So does the concept of medicinal marijuana mean nothing to you?

Medicinal Marijuana is already legal! You don't need to defend it!

Not everywhere!

 

I've also been thinking that rather then straight up legalising it, start with decriminalisation of it. Rather than making the sudden leap, it is more of a step.

 

Decrim is not good enough. It means they can't give you jail time but they can still do things like fine you.

Frankly, even as socially conservative as I am, I find it silly that it's not controlled much like "real" painkillers and anti-depressants. Those are legal, but you can't just get them whenever you like.

 

So, legal? Yes. Legal to have without a prescription? No.

So does the concept of medicinal marijuana mean nothing to you?

Medicinal Marijuana is already legal! You don't need to defend it!

Not everywhere!

 

I've also been thinking that rather then straight up legalising it, start with decriminalisation of it. Rather than making the sudden leap, it is more of a step.

 

Decrim is not good enough. It means they can't give you jail time but they can still do things like fine you.

I said start with, it's more likely to be accepted by society, then we could work to legalising it. If straight up legalisation is accepted by society then I'm all for it!

Decrim is not good enough. It means they can't give you jail time but they can still do things like fine you.

 

I agree, but it would be a step in the right direction. It's better than what our current system runs by.

 

As for the gateway argument, I just find that ridiculous. If someone goes onto harder drugs, it is their fault - not marijuana's. There are plenty of people who smoke marijuana who wouldn't dare touch stuff like heroin and coke.

 

It's also quite funny how nothing else in the world gets the same rap as pot when it comes to gateways. I assure you, there are lots of legal things that correlate with bad things (a prescription is a gateway to becoming a pillhead, rap music is a gateway to joining gangs, television is a gateway to heart disease, sports are a gateway to steroids), yet the only time the gateway argument is used is when talking about weed. The person who invented that theory was just looking for a way to desperately turn the drug into a scapegoat.

but only in doses of 3 grams or less (which would maybe be enough for 1 joint...).

More like 8.

 

As for the gateway argument, I just find that ridiculous. If someone goes onto harder drugs, it is their fault - not marijuana's. There are plenty of people who smoke marijuana who wouldn't dare touch stuff like heroin and coke.

Excactly. People who get addicted to cocaine (using this doesn't necessarily mean you're addicted although the risk is much higher than with pot or xtc) and heroin (stay away :P ) have almost always smoked pot first but there is no way that it is the cause. You already summed up some other pretty good examples of why it's a bad argument^^

 

Why it should be legalized? Its effects are a lot less severe than alcohol. It's also much more controllable. You smoke too much pot and you don't want to smoke another joint. You feel it a lot faster than with alcohol. You drank too much? You haven't realised it yet, bring on the whiskey! And half an hour later you're lying in the gutter vomiting your guts out.

Yeah, I stand corrected, 3 grams is enough for about 10 doses or so. Sorry for that stupid mistake, it's what I heard. That's why I added imHo, I knew there was probably a mistake somewhere in my post, so yeah.

 

Anyway, I'm still leaning towards legalization.

Honestly I think this thread is kind of useless.

 

Everyone that wants it to be legal is going bombard the people that don't, with the same answers as everyone else wanting it to be legal.

 

The way I see it:

 

It's illegal, deal with it.

"It's illegal - deal with it" isn't any sort of logical argument here. We're debating whether or not it should be legal based on facts about the use of marijuana its effects on society - we all know it's illegal (in most places). Just because something is the law doesn't mean that it should be blindly accepted and not discussed.

 

Lastly, if pro-legalisation people bombard the anti-legalisation people with arguments then the people who are against legalisation can make contructive and logical posts to counter - that is the purpose of a discussion forum, to discuss things.

Ok then..

 

I think it's obvious that it doesn't have a good effect on society as a whole.

 

A lot of people will say all of the medical uses that it has and how it can possibly cure cancer. That's great, but why should anyone but doctors possess need for the cure for cancer?

 

Obviously people aren't smoking pot for it's medical purposes.

 

You want to take this illegal drug and abuse it, without getting in to trouble is all.

Legalize it and the only way to get it will be in prepackaged joints stuffed full of nicotine and carcinogens.

A-O.

 

I find it hilarious how people just look at marijuana being legalized and think it'll be a chicken in every pot and a bong in every room. They don't look at how it will be taken advantage of by tobacco companies at all. It seems like nobody has noticed that. Yet, for some reason, I wouldn't be surprised if the government and bigger companies have.

 

Of course it will still be sold alone, probably as "rolling marijuana", and for the first couple of years as everybody legalizes it, maybe it will be just great. But plenty of people who think, "Hey, alcohol is legal, weed should be too!" aren't old enough to drink alcohol. I believe that if it's legalized, penalties for smoking underage will be FAR more extreme than penalties for drinking. That's just common sense.

 

Anyways. Think about tobacco for a second. How much of the population that enjoys smoking buys totally 100% natural, unaltered tobacco and smokes from a pipe? Grows their own? Buys rolling tobacco? Even dip and chewing tobacco aren't natural. It's just easier to smoke cigarettes.

