#101 Posted by Dagbiker (6977 posts) -
#102 Posted by Milkman (16838 posts) -
#103 Posted by SexyToad (2760 posts) -

So I live in WA. I can't vote yet, but I if I could have, I would have voted to legalize it. I never tried it nor wish too but people are doing it. Cigarettes and alchohol can be just as damaging, but then why are they legal? It also brings revenue to the state, so rather than having people smoke illegally, they could smoke legally and bring money to the state. So I saw no problem in having it legalized.

#104 Posted by Everyones_A_Critic (6301 posts) -
#105 Posted by Dagbiker (6977 posts) -

@Milkman: "The consumption of alcohol overall went down by half in the 1920s; and it remained below pre-Prohibition levels until the 1940s." - Prohibition ended in 1933

#106 Posted by Colourful_Hippie (4363 posts) -
#107 Posted by Freshbandito (686 posts) -

@Dagbiker said:

@Freshbandito: @Colourful_Hippie: Then can you explain why I should feel that legalizing Marijuana is a better option then making Smoking and Alcohol Illegal?

The awful attempts that history show will fail to decrease the amount of usage, what's the phrase americans so love? "If you outlaw guns only outlaws will have guns"

by making these chosen opiates of the masses illegal all you do is increase a criminal element behind them which is far more harmful than the side effects those people who will overindulge suffer from. Legalisation opens up paths for taxation and a much better control of what goes into the substance, look how heavily regulated tobacco is and how the labelling is required by law to show it's harmful side effects and tar / nicotine content, If tobacco were illegal who the hell knows what some shady cartel would be mixing into it to ensure higher profits and maximum addictiveness.

As said, even mostly socially accepted drugs like marijuana have ties to mexican drug cartels who use the profits to fund violence and the sort of attrocities we would all condemn, if legalised all the profits from marijuana sales are state/federal sanctioned and taxed which in a perfect world means more money for firefighters, public education and miniature American flags.

Some people will overindulge and show you the worst of what can come about through substance addiction but the vast majority will use these substances sparingly and know their limits/tolerances, I myself am not a very big drinker nowadays but do enjoy getting merrily drunk for celebrations / parties, only touched marijuana once and didn't get much out of it and I quit smoking a good 4-5 years ago so don't think I'm big on consumption looking to defend my favourite intoxicants.

Now, would you kindly return the favour and tell me your argument for making these substances that people enjoy in all variances (from light, recreational use to dreadful overindulgence) illegal?

#108 Posted by itspizza (435 posts) -

I feel like this is a step in the right direction. I honestly don't see how you can have alcohol and tabacco legal and not weed, which is far less harmless. I have not smoked weed in many years, but when I did it fixed my can't fall asleep issues. People are going to smoke weed irregardless, might as well government regulate it and tax the living hell out of it. I saw that the State of Washington alone will generate an estimated 1.6 billion dollars in tax revenue over the next 5 years if this happens.

#109 Edited by Flawed_System (388 posts) -

@iAmJohn said:

@Flawed_System said:

@bombHills said:

@iAmJohn said:

@Flawed_System said:

Giving it to cancer patients is fine. Recreational use should remain illegal.

Why?

Some people are just too healthy to smoke pot.

Medicinal purposes. I don't support recreational drug usage.

Note that you didn't actually answer my question, you just restated your position. So I'll ask again: Why do you think people should not be allowed to smoke pot if they want?

That's not the question you asked. You asked "Why?" I assumed you were asking why it was okay for cancer patients to use it.

Psychedelic drugs, no matter how presumably "mild" they are, should be legal. Aside from obvious reasons such as operating machinery, vehicles etc. It creates competition among cartels and other illegal avenues to pursue a more aggressive pricing, thus, making territory more valuable. Government control over drugs won't eliminate the cartels, it will make the market more competitive for these cartels, thus, escalating violence. What makes people think they won't undercut government pricing?

#110 Posted by mandude (2669 posts) -

Will it not just be the same deal as Alaska, where we can technically do it under state law, but we'll still be breaking federal law?

