Marijuana Good, bad or undecided?

Discussion in 'Free Thoughts' started by soullust, Apr 27, 2010.


the title explains it all.

  1. Good

    26 vote(s)
  2. bad

    13 vote(s)
  3. undecided

    3 vote(s)
  1. Stryder Keeper of "good" ideas. Valued Senior Member

    While misuse of Alcohol is bad, Cigarettes are by far the gateway drug. Afterall it can lead to marijuana usage since it too is smoked. The addictive nature can cause mood swings and anxiety attacks, the tobacco itself through tar is linked with many forms of Cancer and people can inhale it as secondary smoke.
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. sifreak21 Valued Senior Member

    in all reality cigaretts, alcohol, and weed are all gateway drugs on a pretty even scale id say..
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. TheCareTaker BBUURRIITTOOSS!!! Registered Senior Member

    Not sure really, it does have side-effects.
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. Echo3Romeo One man wolfpack Registered Senior Member

    She doesn't have to "prove" her opinion. Substantiate, maybe, but she kind of already did. By her admission, the people she knows who use cannabis are too irresponsible to use it without letting it become a destructive force in their lives. Because this constitutes her sole exposure to the drug, it's understandable to me that she would feel the way she does.

    One could simply point out the narrowness of allowing people who overtly fit the pothead stereotype to define someone's entire perception of a substance they otherwise would have no knowledge of.
  8. Stryder Keeper of "good" ideas. Valued Senior Member

    I couldn't really suggest it was completely even. Afterall cigarettes and Alcohol you can legal purchase when you are the right age, weed in my current country at least is illegal. For it to be a "gateway drug" it would have to be legalised or at the least decriminalised.
  9. Echo3Romeo One man wolfpack Registered Senior Member

    We made a substance illegal and forced it onto the black market, where a pot dealer is more likely to be pushing harder drugs as well. Gateway number one.

    We teach our children that cannabis is a dangerous drug alongside heroin and crack. Kids more than likely hit some during their teenage years, discover it's not a big deal, and begin to wonder what other illicit substances they've been lied to about by grownups and need to try for themselves. Gateway number two.

    The gateway theory is completely overblown, but in some cases it does apply. And in those cases it plays out because of the way our society treats this stuff, not in spite of it.
  10. Stryder Keeper of "good" ideas. Valued Senior Member

    I'm not suggesting it doesn't put people in the predicament of find other drugs usually being dealt by the same dealer, in fact in some cases the Cannabis can be laced with other narcotics to cause people to become addicted, so they go back to that specific dealer.

    I merely pointed out that easily available legal products can cause a gateway effect, especially if a child is say hiding smoking cigarettes, they'll automatically be clandestine about their activities which in turn usually means hanging with other people that are also doing clandestine activities. Then you have the mergence of peer pressure where one party is doing something a little further down the experimental road to the one just smoking a cigarette. They've already been placed into a position where they are likely to turn towards other substances.

    I know from experience and from people I have known, that Cannabis can have some serious downsides that "pot heads" will not want to believe or agree with, such as the increase in likelihood of Schizophernia and increase in Anxiety attacks etc. This is one of the main reasons that it can not be legalised properly, since secondary smoking could trigger schizophrenia and anxiety in people that don't want to be subjecting themselves to the substance.

    Like I said in another thread though, there have never really been any "Impartial" studies, only studies conducted by those that want it to stay illegal and those that want to legalise/decriminalise it. Each have their agenda and they tend to not look at the substance from a scientific viewpoint.
  11. Echo3Romeo One man wolfpack Registered Senior Member

    Hm...we already have public smoking bans in the US, and there are also rather restrictive limitations on where (with the exception of your dwelling) one can have an alcoholic beverage. What makes cannabis incompatible with similar policies?

    Also, do you have any evidence to justify your concern for secondhand smoke? The amount of secondhand cannabis smoke that one must inhale to feel any psychoactive effect is ridiculously high.

