Irony re: marijuana

[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

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

Mind/mood altering as well as the toxic aspects of the ingesting or smoking of the raw material...

Marinol is actually prescribed to increase appetite in cancer patients...

All you have left that is not legal is the smoke and the high.. PERIOD

As stated.. if cigarettes were on the other side of the legal line, even though I was a smoker for YEARS, I would have NO argument in making it legal and taking it off the illegal list

 

[KevinWestern]

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?

Oh come on, even you know this isn't a strong argument.

Do we not already spend money on pot DUIs and workplace accidents? Do you really think incrementally there will be a significant change?

Alcohols legal, but that's still not allowed at work. Why would pot be any different?

Do you realize how much we spend on court fees, prison fees, police fees on policing it, and do you think ALL of that would be trumped by "regulation fees".

And what about the elephant in the room... The cartels. How many alcohol cartel deaths have you heard about in the past 6 months?

Those are very real consequences that we suffer because pot is illegal. The benefit of legalization is no longer suffering those consequences.

Come on man...

 

[Borillar]

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?

Personally? Yeah, I think it's harmless. But even if it was at all harmful, the penalties far outweigh the perceived harm, IMHO.

 

[Rocko]

The last thing we need is a more liberal society towards drugs.

Why?

Because we need need less misfits in our society, not more.

 

[KevinWestern]

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

What no harm crimes are you talking about - name a few? And if you do find some, why keep those laws in tact (what's the benefit)?

Are you a businessperson? Here's a question; if you are running a business, and are currently spending $10 million a year on a component that adds no benefit to your product... Wouldn't it make sense to remove that component? Or would you simply keep paying for it?

 

[KevinWestern]

The last thing we need is a more liberal society towards drugs.

Why?

Because we need need less misfits in our society, not more.

We need less waste in our legal system. Policing a non-fatal drug like pot is waste that we need to cut out.

The billions we pour into policing it can be used to build schools and roads.

Cocaine, meth, heroin... Those are dangerous drugs that are easily fatal. It's worth the cost of policing.

But pot.. No.

 

[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

My argument for legalization is not "I want to get high".

My argument is that it's not worth throwing billions of dollars away to policing it. And it's not worth the tens of thousands of deaths that occur because of the resulting drug trade.

If thousands dead are worth the price (for you) to make illegal a non-fatal plant, than I think you need to reexamine your own personal values.

 

[Rocko]

Why?

Because we need need less misfits in our society, not more.

We need less waste in our legal system. Policing a non-fatal drug like pot is waste that we need to cut out.

The billions we pour into policing it can be used to build schools and roads.

Cocaine, meth, heroin... Those are dangerous drugs that are easily fatal. It's worth the cost of policing.

But pot.. No.

Yeah it's costs money to criminalize pot, but I think we're better off paying that price as opposed to not paying it and having more druggies.

 

[Borillar]

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.

Mind/mood altering as well as the toxic aspects of the ingesting or smoking of the raw material...

Marinol is actually prescribed to increase appetite in cancer patients...

All you have left that is not legal is the smoke and the high.. PERIOD

As stated.. if cigarettes were on the other side of the legal line, even though I was a smoker for YEARS, I would have NO argument in making it legal and taking it off the illegal list

Actually Marinol has many of the same psychoactive effects that marijuana has. Marijuana in smoked or vaporized form is probably better for patients undergoing chemotherapy than a pill. If you are puking everything up, how are you going to keep a pill down?

 

[Mr. Shaman]

There is already THC in a pill. Marinol. So the mice cancer study, which injected THC directly into their stomachs, supports the legalization of Marinol.

That conversation's (already) been had...and, users prefer the non-concentrated THC.

Marinol vs. Natural Plant

A druggie site as proof.. of COURSE They want the one that gets them high...

You are a laughable troll

Got your butt kicked by the facts, again, huh????

Amazing.....

 

[sitarro]

Feds at the nci report pot has effects in stalling certain cancers. Shocker.

Cannabis and Cannabinoids (PDQ®) - National Cancer Institute

Folks don take to kindly to science 'round these parts...best get on

parrot.

 

[KevinWestern]

Because we need need less misfits in our society, not more.

We need less waste in our legal system. Policing a non-fatal drug like pot is waste that we need to cut out.

The billions we pour into policing it can be used to build schools and roads.

Cocaine, meth, heroin... Those are dangerous drugs that are easily fatal. It's worth the cost of policing.

But pot.. No.

Yeah it's costs money to criminalize pot, but I think we're better off paying that price as opposed to not paying it and having more druggies.

See, now we have an argument. Thanks.

I can see the point with cocaine and other deadly drugs. Drugs that kill people and basically make them worthless (ie meth).