#111 Posted by Flawed_System (388 posts) -

@bombHills said:

@Flawed_System said:

@bombHills said:

@iAmJohn said:

@Flawed_System said:

Giving it to cancer patients is fine. Recreational use should remain illegal.

Why?

Some people are just too healthy to smoke pot.

Medicinal purposes. I don't support recreational drug usage.

Recreational/Therapeutical/Medical

It's all from the same plant. How much benefit does one need before it's considered medical? My "recreational" use keeps me happy, gives me insight, helps me relax & sleep. Is that medical enough for ya?

Also, I take it that you do not partake in any recreational substance like caffeine, nicotine, alcohol or viagra (yes, that's recreational). That's great, but please support the right of all people to make their own decisions as to what if any substances to ingest.

I don't consume coffee, nicotine, or alcohol. The only drug you listed was Viagra and that's clearly used for medical purposes (Erectile Dysfunction).

Underlined: Do you support the legalization of any and all drugs?

#112 Posted by McGhee (6094 posts) -

Perhaps those few that still buy the government anti-weed propaganda will learn something when those two states don't fall apart. In fact, if you look at Portugal when they decriminalized marijuana use, the numbers of users went up in the short term, but then in the long term reduced dramatically.

Ask any high schooler which is easier to acquire: alcohol or weed, and most are going to tell you weed is much easier to get. Legalize it and it goes into the light, shady dealers go out of business, prices go down, and it becomes HARDER for kids to get. It is an all around win-win situation.

And for those saying "pot just turns you into a loser." No it doesn't. Losers are born everyday. They just find different things to waste their time and money on. Like video games for instance.

#113 Posted by Dagbiker (6977 posts) -

@Freshbandito said:

@Dagbiker said:

@Freshbandito: @Colourful_Hippie: Then can you explain why I should feel that legalizing Marijuana is a better option then making Smoking and Alcohol Illegal?

The awful attempts that history show will fail to decrease the amount of usage, what's the phrase americans so love? "If you outlaw guns only outlaws will have guns"

by making these chosen opiates of the masses illegal all you do is increase a criminal element behind them which is far more harmful than the side effects those people who will overindulge suffer from. Legalisation opens up paths for taxation and a much better control of what goes into the substance, look how heavily regulated tobacco is and how the labelling is required by law to show it's harmful side effects and tar / nicotine content, If tobacco were illegal who the hell knows what some shady cartel would be mixing into it to ensure higher profits and maximum addictiveness.

As said, even mostly socially accepted drugs like marijuana have ties to mexican drug cartels who use the profits to fund violence and the sort of attrocities we would all condemn, if legalised all the profits from marijuana sales are state/federal sanctioned and taxed which in a perfect world means more money for firefighters, public education and miniature American flags.

Some people will overindulge and show you the worst of what can come about through substance addiction but the vast majority will use these substances sparingly and know their limits/tolerances, I myself am not a very big drinker nowadays but do enjoy getting merrily drunk for celebrations / parties, only touched marijuana once and didn't get much out of it and I quit smoking a good 4-5 years ago so don't think I'm big on consumption looking to defend my favourite intoxicants.

Now, would you kindly return the favour and tell me your argument for making these substances that people enjoy in all variances (from light, recreational use to dreadful overindulgence) illegal?

I don't have an argument, I don't have an opinion, I wanted someone to give me a good argument as to why I should want to legalize marijuana, but then everyone jumped on me. Thank you.

#114 Posted by Colourful_Hippie (4363 posts) -

@Flawed_System said:

@iAmJohn said:

@Flawed_System said:

@bombHills said:

@iAmJohn said:

@Flawed_System said:

Giving it to cancer patients is fine. Recreational use should remain illegal.

Why?

Some people are just too healthy to smoke pot.

Medicinal purposes. I don't support recreational drug usage.

Note that you didn't actually answer my question, you just restated your position. So I'll ask again: Why do you think people should not be allowed to smoke pot if they want?

That's not the question you asked. You asked "Why?" I assumed you were asking why it was okay for cancer patients to use it.

