Colorado, Washington approve recreational marijuana use.

[Juliette]

ok i didnt mean legal justification i meant its effect on the human body. I'm saying the fact that it occurs naturally without human interaction doesn't make it good or healthy or unhealthy. Its a flawed argument to use that as any kind of basis.

The effect on a single human's body and consequentially society as a whole are separate issues. (Which is a pointless statement unless I properly understood your earlier post.)

[Legendary Apophis]

And who defines "justification" when it comes to ingesting anything? who has the right to tell you or me or anybody else what we can and cannot consume? how can a law be made that makes me a criminal for ingesting a substance-regardless of what affect it has on my body?

Sorry, but the argument being made we should be punished for consumption of substances and said substances should remain illegal is not for govt or courts of law. it's down to each and everyone of us to decide if it is right for us or wrong. as i've said before, i've smoked weed and decided it wasn't for me...what gives me the right to force that decision on anybody else?

This all comes down to personal choice, not laws, rules, courts, govt, police, etcetera.

The State has the right to because it should prevent unaware people to be filled with propaganda from others who act as advertisers towards them (teenagers consuming weed trying to convince others -me for example- they should do it because it's cool etc...and if they don't they aren't cool. While cool means being completely stoned during courses and having crap results at tests/exams, and all of this is just telling what I witnessed myself. This didn't stop to teenagers but pursued to university with adult people I also witnessed advertising/being stoned! I am thankful that the State forbids it: the mix of viewing damages+interdiction were a good prevention for me to consume it. I wasn't silly like many who jump at anything illegal; if it's illegal there may be logical reasons behind it), because people like me expect it to do so!

[Juliette]

Within a corporate-aligned society (corporations selling drugs? wait..) it is extremely viable that a single 'ill' product is sold and accepted.

Agree or disagree, it is as it is.

[GrizzZzzly]

ok i didnt mean legal justification i meant its effect on the human body. I'm saying the fact that it occurs naturally without human interaction doesn't make it good or healthy or unhealthy. Its a flawed argument to use that as any kind of basis.

The effect on a single human's body and consequentially society as a whole are separate issues. (Which is a pointless statement unless I properly understood your earlier post.)

Of course. I just wanted to deny this common myth I keep hearing that the fact its a "naturally growing plant" has any bearing on the effects it can have on the human body.

[Legendary Apophis]

It shall not be like this in my country and the right wing will do all the lobbying we can to prevent our society to give up to liberal values which are definitely bad for society. /republican speech

That said, absolute corporate society leads to anything being sold and traded (transplant organs, drugs, prostitutes, babies, contract to kill...). That's why there should be a limit with the goods being traded as where there is profit to be made, there is a market...

[[KMA]Avenger]

The State has the right to because it should prevent unaware people to be filled with propaganda from others who act as advertisers towards them (teenagers consuming weed trying to convince others -me for example- they should do it because it's cool etc...and if they don't they aren't cool. While cool means being completely stoned during courses and having crap results at tests/exams, and all of this is just telling what I witnessed myself. This didn't stop to teenagers but pursued to university with adult people I also witnessed advertising/being stoned! I am thankful that the State forbids it: the mix of viewing damages+interdiction were a good prevention for me to consume it. I wasn't silly like many who jump at anything illegal; if it's illegal there may be logical reasons behind it), because people like me expect it to do so!

Sorry Jim, i have to disagree with you. nobody has the right to tell me what i can and cannot put into or do with my body. as i stated earlier, so long as i am mentally competent, even if i decide to swallow 20 bags of rat poison, nobody has the right to interfere with my actions as long as i cause no harm. if i decide to take poison while driving and kill someone but my life is saved then i should be held to account in a court of law. by the same token, if i decide i'm going to spark up a joint in a car and get high, loose control of the car and hurt or kill someone in the car or outside, i should be punished and held to account. that's not in question here, and nobody in their right mind could argue against that...but we are talking about relaxing at home and not hurting others, then you are telling me that the govt has the right to interfere with my personal life?

As for forcing my habit on someone else, i imagine that also comes under harming others or at the very least bullying others to accept something they don't want to accept...again, that is totally unacceptable.

Of course. I just wanted to deny this common myth I keep hearing that the fact its a "naturally growing plant" has any bearing on the effects it can have on the human body.

That goes without saying, doesn't it? someone who believes that all naturally growing flora/fauna must be good for you simply because they came out of the ground would have to be the most uninformed/misinformed fool on the planet, wouldn't you agree?

I assume you do, in that regard we are both in agreement

[Z E R O]

The State has the right to because it should prevent unaware people to be filled with propaganda from others who act as advertisers towards them (teenagers consuming weed trying to convince others -me for example- they should do it because it's cool etc...and if they don't they aren't cool. While cool means being completely stoned during courses and having crap results at tests/exams, and all of this is just telling what I witnessed myself. This didn't stop to teenagers but pursued to university with adult people I also witnessed advertising/being stoned! I am thankful that the State forbids it: the mix of viewing damages+interdiction were a good prevention for me to consume it. I wasn't silly like many who jump at anything illegal; if it's illegal there may be logical reasons behind it), because people like me expect it to do so!

Odd.. I always got better results on tests when I was stoned...

[Evilevi777]

Odd.. I always got better results on tests when I was stoned...

Same here, it always calms me down and helps me relax and focus for a test

[Juliette]

Odd.. I always got better results on tests when I was stoned...

Naturally. But were you stoned/absent during all lectures as well? (Then how the hell did you pass.. wait.. what level?)

