Laura Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/275/7/521 http://cebp.aacrjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/8/12/1071 http://archpsyc.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/55/11/967 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3492159 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1338215 http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1508814 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9610678 http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/70/4/539 http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/brief/318/6/347 http://www.neurology.org/cgi/content/abstract/59/9/1337 10 from Google Scholar. Hold the phone there Bruno, they're all studies that talk about the impairments of marijuana. We all know it has them, what Im asking you is to prove that they would actually mean something. If marijuana was legalised, the only way the impairments would make a difference would be if the numbers of people using marijuana grew to ridiculous heights, thus causing more traffic accidents. Now I've given you studies that say the numbers wouldn't grow that much, not enough for the negatives to outweigh the benefits. "Marijuana legalisation would cause more deaths than if it was illegal" - Your words. So you're saying, that the numbers of people who die in car accidents/accidents due to marijuana, would be, not only much more than now, but more than the number of people SAVED from removing both the illegality, the gang relations, the concept of lacing the drug, and allowing people to use it as a medicine. Who knows what the future holds for marijuana medically - it has been shown to stop the growth of cancers in lab mice, which for anything other than marijuana, the government would look into immediately. Yet, they refuse to allow people to do anything other than theoretical studies or studies that can only use their, government grown (yes they grow it) strain of marijuana, which is of an extremely low quality. So, again, we all know it causes you impairment issues. But thats irrelevent. That wouldnt matter unless the number of users would rise dramatically, which so far, I haven't seen proof for. Don't compare the entire legalization to medical us. I'm entirely pro medical use. And excuse my ignorance, but the link you gave me was such as a book, and I cannot find your "If legalized numbers would not increase" statement. Even when I see it, I still can't believe it. It's like if speeding was made legal, no one would do it, despite all the facts that it would cause more deaths etc. So yes, I'm basing this on the ignorance of the people today, population of humans, and legal drugs used today. Billions would be gained by the government, but they can stand ideally without spending a cent of it towards victims of marijuana use. Of course I think they should allow the studies of THC and its various forms, but I can't see that happening as of yet. I know it's not physically addicting, but how come this place(http://www.marijuanaaddictiontreatment.com/)doesn't exist for math or sports? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
My_Eggs Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 I'm all for it being legalized for medical use. You see, I have an uncontrollable head twitch, and the doctors have actually said it may possibly be tourrets. When I did marijuanna, my head barely twitched at all. Quite frankly, I'd love it if marijuanna was legalized for medical use. Would help me out bunches. :mrgreen: 99 HP, Attack, Strength, Defence, Summoning, Ranged, Herblore, Prayer, Agility, Magic, Slayer, Fletching, Fishing, Woodcutting, Mining, and Thieving. Jagex'd out of my untrimmed hp cape on 6/14/2011. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deloriagod Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 First off, thank you for posting those sources. Some of those are good reads for anyone thinking of trying it for their first time (I don't really enjoy seeing people with no clue what marijuana can do to you toking up and thinking it's harmless). Of course, smoking anything is going to be bad for you. What I noticed is many studies use joints (aka marijuana cigarettes) as the form of smoking marijuana and I'll be the first to say I prefer a bong to a joint anyday. For one the water (or liquid of choice) helps clean up the smoke a bit and secondly I don't have to worry about other peoples' saliva all over the pipe/joint ([racist term] lipping a pipe = party foul around here). If you happen to come along any studies like the ones you posted but using other means of using marijuana (pipe, bong, bubbler, vaporizer, waterfall, eating) please be sure to link me to that. I'm just arguing that all the "little" thinks that weed does, adds up, regardless of whether you want them or not. It's just to much of a risk to have every other drug company growing marijuana and spreading its use. Some of which ignorant about the facts, to drive, operate machinery, and do it in public. Also who will pay for the cost and maintenance(social, criminal, research, etc) of legalization? Who will be responsible for the newly created drug addicts? Who will support and aid the drug addicts addiction? You're absolutely right, the little things do add up. I know being "burnt out" can affect how you do in school which would be a great reason to put a higher age limit on marijuana if legalized. However, when I smoke marijuana I always feel a drive to do better in school. We all know that stereotype of the stoner who tokes up every night, doesn't do anything in class, etc and I refuse to be that (thank you anti-drug commercials for driving that stereotype home). As far as driving, operating machinery, or smoking in public.. Well people need to learn to use their damn heads. Driving or operating machinery is just plain stupid to attempt when you're high. I tried playing GTA when I was high and I couldn't get my vehicle to do what I wanted to so what makes anyone else think they could get a real vehicle to do any better? And smoking in public.. I'm not totally against that, but I do think it would be best to smoke at a safe location, away from the impressionable youth. Those costs you mention.. How