Legalization of cannabis

[Timmystwin 201]

...the stronger strains of weed are quite damaging mentally.

And... where does this idea come from? Cite a source, because it is illogical.

Barbarossa

Several episodes of Road wars and the copper that came round to our school when some kids got busted for weed.

[astronelson 339]

It's not necessarily illogical - as a psychotropic drug it has an effect on the brain, and if it is stronger it has a greater effect. You would expect, with a certain strength, that the brain would become permanently altered. Quite like applying stress to an iron bar - it can take a bit, but enough will bend and eventually break it.

[Duke87 1,070]

Im fairly sure that britain has a "If your 12+ you can have a little at home" exception

The classic Italian rule of thumb is that once you're tall enough to see the top of the table standing up, you're old enough to have a glass of wine. This is not codified into law anywhere, though...

[Ocram's Razr 964]

1. There have been studies of the schedule 2 pharmaceutical of pure THC and increased dosages have more permanent mental side effects.

2. BBC conducted studies that showed that Skunk was bad. I already posted a link so Barbarosa does not need to backtalk someone new.

3. "Coffeeshops" outside of the red light district should be banned.

4. The Netherlands be damned anyway.

5. Europe has had a long history with alcoholic beverages while the US had prohibition and mass advertisements. Therefore the US has a different alcohol culture.

[Easy Bakes 253]

1. There have been studies of the schedule 2 pharmaceutical of pure THC and increased dosages have more permanent mental side effects.

2. BBC conducted studies that showed that Skunk was bad. I already posted a link so Barbarosa does not need to backtalk someone new.

3. "Coffeeshops" outside of the red light district should be banned.

4. The Netherlands be damned anyway.

5. Europe has had a long history with alcoholic beverages while the US had prohibition and mass advertisements. Therefore the US has a different alcohol culture.

the "coffee shops" may be going away permanently

Amsterdam looks to ban tourists from 'coffee' shops that sell pot

Buzz Kill

Personaly i think thier nuts to do this. their tourism will take a huge hit.

and it wont stop the street sellers.

[Eastwinn 6]

1. There have been studies of the schedule 2 pharmaceutical of pure THC and increased dosages have more permanent mental side effects.

2. BBC conducted studies that showed that Skunk was bad. I already posted a link so Barbarosa does not need to backtalk someone new.

3. "Coffeeshops" outside of the red light district should be banned.

4. The Netherlands be damned anyway.

5. Europe has had a long history with alcoholic beverages while the US had prohibition and mass advertisements. Therefore the US has a different alcohol culture.

1. THC isn't the only active ingredient in marijuana.

2. Why does this matter in legalization?

3. Why?

4. Yeah to hell with 'em!

5. This is true, but what point are you making with this?

[blade2k5 1,523]

...the stronger strains of weed are quite damaging mentally.

And... where does this idea come from? Cite a source, because it is illogical.

Barbarossa

It is illogical, studies or no.

[Ocram's Razr 964]

Strong (High THC, low CBD) Cannabis Sativa is less healthy than Strong (High CBD, low to medium high THC) Cannabis Indica.

Here is the Wikipedia Page. Wikipedia: Cannabis Indica

Industrial hemp is Cannabis Sativa with low THC and some chemicals that upset the stomach if the buds are smoked.

Just to make things short:

THC bad, CBD good.

[Barbarossa 51]

.

  Edited September 8, 2012 by Barbarossa  

[Timmystwin 201]

Wonder if they were on about what was possibly added in with it. (In truth, i have no idea.)

[Eastwinn 6]

Wonder if they were on about what was possibly added in with it. (In truth, i have no idea.)

Pot is rarely adulterated with other drugs. Even when it is, it's easy for a pot user to know: pot has a distinctive smell and look. When pot is sold grounded up into "shake" it can easily be adulterated with other herbs to make a batch heavier and therefore more costly. A naive pot user might fall for it, but typically a pothead can see that some of the shake doesn't look quite right. The smell might also be changed. Fun fact, fresh catnip smells a lot like marijuana. I learned this when I showed a pothead friend of mine the catnip that grows on my property. Anyway, the other herbs probably only have a significant effect on the lungs, as they might produce hotter smoke.