Psychedelic drugs, no matter how presumably "mild" they are, should be legal. Aside from obvious reasons such as operating machinery, vehicles etc. It creates competition among cartels and other illegal avenues to pursue a more aggressive pricing, thus, making territory more valuable. Government control over drugs won't eliminate the cartels, it will make the market more competitive for these cartels, thus, escalating violence. What makes people think they won't undercut government pricing?

I highly doubt that will end up happening. I have no idea why any sane person would give their money to drug cartels for shit schwag over paying for regulated high grade marijuana just to save themselves a quick buck. That just seems ridiculous to me. If what you say is true then why didn't we see this happen with alcohol when it became legal again in the US? The cartels will be fine for now for sure because legalization isn't widespread but once it is I personally think they're fucked and will have to find new sources of revenue like they always do.

@mandude said:

Will it not just be the same deal as Alaska, where we can technically do it under state law, but we'll still be breaking federal law?

Yes but it's not like the DEA will be checking everybody to make sure they don't have bud on them. Having the local police off your back is enough for now. It's the distributors that still have to worry about the feds.

#115 Posted by Azteck (7449 posts) -

@Dagbiker:

So now we are legalizing drugs based on the 3 year old mentality of "If they get to drink beer and smoke, I want my drugs too."

This sounds like an opinion to me, but hey, maybe I'm just crazy.

#116 Posted by Dagbiker (6977 posts) -

@Azteck said:

@Dagbiker:

So now we are legalizing drugs based on the 3 year old mentality of "If they get to drink beer and smoke, I want my drugs too."

This sounds like an opinion to me, but hey, maybe I'm just crazy.

It was not an opinion it was a commentary on the arguments being made. That is the reason why I asked some one to make a better argument.

#117 Posted by LikeaSsur (1537 posts) -

@murisan said:

@Dagbiker said:

@LikeaSsur

@murisan said:

@Hunter5024 said:

Cool that the pre existing stoners can indulge in their habit without fear of prosecution, but weeds shitty in enough subtle ways that it can ruin your life without letting you know it's doing it, and I seriously hope legalizing it doesn't draw more people into the hobby.

lolwut? Guess what else is shitty in subtle ways? Beer. Liquor. Wine. Cigarettes. And they're shitty in NOT so subtle ways, too. Not sure where you've attained your perception of marijuana, but I'm sorry you think it can ruin a life.

Any drug can ruin your life, stop putting marijuana on the "IT'S NOT AS BAD AS EVIL ALCOHOL" pedestal.

Yah. Any drug is dangerous and will have consequences. That's why they usually only let doctors prescribe them.

Except, you know... Tylenol... which has more consequences ranging from liver damage to death every year than the entirety of the United States' marijuana users combined over the history of the nation.

Oh, are you referring to the poisoned Tylenol that killed people? Or were you going to compare drug abusers vs. responsible potheads?

Real fair comparison.

#118 Edited by No0b0rAmA (1490 posts) -

Just legalize marijuana in one state, say Alaska, and then move all of the potheads there and then don't let them leave. The U.S will fix its problem right there.

#119 Posted by Everyones_A_Critic (6301 posts) -

@McGhee said:

Perhaps those few that still buy the government anti-weed propaganda will learn something when those two states don't fall apart. In fact, if you look at Portugal when they decriminalized marijuana use, the numbers of users went up in the short term, but then in the long term reduced dramatically.

Ask any high schooler which is easier to acquire: alcohol or weed, and most are going to tell you weed is much easier to get. Legalize it and it goes into the light, shady dealers go out of business, prices go down, and it becomes HARDER for kids to get. It is an all around win-win situation.

And for those saying "pot just turns you into a loser." No it doesn't. Losers are born everyday. They just find different things to waste their time and money on. Like video games for instance.

HOLY FUCK THIS, THIS, THIS, THIS, 1,000 TIMES THIS!!!

#120 Edited by Colourful_Hippie (4363 posts) -

@No0b0rAmA said:

Just legalize marijuana in one state, say Alaska, and then move all of the potheads there and then don't let them leave. The U.S will fix it's problem right there.

Or better yet, let's legalize marijuana everywhere except for one state and then have all of the people who think every weed smoker falls into this category move there and never let them leave. Win/win if you ask me.