 

I have no doubt it will be legalized before I graduate. I also have no doubt that all your hopes will crash to the ground. Sorry, folks. Big business has big ideas for your bong.

Are you trying to say that pipe/bong/vaporizer/paraphernalia companies will be ruined by legalization? I feel that there are few flaws with your argument:

 

-People have rolled their own joints/packed their own bowls/vaporized weed forever. Even if Marlboro comes out with a pot cigarette, there's really no reason for people to switch from their bongs or vaporizers (especially vaporizers, since the switch would defeat the purpose of vaporizing.)

 

-"I believe that if it's legalized, penalties for smoking underage will be FAR more extreme than penalties for drinking. That's just common sense." Please, tell me why you think this. Smoking tobacco as a minor has the same penalty as alcohol, so why should another legal drug be any different?

 

-How come these ginormous corporations aren't a problem in Amsterdam?

 

-Also, cigarettes/tobacco and cannabis are ingested for totally different purposes. Have you considered that perhaps cigarettes are so prevalent because of the fact that they are extremely practical to smoke at work? The last time I checked, it was legal to drive while smoking a cigarette, since it doesn't impair your driving. Hence, one wouldn't take a bong into a car, since it would be too big, it's illegal, and it would impair their performance. The reason that there won't be a Marijuana monopoly from Marlboro, like tobacco, can be summed up like this: the point of smoking pot is to get the best high pot, something that cannot be achieved by a cigarette.

 

-People love edibles, BHO, other ways of ingesting THC. (I mean, there's LEMONADE with THC in it, come on.)

 

And as such, there would be no reason that corporations would control the market like tobacco; tobacco and marijuana are used under totally different contexts, and for different purposes. Therefore, it is unfair to compare them.

 

P.S. I live in California, and if it doesn't become legalized before I turn 18, I'll just get a card, and have all the legal weed that money can buy.

 

Edit- Saw this terrible post, and had to respond to it:

Ok then..

 

I think it's obvious that it doesn't have a good effect on society as a whole.

 

A lot of people will say all of the medical uses that it has and how it can possibly cure cancer. That's great, but why should anyone but doctors possess need for the cure for cancer?

 

Obviously people aren't smoking pot for it's medical purposes.

 

You want to take this illegal drug and abuse it, without getting in to trouble is all.

Tell me, my friend, where are you getting this information that I'm smoking to get high as kites, instead of trying to fall asleep? I think you missed the part that Marijuana cures diseases that aren't as terrible as cancer (i.e. chronic pain, glaucoma, insomnia, etc.) And why should only doctor's have the cure for a disease? Because a drug like marijuana, with little to no abuse potential doesn't need to be locked up the same way morphine and Vicodin are.

Edited October 25, 200916 yr by Erk02

You want to take this illegal drug and abuse it, without getting in to trouble is all.

 

There are plenty of non-smokers who think it should be legal.

Ok then..

 

I think it's obvious that it doesn't have a good effect on society as a whole.

 

A lot of people will say all of the medical uses that it has and how it can possibly cure cancer. That's great, but why should anyone but doctors possess need for the cure for cancer?

 

Obviously people aren't smoking pot for it's medical purposes.

 

You want to take this illegal drug and abuse it, without getting in to trouble is all.

 

How does TV benefit society? How does candy benefit society? Why don't we just take out all the little joys in life because they don't benefit society?

 

Why shouldn't they want to be able to "abuse" (lol, using words like abused) marijuana legally? What harm is it going to do anyone but themselves (minuscule harm to them even)? I've never used marijuana before, but something that doesn't affect anyone but (arguably) the person doing it shouldn't be illegal.

 

But hey, keep listening to everything the government spoon feeds you instead of doing your own research

Excactly. People who get addicted to cocaine (using this doesn't necessarily mean you're addicted although the risk is much higher than with pot or xtc) and heroin (stay away :P ) have almost always smoked pot first but there is no way that it is the cause. You already summed up some other pretty good examples of why it's a bad argument^^

Post hoc ergo propter hoc, a logical fallacy which states that just because b came after a, does not mean that a caused b. The problem with this is that the states still have more control over drug control than the federal government, so even if the federal government legalizes, let's say medical marijuana, the states can still control and constrict supply and prescriptions enough to make it difficult to obtain.

Cannabis should NOT be legalized because it would lead to a higher crime rate and an unhealthier American population.

 

If cannabis is legalized, drug smugglers and traffickers would come to the U.S to buy cannabis and smuggle it out to deal it to other countries, just like how the drug cartels currently take advantage of the American leniency on guns. Also, drug dealers would be released, and instead of dealing cannabis because of all the large corporations distributing it, they will deal harder and actually dangerous stuff such as cocaine and heroin. The price of cannabis would rise and consumers would move on to the cheaper drugs that the dealers are selling, leading to more people going back to prison.

 

In reaction to the higher rise of actually dangerous and harmful drugs, America will be generally unhealthier as a whole. Also, the large corporations I mentioned would inject the same stuff they did to tobacco to make cannabis harmful. Tobacco itself is harmful, but the main harm comes from nicotine and all that other stuff companies put into it. By putting that stuff in cannabis, and having more people consume it, there will be a higher rate of lung cancer and other bad side effects similar to the side effects of cigarettes.

