Irony re: marijuana

[Borillar]

Because I am one who believes lines must be drawn.. and that is a known line, a good line, and a beneficial line... the 'good' medicinal aspects of pot are had thru a medicine known as Marinol... no need to have the THC effect actual drug legalized

I guess it just boils down to what I consider to be personal freedom. I don't think the government has any business telling me what I should eat or drink or otherwise consume. People are up in arms about the Big Gulp ban in NYC and rightfully so. I see this in the same way. I don't need big brother to tell me what is good and what is bad and to enforce that by law. And I am saying this as someone who doesn't use drugs. I used to partake in pot, but haven't touched anything in over 20 years.

So then you believe no lines in this... and as I said, if no line is to be drawn, you open up the whole can of worms...

Now.. do you believe in a line to be drawn on firearm type, magazine size?? I actually (as a vet, gun advocate, and gun owner) still advocate a line.. the one we have, keeping automatic weapons out of the hand of the general public...

Yes, I believe in drawing a line there. I am also a veteran and own firearms. I would draw the line at fully automatic weapons. After going through a lot of gun control threads, I think that moves to control magazine size or what guns cosmetically look like are pretty futile. I'd like to see guns taken out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them, but not sure how to go about actually accomplishing that. To paraphrase Alvin Lee (RIP) "I'd love to change the world, but I don't know what to do."

 

[DiamondDave]

I guess it just boils down to what I consider to be personal freedom. I don't think the government has any business telling me what I should eat or drink or otherwise consume. People are up in arms about the Big Gulp ban in NYC and rightfully so. I see this in the same way. I don't need big brother to tell me what is good and what is bad and to enforce that by law. And I am saying this as someone who doesn't use drugs. I used to partake in pot, but haven't touched anything in over 20 years.

So then you believe no lines in this... and as I said, if no line is to be drawn, you open up the whole can of worms...

Now.. do you believe in a line to be drawn on firearm type, magazine size?? I actually (as a vet, gun advocate, and gun owner) still advocate a line.. the one we have, keeping automatic weapons out of the hand of the general public...

Yes, I believe in drawing a line there. I am also a veteran and own firearms. I would draw the line at fully automatic weapons. After going through a lot of gun control threads, I think that moves to control magazine size or what guns cosmetically look like are pretty futile. I'd like to see guns taken out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them, but not sure how to go about actually accomplishing that. To paraphrase Alvin Lee (RIP) "I'd love to change the world, but I don't know what to do."

So you are a hypocrite... lines where you like it emotionally.. no lines where you like it emotionally

got it

 

[Borillar]

Each and every day, we see the evidence of the long term impact of MJ... right here on this board. Pot lowers IQ... yea, there's a study for that too. And it's a really big one... a longitudinal one.... you might want to google 'longitudinal'.

Funny, because I know of quite a few brilliant scientists, mathematicians, musicians, and writers who all claim that the drug expands their mind and helps them think in new ways to solve complex patterns and ideas.

It's not so-much a matter of expansion, as it is a more-convenient means of ignoring all o' those day-to-day distractions that hinder deeper thought.​

"I make no excuses for all the things I uses
just to sweeten my relationships and brighten up my day..."

Yeah, Dr. Carl Sagan comes to mind.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

By making pot illegal - YOU ARE!

You pay for all of the unnecessary prison time with your tax dollars. I support ending this.

Medicinal pot has been legal for a long time.. MARINOL...

Oh.. but you want the HIGH too??.. well, we see where the motivation TRULY lies

What's wrong with that? Why else would a person drink alcoholic beverages? Something wrong with wanting to feel good?

....Another o' those Judeo-Christian values.....

 

[KevinWestern]

Because I am one who believes lines must be drawn.. and that is a known line, a good line, and a beneficial line... the 'good' medicinal aspects of pot are had thru a medicine known as Marinol... no need to have the THC effect actual drug legalized

Ok, I get where you're going, but let me rephrase

Real things:
1.) Policing marijuana costs us billions in taxpayer dollars every year (ie police work, courts, prison overhead, feeding prisoners, ect)
2.) Policing marijuana drains on vital resources (cops could be stopping murders, ect)
3.) Marijuana prohibition puts millions behind bars every year (GRAND majority non-violent offenders), breaking up families, ruining lives
4.) Marijuana prohibition gives power to the drug cartels and their violent reign, as they can profit and make billions of tax free dollars.
5.) Marijuana prohibition means that all the money that could be made from private legal business in the US instead remain mostly in Mexico.