#121 Posted by Milkman (16838 posts) -

@No0b0rAmA said:

Just legalize marijuana in one state, say Alaska, and then move all of the potheads there and then don't let them leave. The U.S will fix it's problem right there.

What problem is that solving exactly?

#122 Posted by Freshbandito (686 posts) -

@Dagbiker: Then I'll admit I misread your original intention and thought you were just demonising people who partake in substances of that ilk and reducing the greater discussion of legalised marijuana to a far simpler thing than it is.

#123 Posted by Raven10 (1804 posts) -

Honestly I can't say I would ever smoke weed (or tobacco for that matter) but what right does the government have to tell people what drugs they can and can't use? Using weed hurts only yourself (and not nearly as much as alcohol and tobacco do) and any who may count on you as their friend. If someone wants to fuck up their life then let them. Tax the hell out of them and get some value from their wasted lives instead of wasting government money on trying to stop them. For hard drugs, I am more torn, but honestly I would really be for legalizing all drugs, just with significant warnings and limitations on them. I'll never do drugs, and I'll fight like hell to keep those I love from doing drugs, but in the end that is a personal lifestyle choice and not something the government should have a say in regulating. As long as someone is over 21 they should be free to do as they choose until said actions begin to hurt others.

And before someone asks, I wouldn't support insurance in any way covering drug abuse. If you do it, good for you, but don't expect any help from society unless you pay for it. Pretty simple. Personally I think for a lot of people they start doing drugs as a way of rebelling against something. Take out the rush of doing something illegal and I think a fair number of people wouldn't do drugs at all. Plus you would remove a key source of income from impoverished neighborhoods, forcing people to get honest jobs. If you can buy weed at the local supermarket then there is no need to get it on the street and the entire illegal culture that rises from that is erased. For a good example of what I am talking about see Prohibition. Look at the rise of various gangs, including the Mafia during prohibition. Crime drastically rose during that era because there was a major market for something that the government said we shouldn't have. People became rich by selling booze and people died protecting their illegal empires. The same thing is true right now for other drugs. Remove the laws banning them and crime will drop, and employment will rise. Plus when drugs are being produced by regulated companies there can be a level of quality assurance involved. So you don't see weed that is tainted with God knows what. Honestly a huge percentage of people who have really terrible reactions to smoking weed aren't reacting to the drug, but to other chemicals added into the drug to lower costs. So honestly in my opinion legalizing drugs, and weed especially would be an amazing thing, even though I wouldn't want any of my friends to become involved in those things. I just don't think making drugs illegal stops anyone from doing them. You can have the same "Don't Do Drugs" message for kids while letting adults make their own decisions about what they want to do with their bodies.

#124 Edited by thedj93 (1237 posts) -

i smoke and go to college and right now im getting better grades than i ever have in the past, working hard everyday, and it feels great to stay productive.

this morning it eased my writer's block and allowed me to complete/turn in a major assignment for class.

i'm pretty sure I would have been able to have finish it without being under the influence, but the point is, sometimes it DOES help from a creativity and intelligence (and boredom) standpoint.

it's not like I don't take weeks off from imbibing when i feel myself losing grip on life, but if that's the case its usually a result of stress. the sobriety merely helps me reorient myself. anyways...

TL;DR it's totally possible to nurse a weed habit while simultaneously being a fully functioning human being. most people don't even notice, they just think i laugh a lot because I have a naturally joyful disposition. :)

#125 Posted by GERALTITUDE (3345 posts) -

If anyone thinks stoners are going to move to Washing and Colorado because of those laws they're totally out to lunch. They ain't movin no where! 99% of pot smokers never get busted anyways, so..

#126 Edited by Laurentech (127 posts) -

I'm glad they passed. The feds will probably try their best to squash them, but the public and local governments are becoming more and more in favor of it. I hope it gets the ball rolling elsewhere so that eventually changes can be made at the federal level. I live in a very conservative state, and I happened to ask my doctor for his opinion of cannabis. To my surprise, he responded pretty vigorously saying that it ought to be as available as alcohol is. He's not exactly a young guy, either.

