop me on the street and bother me with religious and philosophical conversations that don't make a lick of sense. I know this is unfair and entirely untrue, but those are the people that come into my head when I think of marijuana. I also think it smells absolutely horrid.

The part about the conversations is what makes me question whether there is any positive correlation between smoking marijuana and creativity. Listening to someone who has had a bit too much alcohol isn't any better.

That's as good a reason as any not to go down the rabbit hole.

[tonywalt]

The social aspect of marijuana smoking has completely skewed my views on this. I associate marijuana with laziness, dirtiness, and people who want to stop me on the street and bother me with religious and philosophical conversations that don't make a lick of sense. I know this is unfair and entirely untrue, but those are the people that come into my head when I think of marijuana. I also think it smells absolutely horrid.

Doesn't matter what I think of it in the end because I don't smoke it and I never have. I guess it's not something I care about because it doesn't apply to me in the least. My world wouldn't change with or without marijuana.

I will say, however, that I believe alcohol to be far more dangerous than marijuana and, if marijuana is illegal, alcohol should be as well. Alcohol has directly affected me and my family's well being (many of my family members have been in car accidents because of drunk drivers and I was physically assaulted by a drunk person) so I DO have many thoughts on alcohol. Marijuana doesn't bother me as much as alcohol does.

They were well dressed in "Reefer Madness". I have to admit I do not identify marijuana with dirtiness or religious pamphlets (maybe the 1960's). It sounds like 1950's social convention. And do not get me wrong, I like many traditional values, but to view marijuana as something for stinky longhaired hippies is from another time and place.

[JuniperWoolf]

I’m not pushing for anything I’m merely going about my business.

Nnnnnooooo, you're debating on an online forum in favour of the continuation of a zero-tolerance policy in regards to marijuana.


Though if I were an angst teen at the moment I would be pushing for far more important things, like university fees, education cuts, healthcare reforms, youth unemployment, state pension age, etc, etc, though there would be little point anyway, ultimately.

I do push for lower tuition rates (I used to be a member of the SU), and I also dedicate a lot of my time and writing to freedom of information on the internet; these plus the legalization of marijuana are my three main pet projects. We don't really need healthcare reforms in Canada in my opinion (although people do love to go on about it, blah blah Stelmach blah blah privatized healthcare paranoia - never gonna happen), and our public schools are doing relatively well as long as you don't give a sh*t about the arts, which I don't. Also, in Alberta we've got jobs aplenty, especially for young people - you've got to be very physically fit to work in the oil patch. Reminder: I live in a different country than you do. The priorities and interests of people living here are different than those of people living in the UK. I know that in North America protesting against a legislation which significantly funds global terrorism and criminality, plus leeches tonnes of money away from public works is quite a worthy goal. Besides "it's smelly," I still don't understand why you disagree.

Also, what do you mean there would be little point? You don't seem to have very much faith in humanity or democracy.

...And, did you just call me an angst teen? Doesn't angst = insecure/hopeless? I'm pretty hopeful and clearly full of myself, and also I'm 23.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

You don't give a **** about the arts, Juniper?

[JuniperWoolf]

You don't give a **** about the arts, Juniper?

Not in school. I don't think that humans need to take a class to learn to love creating things. School is for learning stuff like math and science, not hobbies. I don't have a very strong opinion about it though, I literally don't care. If the pro-art-in-school crowd feels that strongly about it, then I don't mind if they succeed. It would just be 45 minutes of fun time for kids, which isn't a bad thing I guess.

I know, I've been ranted at by many people.

[PMLondonderry]

They were well dressed in "Reefer Madness". I have to admit I do not identify marijuana with dirtiness or religious pamphlets (maybe the 1960's). It sounds like 1950's social convention. And do not get me wrong, I like many traditional values, but to view marijuana as something for stinky longhaired hippies is from another time and place.

I couldn't agree more. I recognize this association of marijuana with hippies as being foolish on my own part. Unfortunately, I have never been around individuals who contradict the stereotype, as outdated and close-minded as it may be.

To be perfectly honest, I am entirely indifferent to the legalization of marijuana. It sparks absolutely no response from me as I have never smoked it in my life. The only response that I really have in regards to its legalization is that I do believe it is safer than alcohol and if alcohol remains legal (which it will), then there really seems to be no logical reason to make marijuana illegal. If the one that is more dangerous is the one that is legal then it seems to be a rather twisted law.