But pot? Its non lethal, non addictive, people generally can still function just fine (a lot of very successful people smoke), and too a bunch of people are gonna smoke it regardless of the law (ie how many incremental smokers will you get anyway?).

Too, is policing a non lethal drug really worth billions of taxpayer dollars, all the cartel deaths, all of the lives ruined by prison, all of the resources drained in our courts and police offices (maybe they could spend that time tracking down more pedophiles or murderers)?

If prohibiting something results in tens of thousands of drug trade deaths every year, you better have a pretty darn good reason for prohibiting it. Are we saving tens of thousands of lives every year by making it illegal? Given that no one in history has ever overdosed on pot, id say no.

Are all those costs really worth it? I'm giving tangible consequences, do you have an equivalent tangible benefits?

 

[Mr. Shaman]

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

If cocaine, meth, and heroin were legal, would you rush out to buy them? If not, why do you assume everybody else would? Keeping drugs illegal is giving power to gangs, pushers, and organized crime.

Whether I would is irrelevant... many would...

I guess keeping murder and violence illegal gives power to criminals, gangs, mobs, etc... gotta cut that out too

Sophomoric-logic; how quaint!​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

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...

Too-much freedom, huh??

 

[The Rabbi]

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?

Oh come on, even you know this isn't a strong argument.

Do we not already spend money on pot DUIs and workplace accidents? Do you really think incrementally there will be a significant change?

Alcohols legal, but that's still not allowed at work. Why would pot be any different?

Do you realize how much we spend on court fees, prison fees, police fees on policing it, and do you think ALL of that would be trumped by "regulation fees".

And what about the elephant in the room... The cartels. How many alcohol cartel deaths have you heard about in the past 6 months?

Those are very real consequences that we suffer because pot is illegal. The benefit of legalization is no longer suffering those consequences.

Come on man...

So your argument is we already spend lots of money so what's a little more? Really? That's it?

 

[The Rabbi]

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?

Personally? Yeah, I think it's harmless. But even if it was at all harmful, the penalties far outweigh the perceived harm, IMHO.

OK, that pretty much rules out any opinion you might have as the bad effects of MJ are well documented.

 

[KevinWestern]

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?

Oh come on, even you know this isn't a strong argument.

Do we not already spend money on pot DUIs and workplace accidents? Do you really think incrementally there will be a significant change?

Alcohols legal, but that's still not allowed at work. Why would pot be any different?

Do you realize how much we spend on court fees, prison fees, police fees on policing it, and do you think ALL of that would be trumped by "regulation fees".

And what about the elephant in the room... The cartels. How many alcohol cartel deaths have you heard about in the past 6 months?

Those are very real consequences that we suffer because pot is illegal. The benefit of legalization is no longer suffering those consequences.

Come on man...

So your argument is we already spend lots of money so what's a little more? Really? That's it?

What?!

My argument is for us NOT to spend money on things that don't provide us with an equivalent benefit (for the cost).

You're arguing for prohibition, which costs us billions, costs tens of thousands of cartel deaths. I say lets legalize marihuana, save those lives and the billions of dollars...

You're the one who wants to spend those dollars, so you need to justify why. how many more need to die for your cause of criminalizing non lethal, non toxic plants that relax people?

 

[Mr. Shaman]

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

...Kinda like your Marinol-trip.

Got it!!​

 

[ABikerSailor]

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

Cocaine is highly addictive, but it still has medicinal benefits, that's why it's a Schedule II drug.

Meth is highly addictive and has no known medical benefits, neither does heroin, which is why both of those are classed as Schedule I drugs.

Cannabis is NOT PHYSICALLY ADDICTIVE, has PROVEN MEDICAL BENEFITS, yet is still on the Schedule I drug list.

As far as why should it be legal? Because, we already allow highly addictive substances like cigarettes and alcohol (and yes, drink enough alcohol and you will become physically addicted), and yet we refuse to allow cannabis.

The benefits to legalization would be not only would we be able to use the buds for smoke, but the rest of the plant could be used for things like cloth, paper, food and biofuel, which would contribute greatly towards helping out the economy.

At the very least, cannabis should be moved to Schedule II like cocaine is, because there ARE proven medical benefits, and cannabis is not physically addictive.

You might say that it could become psychologically addictive, but the same could be said about gambling, shopping, or co-dependent relationships.

 

[ABikerSailor]

And, as far as Marinol? Yes, it is almost pure THC, but some people who have used it have reported negative effects like hallucinations and feeling paranoid when they tried pure THC in the form of Marinol or a vaporizer, yet they didn't experience any of those negative effects when it was smoked or consumed in food made with cannabis.