The government has a lot of business in telling people what they can and cannot do to their body, especially here in the UK where the government pays for all our healthcare. Ok the money still comes from the people, but unnecessary expenditures that can be avoided are definitely reason to get involved. Well, that's a bit of a bad comparison with the cars and bikes, because used perfectly safely, the bike can be just as safe as the car, and can do no damage to you through years of riding.

 

I'm not sure how people are not understanding what I'm saying, so i'll try and make it clear.

 

Smoking a joint, half weed, half tobacco = half the tobacco of a cigarette = smoking half a cigarette. THAT is what I'm saying should not be legalised. The gov is trying to crack down on all forms of smoking with tobacco, so not until pigs fly will they allow that. Any joint rolled with tobacco should never be legalised.

 

I live in Canada, national healthcare. You're telling me that the money the government makes off the marijuana will be less than the money they have to spend on the damage weed apparently does? And I don't know how you don't get that it's not just tobacco in a cigarette, it's not like smoking half a cigarette.

 

 

The healthcare issue was just an example I used in reply to the government telling us what we can and cannot do with our body. In general, much as was discussed in the recent seatbelt thread, they don't want us to get hurt, simple as that.

 

There is not just tobacco in a cigarette I know that, but apart from the tobacco, there also isn't much harmful chemicals in a cigarette either compared to the actual tobacco. The majority of the chemicals added are to help cigarettes burn better. Hand rolling tobacco still does just as much damage, if not more, as it is unfiltered when smoked with weed.

 

It is just logical, that if you have half a cigarettes worth of tobacco when you smoke a joint, your smoking half a cigarette, I feel like hitting my head on my table here.

Danqazmlp - You're right, a joint can be the equivalent of half a cigarette (half weed, half tobacco). However, anyone who smokes marijuana will not be able to smoke the same number of joints as they can cigarettes. So while there is still half a cigarette worth of tobacco being smoked per joint - there is even less th tobacco smoked because it just isn't possible to smoke the same number of joints.

A government that legalises weed is not going to continue a war on tobacco. I'm sure the ban in public places will stay, but they're never going to ban it completely.

I can never seriously see it being legalised here in the UK at all. It was even moved up a class, a step in the other direction. I also see no people who actually argue for it to be legalised outside of online environments and in schools.

A government that legalises weed is not going to continue a war on tobacco. I'm sure the ban in public places will stay, but they're never going to ban it completely.

I dont know what damages your health more, weed+tobacco or pure tobacco, im not an expert on that (although i could try some ganja... sometime)

So while there is still half a cigarette worth of tobacco being smoked per joint - there is even less th tobacco smoked because it just isn't possible to smoke the same number of joints.

 

It's possible for some people, especially growers who have pounds at their expense - but as for your average smoker, you're absolutely right. A pack of 20 cigarettes here is about 6 bucks. 20 joints would cost several times that amount. Not only that, but there isn't even much of a need to smoke that much marijuana. The effects of one joint can last you about an hour, while a cigarette's effects last about 5 minutes.

 

It's really the quantity of tobacco that kills so many people.

Some people smoke two packs a day. If you smoked 40 joints a day... well you'd be spending a lot of money and you'd be very baked.

It isn't really an issue of cost, smoking that many joints would make you sick.

It's like saying owning a knife can be fine, used in the right way for cutting food can be fine, but use it to stab somebody as it isn't.

Yet the majority of people who own knives do not misuse them. The same applies to weed: the majority of users are not abusers (i.e. do not become addicted, etc).

 

I don't get why you bolded the half a cigarette part, as the majority rolled will have as much tobacco in as half a cigarette. You can say use vaporizers and such, but only a massive minority do, using tobacco is the easiest thing, and is the thing that will kill.

"Batching" a joint with tobacco does not make it any easier of a job -- in fact, it becomes a much more difficult task. Most joints -- especially in North America -- are not rolled with tobacco.