[Alexander III]

I couldn't agree more. I recognize this association of marijuana with hippies as being foolish on my own part. Unfortunately, I have never been around individuals who contradict the stereotype, as outdated and close-minded as it may be.

To be perfectly honest, I am entirely indifferent to the legalization of marijuana. It sparks absolutely no response from me as I have never smoked it in my life. The only response that I really have in regards to its legalization is that I do believe it is safer than alcohol and if alcohol remains legal (which it will), then there really seems to be no logical reason to make marijuana illegal. If the one that is more dangerous is the one that is legal then it seems to be a rather twisted law.

How dare you question the goverment !?!? It knows best always, only a traitor and un-patriotic man would ever question his goverment!

[LitNetIsGreat]

I don't understand….


I still don't understand why you disagree…

If you go back I think I have more than adequately described my position on cannabis. Look to my last post on why a government minister is not going to push for the legalisation of it and the eleven pages prior to that.


You admit that marijuana being illegal and alcohol being legal is just bad luck for the stoners, but then you say that the illegality of marijuana is just? How is it just?

Because to give cannabis the green light is to…(see previous comments)


Nnnnnooooo, you're debating on an online forum in favour of the continuation of a zero-tolerance policy in regards to marijuana.

I agree with the current government position, that’s all.


Also, what do you mean there would be little point? You don't seem to have very much faith in humanity or democracy.

No I have a realist's view of humanity and democracy but perhaps that’s the same thing?


...And, did you just call me an angst teen? Doesn't angst = insecure/hopeless? I'm pretty hopeful and clearly full of myself, and also I'm 23.

No I didn't call you anything. I was speaking generally, but the issue does strike me as one which is driven by a fanatic-like teen angst, that's what I mean.

I'll pass on the not needing an art/literature teacher comment, I don't even want to pick that stone up!

[Emil Miller]

[QUOTE]And do not get me wrong, I like many traditional values, but to view marijuana as something for stinky longhaired hippies is from another time and place

I think you will find that many of them ditched the long hair and stinky cannabis and took to wearing suits and sniffing cocaine once the hippie nonsense fell out of fashion.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Not in school. I don't think that humans need to take a class to learn to love creating things. School is for learning stuff like math and science, not hobbies. I don't have a very strong opinion about it though, I literally don't care. If the pro-art-in-school crowd feels that strongly about it, then I don't mind if they succeed. It would just be 45 minutes of fun time for kids, which isn't a bad thing I guess.

I know, I've been ranted at by many people.

I assume you feel the same way about sports, which would seem even more useless,

Well, this doesn't make sense to me, because people do need to learn how to create things, if they want to create things. They can be taught techniques, how to utilize different mediums, etc. Plus, it's a bit easier to learn how to play an instrument with instruction.

And, it can be more than a hobby. Many people make their livings as an artist and musician.

[Darcy88]

I agree with the current government position, that’s all.


Well the next time you're sitting comfortably in your favorite pub sipping a frosty mug of ale you can think of the young man spending that night and many more to come inside a stark windowless cell, away from his family, away from his life, just because he indulged in a product less harmful than that which fizzes there in your hand. A most just and rational circumstance.

[Emil Miller]

Well the next time you're sitting comfortably in your favorite pub sipping a frosty mug of ale you can think of the young man spending that night and many more to come inside a stark windowless cell, away from his family, away from his life, just because he indulged in a product less harmful than that which fizzes there in your hand. A most just and rational circumstance.

I agree. If I knew that by breaking a law I would be thrown into a stark windowless cell, I would avoid doing something that was illegal and totally unnecessary.

[Darcy88]

I agree. If I knew that by breaking a law I would be thrown into a stark windowless cell, I would avoid doing something that was illegal and totally unnecessary.

Is it unnecessary to drink? Is it unnecessary to act in accordance with logic and sense? If they banned alcohol are you telling me that you would actually cease to partake?