Other drugs are often used in combination with marijuana, especially any that might cause nausea or dizziness. However rarely are they sold mixed together already. This is basically unheard of, aside from a few dissociatives such as PCP. According to word of mouth, marijuana adulterated with PCP is easy to spot, but regardless, PCP on its own isn't very popular at all.

There's a large chance that the cop didn't know what s/he was talking about. Police service might teach an individual quite a bit about the worst immediate effects of a drug, but there is no guarantee that they know drugs from a medical standpoint.

[Ocram's Razr 964]

1. "Chronic" used to mean marijuana spiked with stimulants (forms of cocaine being most popular), now it means marijuana with an unhealthy level of THC.

2. THC has permanent negative side effects at higher levels (higher dose or chronic usage). Permanent negative side effects are miniscule in low dosage with no repetition.

3. The negative side effects of THC are counteracted by CBD while CBD does not lower the positive affect of THC.

[Eastwinn 6]

^ That's all fine and dandy, but what does the health effects of marijuana have to do with its legalization?

[Ocram's Razr 964]

Smoking cigarettes is very unhealthy and the government is doing everything it can to get rid of them as quickly and thoroughly as possible. The same people who hate tobacco, hate narcotics just as much (on average, some are vehemently opposed to one and not the other). Until there is scientific proof that cannabis is a good alternative to the pharmaceuticals--with the mounting proof of bad things--cannabis will not gain widespread legality. I know how lawmakers work (and I have a vague inkling on how most politicians think).

[Eastwinn 6]

Smoking cigarettes is very unhealthy and the government is doing everything it can to get rid of them as quickly and thoroughly as possible. The same people who hate tobacco, hate narcotics just as much (on average, some are vehemently opposed to one and not the other). Until there is scientific proof that cannabis is a good alternative to the pharmaceuticals--with the mounting proof of bad things--cannabis will not gain widespread legality. I know how lawmakers work (and I have a vague inkling on how most politicians think).

It's a shame, because whether it is healthy or not doesn't change the fact that the drug war is a massive failure and marijuana deserves to be legal, along with every other "narcotic."

[jammy 0]

All drugs should be made legal.

They should be heavily regulated, legal and instead of arresting millions every year and overcrowding jails which can cost up to £50,000 per inmate per year in the UK they should encourage education and rehabilitation which would cost around £10,000 a year and keep the jails much more free for people who are actually a threat to society.

The amount of tax revenue would balance the books.

The problem with drugs policy is that the wrong drugs are illegal in my opinion. Tobacco, for example, in an idealistic world, would be illegal as it is much more damaging to health and much more addictive than so called 'class A' or the worst band of drugs such as ecstasy.

I do not think taking drugs is a good idea, just like binge drinking, smoking excessively etc. isn't a great idea. It should be down to the individuals prerogative to whether they take drugs.

Legalizing heroin (a very bad drug which I personally am strongly against) lowers the chance of needle-transmitted infections, as seen in Portugal, which had a high heroin use and high HIV prevalence due to needle use. Now it's legal, education is available and needle exchanges have being set up. The use of heroin has actually fallen, the number of people in jail has fallen and the HIV infection rate has fallen considerably.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

I tend to agree with respect to street drugs. Most opiates, including Heroin are already legally available to the medical crowd to prescribe, but the methamphetamines have no real use, are highly addictive, and about equivalent to drinking methanol. They are out and out poisons.

Yes, I know all drugs are poisons and it is only a matter of dose. However, crack-heads get to a state where they don't know when to quit or limit their dose, and so get their Darwin award, and deservedly so. The basic problem is to keep these defective people from spreading their genes.

Legalization of street drugs will not stop addicts from mugging people to get the price of the fix.

[Ocram's Razr 964]

The world will be a better place when drugs are legalized to be used in certain establishments and produced legally by authorized parties but society is not ready yet.