about the gov't? Let me tell you why. It currently costs the gov't ~$32,000 USD per inmate per year. Take into account that there are over 800,000 arrests due to marijuana per year. Multiply those together and you come to a grand total of $25,600,000,000 USD. That's a hell of a lot of money that could be much better spent on things besides keeping these "criminals" behind bars. Addicts. Don't plan on seeing too many. Anything can be addicting, I'm sure we can agree on that however marijuana is generally not that addicting. It's fun, yes. But it should be treated like alcohol. Sure, you have your alcoholics who drink and drink but then you have the majority of people who only drink on weekends or special occasions. So why shouldn't marijuana be like that? Maybe smoke a joint on a Friday night and enjoy the evening. Hell, wake-and-bake on Saturday if you want. Just make sure you aren't going to feel like total [cabbage] on Monday and be back to normal by Tuesday (nobody likes Mondays and nobody gets anything accomplished as it is.. :P). Sure you'll see a little crime to pay for some marijuana but we already see that. Just a side note.. I'd love to see marijuana prices go down due to legalization, mass production, and the ability to grow it at home without being arrested. It's expensive right now and the US isn't exactly booming as far as the economy goes.. Internet Marketing For Newbies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
user1991 Posted June 28, 2008 Author Share Posted June 28, 2008 http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/275/7/521 http://cebp.aacrjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/8/12/1071 http://archpsyc.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/55/11/967 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3492159 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1338215 http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1508814 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9610678 http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/70/4/539 http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/brief/318/6/347 http://www.neurology.org/cgi/content/abstract/59/9/1337 10 from Google Scholar. Hold the phone there Bruno, they're all studies that talk about the impairments of marijuana. We all know it has them, what Im asking you is to prove that they would actually mean something. If marijuana was legalised, the only way the impairments would make a difference would be if the numbers of people using marijuana grew to ridiculous heights, thus causing more traffic accidents. Now I've given you studies that say the numbers wouldn't grow that much, not enough for the negatives to outweigh the benefits. "Marijuana legalisation would cause more deaths than if it was illegal" - Your words. So you're saying, that the numbers of people who die in car accidents/accidents due to marijuana, would be, not only much more than now, but more than the number of people SAVED from removing both the illegality, the gang relations, the concept of lacing the drug, and allowing people to use it as a medicine. Who knows what the future holds for marijuana medically - it has been shown to stop the growth of cancers in lab mice, which for anything other than marijuana, the government would look into immediately. Yet, they refuse to allow people to do anything other than theoretical studies or studies that can only use their, government grown (yes they grow it) strain of marijuana, which is of an extremely low quality. So, again, we all know it causes you impairment issues. But thats irrelevent. That wouldnt matter unless the number of users would rise dramatically, which so far, I haven't seen proof for. Don't compare the entire legalization to medical us. I'm entirely pro medical use. And excuse my ignorance, but the link you gave me was such as a book, and I cannot find your "If legalized numbers would not increase" statement. Even when I see it, I still can't believe it. It's like if speeding was made legal, no one would do it, despite all the facts that it would cause more deaths etc. So yes, I'm basing this on the ignorance of the people today, population of humans, and legal drugs used today. Billions would be gained by the government, but they can stand ideally without spending a cent of it towards victims of marijuana use. Of course I think they should allow the studies of THC and its various forms, but I can't see that happening as of yet. I know it's not physically addicting, but how come this place(http://www.marijuanaaddictiontreatment.com/)doesn't exist for math or sports? The numbers of users would increase, but by a small amount. Not enough to actually affect anything dramatically. "Even when I see it, I still can't believe it." So you're asserting that your gut instinct, unfounded with evidence or experience, is more valuable than dozens of scientific studies/reports? Okay, well now I know what I'm dealing with. That's sort of like "blind faith", right? The reason that website exists, is because of the image of marijuana in society. By making it illegal, you add to the stigma. Noone talks about caffeine addiction, when that is much more of a problem than marijuana addiction. And why not? Because you can buy it, in drinks, in food, in pretty much everything. There isn't this image of it as a dangerous drug, like there is for marijuana. People convince themselves they're addicted to it to the point where they actually are addicted - but the only reason this happens is because of their subconscious and how it is influenced. If you're told all your life something is addictive, and you take it, you might think yourself addicted. However, if you're told all your life it isn't addictive, what are the chances of you imagining yourself to be addicted to it? Not very high. Hey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bloodyhatchetbear Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 Well, alot happened when I went out today ^_^ @Goddess: I was diagnosed at 13 with bipolar disorder. Up until I was 18, I was pretty much a guinea pig for every drug on the market at the time. Some made me lethargic, some made me psychotic, some didn't help at all, and one other made