    This was the case for quite some time in the US. After the federal government's policies were turned on their head by the results of studies intended to support them, legitimate medical research of the effects of cannabis was all but nonexistent. The Compassionate IND program was the only effort put forth by the federal government to research the effects from a medical standpoint. Most other "studies" consisted merely of slanted statistical analyses of crime, treatment, and emergency room stats. It wasn't until 1996 when California became the first state to legalize medical cannabis that medical grade stuff became more widely available, and universities (in California) began more intensive research on their own. All in contravention of federal law.

    Yes, it is unfortunate that the issue has become so politicized that it's made for more sound bites than useful dialogue, but it isn't like South Park where both sides are equally wrong and the truth is smack in between. Like I said earlier, the reason this stuff was banned in the first place had nothing to do with science, or medicine, or crime. It was all based on blatant racism. The only way to have a useful dialogue is to wipe the table clean and reassess whether or not there need to be any laws regulating it at all, and if so, what actually works.

    The only laws that seem to be doing any good for their respective communities, at this point, are the state-level medical programs that improve the QOL of sick and suffering while earning their host states some tax revenue.
  12. soullust Registered Senior Member

    Yeah Thats true.

    But i just hate getting judged, by People who only have a limited experience with this herb. When obviously me being a 17 year pot head with no bad side effects.
  13. NMSquirrel OCD ADHD THC IMO UR12 Valued Senior Member

    if it were legal then the gov can tax it..i would rather they make pot legal and alchohol illegal..there would be less accidents..
    i dont think so..
    depends how much you pay for it.(that is if you dont grow it yurself)
    some pot has a pleasent smell
    on occasion
    depends on the bud..
    only if one smokes too much..
    again..depends on the bud..
    better than cigs..
    dunno..i smoke cigs..hard to tell..
    see last answer
    oh i hate that..(again depends on the bud..)
    is there such a thing?
    have you ever smoked pot?
    if you havent smoked pot how can you related to them?

    don't take me too seriously sandy..i couldnt sleep and got on here to kill some time..your post looked like a fun one to reply to..

    on a related note..
    how many anti-pot commercials seem really lame and clueless?
    (this is the first one)
    Last edited: May 13, 2010
  14. BigFairy Hi Im Big Fairy! Registered Senior Member


    Do you know what an apple tastes like if you have never eaten one?

  15. Enmos Valued Senior Member

    You don't have to eat and taste an apple to know that it's harmless food.
    Have you ever eaten rat poison? No? Then how do you know it's bad for you? Maybe you should try it, you might be missing out.
  16. common_sense_seeker Bicho Voador & Bicho Sugador Valued Senior Member

  17. soullust Registered Senior Member

    See even Leprechauns Know it is good for you, In moderation.

    Lets get this shit legalized, i will stop growing vegetables in our family hot houses, and give free samples to all on this site who comes visit, we will get blasted and i will take you to see the Fortress of Louisbourg

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  18. Non-Logical-Idea-Guy Fat people can't smile. Registered Senior Member

  19. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    That's because apples have the same effect on everyone. This is also true of the legal recreational drugs: caffeine, alcohol and tobacco. They affect almost everyone in almost the same way. Differences are rare and usually mild.

    Most of the other recreational drugs are not like that. Most people have a fairly standard experience on marijuana, but there are a few people at one end of the bell curve who are overwhelmed with paranoia or who become a little too uninhibited, and there are rather more at the other end of the curve who feel a mild effect not worth the trouble, or no effect at all. It tends to dampen left-brain activity, making it a poor choice for people with low IQs, but providing a few hours of a different and fascinating perspective on life for engineers, lawyers and computer programmers.

    Nonetheless, the percentage of the population for whom marijuana is truly dangerous (assuming they've been properly introduced to it with a vaporizer rather than by inhaling smoke) is so tiny that only the most devout Drug Warriors can even find their anecdotes to repeat in their fraudulent D.A.R.E. lectures.