Those are the real consequences of prohibiting marijuana. So I pose the question...what reasons justify keeping probation in place (ie what do we gain) despite those very real and costly side effects?

I think it's up to your camp to justify why it needs to be illegal, because prohibition COSTS me and my society in a very real way, both from a monetary standpoint, and a quality of life standpoint (more street violence, more people in jail, ect)....

It's up to you to make the case of why it's worth it to expend all of those resources and suffer all the negative side effects.


.

Policing and prosecuting ANY crime or illegal THING costs much money... drains resources.. imprisons millions.. gives power to criminals.. gives money to those dealing in the illegal...

It's that simple

It is illegal now, with the beneficial effects LEGALIZED as stated (Marinol)... it is YOUR case to make, which you have not

Yes, I realize policing things cost money (you're missing the point!). We as a society decide that it's worth investing the dollars in stopping things that are truly dangerous.

Example: it's worth spending billions of dollars policing murders and locking murderers up because... if murder was legal it would pose a huge threat to our quality of life.

However, given that pot is non-lethal, makes people calm, and pretty much poses zero threat to our overall quality of life, it's NOT worth policing. I'm not getting ANY BENEFIT for the billions of dollars we're pouring into the cause.

You need to provide us with justification for spending all of those dollars, and allowing tthe drug cartels to maintain a consistent revenue stream.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Medicinal pot has been legal for a long time.. MARINOL...

Oh.. but you want the HIGH too??.. well, we see where the motivation TRULY lies

What's wrong with that? Why else would a person drink alcoholic beverages? Something wrong with wanting to feel good?

Then why not cocaine?? Why not meth?? Why not heroin???

You open up the floodgates, and precedent lets it all in...

Unless you ARE for drawing a line.. and for most people, that line is with the drugs we have as illegal

Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.....I thought that constituted a Nanny State????????

​

 

[DiamondDave]

What's wrong with that? Why else would a person drink alcoholic beverages? Something wrong with wanting to feel good?

Then why not cocaine?? Why not meth?? Why not heroin???

You open up the floodgates, and precedent lets it all in...

Unless you ARE for drawing a line.. and for most people, that line is with the drugs we have as illegal

Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.....I thought that constituted a Nanny State????????

​

Nanny state is control over even the smallest of things, such as FOOD... taking personal responsibilities and putting that burden on the government instead of the individual...

Being against the nanny states does not mean a want to get rid of all law and go to anarchy...

With harmful things such as drugs, a line MUST be drawn... I would make the argument if cigarettes if they were currently illegal and you had people calling to legalize them... the line is there, there is no actual benefit of making pot legal, except emotionally

 

[DiamondDave]

Ok, I get where you're going, but let me rephrase

Real things:
1.) Policing marijuana costs us billions in taxpayer dollars every year (ie police work, courts, prison overhead, feeding prisoners, ect)
2.) Policing marijuana drains on vital resources (cops could be stopping murders, ect)
3.) Marijuana prohibition puts millions behind bars every year (GRAND majority non-violent offenders), breaking up families, ruining lives
4.) Marijuana prohibition gives power to the drug cartels and their violent reign, as they can profit and make billions of tax free dollars.
5.) Marijuana prohibition means that all the money that could be made from private legal business in the US instead remain mostly in Mexico.


Those are the real consequences of prohibiting marijuana. So I pose the question...what reasons justify keeping probation in place (ie what do we gain) despite those very real and costly side effects?

I think it's up to your camp to justify why it needs to be illegal, because prohibition COSTS me and my society in a very real way, both from a monetary standpoint, and a quality of life standpoint (more street violence, more people in jail, ect)....

It's up to you to make the case of why it's worth it to expend all of those resources and suffer all the negative side effects.


.

Policing and prosecuting ANY crime or illegal THING costs much money... drains resources.. imprisons millions.. gives power to criminals.. gives money to those dealing in the illegal...

It's that simple

It is illegal now, with the beneficial effects LEGALIZED as stated (Marinol)... it is YOUR case to make, which you have not

Yes, I realize policing things cost money (you're missing the point!). We as a society decide that it's worth investing the dollars in stopping things that are truly dangerous.