me lactate when I had absolutely no reason to. I went off of everything for a few years, and that's when I started the whole self-medicating thing. I only did it maybe once a month and it kept me from going manic for that amount of time. (I think if it were legal, the last doctor I saw probably would have prescribed marijuana for me, considering he prescribed something quite similar) Another thing, doctors here in the US have to ask if you use illicit drugs by law. If you do use them, they are not allowed to report it to police, by patient-doctor confidentiality laws. Alot of times this effects the decision in your medications. Sounds to me like you had a carpy doctor. @Laura and Noob: You two will be debating this till the cows come home. It seems to me you both have your own opinions on this, and are completely set in your ways. Yes the little things add up, and some people view it as a bad thing for society, some view it as people need to take responsibility for their own actions. I say, you both take a few minutes and look throug each other's eyes. Give it a try, and you might see where the other is coming from. @Deloria: I agree, joints are bad. Especially if they aren't rolled correctly. Plus the water in the bong acts as a natural filter. Final note: I am probably not going to read any of the links, mainly because no matter what side they appeal to, I know all of the information there is to know about the subject at hand. I don't know everything, but I try ^_^ Cooking and Fishing...My Journey!|Brawl Friend Code:1032-2280-0189Brush up on your Vocab: FreeRice.com|My Adoptables, Click Pl0x!!My YouTube Channel Thingy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laura Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 The numbers of users would increase, but by a small amount. Not enough to actually affect anything dramatically. "Even when I see it, I still can't believe it." So you're asserting that your gut instinct, unfounded with evidence or experience, is more valuable than dozens of scientific studies/reports? Okay, well now I know what I'm dealing with. That's sort of like "blind faith", right? The reason that website exists, is because of the image of marijuana in society. By making it illegal, you add to the stigma. Noone talks about caffeine addiction, when that is much more of a problem than marijuana addiction. And why not? Because you can buy it, in drinks, in food, in pretty much everything. There isn't this image of it as a dangerous drug, like there is for marijuana. People convince themselves they're addicted to it to the point where they actually are addicted - but the only reason this happens is because of their subconscious and how it is influenced. If you're told all your life something is addictive, and you take it, you might think yourself addicted. However, if you're told all your life it isn't addictive, what are the chances of you imagining yourself to be addicted to it? Not very high. I simply wanted to see it, and then take a look at the source, nothing so called as your "blind-faith". Regardless of the "addictions" it still has a use, and people want this use, much like they-as you said-want caffeine. Now you're also bringing into the equation hypochondriacs, which further add to these addiction equations. If told it wasn't addictive-as much as a false statements as it is-people would think nothing of there, 2, 4, 8 joints a day. They wouldn't consult any help because it was considered fine and not an addicting drug. He'd most likely end up dying of lung cancer or other adverse sideffect from the impurities of the drug. So even if it wasn't addicting, people would still use it, probably daily(if not, weekly) which would lead to at least one arrogant fool to use it adversely, and drive home from the wild party at whom they used the drug. So I really can't see any debate over the fact that people would use it sometime in there household, unafraid of criminal forces, would be more likely to do something the user would otherwise not do(think they NEED milk or some other common household good. Then they drive down to the grocery store, make it there and think they've beaten the system. They drive back no problem and they do it again the next day. They think: Hey, I've got this down, I can drive no problem". Sooner or later, down the line, they get pulled over or crash. It's simply the way we work, whether you're sneaking out at night, disobeying parents, the works). As opposed to someone who knows it's against the law, and know the problems it could pose if found to be in possession of the substance. Even if that group of drug users aren't exactly the smartest bunch, and do the same as the above, and get caught. I seriously think that someone whom knows the drug is illegal, would make the decision not to run down to the store for something silly enough as a jug of milk, knowing the effects of marijuana(unless the drug made them do so). Goddess, new ultra? :thumbsup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bloodyhatchetbear Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 If told it wasn't addictive-as much as a false statements as it is-people would think nothing of there, 2, 4, 8 joints a day. I'm gonna be honest, I don't know too many regular pot smokers who smoke 8 joints in a day by themselves, even if it's weak. Cooking and Fishing...My Journey!|Brawl Friend Code:1032-2280-0189Brush up on your Vocab: FreeRice.com|My Adoptables, Click Pl0x!!My YouTube Channel Thingy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laura Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 If told it wasn't addictive-as much as a false statements as it is-people would think nothing of there, 2, 4, 8 joints a day. I'm gonna be honest, I don't know too many regular pot smokers who smoke 8 joints in a day by themselves, even if it's weak. I don't know any pot smokers(anymore). Nor do I know how often it's smoked a day, I was just posting numbers. :? