Marijuana

[DuLake]

So. . . Ganja's a topic now, right? What does everyone think? Is smoking pot wrong? Should it be decriminalized or left illegal?

[lemmingllama]

Personally, as long as it is used only for small time recreation, then I see no problem with it. Alcohol is more problematic than marijuana. Yes yes, pot is an introduction drug to other things. However, it is fairly safe. So as long as they put it in the same category as alcohol, in the fact that it can only be purchased by people of a certain age (although a quantity constraint would also be good), then I personally see no real problem with it. This way the government makes money off of it, and the police can focus more on the harder drugs.

[Pinkie Pie]

legalize it 420 smoke weed erryday smoke weed smoke weed

i mean what

Anyway, I've done it before, and it was pretty grand I have to say > w> It should be legalized and taxed tbh. Just think of the sick money the government would make from it.

[DuLake]

Not saying where I fall yet, but I hear the taxation argument a lot and that's really not the question right now. The current American argument isn't really for legalization as much as decriminalization. You see, states like Colorado aren't (and can't) legalizing pot -- since it's a federal offense -- they're decriminalizing it (meaning they're removing are severely reducing the punishment and enforcement of the law). For example, when New York decriminalized marijuana, it didn't go into any stores, drug dealers were just not arrested when they started selling in front of cops. So, while the taxation argument is fair, it's not really a part of the current American Marijuana debate.

[lemmingllama]

 So, while the taxation argument is fair, it's not really a part of the current American Marijuana debate.

 

Haha, but I am a Canadian!!!!

 

Joking aside, if they started taxing it then people would continue to grow their own. It really isnt all that difficult to grow, just needs heat and water like any other plant. One reason why people speculate that they haven't legalized it is due to the ease that people can get it, if it was legalized then people wouldnt buy it from stores and just grow their own instead.

[DuLake]

Truth. No matter how low the taxes, the guy on the corner will always be able to sell it for cheaper.

[† Mute point]

Unless they make it legal only through licensed dealers. Much like alcohol and tobacco.

 

I don't smoke it, but it doesn't bother me that others do. I don't care how safe you think it is, or how little you think it affects you though. Anything that makes you think the texture pattern on your drywall is funny is not safe to use while driving. (Yes, I have seen this happen)

[lemmingllama]

Truth. No matter how low the taxes, the guy on the corner will always be able to sell it for cheaper.

 

One other quick thing before I float off to bed. If it was legalized, then the marijuana that was purchased from stores would be guaranteed to not contain filler. Because of this, we wouldn't have quite as many stories about people lacing marijuana with hard drugs or feces. Makes it safer for everyone.

[Malyssa Rahl]

Legalizing it completely could be good or bad. It would probably reduce the number of users, because there is no rebellion in using something you're allowed to use.

 

If they do make it legal, it needs to be through licensed distributors only. That way everyone gets the pure stuff instead of worrying about someone lacing it with rat poison or something.

 

Treat it the same way as alcohol in regard to driving, though obviously they'd need a different kind of test to determine that one.

 

 

No, I don't smoke it, and wouldn't even if it were 100% legal. No issues with others smoking it though.

[Kasoivc]

I'm not really for or against it, but I'd rather get it legalized for the sake of prevention of the insanity that its already brought about.

 

Like Mal noted, if it were made available only through licensed distributors, safety issues concerning whether or not it is pure or tainted would be moot, and it would also still be taxable like tobacco to generate revenues for the government.

 

The fact that states have begun to decriminalize it is setting a precedent in standards. Removing enforcement makes it essentially "legal" because the U.S. Government won't be able to chase after; otherwise you'll have a major states rights issue if the government intervenes to enforce the "illegal status" of marijuana.

 

I personally don't care much, to me I treat it as a regular drug; whether its over/under the counter, if you take enough or do enough of a drug, you're going to get addicted. Its always been like that, unless you have a highly unaddictive personality. Then you're good.

[DuLake]

The fact that states have begun to decriminalize it is setting a precedent in standards. Removing enforcement makes it essentially "legal" because the U.S. Government won't be able to chase after; otherwise you'll have a major states rights issue if the government intervenes to enforce the "illegal status" of marijuana.

 

There actually has been federal intervention in California a few times by the FBI. They don't go after consumers -- mostly growing operations and the occasional dispensary (usually ones that are grossly out of compliance with California state standards though). Granted, it's kind of difficult to gauge how that would translate to states like Colorado, since it's a different sort of legal structure ("medicinal" exceptions vs decriminalization).

 

I personally don't care much, to me I treat it as a regular drug; whether its over/under the counter, if you take enough or do enough of a drug, you're going to get addicted. Its always been like that, unless you have a highly unaddictive personality. Then you're good.