Example: it's worth spending billions of dollars policing murders and locking murderers up because... if murder was legal it would pose a huge threat to our quality of life.

However, given that pot is non-lethal, makes people calm, and pretty much poses zero threat to our overall quality of life, it's NOT worth policing. I'm not getting ANY BENEFIT for the billions of dollars we're pouring into the cause.

You need to provide us with justification for spending all of those dollars, and allowing tthe drug cartels to maintain a consistent revenue stream.

No.. it is EXACTLY the point.. you only want it legalized for the sake of the high.. which is no reason to make it legal...

Many crimes are only crimes of minor or no threat.. you just don't like it in this case emotionally

Oh, and pot is indeed harmful... you just accept that harm personally on an emotional (not rational) level

YOU need to provide justification to CHANGE the line of legality, which you have not done. you have only brought feeling and emotion into it.. the monetary argument is not valid for, as I said, every policing and prosecuting costs money... if the beneficial part is already legal, and all you want is the dangerous, or altering aspect, then you have ZERO argument.. and why I am very comfortable with the line as it is legally

 

[KevinWestern]

Then why not cocaine?? Why not meth?? Why not heroin???

You open up the floodgates, and precedent lets it all in...

Unless you ARE for drawing a line.. and for most people, that line is with the drugs we have as illegal

Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.....I thought that constituted a Nanny State????????

​

Nanny state is control over even the smallest of things, such as FOOD... taking personal responsibilities and putting that burden on the government instead of the individual...

Being against the nanny states does not mean a want to get rid of all law and go to anarchy...

With harmful things such as drugs, a line MUST be drawn... I would make the argument if cigarettes if they were currently illegal and you had people calling to legalize them... the line is there, there is no actual benefit of making pot legal, except emotionally

No actual benefit to making pot legal?

-How about we get to save billions on prison costs, court costs, police costs.
-Free up resources to track down terrorists or other real domestic threats
-We cut a HUGE PORTION of the revenue stream off for the illegal and violent drug cartels.
-We create a whole new business here in the US with jobs, innovation, value,
-We free a huge deal of non-violent offenders who otherwise could be contributing to society

Those aren't benefits?!

You need to explain, Dave...

 

[Borillar]

So then you believe no lines in this... and as I said, if no line is to be drawn, you open up the whole can of worms...

Now.. do you believe in a line to be drawn on firearm type, magazine size?? I actually (as a vet, gun advocate, and gun owner) still advocate a line.. the one we have, keeping automatic weapons out of the hand of the general public...

Yes, I believe in drawing a line there. I am also a veteran and own firearms. I would draw the line at fully automatic weapons. After going through a lot of gun control threads, I think that moves to control magazine size or what guns cosmetically look like are pretty futile. I'd like to see guns taken out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them, but not sure how to go about actually accomplishing that. To paraphrase Alvin Lee (RIP) "I'd love to change the world, but I don't know what to do."

So you are a hypocrite... lines where you like it emotionally.. no lines where you like it emotionally

got it

Well, for one thing, nobody is going to kill someone by smoking a doobie, whereas some jackass shooting guns in a theater or school will get someone killed. Has more to do with pragmatism than emotion. I should clarify that I do draw a distinction between harmless and potentially harmful drugs. Cannabis is pretty much a benign and harmless plant, not a drug. Heroin used to be sold over the counter. Cocaine was once part of the Coca-Cola drink. I think drug addiction should be treated as a medical issue, not a legal one.

Are you suggesting that unless I support people having unfettered access to nuclear weapons and death rays, I am being hypocritical because I want a harmless plant legal?

 

[KevinWestern]

Policing and prosecuting ANY crime or illegal THING costs much money... drains resources.. imprisons millions.. gives power to criminals.. gives money to those dealing in the illegal...

It's that simple

It is illegal now, with the beneficial effects LEGALIZED as stated (Marinol)... it is YOUR case to make, which you have not

Yes, I realize policing things cost money (you're missing the point!). We as a society decide that it's worth investing the dollars in stopping things that are truly dangerous.

Example: it's worth spending billions of dollars policing murders and locking murderers up because... if murder was legal it would pose a huge threat to our quality of life.