I wouldn't. I am a man, not a sheep, and it is rightness over law, conscience over compulsion, as its weighed in my scheme of things.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Don't bother Darcy. See, with people like Emil, if it's a law he agrees with, than it's just fine--those who break should've known better. If it is a law he doesn't agree with, though, than he'd be all for the "fight the power" attitude. It's how they justify what is clearly illogical.

[Darcy88]

Don't bother Darcy. See, with people like Emil, if it's a law he agrees with, than it's just fine--those who break should've known better. If it is a law he doesn't agree with, though, than he'd be all for the "fight the power" attitude. It's how they justify what is clearly illogical.

The government and the advertisers say alcohol is okay but weed is bad. Oh my god! Alcohol is okay, weed is bad!

[BienvenuJDC]

Uh oh.....

I don't drink....
I don't smoke....
...but currently I don't know where I stand on the legalization or criminalization of either.

[Darcy88]

Uh oh.....

I don't drink....
I don't smoke....
...but currently I don't know where I stand on the legalization or criminalization of either.

I go by the harm principle. If something doesn't cause significant harm to oneself or to society then it out to be permitted. And even if it does harm oneself and society we often turn a blind eye. People who eat themselves into morbid obesity and risk their own lives and strain the health-care system are free to do so.

Its really about freedom. People shouldn't be telling other people what to do when it does not affect them.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

The government and the advertisers say alcohol is okay but weed is bad. Oh my god! Alcohol is okay, weed is bad!

Yep. And certain state governments also tell us that it's illegal to take a bath with a squirrel. I will if I want to, though, laws be damned.

[BienvenuJDC]

I go by the harm principle. If something doesn't cause significant harm to oneself or to society then it out to be permitted. And even if it does harm oneself and society we often turn a blind eye. People who eat themselves into morbid obesity and risk their own lives and strain the health-care system are free to do so.

Its really about freedom. People shouldn't be telling other people what to do when it does not affect them.

Ever notice how fat preachers often preach against how smoking destroys the body, which is the temple of God? However, the lessons against gluttony are rarely taught.

[Alexander III]

Ever notice how fat preachers often preach against how smoking destroys the body, which is the temple of God? However, the lessons against gluttony are rarely taught.

Yes I have always wondered about that too, Gluttony as a sin seems largley obscured by all the other one's.

I mean if drinking, smoking, sleeping around, vanity, greed - all sins frequently discussed.

yet no one would ever tell an obese man that he is a sinner - yet being obesse shows just as much lack of controll as a man who drinks or cheats on his wife.

[tonywalt]

Have you seen the size of most Christian Evangelicals. If they actually determined what was sinful based on health, they would lay off all that potato salad and fried chicken.

The sin is not the unhealthy aspect of the thing in question but the "bad" association.

[Paulclem]

Gluttony is a sin because they need the render to keep the fires going.....sorry.....

[tonywalt]

On Marijuana: Bumping the thread here, but thought that the general consensus 3 years ago reflecting a small plurality opposed to the recreational use of marijuana. Wonder if that has changed?

[Pike Bishop]

All sound scientific studies and documentation of the comparable effects of alcohol and marijuana on their users and users' loved ones show marijuana to be the less harmful of the two. Of course, as a connoisseur of both, they are both more than fine with me. Anyone who opposes legalized marijuana, however, but supports legalized alcohol--which damages both user and user's loved ones--is taking a hypocritical stance unsupported by facts.

[Emil Miller]

On Marijuana: Bumping the thread here, but thought that the general consensus 3 years ago reflecting a small plurality opposed to the recreational use of marijuana. Wonder if that has changed?

Thanks for bumping this thread, it was a bit like shooting fish in a barrel but still good fun.

[tonywalt]

All sound scientific studies and documentation of the comparable effects of alcohol and marijuana on their users and users' loved ones show marijuana to be the less harmful of the two. Of course, as a connoisseur of both, they are both more than fine with me. Anyone who opposes legalized marijuana, however, but supports legalized alcohol--which damages both user and user's loved ones--is taking a hypocritical stance unsupported by facts.

I agree. Marijuana has great momentum at this moment behind it, however I am concerned for people who use it for anxiety/depression. Questions must be asked about this particular medicinal use: how much? When? What happens when you are having anxiety at work(it's a long damn day) - what then? Do you just use it when you finish the day to kind of 'cool the engines'

The issue can easily become this: In the absence of marijuana your body may crave marijuana as it contains cannaboids blocking the emotional receptors in the brain. At this point usage may go up. This writer knows that usage and effects vary wildy from person to person.

