Legalize Marijuana - Yay or Nay

[Kit-Fox]

I did try to warn you all not to bother with our resident religious zealot.

[~Sokar~]

Nay :- For the obvious moral, health, economic and social well being reasons.


No need to bother explaining.

[Poppler King]

I listened to you kit fox !
I still read Sandmans posts in here just because they're funny

Get lone dragon back in here if you want a nice good debate!

[GhostyGoo]

Apologies but i'm not reading through 11 pages.

Can anyone please tell me why "cannabis" should be legalised? I'm quite sure that anyone who studies chemistry or shamanism can see my point...my point being, the essential need for "cannabis" in society is what?

Your whole debate seems, like most do on this topic, to have strayed from the subject of marijuana.

Do correct me, if i'm mistaken.

-Goo™

[Poppler King]

http://www.gadling.com/2009/08/26/argen ... marijuana/

Ghosty you really should read the other 11 pages although it does get a bit repetitive.
Oh and that link there is about Argentina decriminalising Marijuana, I have a better link on my comp somewhere but I can't find it, doesn't really matter you just need the jist of the article to get my point because there's probably thousands of articles like it on the net. A new approach to drugs is coming to the forefront and its only a matter of time before more and more countries follow suit.
Criminalizing someone because of something that is only "harming" themselves is ridiculous.

[lone dragon]

I noted the health detriments of heroin. If you are talking the lesser of two evils,Marijuana is. But, they are both evil. Noting that both are evil, and illegal, there is no real difference, except for the fact, Heroin screw you over faster. Marijuana will screw you over time. that is a Proven Fact. Do not give me BS i smoke it and im fine, Im sure as anything you are not fine, because why would you be smoking it in the first place? Because it is cool? Fact:It isnt cool, and people who do it, sooner or later have a crap life. Eg. to escape reality? maybe! therefore you are not fine. Why would a 'normal' person see the sense in using it? Fact: They dont.

All in all, read my post, for my context, Do not assume.

As for your evidence

"Smoking marijuana causes more damage to cells and DNA than smoking tobacco, scientists say. "

http://www.tfy.drugsense.org/tfy/addictvn.htm > just noting the persons agenda , the time of research done, the bias of research..... = void

I would agree with you but I don't agree per say that marijuana is evil, its the application of anything that can determine good or bad, but I didn't know about the genetic component, but it would make sense because your environment can change you DNA. As for arguing I believe that if someone wants something so bad there is no argument or logic that you can argue, all you can really say is if you are happy doing or wanting this so badly, as long as I don't have to have it or have it forced upon me then what can you say..

[Alex]

I would agree with you but I don't agree per say that marijuana is evil, its the application of anything that can determine good or bad,

I agree in part, it's all about use.

but I didn't know about the genetic component, but it would make sense because your environment can change you DNA. As for arguing I believe that if someone wants something so bad there is no argument or logic that you can argue, all you can really say is if you are happy doing or wanting this so badly, as long as I don't have to have it or have it forced upon me then what can you say..

I wouldn't put too much stock in sandman's "source" about it damaging DNA more then cigs, he did little more then say something that he believes to be true and slap quotation marks around it. Not citing a source or offering any more information to back up his claim.

[lone dragon]

I would agree with you but I don't agree per say that marijuana is evil, its the application of anything that can determine good or bad,

I agree in part, it's all about use.

but I didn't know about the genetic component, but it would make sense because your environment can change you DNA. As for arguing I believe that if someone wants something so bad there is no argument or logic that you can argue, all you can really say is if you are happy doing or wanting this so badly, as long as I don't have to have it or have it forced upon me then what can you say..

I wouldn't put too much stock in sandman's "source" about it damaging DNA more then cigs, he did little more then say something that he believes to be true and slap quotation marks around it. Not citing a source or offering any more information to back up his claim.

and you are right it is not a credible source, sorry Sand Man its from the New York Times with no credible backing especially of the percentages.

[Demeisen]

it should definitely be legalised. the reasons are many but put simply:

more tax for government.

more control over the smoking of weed and associated criminal activity.

better quality weed better for smokers health (no contamination etc).

more tax for government.

good for uk tourism ( think amsterdam).

people will smoke regardless. legal measures have had no effect.

more tax for government.

will cut profits of dangerous criminal gangs who currently supply (and even export) cannabis.


alcohol and cigarattes are far more damaging to health. they are excellent for tax though. the government of the uk should wise up and attempt to police what they failed to outlaw.

i find the whole idea of banning weed as stupid. its like banning the moon. it will never work.

[lone dragon]

it should definitely be legalised. the reasons are many but put simply:

more tax for government.

more control over the smoking of weed and associated criminal activity.

better quality weed better for smokers health (no contamination etc).

more tax for government.

good for uk tourism ( think amsterdam).

people will smoke regardless. legal measures have had no effect.

more tax for government.

will cut profits of dangerous criminal gangs who currently supply (and even export) cannabis.


alcohol and cigarattes are far more damaging to health. they are excellent for tax though. the government of the uk should wise up and attempt to police what they failed to outlaw.

i find the whole idea of banning weed as stupid. its like banning the moon. it will never work.

Its a good point, but why should other people have to suffer people having weed on the streets and legally? I don't care what peoples' choices are its their life, but like cigarattes why should someones decisions be able to affect people who don't want it. Even now cigarattes are getting further restricted these days.