However, given that pot is non-lethal, makes people calm, and pretty much poses zero threat to our overall quality of life, it's NOT worth policing. I'm not getting ANY BENEFIT for the billions of dollars we're pouring into the cause.

You need to provide us with justification for spending all of those dollars, and allowing tthe drug cartels to maintain a consistent revenue stream.

No.. it is EXACTLY the point.. you only want it legalized for the sake of the high.. which is no reason to make it legal...

Many crimes are only crimes of minor or no threat.. you just don't like it in this case emotionally

Oh, and pot is indeed harmful... you just accept that harm personally on an emotional (not rational) level

YOU need to provide justification to CHANGE the line of legality, which you have not done. you have only brought feeling and emotion into it.. the monetary argument is not valid for, as I said, every policing and prosecuting costs money... if the beneficial part is already legal, and all you want is the dangerous, or altering aspect, then you have ZERO argument.. and why I am very comfortable with the line as it is legally

If marijuana prohibition wasn't costing our society some very real and negative consequences, than you would have a point. But it does cost us to keep this drug illegal! That's the point!

By legalizing it, we no longer have to suffer those consequences I laid out.

What justification do you have for taking money out of my paycheck to police a drug that is harmless, non-lethal, and makes people calm and relaxed? Why can't I just keep that money?!

Again, I'm fine with paying to police assault, rape, murder, extortion, because I gain a benefit from doing so.

Pot - no benefit.

 

[DiamondDave]

Yes, I believe in drawing a line there. I am also a veteran and own firearms. I would draw the line at fully automatic weapons. After going through a lot of gun control threads, I think that moves to control magazine size or what guns cosmetically look like are pretty futile. I'd like to see guns taken out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them, but not sure how to go about actually accomplishing that. To paraphrase Alvin Lee (RIP) "I'd love to change the world, but I don't know what to do."

So you are a hypocrite... lines where you like it emotionally.. no lines where you like it emotionally

got it

Well, for one thing, nobody is going to kill someone by smoking a doobie, whereas some jackass shooting guns in a theater or school will get someone killed. Has more to do with pragmatism than emotion. I should clarify that I do draw a distinction between harmless and potentially harmful drugs. Cannabis is pretty much a benign and harmless plant, not a drug. Heroin used to be sold over the counter. Cocaine was once part of the Coca-Cola drink. I think drug addiction should be treated as a medical issue, not a legal one.

Are you suggesting that unless I support people having unfettered access to nuclear weapons and death rays, I am being hypocritical because I want a harmless plant legal?

It is not harmless.. this is a fact.. the harmless or beneficial part IS ALREADY LEGAL.. the harmful and altering aspect is the only thing differing from the Marinol to the plant/drug

 

[DiamondDave]

Yes, I realize policing things cost money (you're missing the point!). We as a society decide that it's worth investing the dollars in stopping things that are truly dangerous.

Example: it's worth spending billions of dollars policing murders and locking murderers up because... if murder was legal it would pose a huge threat to our quality of life.

However, given that pot is non-lethal, makes people calm, and pretty much poses zero threat to our overall quality of life, it's NOT worth policing. I'm not getting ANY BENEFIT for the billions of dollars we're pouring into the cause.

You need to provide us with justification for spending all of those dollars, and allowing tthe drug cartels to maintain a consistent revenue stream.

No.. it is EXACTLY the point.. you only want it legalized for the sake of the high.. which is no reason to make it legal...

Many crimes are only crimes of minor or no threat.. you just don't like it in this case emotionally

Oh, and pot is indeed harmful... you just accept that harm personally on an emotional (not rational) level

YOU need to provide justification to CHANGE the line of legality, which you have not done. you have only brought feeling and emotion into it.. the monetary argument is not valid for, as I said, every policing and prosecuting costs money... if the beneficial part is already legal, and all you want is the dangerous, or altering aspect, then you have ZERO argument.. and why I am very comfortable with the line as it is legally

If marijuana prohibition wasn't costing our society some very real and negative consequences, than you would have a point. But it does cost us to keep this drug illegal! That's the point!

By legalizing it, we no longer have to suffer those consequences I laid out.

What justification do you have for taking money out of my paycheck to police a drug that is harmless, non-lethal, and makes people calm and relaxed? Why can't I just keep that money?!