    There are seven billion people on this planet, so if you name a condition there's somebody somewhere who's got it, and if he finds a predatory lawyer he'll probably make some money off of it. But that's not a valid reason to outlaw something that's harmless to everyone else.
    Judging from:
    • Your abysmal grasp of probability theory,
    • Your use of anecdotes as statistics, and
    • Your rush to trample on the right of consenting adults to make their own choices,
    You simply have to be an American.

    Let me take a wild guess here...

    You also believe that it is a wise policy to give up our freedom to the Homeland Gestapo, overthrow two sovereign governments, destabilize the entire Middle East, piss off all of the planet's one billion Muslims, spend a trillion dollars we don't have, and push Al Qaeda and the Taliban into a country that is not entirely hostile to them and not entirely friendly to us and has nuclear weapons, in order to save the three thousand Americans who are killed by terrorists in every decade...

    AND you also believe that it would be a bad policy to install a breathalyzer ignition interlock in every car at the factory, at a cost of a couple of billion dollars per year, in order to save the one hundred twenty thousand Americans who are killed by drunk drivers during that same decade.

    Because all those drunk driving deaths aren't as big a tragedy as a headline-grabbing terrorist attack, or the occasional one-percenter who has a bad trip on marijuana.

    Last edited: May 15, 2010
  20. Non-Logical-Idea-Guy Fat people can't smile. Registered Senior Member

    The majority of people oppose cannabis consumption on the grounds that it harms your brain/causes mental issues, causes social decay, that is harms society, it is a gateway drug and is unhealthy. I disagree with the first 3 and feel the 4th point is negligible.

    Use of Cannabis does not contribute to brain damage, memory loss, or stupidity THIS IS A LIE spread by Ronald Reagan in 1974 in the Heath/Tulane study. They pumped monkeys full of weed roughly 30 joints worth a day, after about 90 days they tended to die and were shown to have suffered from brain damage- THIS WAS THE FOUNDATION OF ALL ARGUMENTS THAT CANNABIS CAUSED BRAIN DAMAGE AND KILLED BRAIN CELLS. After 6 years of requests for how the study was conducted, they finally caved in; instead of pumping monkeys with 30 joints a day over 12 months, Heath and Tulane used a gas mask on the monkeys and pumpedthem with 63 columbian strength joints worth of weed in 5 minutes over 3 months WITHOUT ADDITIONAL OXYGEN - this suffocated the monkeys, and this is why they were observed to be losing brain cells - this is the study you are quoting when you say cannabis causes brain damage. It is scientifically unfounded

    Studies since have shown no connection between cannabis and brain damage. 2005 Journal of Clinical Investigation ; Xia Zhang of Saskatchewan University actually showed that marijuana could stimulate brain cell growth.

    In terms of health, Marijuana of course is not the perfect thing to be putting in your system, you're inhaling the smoke of plant matter after all. BUT IT POSES MINIMAL SERIOUS HEALTH HAZARDS
    Cannabis doesn't cause lung cancer, brown lung or emphesyma ; no government is yet to provide one example of a case of Cancer caused by Cannabis use - as the 1999 study by the Medical Institute of USA shows. Dr Donald Tashkin of UCLA recently performed a study and concluded that MJ does not in any way contribute to lung cancer and "does not potentiate emphysyma in any way"
    Don't even have to talk about deaths. Cannabis kills nobody. Caffeine kills more of us, as does DIY
    Dr. Lester Grinspoon of Harvard medical school has stated "the damage to health caused by moderate cannabis use is minimal, a poor diet would cause more medical problems." Dr. Perry Kendall, BC Provincial Health Officer has said "You have to smoke 15000 joints in 20 minutes to acquire a toxic level of THC in your body." I challenge anyone to do that

    Also there is a common misconception that the potency has been increasing, and higher THC levels have contributed to more damaging effects. THIS IS NOT TRUE. No grade available in any country is significantly higher than any Columbian or British Columbian buds of the 20th century- and everyone turned out fine! it is pure ego to suggest that in the last 50 years of prohibition we have developed better strains and varieties than were cultivated in places like India for the past thousands of years.