#127 Posted by Dethfish (3670 posts) -

I live in WA but felt too uniformed to vote on anything. If I had voted, I probably would of voted against the legalization of marijuana, mainly just as a gut reaction. I'm alright with it passing though, At least someone is going to give it a shot.

#128 Posted by ThePickle (4184 posts) -

CHANGED MY GAMERTAG TO xXcOloRaD0bLuNtzzzz420Xx

The bigger, in my mind better, news is that gay marriage is legal in Maine and Maryland and Minnesota shot down a law that would ban gay marriage.

Also, ANGUS FUCKING KING. Why is the greatest name in American history not the biggest news story right now?

Angus King.

#129 Posted by Godlyawesomeguy (6398 posts) -

What I have learned about others from this thread: 1.POT CAN RUIN PEOPLE'S LIVES THIS IS A BAD MOVE HERES SOME ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE! 2. I SMOKE EVERYDAY AND WOOOOO LEGALIZED WEED ALSO I AM THE SMARTEST PERSON IN THE WORLD ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE!!!!! 3. I DON'T SMOKE AND AM ON SOME WEIRD MORAL HIGH HORSE BUT I AM GLAD THIS HAPPENED BECAUSE TAXES AND STUFF

#130 Posted by Colourful_Hippie (4363 posts) -

@Godlyawesomeguy: Generalizing is fun.

#131 Posted by Franstone (1124 posts) -

@Dagbiker said:

@OneManX: No, it actualy worked. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prohibition_in_the_United_States

Direct quote from that link 3rd paragraph down.

"The lack of a solid popular consensus for the ban resulted in the growth of vast criminal organizations, including the modern American Mafia, and various other criminal cliques. Widespread disregard of the law also generated rampant corruption among politicians and within police forces."

Yea, that worked...

That must be why it's still in effect.

Hmm... Sounds familiar.

#132 Posted by Flawed_System (388 posts) -

@Colourful_Hippie said:

@Flawed_System said:

@iAmJohn said:

@Flawed_System said:

@bombHills said:

@iAmJohn said:

@Flawed_System said:

Giving it to cancer patients is fine. Recreational use should remain illegal.

Why?

Some people are just too healthy to smoke pot.

Medicinal purposes. I don't support recreational drug usage.

Note that you didn't actually answer my question, you just restated your position. So I'll ask again: Why do you think people should not be allowed to smoke pot if they want?

That's not the question you asked. You asked "Why?" I assumed you were asking why it was okay for cancer patients to use it.

Psychedelic drugs, no matter how presumably "mild" they are, should be legal. Aside from obvious reasons such as operating machinery, vehicles etc. It creates competition among cartels and other illegal avenues to pursue a more aggressive pricing, thus, making territory more valuable. Government control over drugs won't eliminate the cartels, it will make the market more competitive for these cartels, thus, escalating violence. What makes people think they won't undercut government pricing?

I highly doubt that will end up happening. I have no idea why any sane person would give their money to drug cartels for shit schwag over paying for regulated high grade marijuana just to save themselves a quick buck. That just seems ridiculous to me. If what you say is true then why didn't we see this happen with alcohol when it became legal again in the US? The cartels will be fine for now for sure because legalization isn't widespread but once it is I personally think they're fucked and will have to find new sources of revenue like they always do.

Alcohol wasn't a drug that the cartels were interested in.

"The sale of alcohol was illegal, but alcoholic drinks were still widely available. People also kept private bars to serve their guests."

"There were, however, several loopholes for people to legally drink during Prohibition. For instance, the 18th Amendment did not mention the actual drinking of liquor. Since Prohibition went into effect a full year after the 18th Amendment's ratification, many people bought cases of then-legal alcohol and stored them for personal use. The Volstead Act allowed alcohol consumption if it was prescribed by a doctor. Needless to say, large numbers of new prescriptions were written for alcohol."

#133 Posted by captain_clayman (3322 posts) -

Hopefully these states will serve as a small-scale experiment long enough for us to see what kind of impact marijuana legalization would have on a federal level.

#134 Posted by mlarrabee (2967 posts) -

I voted for its legalization because I believe using marijuana is incredibly stupid and true freedom is the freedom to be incredibly stupid, as long as you keep the consequences to yourself.