 

Even if marijuana smokers did roll with a mixture of tobacco, occasionally smoking a couple of "batched" joints would not contribute to cancer any more than occasionally smoking a cigarette or cigar, or for that matter occasionally inhaling carcinogens from a vehicle or campfire.

 

I often find the best way to judge something is from personal experience rather than reports and studies

And here lies your problem.... Try reading some literature on the subject, rather than basing your opinion off a few personal anecdotes.

 

I can never seriously see it being legalised here in the UK at all.

When marijuana becomes decriminalized, I imagine the UK will follow the rest of the industrialized world.

I think you guys know my stance on marijuana. I can see a very real possibility of unforeseen (or foreseen, depending on the situation) consequences relating to mental health, similar to what happened with tobacco but worse. To say that the money the government will gain in taxes will be greater than the healthcare cost increases, may be true, but you're reducing it to money when the mental health of people are possibly at stake. I'm just not willing to take the risk just for the sake of a few people feeling slightly better.

I'm not sure why someone's mental health would be affected to cannabis. I've never come across anything of the sort to suggest that other than rarely a few hours of paranoia. I could easily be misinterpreting though.

I think you guys know my stance on marijuana. I can see a very real possibility of unforeseen (or foreseen, depending on the situation) consequences relating to mental health, similar to what happened with tobacco but worse. To say that the money the government will gain in taxes will be greater than the healthcare cost increases, may be true, but you're reducing it to money when the mental health of people are possibly at stake. I'm just not willing to take the risk just for the sake of a few people feeling slightly better.

 

It's flattering that you're worried about my mental health, but the risk is mine to take - Not yours. Have you read the list of side effects for most legal drugs?

I think you guys know my stance on marijuana. I can see a very real possibility of unforeseen (or foreseen, depending on the situation) consequences relating to mental health, similar to what happened with tobacco but worse. To say that the money the government will gain in taxes will be greater than the healthcare cost increases, may be true, but you're reducing it to money when the mental health of people are possibly at stake. I'm just not willing to take the risk just for the sake of a few people feeling slightly better.

 

So what you are saying is that if cannabis were legal, there would be an increase in mental illnesses? Legality barely stops people from using drugs though. Marijuana is already a part of our society, even if it's illegal.

I think you guys know my stance on marijuana. I can see a very real possibility of unforeseen (or foreseen, depending on the situation) consequences relating to mental health, similar to what happened with tobacco but worse. To say that the money the government will gain in taxes will be greater than the healthcare cost increases, may be true, but you're reducing it to money when the mental health of people are possibly at stake. I'm just not willing to take the risk just for the sake of a few people feeling slightly better.

 

Pray tell, what are these mental health consequences exactly?

There's not much mental damage one gets from smoking ganja, but it's still there. One side effect is someone who smokes is more likely to get schizophrenia earlier in their life than if they didn't smoke.

But Will, you need to stop and take a few seconds to think. Marijuana is still used by millions of people in America, and if the mental dangers were as bad as you think they are, the government would be all over those cases using them as evidence for whatever. Just like IF there was even a single death caused by marijuana use, it would be blown up so much it would be ridiculous.

What I'm saying is mota isn't nearly as bad as you think it could possibly be. I don't understand how you think what you think.

That schizophrenia thing is bs, it was discovered it's just drug induced psychosis. This is not only rare, it is even rarer for it to be chronic, and rare for it to be caused by a soft drug like marijuana. If you get chronic psychosis from marijuana then you should start entering the lottery.

There's not much mental damage one gets from smoking ganja, but it's still there. One side effect is someone who smokes is more likely to get schizophrenia earlier in their life than if they didn't smoke.

 

No, no, no, no, no, no, NO.

 

1. It was CORRELATED with schizophrenia, note that correlation != causation

2. That was in people who were already genetically predisposed to schizophrenia

There's not much mental damage one gets from smoking ganja, but it's still there. One side effect is someone who smokes is more likely to get schizophrenia earlier in their life than if they didn't smoke.

 

No, no, no, no, no, no, NO.