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deloriagod Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 If told it wasn't addictive-as much as a false statements as it is-people would think nothing of there, 2, 4, 8 joints a day. I'm gonna be honest, I don't know too many regular pot smokers who smoke 8 joints in a day by themselves, even if it's weak. I don't know any pot smokers(anymore). Nor do I know how often it's smoked a day, I was just posting numbers. :? Yeah, I smoke on somewhat of a regular basis and it takes one bowl (1 bowl at the end of a pipe filled up) to get me right where I like to be. If I were smoking joints, I'd say 2 would be tops for me. It doesn't take much to get you high unless you're one of those "heavy users" -Edit: Hehe, I've put away a decent amount of vodka so far and I saw the "post entered" screen and was like "wtf? What thread did I post in and what did I say!?" Internet Marketing For Newbies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IGoddessI Posted June 28, 2008 Share Posted June 28, 2008 *edit* I've decided to PM this information instead of making it public The only people who tell you that you can't do something are those who have already given up on their own dreams so feel the need to discourage yours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oy_the_Great Posted July 8, 2008 Share Posted July 8, 2008 Ok, I was pretty much done with this topic before, but now, seriously, I am now. You're basically telling me, that if legalized, that the drug would have LESS users? :roll: I don't know anything about the Netherlands, nor if it's even legal there. If you want to place that argument in my face, come up with some variables as to why it's not. Seriously. There was no reason you have to use immature language, and capital letters just to make your point heard. We respond to nearly all the posts on here and I would have been happy to debate the issue with you. :roll: I hope I don't get shot for bringing this oldie up again, but I just had to say that it is true that marijuana use decreased in Holland, definitely in the population regions where it actually harmed a little: youths. I'm Belgian, but half my family is Dutch, and I see a lot more teenage users here than in Holland. The reason for smoking marijuana when you're 12-16 is almost always the same: it's a thrill to do it, you're fighting the establishment by offending the rules. Basic teenage psychology. If you take away that illegal part, which is a thrill, you've got to admit that, that group of users will surely decrease. Pot is expensive and without the illegal aspect, it's probably not worth spending so much money on it when you're young. The same goes for alcohol, cigarettes and other drugs that can potentially be harmful, but not horribly addictive or life-threatening. I wouldn't like to see heroine, cocaine, crack, speed etc. to be legalised though: they are very addictive and seriously affect your mental state, also in the long term, unlike being drunk or high on marijuana. A little more proof: alcohol is illegal in the States when you're not 21 yet (at least in most states iirc): 7 of my (Belgian) friends went to college in the US, varying from San Francisco to Boston, and they all noticed the same: as soon as students (and they're the upper regions of American society) turned 21, a lot of them binged as much as their bodies would let them, or even to the point of intoxication. That rarely happens here, in Belgium, which is pretty much the home of beer. It does happen, but (un)surprisingly enough most of the people who end up hospitalised from intoxication are 16 or less, which happens to be the age at which drinking is still illegal here. The thrill factor, remember? I don't know about the drinking habits of American teenagers, but I'm guessing that drinking beer (which is pretty harmless) is a thrill for them too, because it's illegal, not because it tastes good or not even that much because it gets you drunk when you overconsume it. Bill Hicks[/url]":dhj2kan9]Since the one thing we can say about fundamental matter is, that it is vibrating. And since all vibrations are theoretically sound, then it is not unreasonable to suggest that the universe is music and should be perceived as such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zierro Posted July 29, 2008 Share Posted July 29, 2008 I hope I don't get shot for bringing this oldie up again, but I just had to say that it is true that marijuana use decreased in Holland, definitely in the population regions where it actually harmed a little: youths. I'm Belgian, but half my family is Dutch, and I see a lot more teenage users here than in Holland. The reason for smoking marijuana when you're 12-16 is almost always the same: it's a thrill to do it, you're fighting the establishment by offending the rules. Basic teenage psychology. If you take away that illegal part, which is a thrill, you've got to admit that, that group of users will surely decrease. Good point, look at the Prohibition Act for a nice example. Once alcohol was banned, people ended up doing it more often. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superson Posted July 29, 2008 Share Posted July 29, 2008 My mom is having a lot of trouble with her cancer treatment right now because she has to take a steroid for cancer treatment that raises her eye pressures, causing her to go blind (glaucoma) and they are having trouble finding a solution. However, every doctor who she has asked has told her (off the record of course) that if she could get marijuana and use it in the right amounts, it would help the problem greatly. =S In Soviet Russia, glass eats OTers. Alansson Alansson, woo woo woo! Pink owns yes, just like you!GOOOOOOOOOO ALAN! WOO! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Range_This11 Posted July 29, 2008 Share Posted July 29, 2008 My mom is having a lot of trouble with her cancer treatment right now because she has to take a steroid for cancer treatment that raises her eye pressures, causing her to go blind (glaucoma) and they are having trouble finding a solution. However, every doctor who she has asked has told her (off the record of course) that if she could get marijuana and use it in the right amounts, it would help the problem greatly. =S Well it's true... "He could climb to it, if he climbed alone, and once there he could suck on the pap of life, gulp down the incomparable milk of wonder." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now