That said, there is currently no four-minute way to determine the impairment of a user while their vehicle's on the shoulder. Law enforcement needs the THC equivalent of the breathalyzer as soon as possible.

And since it is still illegal on a national level, the ATF is still perfectly free to raid growers, sellers, and users. We're far from the "go and roll a fatty" point.

#135 Posted by Hunter5024 (5702 posts) -

@murisan said:

No, because it's simply not as bad in any way, shape or form. It's not physically addictive, it's not physically damaging if vaporized (my preferred method of intake), and there's no hangovers. Marijuana can ruin your life if you are predisposed to psychological addictions, but then again so can masturbating or drinking cough syrup.

@Colourful_Hippie said:

Who the hell says that? Of course you would want to use weed in moderation and no it isn't physically addicting. The only form of addiction that marijuana can create from extensive use over a long period of time is psychological. There are absolutely no elements in weed that can create a physical withdrawal effect.

This is a common myth perpetuated by drug culture, to justify their habits. There are not multiple types of addiction, all addiction is psychological. The "physical addiction" you're talking about is a bodies physical dependency on certain chemicals in some drugs. This is caused by an outside source interfering with the chemicals in your body over a long period of time, your body adapts to the expected chemicals and comes to depend on them (like with Meth, Alcohol, and yes Marijuana). But this only reinforces a psychological addiction by making your body react in odd ways when you try and give it up, like in the case of pot, you would get cravings, mood swings, maybe headaches, changes in appetite, and sometimes sleep problems. Do you guys just believe everything you get off of pro pot websites or what?

#136 Posted by Intro (1207 posts) -

@Hunter5024 said:

@murisan said:

No, because it's simply not as bad in any way, shape or form. It's not physically addictive, it's not physically damaging if vaporized (my preferred method of intake), and there's no hangovers. Marijuana can ruin your life if you are predisposed to psychological addictions, but then again so can masturbating or drinking cough syrup.

@Colourful_Hippie said:

Who the hell says that? Of course you would want to use weed in moderation and no it isn't physically addicting. The only form of addiction that marijuana can create from extensive use over a long period of time is psychological. There are absolutely no elements in weed that can create a physical withdrawal effect.

Do you guys just believe everything you get off of pro pot websites or what?

Understand what you're saying, but no. They probably just don't ever see or hear about people getting the shakes or having seizures if they're deprived from the drug (because that doesn't happen), like pills can do for example.

Either way, it's much safer than alcohol and tobacco. I say good for the two states, but it doesn't matter if it's legal or not, people are going to smoke it. So why not follow these states and keep taxing the shit out of it? If not, a trip to my dealer is not far away and people in the black market can get my money, not the government. However, if the gov was willing to sell to me legally for a little extra in a professional shop, I'd be more than happy to go there.

Also good to see Mass. allow medical use. I've been taking pills my dermatologist gave me for a skin problem and they make me nauseous and throw up, every time I take them, it never fails. I tried different brand name of the meds and that didn't work either, the pharmacist said it's normal. Unless I smoke before, then I take them and laugh at shit in my house for a couple of hours with no sickness. Believe it or not, I also go to college and have a job that I show up for on time everyday. I'm a criminal, I belong in a prison though.

#137 Posted by PillClinton (3291 posts) -

@Godlyawesomeguy said:

What I have learned about others from this thread: 1.POT CAN RUIN PEOPLE'S LIVES THIS IS A BAD MOVE HERES SOME ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE! 2. I SMOKE EVERYDAY AND WOOOOO LEGALIZED WEED ALSO I AM THE SMARTEST PERSON IN THE WORLD ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE!!!!! 3. I DON'T SMOKE AND AM ON SOME WEIRD MORAL HIGH HORSE BUT I AM GLAD THIS HAPPENED BECAUSE TAXES AND STUFF

How about 4: I've partook quite heavily at various points in my life, and while I'm kind of over the whole thing right now, I recognize it's so utterly harmless, and its benefits far outweigh its detriments.

@mlarrabee said:

I voted for its legalization because I believe using marijuana is incredibly stupid and true freedom is the freedom to be incredibly stupid, as long as you keep the consequences to yourself.