    Another argument is the addiction/gateway drug theory.. after all there are more kids in therapy and rehabilitation for cannabis addiction than any other substance. So it must be addictive. right? No. The reason for thsi figure is down to the policy of the DEA- if a kid gets caught smoking cannabis and it is filed as an offence, a first or second timer is offered a choice- face a minor criminal record and some kind of fine or punishment.. or go into therapy/rehabilitation. What would you choose? and this creates a figure the DEA can point to as evidence that the amount of kids in treatment shows that cannabis damages people and society. But it is a manufactured figure. Only 3% of people in cannabis treatment are there volunatarily.
    Cannabis possesses no addictive element. People argue of its psychological addictiveness- anything can be psychologically addictive, and cannabis posseses no quality than any other form of medicine or drug doesnt have whic.h makes it more prone to causing psychological addiction. It is habituating, but can be discontinued.

    Cannabis in itself is not a gateway drug it is not a stepping stone on to harder drugs. Again Dr. Lester Grinspoon of Harvard medical school has stated "there is no inherent pharmacological or psychological property in cannabis that pushes one towards another drug... by such reasoning it could be argued that if alcohol is your drug of choice, you started on milk." The only actuality that can make cannabis a stepping stone drug is when the markets of hard drugs are blended together with the markets of soft drugs by Cannabis' prohibition which creates a intimacy in which people who go to score pot do end up being exposed to some ketamine or coke. The prohibition creates a black market which is the only cause of the 'stepping stone' event which OCCASSIONALLY OCCURS. A 2008 DEA study showed only 1/104 marijuana users used cocaine, and less than 1/104 used heroin or LSD. Which shows that ultimately, Marijuana consumption poses a minimal threat as a gateway drug. But the study was kept a bit quiet

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    And Legalisation and regulation would prevent this small effect entirely.

    And now we come to face the idea that marijuana use harms society. No it doesn't, it's prohibition does.
    I think Sandy mentioned that it causes laziness and uselessness?
    Steven Jobbs developed apple computers smoking pot
    Ted Turner developed CNN smoking pot, still smokes a j every day

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Almost every modern presedential candidate has admitted to using marijuana at some point in their lives
    Cannabis does not cause idleness, many are in fact motivated by it.

    Second, even if you do stick to your guns that cannabis is detrimental to society, ok. But does prohibition protect society from it? NO. There are over 50 million regular users in the USA, and more who don't admit it, supply is as high as ever as is demand. So what does prohibition actually do? It provides money for organised criminals ; In British Colombia, Canada alone, its estimated that the illegal marijuana trade brings in $7 billion per year. Prohibiton also allows our children to access the drug at will, Prohibition creates an unregulated market, where one cant regulate who can buy pot. People who say we need to protect our kids from weed should want it legalised, because then you can enforce an age limit, at the minute any 11 year old can score some weed if you know someone scummy enough. We should not leave the dealers to decide what age is appropriate for a kid to buy weed. Ask any 16 year old what's easier to get, booze or weed. They'll say weed. If you try to prohibit something that's in demand, it is folly.

    To decide whether marijuana should be prohibited or not, you should just look at the effect that prohibition compared to regulation had on alcohol. Alcohol prohibition gave rise to massive organised crime, Al Capone and the like, led to a general disregard for the law and a general disregard for police activity. Alcohol poisoning increased by 600% during the prohibition years. People were shooting each other over booze. Similarly, the prohibition of marijuana strengthens organised crime, and funds their activities- weed is now worth more oz per oz than gold, it creates an artificially inflated price for the product which makes people prepared to fight and murder over it. The Frasier Institute called cannabis prohibition a "gift of revenue to organised crime." When you have organised criminals supporting prohibition, you have to scratch your head and wonder who this prohibition is really benefitting. Legalising cannabis would undermine this violent and criminal trade and redirect the benefits of cannabis back into official hands - it's been estimated that taxing cannabis consumption in the US at similar levels to tobacco or alcohol would raise between $10-14 billion a year.