 

I have to disagree. Traditionally, addictions are the result of the brain trying to repeat a previously experienced "high." The brain records chemical surges brought on by risky or exciting behavior. For example, a man wins a small amount of money on the slot machines, his dopamine levels surge, and his brain wants to replicate that sensation. Of course, dopamine surges can be caused by substances such as nicotine and cocaine as well as any number of risky or thrilling acts (such as gambling or sex or internet shopping). Of course, some addictions -- such as alcoholism -- are a little more complicated (and not entirely understood), but that is the basic current understanding of what addiction is.

 

Marijuana, on the other hand, suppresses dopamine and is therefore not addictive by current medical standards. I have met people who abuse marijuana, or feel symptoms when in withdrawal, so I'd agree that there are addictive qualities to prolonged marijuana use, but -- as you point out -- the same could be said -- often more so -- for most things.

[† Mute point]

Anything and everything can be addictive. Even stuff that is good for you. Physical activity, food, drink, and (obviously) drugs. All have some impact on brain chemistry.

 

Some things are more addictive than others. Marijuana is a more subtle addiction than say, heroin, but both are still addictive.

 

"I do it because I like it. I can stop any time! *buys another bag for tomorrow.*"

 

It's like any habit, the more you do it, the more you want to keep doing it. Eventually, the brain will actively crave whatever it is that you're doing... And that's where withdrawal symptoms kick in.

 

In some cases, it is the natural brain chemicals that you are actually addicted to, But not always.

[RYONBO]

 

The fact that states have begun to decriminalize it is setting a precedent in standards. Removing enforcement makes it essentially "legal" because the U.S. Government won't be able to chase after; otherwise you'll have a major states rights issue if the government intervenes to enforce the "illegal status" of marijuana.

 

There actually has been federal intervention in California a few times by the FBI. They don't go after consumers -- mostly growing operations and the occasional dispensary (usually ones that are grossly out of compliance with California state standards though). Granted, it's kind of difficult to gauge how that would translate to states like Colorado, since it's a different sort of legal structure ("medicinal" exceptions vs decriminalization).

 

I personally don't care much, to me I treat it as a regular drug; whether its over/under the counter, if you take enough or do enough of a drug, you're going to get addicted. Its always been like that, unless you have a highly unaddictive personality. Then you're good.

 

I have to disagree. Traditionally, addictions are the result of the brain trying to repeat a previously experienced "high." The brain records chemical surges brought on by risky or exciting behavior. For example, a man wins a small amount of money on the slot machines, his dopamine levels surge, and his brain wants to replicate that sensation. Of course, dopamine surges can be caused by substances such as nicotine and cocaine as well as any number of risky or thrilling acts (such as gambling or sex or internet shopping). Of course, some addictions -- such as alcoholism -- are a little more complicated (and not entirely understood), but that is the basic current understanding of what addiction is.

 

Marijuana, on the other hand, suppresses dopamine and is therefore not addictive by current medical standards. I have met people who abuse marijuana, or feel symptoms when in withdrawal, so I'd agree that there are addictive qualities to prolonged marijuana use, but -- as you point out -- the same could be said -- often more so -- for most things.

 

dulake said almost everything I could think of; I have no problem with people smoking marijuana as long as it isin't done in a public space, or smeltby people who don't want to smell it. I personally think it stinks; when its burnt after being dried and cured that is.My cause for concern is the risk of overdosing

here in Jamaica the topic of weed can get annoying, I also have a story or two. have you ever found a decent amount of it; offered any by friends, had a classmate in college sit next to you with with a strong stench of it, or even kicked a joint out of a public passenger vehicle? The topic came to mind after watching NieA under 7.

[HeavenlyClassic]

bleh

Edited June 9, 2014 by HeavenlyClassic

[Princess]

The only good thing about it is how it relaxes you, the bad side is the side effects, easily paranoid, can get angry easily. It really depends on the person too and how much they smoke it.

Personally I hate it.

[Tanis]

 

The only good thing about it is how it relaxes you, the bad side is the side effects, easily paranoid, can get angry easily. It really depends on the person too and how much they smoke it.

Personally I hate it.

 

I thought this thread was about weed, not booze.

I don't do either.

But, lets face it, booze is WAY worse.

[Princess]

I was talking about weed. I know how it is from someone I know who smokes it.

[Tanis]

 

I was talking about weed. I know how it is from someone I know who smokes it.

 

So, anecdotal?

I was just saying that booze is FAR worse.

Unless you splice something with weed, it's very very rarely more harmful than tobacco.

[Princess]

True

[RabbitBones]

As someone who spends a lot of time around pot heads, I think it's annoying. But if cigarettes can be legal, I don't understand what the issue is with pot. Pot relaxes you and... makes you eat. Cigs rot your lungs... and everyone else's lungs. Not to mention, people who smoke cigarettes are frequently intolerable to be around. I'm allergic, and so many people think it's their right to smoke in public, confined areas. You are literally harming other people doing that. Pot smokers... tend to be lax and happy. They may act a bit stupid, but booze makes you twice as stupid. So. I'd switch the legality of pot and cigs if I could.