That said, there is currently no four-minute way to determine the impairment of a user while their vehicle's on the shoulder. Law enforcement needs the THC equivalent of the breathalyzer as soon as possible.

And since it is still illegal on a national level, the ATF is still perfectly free to raid growers, sellers, and users. We're far from the "go and roll a fatty" point.

The level of impairment of an experienced Cannabis user while driving is virtually none at all. That can't be said of even the most experienced drinkers when they're truly intoxicated. Alcohol and marijuana are barely analogous in any way.

#138 Posted by Intro (1207 posts) -

@Milkman said:

@No0b0rAmA said:

Just legalize marijuana in one state, say Alaska, and then move all of the potheads there and then don't let them leave. The U.S will fix it's problem right there.

What problem is that solving exactly?

The same problem putting marijuana users in prison is solving. Nothing.

#139 Posted by Hunter5024 (5702 posts) -

@Intro said:

@Hunter5024 said:

@murisan said:

No, because it's simply not as bad in any way, shape or form. It's not physically addictive, it's not physically damaging if vaporized (my preferred method of intake), and there's no hangovers. Marijuana can ruin your life if you are predisposed to psychological addictions, but then again so can masturbating or drinking cough syrup.

@Colourful_Hippie said:

Who the hell says that? Of course you would want to use weed in moderation and no it isn't physically addicting. The only form of addiction that marijuana can create from extensive use over a long period of time is psychological. There are absolutely no elements in weed that can create a physical withdrawal effect.

Do you guys just believe everything you get off of pro pot websites or what?

Understand what you're saying, but no. They probably just don't ever see or hear about people getting the shakes or having seizures if they're deprived from the drug (because that doesn't happen), like pills can do for example.

Ignoring the fact that it would take a high volume of pills over a long period of time to produce withdrawals that severe, and even then only to someone whose already prone to seizures, it doesn't change the fact that an addiction to weed is still an addiction, and acting like that's not a really shitty thing benefits nobody. And comparing weed to other drugs isn't a competent defense, stoners like to spout off facts about some of the shittiest substances on the planet just because it makes weed look better by comparison, but that's like saying a husband who hits his wife isn't so bad by comparing him to a husband who murdered his.

#140 Posted by OneManX (1693 posts) -

@Hunter5024 said:

@Intro said:

@Hunter5024 said:

@murisan said:

No, because it's simply not as bad in any way, shape or form. It's not physically addictive, it's not physically damaging if vaporized (my preferred method of intake), and there's no hangovers. Marijuana can ruin your life if you are predisposed to psychological addictions, but then again so can masturbating or drinking cough syrup.

@Colourful_Hippie said:

Who the hell says that? Of course you would want to use weed in moderation and no it isn't physically addicting. The only form of addiction that marijuana can create from extensive use over a long period of time is psychological. There are absolutely no elements in weed that can create a physical withdrawal effect.

Do you guys just believe everything you get off of pro pot websites or what?

Understand what you're saying, but no. They probably just don't ever see or hear about people getting the shakes or having seizures if they're deprived from the drug (because that doesn't happen), like pills can do for example.

Ignoring the fact that it would take a high volume of pills over a long period of time to produce withdrawals that severe, and even then only to someone whose already prone to seizures, it doesn't change the fact that an addiction to weed is still an addiction, and acting like that's not a really shitty thing benefits nobody. And comparing weed to other drugs isn't a competent defense, stoners like to spout off facts about some of the shittiest substances on the planet just because it makes weed look better by comparison, but that's like saying a husband who hits his wife isn't so bad by comparing him to a husband who murdered his.

Well.. yeah, but that doesn't make any more dangerous than cough syrup, tobacco or alcohol when abused. It all falls on Personal Responsibility, there are restrictions on alcohol and tobacco, why not weed? It is a silly thing that should of been dealt with sooner, considering it is a cheap cash crop, and other places that have legalized and regulated it, are not in constant anarchy which seemed to be the fear, and hopefully that has changed and now people can start having real conversations about the subject.