[Legendary Apophis]

The ones who used it were usually the ones who were absent but present (absent mind, present body) during exams/tests. Usually on the lower end of the results. The cleanest ones were the ones doing the best. Thus double mocked by the lower rated ones considering them double uncool. (Nelson Muntz syndrome where the least performing at school are considered the "cool" and the best performing the "crawlers")
I'm talking about medium and high school, for university, well, I didn't care much about others' results as much as before, so I couldn't tell.

[Z E R O]

Odd.. I always got better results on tests when I was stoned...

Naturally. But were you stoned/absent during all lectures as well? (Then how the hell did you pass.. wait.. what level?)

Twas back in highschool, I was rarely stoned in class, or absent for that matter. Mostly I would smoke just before tests as someone said, it helps me relax and calm my mind. It feels easier to access the information. I also usually scored higher than most of the class on every test.

Haven't done any university level learning while high, though.

Back on topic.

A question that's been kind of itching at me...

Will those incarcerated for posession of under 1 oz of marijuana be released? As it is no longer a crime..

Was that even possible previously in Washington and Colorado?

[Angnoch]

Liberal nonsense always pushes itself in.

You've lost me Jim, what does this have to do with which political ideology one supports?

It's not a matter of Democrat or Republican, because you likely have Democrats who are opposed to it (conservative democrats who would be conservative for society values but totally agreeing with democrats' economic policy/welfare/domestic policy), while you have Republicans who are in favor, even though the latter usually become Libertarians because Libertarians (liberal for both economy and society) are in favor of legalization.

Politics aren't limited to one line, it's determined by two things, think about the political compass: stance on the domestic policy and society on the one hand, stance on economy/taxes on the other. Libertarians are liberal in both. Conservative democrats aren't liberal in any. Republicans are usually liberal-conservative, conservative for domestic/society (well they are usually conservative for society values like same-sex marriage, adoption for same sex and legalizing drugs and more towards a small state than a big state) and liberal for economy. Finally you have democratic liberals, who are liberal for society but not necessarily domestic policy (depends on particular points) and not really liberal to not at all for economy.

Economically I am in the middle between Obama and Romney, for foreign and environment I am closer to Obama while for society values, a part of domestic values, security and immigration I am very close to Mitt Romney. That tells you it's maybe more complicated than the explanation I gave above, but closer to this than a simple split democrat/republican.

I am completely sorry but I need to point out that you are wrong Jim, a TRUE Republican is a person who believes in a small centralized government that his little to no say in a persons daily life. The republican party as it stands now is a completely corrupted and pathetic excuse for what it was supposed to stand for. Politics as I see it has no place determining what is socially acceptable, and anyone who tells you otherwise has an agenda of their own.

[Juliette]

I am completely sorry but I need to point out that you are wrong Jim, a TRUE Republican is a person who believes in a small centralized government that his little to no say in a persons daily life. The republican party as it stands now is a completely corrupted and pathetic excuse for what it was supposed to stand for. Politics as I see it has no place determining what is socially acceptable, and anyone who tells you otherwise has an agenda of their own.

And therein lies the rub. Not just their own agenda, but 'big business' too.

[Field Marshall]

I'm going to ignore the last 4 pages and give my tête-à-tête to the subject. As a past very recreational user, I dabbled with marijuna when I was 17/18.

Very simple facts:

Other than 1 time in Amsterdam, I haven't touched it for 8 years since.
I do not seemingly suffer from any mental illnesses.
I have been far more effected whilst under the influence of alcohol.

Simple matter of the fact is drugs DO affect some people badly and CAN lead to the consumption of harder drugs which really can impare your life. This is a minority and most people like me will experiment for a couple of years and because as you grow up, it becomes not so socially acceptable.

I had some great experiences under marajuna and it was fun, never hurt me. I had a far bigger problem with alcohol. I got caught drink driving and had dependancy issues. Pretty much was the sole reason for me cocking up my life about 8 years ago. Alcohol and Nicotene are far worse drugs in terms of dependency and the amount of people that are harmed by it. Difference is, our goverments are funded by these (one for you KMA )

My advice is give it up, it isn't good for you. Sure it makes you feel good...but anything that shortcuts the happy meter isn't good for you

[Juliette]

I'm going to ignore the last 4 pages and give my tête-à-tête to the subject. As a past very recreational user, I dabbled with marijuna when I was 17/18.

Very simple facts:

Other than 1 time in Amsterdam, I haven't touched it for 8 years since.
I do not seemingly suffer from any mental illnesses.
I have been far more effected whilst under the influence of alcohol.

Simple matter of the fact is drugs DO affect some people badly and CAN lead to the consumption of harder drugs which really can impare your life. This is a minority and most people like me will experiment for a couple of years and because as you grow up, it becomes not so socially acceptable.

I had some great experiences under marajuna and it was fun, never hurt me. I had a far bigger problem with alcohol. I got caught drink driving and had dependancy issues. Pretty much was the sole reason for me cocking up my life about 8 years ago. Alcohol and Nicotene are far worse drugs in terms of dependency and the amount of people that are harmed by it. Difference is, our goverments are funded by these (one for you KMA )

My advice is give it up, it isn't good for you. Sure it makes you feel good...but anything that shortcuts the happy meter isn't good for you

That last sentence is the same argument various religious groups use when it comes to medicine; "anything that shortcuts the natural healing process is not good for you" Very dangerous thing to say.
Agreed with the rest, otherwise. Glad you got your life back on track, by the way.