As for my knowlege of this topic: it is extensive.

I will put aside the argument for physical illness - hell, if you're sick at home/bed: do what you have to do to make it. I just wanted to initially focus on anxiety and depression for functioning people, both conditions are extremely common in creative types such as writers and artists i.e. many many people on this board.

[Clopin]

Of course it should be legalized, like every other drug.

[tonywalt]

Clopin, I agree that it should be legalised and it's very clear that Marijuana has great momentum at this moment behind it, however I am concerned for people who use it for anxiety/depression. Questions must be asked about this particular medicinal use: how much? When? What happens when you are having anxiety at work(it's a long damn day) - what then? Do you just use it when you finish the day to kind of 'cool the engines'

The issue can easily become this: In the absence of marijuana your body may crave marijuana as it contains cannaboids blocking the emotional receptors in the brain. At this point usage may go up. This writer knows that usage and effects vary wildy from person to person.

As for my knowlege of this topic: it is extensive.

I will put aside the argument for physical illness - hell, if you're sick at home/bed: do what you have to do to make it. I just wanted to initially focus on anxiety and depression for functioning people, both conditions are extremely common in creative types such as writers and artists i.e. many many people on this board.

[Pike Bishop]

Nobody should self-medicate with anything for chronic anxiety and/or depression, much less alcohol and/or marijuana. Both can be fine tonics in moderation to soothe the edge, but neither are appropriate medicinal treatments for the psychiatric/biological conditions of anxiety or depression. Alchohol is particularly bad since it is itself a depressant. And I would be surprised if marijuana had any serotonal value, despite my personal like for the herb, so it would probably have little medicinal value in that area as well.

So, the problem isn't alcohol or marijuana per se. They are both excellent substances in which to moderately partake. The problem lies in the abuse of them, and neither legalization or illegalization themselves are going to solve those problems. Education will.

[tonywalt]

I have become interested in the studies that indicate cannabinoids producing increased activity in the neurons that produce serotonin, but do not think it should be used as a treatment for anxiety and or it's sibling, depression.

I am beginning to become a bit concerned over the last year or so when I see marijuana being prescribed (as a primary treatment) for people with anxiety and PTSD. The US media (and UK) has frequently showed veterans of the latest wars using marijuana as prescribed and it's clear to this writer that these individuals are consuming quite alot of marijuana - (although they are never explicit about this and the reporters rarely ask).


http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071023183937.htm

[Pike Bishop]

Cannabinoids produce increased activity in the neurons producing serotonin? I knew there was a reason I liked it so much. Now I have another reason to convince my wife I shouldn't give it up.

As to people misusing the prescribed cannabis, that is a problem with all medications, particularly painkillers. If it is actually medically approved to help with anxiety and PTSD, and it actually helps their sufferers, than misuse alone shouldn't be enough reason to stop the prescription. Misuse of marijuana is actually less harmful than misuse of ADHD medications or painkillers like oxycodone...and nobody wants to get rid of them for good.

[Pike Bishop]

The Ten Best Movies to See Stoned:

1. Pee Wee's Big Adventure
2. Willie Wonka's Chocolate Factory (skip to the factory)
3. The Wizard of Oz (played to Dark Side of the Moon)
4. Time Bandits
5. Mulholland Drive (except for the freaky ending)
6. 2001
7. Monty Python's Holy Grail
8. Zardoz
9. Ferris Beuller's Day Off
10. Moulin Rouge

[Pike Bishop]

Ten Movies to Never See Stoned:

1. Eraserhead
2. Freaks
3. Akira
4. Brazil
5. The Exorcist
6. Twin Peaks: Fire Walk With Me
7. After Hours
8. The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari
9. The Texas Chainsaw Massacre
10. Spice World

[Delta40]

The Candy Man at the start of Willy Wonka is not to be missed!

[Pike Bishop]

That's lovely, Delta. Thank you for the ardent and informative recommendation.

[Delta40]

My pleasure. Willy Wonka is a classic movie and a fine suggestion by you.

[tonywalt]

........