#141 Posted by PillClinton (3291 posts) -

@Hunter5024 said:

@Intro said:

@Hunter5024 said:

@murisan said:

No, because it's simply not as bad in any way, shape or form. It's not physically addictive, it's not physically damaging if vaporized (my preferred method of intake), and there's no hangovers. Marijuana can ruin your life if you are predisposed to psychological addictions, but then again so can masturbating or drinking cough syrup.

@Colourful_Hippie said:

Who the hell says that? Of course you would want to use weed in moderation and no it isn't physically addicting. The only form of addiction that marijuana can create from extensive use over a long period of time is psychological. There are absolutely no elements in weed that can create a physical withdrawal effect.

Do you guys just believe everything you get off of pro pot websites or what?

Understand what you're saying, but no. They probably just don't ever see or hear about people getting the shakes or having seizures if they're deprived from the drug (because that doesn't happen), like pills can do for example.

Ignoring the fact that it would take a high volume of pills over a long period of time to produce withdrawals that severe, and even then only to someone whose already prone to seizures, it doesn't change the fact that an addiction to weed is still an addiction, and acting like that's not a really shitty thing benefits nobody. And comparing weed to other drugs isn't a competent defense, stoners like to spout off facts about some of the shittiest substances on the planet just because it makes weed look better by comparison, but that's like saying a husband who hits his wife isn't so bad by comparing him to a husband who murdered his.

Weed can definitely produce a psychological addiction (but absolutely no physical addiction whatsoever), and most certainly has the potential to decrease motivation and drive in some people, but it really all depends on the specific person and their levels of usage. I've personally known people on both sides of the spectrum. So while you're not wrong, I think you may be exaggerating a bit.

#142 Posted by Hunter5024 (5702 posts) -

@PillClinton: No such thing as a physical addiction dude, go back and read my post on the last page. Any addiction specialist will tell you exactly the same thing.

#143 Edited by AngriGhandi (779 posts) -

I think the problem here is that we are having arguments about two different things. Everyone needs to start off their post by stating their opinions on alcohol, tobacco, and marijuana's respective legalities.

That way, we can divide our arguments into "people who don't think marijuana should be legal, but do think alcohol and cigarettes should be," which is the mainstream argument we're having, if perhaps a slightly hypocritical one--

And "people who don't think any of those drugs should be legal for anyone," AKA fascists.

Of course, I'm only kidding about the "fascist" bit, ha ha--!

...Please don't invade me.

#144 Posted by cyraxible (688 posts) -

Love the all the condescension and moral superiority going on in this thread. Quality conversations.

#145 Posted by PillClinton (3291 posts) -

@Hunter5024: Yeah, I read it. You're arguing semantics. Physical dependence, which could also be called a physical addiction, is a real thing, no matter how you label it. And that doesn't disprove my point anyway. Marijuana does not create a physical dependence--only psychological. I'm not at all claiming that means it has no negative effects, though; it has the potential to do so. Now, you might have already answered this (I haven't read all your posts, admittedly), but do you have any personal experience with marijuana use from which to draw conclusions? Or are you just judging from your armchair?

#146 Posted by clumsyninja1 (817 posts) -

Finally politics are on the 21st Century...at least the democrats are.

#147 Posted by the_OFFICIAL_jAPanese_teaBAG (4308 posts) -

Youre not afroman!!!!!

#148 Edited by TooWalrus (13218 posts) -

@Hunter5024 said:

@PillClinton: No such thing as a physical addiction dude, go back and read my post on the last page. Any addiction specialist will tell you exactly the same thing.

That's not true at all. A severe alcohol withdrawal will fuckin' kill you dude. Just because you can overcome an addiction through sheer willpower doesn't mean it's not a physical issue.

#149 Posted by PillClinton (3291 posts) -

@the_OFFICIAL_jAPanese_teaBAG said:

Youre not afroman!!!!!

Yeah, new account or what?

#150 Posted by the_OFFICIAL_jAPanese_teaBAG (4308 posts) -
@PillClinton said:

@the_OFFICIAL_jAPanese_teaBAG said:

Youre not afroman!!!!!

Yeah, new account or what?

Nah I dont think so, Im pretty sure he got an IP ban.