 

1. It was CORRELATED with schizophrenia, note that correlation != causation

2. That was in people who were already genetically predisposed to schizophrenia

 

Yeah, that's what I meant. I didn't mean smoking causes schizo, i meant #2.

oops!

There's not much mental damage one gets from smoking ganja, but it's still there. One side effect is someone who smokes is more likely to get schizophrenia earlier in their life than if they didn't smoke.

 

No, no, no, no, no, no, NO.

 

1. It was CORRELATED with schizophrenia, note that correlation != causation

2. That was in people who were already genetically predisposed to schizophrenia

 

Yeah, that's what I meant. I didn't mean smoking causes schizo, i meant #2.

oops!

 

That's for so few people that it's practically a non-issue.

In my country (Belgium) it still is considered to be an illegal drug BUT penalising the possession of it is no longer a priority for justice.

The government also allows you to grow a small amount of plants, last I heard was 4 plants but it's for own usage. You may not sell the weed to others.

In my opinion that is a very good attitude. Cannabis has never been the drug that causes overdoses, extreme violence or poverty because of the low addiction risk.

I'm talking physical here, ofc.

I myself used to smoke a joint a day from my 15 till I was 18. I quit using drugs when I entered the army 5 years ago, but I still suffer consequenses from it.

People who say the only bad thing about weed is the extreme amount of tar u inhale are ignorant and don't know what the bad influences of this drug are on the body & the mind.

I still suffer problems when I have to study or memorize certain things or even forget important things like names & birthday dates, things I remembered easily in the past.

Now I say 'mate' or 'bro' to most of the people I know, because I fear I might mistake in names... No kidding, I do this :)

But I ain't hypocrite about this, every drug causes certain disadvantages. Alcohol is imo way worse than weed...

It's been proven alcohol is in the "hard drug"-category where pot is a soft drug.

 

For me personally I think every drug should be tolerated as far as we talk about posession.

I see no problem swallowing pills when going out, or sniffing some lines if you have the age of 18 and the product doesn't contain rubbish, but only pure materials that are worth the money. If the government would provide these materials in a controlled and well secured area like state groceries or something like that, they could make huge profits on it to stack up financial reserves to counter the economical crisis. If you think about this it would take out the illegal circuit of drug traffic and there would be less garbage being bought and sold.

This would lower the O.D.'s & cause less social problems since people could talk about their drug problems instead of being ashame to share their trouble with family, friends or social services.

I know this sounds insane to many people but there was an experiment in my country 2 years ago.

They provided heroin-addicts with free shots every day, to take out the illegal circuit in that city and to make sure the addicts were already located so they could provide a better follow-up and be prepared for treatment for these junkies. It was in Charleroi, a city 150km of my city and it caused a lot of commotion, since the majority of the Belgian people didn't want to know about the fact tax money was used for this. This experiment caused the drug dead percentage to decrease with over 30% and it lowered the stealing, car jacking & robbery percentage by half...

 

All things to think about, just imagine weed was made legal and sold for a fair price in shops, owned and controlled by the government.

I think you guys know my stance on marijuana. I can see a very real possibility of unforeseen (or foreseen, depending on the situation) consequences relating to mental health, similar to what happened with tobacco but worse. To say that the money the government will gain in taxes will be greater than the healthcare cost increases, may be true, but you're reducing it to money when the mental health of people are possibly at stake. I'm just not willing to take the risk just for the sake of a few people feeling slightly better.

 

So what you are saying is that if cannabis were legal, there would be an increase in mental illnesses? Legality barely stops people from using drugs though. Marijuana is already a part of our society, even if it's illegal.

Unless your paranoid as all hell in being caught by either the law or the people who pay for your shelter, food etc. :|

In my country (Belgium) it still is considered to be an illegal drug BUT penalising the possession of it is no longer a priority for justice.

The government also allows you to grow a small amount of plants, last I heard was 4 plants but it's for own usage. You may not sell the weed to others.

In my opinion that is a very good attitude. Cannabis has never been the drug that causes overdoses, extreme violence or poverty because of the low addiction risk.

I'm talking physical here, ofc.