Again, I'm fine with paying to police assault, rape, murder, extortion, because I gain a benefit from doing so.

Pot - no benefit.

So you only want it legalized because you like the negative or altering effects.. as I said.. no benefit at all from legalizing it... might as well take away enforcing indecency laws, hurts nobody.. no harm in graffiti... no harm in lots of things

And as stated, it is NOT harmless.. the harmless parts ARE LEGAL

Do not keep spouting fallacies as truth

 

[KevinWestern]

So you are a hypocrite... lines where you like it emotionally.. no lines where you like it emotionally

got it

Well, for one thing, nobody is going to kill someone by smoking a doobie, whereas some jackass shooting guns in a theater or school will get someone killed. Has more to do with pragmatism than emotion. I should clarify that I do draw a distinction between harmless and potentially harmful drugs. Cannabis is pretty much a benign and harmless plant, not a drug. Heroin used to be sold over the counter. Cocaine was once part of the Coca-Cola drink. I think drug addiction should be treated as a medical issue, not a legal one.

Are you suggesting that unless I support people having unfettered access to nuclear weapons and death rays, I am being hypocritical because I want a harmless plant legal?

It is not harmless.. this is a fact.. the harmless or beneficial part IS ALREADY LEGAL.. the harmful and altering aspect is the only thing differing from the Marinol to the plant/drug

Yes but we're spending billions policing the illegal part! What justification do you have for those wasted resources. You need to justify using those resources and dollars because they come from my pocket!

 

[KevinWestern]

No.. it is EXACTLY the point.. you only want it legalized for the sake of the high.. which is no reason to make it legal...

Many crimes are only crimes of minor or no threat.. you just don't like it in this case emotionally

Oh, and pot is indeed harmful... you just accept that harm personally on an emotional (not rational) level

YOU need to provide justification to CHANGE the line of legality, which you have not done. you have only brought feeling and emotion into it.. the monetary argument is not valid for, as I said, every policing and prosecuting costs money... if the beneficial part is already legal, and all you want is the dangerous, or altering aspect, then you have ZERO argument.. and why I am very comfortable with the line as it is legally

If marijuana prohibition wasn't costing our society some very real and negative consequences, than you would have a point. But it does cost us to keep this drug illegal! That's the point!

By legalizing it, we no longer have to suffer those consequences I laid out.

What justification do you have for taking money out of my paycheck to police a drug that is harmless, non-lethal, and makes people calm and relaxed? Why can't I just keep that money?!

Again, I'm fine with paying to police assault, rape, murder, extortion, because I gain a benefit from doing so.

Pot - no benefit.

So you only want it legalized because you like the negative or altering effects.. as I said.. no benefit at all from legalizing it... might as well take away enforcing indecency laws, hurts nobody.. no harm in graffiti... no harm in lots of things

And as stated, it is NOT harmless.. the harmless parts ARE LEGAL

Do not keep spouting fallacies as truth

The benefit - Dave - of legalizing it does NOT lie in the drug.

The benefit is we get to keep billions of tax dollars, free up prisons, and cripple the cartels. That is the benefit we're missing out on... Get it?

 

[DiamondDave]

Well, for one thing, nobody is going to kill someone by smoking a doobie, whereas some jackass shooting guns in a theater or school will get someone killed. Has more to do with pragmatism than emotion. I should clarify that I do draw a distinction between harmless and potentially harmful drugs. Cannabis is pretty much a benign and harmless plant, not a drug. Heroin used to be sold over the counter. Cocaine was once part of the Coca-Cola drink. I think drug addiction should be treated as a medical issue, not a legal one.

Are you suggesting that unless I support people having unfettered access to nuclear weapons and death rays, I am being hypocritical because I want a harmless plant legal?

It is not harmless.. this is a fact.. the harmless or beneficial part IS ALREADY LEGAL.. the harmful and altering aspect is the only thing differing from the Marinol to the plant/drug

Yes but we're spending billions policing the illegal part! What justification do you have for those wasted resources. You need to justify using those resources and dollars because they come from my pocket!