[Alex]

While I agree with what your saying that nobody should have to be around that sort of influence or activity if they don't want too in Amsterdam (so far as I understand) you are only supposed to smoke in the coffee shops (predesignated smoking area) or the privacy of your own home. While that same system may be hard to enforce in America it would be easier to attempt to enforce that then the ban of marijuana as a whole.

[lone dragon]

While I agree with what your saying that nobody should have to be around that sort of influence or activity if they don't want too in Amsterdam (so far as I understand) you are only supposed to smoke in the coffee shops (predesignated smoking area) or the privacy of your own home. While that same system may be hard to enforce in America it would be easier to attempt to enforce that then the ban of marijuana as a whole.

Good point, and it would be a bit more fair so people know where it is to make an informed choice to stay or to join. After all people are going to make there choice and it cant be stopped. While I don't agree with it being good its better to control where and how so if people need help it can be easily accessed.

[Demeisen]

yeh. if legalised, weed smoking could be restricted to certain areas (like cigarettes but with stricter controls). would be part of the process id think. would also allow police to moniter the supply and use of cannabis, leading to a reduction in related criminal activity.

we can talk about the effect legalisation will have on non users but that doesnt matter in the end.

its the simple practical truth that weed cannot be banned by law, therefore the only alternative is bringing it directly under government control.

without the need to divert so much resources to fighting weed, other areas would get more funding. everyone would feel the benefits of safer streets and better emergency services. the tax raised would further contribute to the country. hardcore criminals who rely on weed profits will wither away.

[Mister Sandman]

Seening as the minority wants the legalisation of weed....
again, no to legalisation.
Why encourage irresponsible behaviour?
The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Meaning, there is only a minority of people wanting the legalising Marijuana. [this thread cannot be used as a estimation, for various of obvious reasons]


In addition,
People seem to forget, Marijuana gets you high. No matter how you spin this.

Marijuana as well as other substances put one out of control out of ones body. And with anything, no real good comes out of that.

Lets look at cigarettes in comparison with Marijuana . People who smoke cigarettes, are not high, and thus, not a hazard to safety to themselves, and others. Where as, a person on Marijuana, such with someone being drunk, can be unpredictable, and can be a safety issue.

In contrast with alcohol, Marijuana can get you high off one puff. Whereas, alcohol, strictly speaking, cannot get you drunk off one standard drink. Many people, including me, drink alcohol for pleasure, not intending to get drunk.

If Marijuana is legalised, 'smoking it could be in restricted"?
Doubt it, it would be practically impossible to police and enforce. As with the current delima of keeping it illegal.




Hardcore criminals dont rely on Marijuana profits at all. In reality, the profit margins of Marijuana are not as desirable than other 'hardcore' drugs. It is the small time criminals, rather, the petty thieves of society who deal Marijuana .

If we are talking about USA and the 'taxes goingto a better place' the fact is, there is no better place because we all know USA as a whole knows nothing Social equity is, and cant ever do anything productive with tax dollars. Take forexample the war on Iraq, and Afghanistan. Point in case.

[agapooka]

People seem to forget, Marijuana gets you high. No matter how you spin this.

Marijuana as well as other substances put one out of control out of ones body. And with anything, no real good comes out of that.

Lets look at cigarettes in comparison with Marijuana . People who smoke cigarettes, are not high, and thus, not a hazard to safety to themselves, and others. Where as, a person on Marijuana, such with someone being drunk, can be unpredictable, and can be a safety issue.

Adrenaline gets you high. I guess we shouldn't be doing sports.

When in the bloodstream, [adrenaline] rapidly prepares the body for action in emergency situations. The hormone boosts the supply of oxygen and glucose to the brain and muscles, while suppressing other non-emergency bodily processes (digestion in particular).[citation needed]

It increases heart rate and stroke volume, dilates the pupils, and constricts arterioles in the skin and gastrointestinal tract while dilating arterioles in skeletal muscles. It elevates the blood sugar level by increasing catabolism of glycogen to glucose in the liver, and at the same time begins the breakdown of lipids in fat cells. Like some other stress hormones, epinephrine has a suppressive effect on the immune system

One of the reasons marijuana has an effect on the mind and body of an individual smoking it is that it affects dopamine levels. Heck, sex releases dopamine. Guess that's why sex is bad for you. Your parents are sinners!!!! ;p

And the rest of your argument isn't worth replying to. What, marijuana causes people to be a "safety issue"? As far as I know, people become mellow peace-loving hippies when under the effect of Mary-Jane. Oh and then you make the assumption that the word "high" necessarily has all the connotations you wish it to have.

So, as I set out to investigate this, I found that "high" is just an umbrella term for any effect of any psychoactive drug. It doesn't technically carry any other connotations. When I clicked that definition of "high" in their disambiguation page, it sent me to their article on "intoxication".

Intoxication is the state of being affected by one or more psychoactive drugs. It can also refer to the effects caused by the ingestion of poison or by the overconsumption of normally harmless substances.

Some types of intoxication:
A mechanism of disease.
Drunkenness (alcohol intoxication)
Caffeine intoxication
Cannabis intoxication
Heroin intoxication
Water intoxication
Contact high

Cheers,

Agapooka