Excactly. People who get addicted to cocaine (using this doesn't necessarily mean you're addicted although the risk is much higher than with pot or xtc) and heroin (stay away :P ) have almost always smoked pot first but there is no way that it is the cause. You already summed up some other pretty good examples of why it's a bad argument^^

Post hoc ergo propter hoc, a logical fallacy which states that just because b came after a, does not mean that a caused b. The problem with this is that the states still have more control over drug control than the federal government, so even if the federal government legalizes, let's say medical marijuana, the states can still control and constrict supply and prescriptions enough to make it difficult to obtain.

So, I take it today's English class was a very informative one, then?

Don't be a douche.

 

And besides, you're not even right on the subject. It's probably more of a Philosophy class than an English class.

Cannabis should NOT be legalized because it would lead to a higher crime rate and an unhealthier American population.

 

If cannabis is legalized, drug smugglers and traffickers would come to the U.S to buy cannabis and smuggle it out to deal it to other countries, just like how the drug cartels currently take advantage of the American leniency on guns. Also, drug dealers would be released, and instead of dealing cannabis because of all the large corporations distributing it, they will deal harder and actually dangerous stuff such as cocaine and heroin. The price of cannabis would rise and consumers would move on to the cheaper drugs that the dealers are selling, leading to more people going back to prison.

 

In reaction to the higher rise of actually dangerous and harmful drugs, America will be generally unhealthier as a whole. Also, the large corporations I mentioned would inject the same stuff they did to tobacco to make cannabis harmful. Tobacco itself is harmful, but the main harm comes from nicotine and all that other stuff companies put into it. By putting that stuff in cannabis, and having more people consume it, there will be a higher rate of lung cancer and other bad side effects similar to the side effects of cigarettes.

 

...I'm not sure as to where to even begin striking this post down...

 

Your claim of higher crime rates is utter bull [cabbage]. You don't realize that decriminalizing it would actually lower crime rates, if indirectly, since some crime revolves around these drugs specifically. By making it legal, the more indirect crimes over this stuff would be reduced. The ones that are sitting in jail right now are the users, and the users are actually pretty equal on the dealers on a 1:1 scale[1].

 

If they do legalize cannabis though, there's no guarantee that the pricing on it will rise, since it can be farmed more easily than tobacco as it is. Oh, and by saying that cocaine and heroin is "actually dangerous", you're implying that cannabis is not dangerous, which would contradict your claim of it making for "an unhealthier American population." By the way, if it's legalized, then people can farm their own cannabis for their own personal use, and avoid the large corporations. And besides, I'd like for you to prove that there will be, in fact, more deaths, injuries, or otherwise, if cannabis is legalized. If you cannot do that, then your entire claim falls apart.

 

[1]http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/factsht/crime/index.html

i agree wit squareroot2 weed shoulnt be legalized i think more people would die and we don't need that

i agree wit squareroot2 weed shoulnt be legalized i think more people would die and we don't need that

 

Your profile causes more harm in the world than weed does.

i agree wit squareroot2 weed shoulnt be legalized i think more people would die and we don't need that

 

 

To be serious though, you're just saying, and not proving. All bark and no bite, if you will. There are no logical arguments here, and as such, your post carries no weight.

 

i agree wit squareroot2 weed shoulnt be legalized i think more people would die and we don't need that

 

Your profile causes more harm in the world than weed does.

 

No kidding. And I'm tempted to bet that this person isn't even older than 13, and cannot grasp the basics of the English language.

i agree wit squareroot2 weed shoulnt be legalized i think more people would die and we don't need that

 

 

To be serious though, you're just saying, and not proving. All bark and no bite, if you will. There are no logical arguments here, and as such, your post carries no weight.

 

i agree wit squareroot2 weed shoulnt be legalized i think more people would die and we don't need that

 

Your profile causes more harm in the world than weed does.

 

No kidding. And I'm tempted to bet that this person isn't even older than 13, and cannot grasp the basics of the English language.

 

u kno i think u guyz just defend it cuz u smoke it yall should go 2 jail

So I ask this very important question: What's green, and lives under a bridge...?

 

And once again, you're wrong. I don't smoke weed. You've degraded to mere insults. You're a [bleep]ing troll.

Wait my arguments are invalid or his?

u kno i think u guyz just defend it cuz u smoke it yall should go 2 jail

 

And everyone in the Homosexuality thread who thinks gay marriage should be legal must be gay too then, right?

So I ask this very important question: What's green, and lives under a bridge...?

 

And once again, you're wrong. I don't smoke weed. You've degraded to mere insults. You're a [bleep]ing troll.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure its a troll as well.

u kno i think u guyz just defend it cuz u smoke it yall should go 2 jail

 

And everyone in the Homosexuality thread who thinks gay marriage should be legal must be gay too then, right?

yes cuz u agree and u gay smoking pot can cause cancer do u agree wit cancer i hope not...