We spend millions and billions on all illegal parts of everything illegal

I do not need to justify... you need to justify the CHANGE that is only based on the want of the harmful or altering

 

[Borillar]

So you are a hypocrite... lines where you like it emotionally.. no lines where you like it emotionally

got it

Well, for one thing, nobody is going to kill someone by smoking a doobie, whereas some jackass shooting guns in a theater or school will get someone killed. Has more to do with pragmatism than emotion. I should clarify that I do draw a distinction between harmless and potentially harmful drugs. Cannabis is pretty much a benign and harmless plant, not a drug. Heroin used to be sold over the counter. Cocaine was once part of the Coca-Cola drink. I think drug addiction should be treated as a medical issue, not a legal one.

Are you suggesting that unless I support people having unfettered access to nuclear weapons and death rays, I am being hypocritical because I want a harmless plant legal?

It is not harmless.. this is a fact.. the harmless or beneficial part IS ALREADY LEGAL.. the harmful and altering aspect is the only thing differing from the Marinol to the plant/drug

What is this harmful aspect you are speaking of? The euphoric effect? Munchies? BTW Marinol can have these effects too.

 

[The Rabbi]

If marijuana prohibition wasn't costing our society some very real and negative consequences, than you would have a point. But it does cost us to keep this drug illegal! That's the point!

By legalizing it, we no longer have to suffer those consequences I laid out.

What justification do you have for taking money out of my paycheck to police a drug that is harmless, non-lethal, and makes people calm and relaxed? Why can't I just keep that money?!

Again, I'm fine with paying to police assault, rape, murder, extortion, because I gain a benefit from doing so.

Pot - no benefit.

So you only want it legalized because you like the negative or altering effects.. as I said.. no benefit at all from legalizing it... might as well take away enforcing indecency laws, hurts nobody.. no harm in graffiti... no harm in lots of things

And as stated, it is NOT harmless.. the harmless parts ARE LEGAL

Do not keep spouting fallacies as truth

The benefit - Dave - of legalizing it does NOT lie in the drug.

The benefit is we get to keep billions of tax dollars, free up prisons, and cripple the cartels. That is the benefit we're missing out on... Get it?

What will it cost to regulate it, tax it, police it, and lock up those convicted of DUI? Plus the cost of workplace accidents caused by people smoking on the job?

 

[DiamondDave]

If marijuana prohibition wasn't costing our society some very real and negative consequences, than you would have a point. But it does cost us to keep this drug illegal! That's the point!

By legalizing it, we no longer have to suffer those consequences I laid out.

What justification do you have for taking money out of my paycheck to police a drug that is harmless, non-lethal, and makes people calm and relaxed? Why can't I just keep that money?!

Again, I'm fine with paying to police assault, rape, murder, extortion, because I gain a benefit from doing so.

Pot - no benefit.

So you only want it legalized because you like the negative or altering effects.. as I said.. no benefit at all from legalizing it... might as well take away enforcing indecency laws, hurts nobody.. no harm in graffiti... no harm in lots of things

And as stated, it is NOT harmless.. the harmless parts ARE LEGAL

Do not keep spouting fallacies as truth

The benefit - Dave - of legalizing it does NOT lie in the drug.

The benefit is we get to keep billions of tax dollars, free up prisons, and cripple the cartels. That is the benefit we're missing out on... Get it?

As stated.. you spend millions and billions on many 'no harm' crimes.. the point is not valid

You want change only based on the harmful or altering.. and that is not valid in itself

 

[The Rabbi]

Well, for one thing, nobody is going to kill someone by smoking a doobie, whereas some jackass shooting guns in a theater or school will get someone killed. Has more to do with pragmatism than emotion. I should clarify that I do draw a distinction between harmless and potentially harmful drugs. Cannabis is pretty much a benign and harmless plant, not a drug. Heroin used to be sold over the counter. Cocaine was once part of the Coca-Cola drink. I think drug addiction should be treated as a medical issue, not a legal one.

Are you suggesting that unless I support people having unfettered access to nuclear weapons and death rays, I am being hypocritical because I want a harmless plant legal?

It is not harmless.. this is a fact.. the harmless or beneficial part IS ALREADY LEGAL.. the harmful and altering aspect is the only thing differing from the Marinol to the plant/drug

What is this harmful aspect you are speaking of? The euphoric effect? Munchies? BTW Marinol can have these effects too.

Do you really think it is not harmful at all? Really?