I myself used to smoke a joint a day from my 15 till I was 18. I quit using drugs when I entered the army 5 years ago, but I still suffer consequenses from it.

People who say the only bad thing about weed is the extreme amount of tar u inhale are ignorant and don't know what the bad influences of this drug are on the body & the mind.

I still suffer problems when I have to study or memorize certain things or even forget important things like names & birthday dates, things I remembered easily in the past.

Now I say 'mate' or 'bro' to most of the people I know, because I fear I might mistake in names... No kidding, I do this :)

But I ain't hypocrite about this, every drug causes certain disadvantages. Alcohol is imo way worse than weed...

It's been proven alcohol is in the "hard drug"-category where pot is a soft drug.

 

I have to say that your tolerance despite supposed side-effects is admirable, but I have to wonder how you can be so sure that it was the weed. 18 is still young in the grand scale of things. Maybe you just turned into a forgetful guy because that's what happens to some people. Of course it's also possible that it was the weed, I'm just saying that it's difficult to be sure.

but I have to wonder how you can be so sure that it was the weed. 18 is still young in the grand scale of things. Maybe you just turned into a forgetful guy because that's what happens to some people.

 

Because correlation = causation. Duh

the amount of money used by some governments hunting for marijuana users is such a huge waste of taxpayer's money.

 

gov't with common sense ftw

Some relevant news...

 

How Oakland Is Leading Marijuana Legalization

 

Source: http://www.newsweek.com/id/217942

 

Inside [Oaksterdam University], dutiful students flip through thick plastic binders of the day's lessons, which, on a recent Saturday began with "Pot Politics 101," taught by a ponytailed legal consultant who has authored a number of books on hemp. The class breaks for lunch around noon and resumes an hour later, with classes on "budtending," horticulture, and cooking, which includes a recipe for "a beautiful pot pesto." ...

 

The university's founder, Richard Lee, 47, rolls in and out on his wheelchair greeting students, looking the part of a pot-school dean in Converse sneakers, aviator glasses, and a green "Oaksterdam" T shirt. ... Among the businesses he owns are the Blue Sky Coffeeshop, a coffeehouse and pot dispensary where getting an actual cup of Joe takes 20 minutes but picking up a sack of Purple Kush wrapped neatly in a brown lunch bag takes about five. There's Lee's Bulldog Café, a student lounge with a not-so-secret back room where the haze-induced sounds of "Dark Side of the Moon" seep through thick smoke and a glass-blowing shop where bongs are the art of choice. Around the corner is a taco stand (Lee doesn't own this one) that has benefitted mightily from the university's hungry students.

 

An education at Oaksterdam means learning how to grow, sell, market, and consume weed—all of which has been legal in California, for medicinal use only, since 1996. For the price of a half ounce of pot and a couple of batches of brownies (about $250), pot lovers can enroll in a variety of weekend cannabis seminars all focused on medicinal use. But "medicinal" is something of an open joke in the state, where anyone over age 18 with a doctor's note—easy to get for ailments like anxiety or cramps, if you're willing to pay—can obtain an ID card allowing access to any of the state's hundreds of dispensaries, or pot shops. ("You can basically get a doctor's recommendation for anything," said one dispensary worker.) Not all of those dispensaries are legally recognized, however: there's a growing discrepancy over how California's laws mesh (or don't mesh) with local and federal regulations. But Oakland is unique in that it has four licensed and regulated dispensaries, each taxed directly by the city government. This past summer, Oakland voters became the first in the nation to enact a special cannabis excise tax—$18 for every $1,000 grossed—that the city believes will generate up to $1 million in the first year. Approved by 80 percent of voters, and unopposed by any organization, including law enforcement, the tax was pushed by the dispensary owners themselves, who hope the model will prove to the rest of California that a regulated marijuana industry can be both profitable and responsible. "The reality is we're creating jobs, improving the city, filling empty store spaces, and when people come down here to Oakland they can see that," says Lee, who smokes both recreationally and for his health, to ease muscle spasms caused by a spinal chord injury.