[jammy 0]

I agree society isn't ready. There are always pros and cons of such massive decisions as legalizing drugs with the stance on drugs differing around the world. Many countries in the Middle East (mainly due to religious reasons and the Muslim stance on alcohol) ban alcohol, but this is changing in the UAE where Dubai is located due to western influence. Alcohol is legally available but heavily regulated, no drinking problems exist and only people who want to drink do drink.

I believe it should be similar to the use of drugs. Drugs should be heavily taxed, highly regulated and illegal to consume in locations such as near schools/hospitals etc.

I more than accept that some drug crime is bound to exist, but the crime rate will obviously fall due to the legality of drugs as well as a reduction of the amount of people incarcerated (a particular problem in California where the standard of prison accommodation is deficient and even against human rights (prisoners are expected to suffer a reduction in rights, but many people in prisons do not pose a risk to society and therefore should be fined/educated rather than incarcerated which is more expensive then it would be to educate and rehabilitate)

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

In our world, heavy taxation and stiff regulation only leads to bootlegging, which is essentially the situation we have now. If this is done at all, it has to be done with kid gloves.

There will be a period of adjustment with many Darwin awards, all well and truly earned. Once the glitter of illegality and the general public availability wears off the novelty, there will be no more problems than there are with alcohol. New rehabilitation facilities will open and the criminal element will be out of work.

It will be necessary to create a group of facilities to deal with drug syndrome infants as we now deal with alcohol syndrome infants, although I think Dean Swift had the right of it there.

The taxes should be sufficient to fund the problems and provide a little bit over, but not so heavy as to drive things underground. Initially, this will be a balancing act, as govenments are always loath to reduce taxes.

I am switching my stance on Methamphetamines. Let them be available too. It will solve the overpopulation problem on a voluntary basis.

[Duke87 1,070]

Bump for... this item of consideration.

Can't vouch for the accuracy of the story's portrayal, but wow.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

Bump for... this item of consideration.

Can't vouch for the accuracy of the story's portrayal, but wow.

When your baby is dying, then whatever works. Period!

[Follarch 327]

Hell, if I had my way, I'd keep it illegal/ban it permanently. As well as all Tobacco and Alcohol products.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

Hell, if I had my way, I'd keep it illegal/ban it permanently. As well as all Tobacco and Alcohol products.

I guess you like black markets and organized crime, then. Banning things doesn't work.

  Edited March 29, 2012 by A Nonny Moose  

[Sgt Pepper 864]

It should be legal. "And that is all I have to say about that."

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

It should be legal. "And that is all I have to say about that."

And taxed at the same rates as tobacco and alcohol. New industry, new tax, more employed in the new industry and tax department. A general inprovement for the economy.

And while we are at it, hashish should be included.,

[Easy Bakes 253]

They would have to do something to differentiate regular tobacco cigarettes with marijuana ones if they were legal.

or Cops would have to pull over every one who is driving and smoking.

[hym 358]

They would have to do something to differentiate regular tobacco cigarettes with marijuana ones if they were legal.

or Cops would have to pull over every one who is driving and smoking.

Authorities wouldn't look for smokers. They would look for drunk drivers. Research has indicated that an individual under the influence of marijuana drives almost identically to a drunk driver.

Legalizing marijuana also raises the issue of how testing would be performed. In the absence of a field kit that provides rapid, reliable testing results, officers would have to be authorized to detain suspected individuals to obtain blood/urine samples or provide officers with unlimited freedom to level DUI/DWI charges.

[Kevin 101]

In the absence of a field kit that provides rapid, reliable testing results, officers would have to be authorized to detain suspected individuals to obtain blood/urine samples or provide officers with unlimited freedom to level DUI/DWI charges.

In Connecticut we have the right to demand a blood test or urine test instead of a Breathalyzer or sobriety test... so it's not unheard of.

[hym 358]

In the absence of a field kit that provides rapid, reliable testing results, officers would have to be authorized to detain suspected individuals to obtain blood/urine samples or provide officers with unlimited freedom to level DUI/DWI charges.

In Connecticut we have the right to demand a blood test or urine test instead of a Breathalyzer or sobriety test... so it's not unheard of.

Does the state have that right, or do you have that right?