    Nay sayers may say 'What about all the crime and voilence associated with marijuana?' Stoned people are not violent, and they definitely aren't up for holding robberies or raping someone, we're chilled, we wanna watch a black and white film and eat some fucking pizza.
    Norm Stamper, police chief of Seattle 1994-2000 ; "While I saw ample evidence of violence caused by alcohol I saw the absence of evidence of voilence caused by marijuana use, and i mean complete absence. I cannot recall a single case in which marijuana contributed to domestic voilence, crimes of theft and the like, show me a guy who smoked too much pot and went home and beat his wife and kids like you see on alcohol"

    Furthermore, the cost of enforcing marijuana prohibition is astronomical; Last year, USA spends $7.7 billion enforcing cannabis prohibition every year. Only $400 million is spent on enforcing prohobition of all the other drugs combined- crack, coke, heroin, meth, ketamine, LSD, mushrooms, the date rape drug etc. Which do you think damages society more?

    If you're convicted for possession of one joint, you can't get a government loan to get you through college. Even with a murder, rape or aggravated assault conviction, you can get a loan from the government to get you through college. i guess the message is it's ok to murder rape and pillage, just dont smoke a j afterwards.

    To Illustrate the sillyness of the smear campaign on marijuana ; "Everyone of the bastards out for legalizing marijuana is jewish" - Richard Nixon 1971, White House Tapes. He ignored the Shafer report he commissioned as it stated that £marijuana should have no criminal penalty attached to it" and created this war on marijuana to prevent pacifism in the USA which led to war protests about Vietnam.

    In terms of the god uses that industrial hemp can be put to, the list is endless

    It's fibres are the strongest naturally occuring fibres in the world
    More than 5000 textile products
    More than 25000 products from cellulose- dynamite to cellophane
    Paper superior to trees and a much more renewable resource- The bill of rights was written on hemp paper
    Clothes - longlasting, more durable than cotton
    Seeds are a great source of amino acids
    sooo many more

    .Marijuana is not a moral debate, you must be pragmatic about it. There is a demand, and we cannot stop the supply. We should legalise it, regulate it, taxt the hell out of it and put every penny back into the health system. Whether it is good or bad... I see a plant which can bring a lot of happiness, a lot of pain relief and a lot of answers to modern day problems which poses very few negative side effects. I think marijuana could be put to good use.
  21. soullust Registered Senior Member


    Good stuff.

    Guy's come on, why are some of you saying no?

    I mean weed was around for over 10 000 years, it is not going no where, and the black market owns it.

    As far as i am Concerned, you People that are Blocking legalization, are Dumb, Like completely (sorry)..

    I mean, Do you want to know how Our Cocaine and Crack dealers get there money to get started, By selling Pot!

    Why not you can get started buying a quarter ounce pot for 55 dollars, thats the street value up here in Canada for decent Hydro weed.

    Sell 10 of them at 10 a gram, bang you just made 150 dollars, Now you can buy your a small bag of coke and make 500 profit, It's just that easy.

    Illegal weed Is a god damn Crime against humanity, and you people who are Blocking legalizing it need to get, your head straight, because you must have a few screws loose if you can not see .......

  22. soullust Registered Senior Member

    Oh and come on People, Place your votes, little polls like this can make a huge difference, for reals.
  23. Stryder Keeper of "good" ideas. Valued Senior Member

    Like I've said in previous threads made on the subject, no decent research has been done because it's always slanted. If a government does research, they will find findings that stoners will be unappreciative of while if stoners do research... (ha... research.....) They'll just get "Potty" results. (Yeah you could troll through a whole bunch of web searches on the subject, just remember all the "positive" results are going to be spammed by pro campaigners, much like the "negative" ones by the anti campaigners.)

    What is needed is Neutral research done on it, that isn't being manipulated because of law and isn't being slighted because a pothead has a habit.

Share This Page