Legalise marijuana

[Hurlshort]

I grew up in Santa Cruz, where drug use is fairly rampant. I had a few friends who were very bright, I mean considerably smarter than myself. In High School they got into pot and shrooms, and now they have pretty much fallen off the map. I know two of them live up in Humboldt in a trailer growing their own stuff and working odd jobs.

 

These are guys that could have done quite well in college, probably could have excelled in any career they chose. But they choose to live in a trailer and get high. Now maybe they never had they desire or drive necessary to excel, drugs or not, but I find that hard to believe.

 

This has nothing to do with legality, I don't mind if it is legal. Alcohol is legal and can ruin lives just as easily. But lets not go nuts over the wonders of marijuana.

[LadyCrimson]

This has nothing to do with legality, I don't mind if it is legal. Alcohol is legal and can ruin lives just as easily. But lets not go nuts over the wonders of marijuana.

That's kinda my stance on it. To me it doesn't seem any worse than alcohol so I have no problem with it being legal, since alcohol is legal. But I wouldn't say using weed on a regular basis is completely harmless or without possible consequence, either.

[Gorgon]

I grew up in Santa Cruz, where drug use is fairly rampant. I had a few friends who were very bright, I mean considerably smarter than myself. In High School they got into pot and shrooms, and now they have pretty much fallen off the map. I know two of them live up in Humboldt in a trailer growing their own stuff and working odd jobs.

 

These are guys that could have done quite well in college, probably could have excelled in any career they chose. But they choose to live in a trailer and get high. Now maybe they never had they desire or drive necessary to excel, drugs or not, but I find that hard to believe.

 

This has nothing to do with legality, I don't mind if it is legal. Alcohol is legal and can ruin lives just as easily. But lets not go nuts over the wonders of marijuana.

I don't know if hash robs you of your ambition, but it's certainly possible it may makes you feel that everything is already irie so why bother challenging yourself.

 

We all lie to ourselves about how successful we are and how close we are to realising our dreams, this is a healthy delusion though, if you didn't wake up thinking that everything is possible and that things are more likely to go better than worse you are adding yourself to the list of things that need to be overcome. I think it's possible for your sense of deferred gratification to get muddled with hash, and you absolutely need it to succeed in anything.

 

I guess I'm like most of the smokers I know, I indulged rather heavily in my 20s and slowed down to a couple of times a month. Doesn't hold the appeal it used to, but I can still get into it once in a while.

[Humodour]

Heathen: Gromnir has been trolling these boards on and off for many years mate. Don't feed him.

 

It's a pretty big jump to say drugs = brilliance. I don't remember any quotes by prominent scientists that sounded like "I was totally stumped on this complex problem, but then I got totally wasted, and I solved it!"

 

Actually, a fair number of scientists and mathematicians use drugs a fair bit when they're stumped on problems and such. Mainly stimulants (especially ADHD meds like Ritalin and amphetamines) and hallucinogens (LSD and shrooms).

 

But yeah, marijuana is a drug more suited to progress in the arts. From my experience, compared to something like LSD, you're not going to get those sudden insights or eureka moments while stoned, IMHO.

 

Do I think it's a good idea to take drugs to boost creativity? Sure, every now and then. It's brilliant to get that different perspective from time to time. But it shouldn't be used to replace your own creativity all the time or anything.

 

I grew up in Santa Cruz, where drug use is fairly rampant. I had a few friends who were very bright, I mean considerably smarter than myself. In High School they got into pot and shrooms, and now they have pretty much fallen off the map. I know two of them live up in Humboldt in a trailer growing their own stuff and working odd jobs.

 

These are guys that could have done quite well in college, probably could have excelled in any career they chose. But they choose to live in a trailer and get high. Now maybe they never had they desire or drive necessary to excel, drugs or not, but I find that hard to believe.

 

These guys made a choice. Marijuana and shrooms didn't do this (I might feel differently if they were pumped on heroine or something). These are both some of the least harmful drugs in existence (non-addictive and contemplative with low self-harm level), and I can guarentee you they think about their situation a fair bit when they trip on shrooms - how to improve it, how they got there, etc.

 

This has nothing to do with legality, I don't mind if it is legal. Alcohol is legal and can ruin lives just as easily. But lets not go nuts over the wonders of marijuana.

 

Agreed.

[Walsingham]

I think your personal experience of hash users has skewered your perception to an unreasonable degree. It does not impact work performance unless it becomes a daily thing. Sure not every one can keep their usage in check, but that's not really what we were discussing. Potheads smell like the clothes hamper, drunks smell like what they had to drink this week. That's neither here nor there.

 

I've thought about your point and I'm going to turn that around. I know a very very wide section of people who dope up, from the obvious students and techies to army officers and nurses. Low to high achievers. But at the end of the day it's about putting stuf in your brain which is more complex than ethanol. For ****'s sake its two active components. Not even one.

 

So I think you are the one who is letting their personal experience cloud their judgement. The zulus use dope for fighting on. How does that fit with your cosy white 1960s view?

[Gorgon]

What are you saying, that science does not back up to a large degree that hash is less dangerous than drinking or smoking. I would certainly take issue with that.

 

Taking drugs that alter brain chemistry has been a part of the human experience for as long as one cares to go back. The track record of cannabis as a recreational drug is pretty good over all. What exactly is the relevance of either the Zulus or the number of active ingredients. It wasn't even clear if you were differentiating or not.

 

 

Where I come from 'dope' means heroin. Is that what you were talking about ?.

[Humodour]

But at the end of the day it's about putting stuf in your brain which is more complex than ethanol. For ****'s sake its two active components. Not even one.

 

This makes no sense from a biological point of view, wals. The GABA system is no less complex than the cannabinoid system, and the cannabinoids have just as complex an interaction in the brain as ethanol does, even if it's a structually more complex molecule.

 

Ethanol is not harmless. It's not even more harmless than cannabis. It DOES cause permanent damage to the brain when used daily in larger doses (e.g. half a dozen standards or more). It also leads to a statistically significant increased risk of disease and cancer.

 

Wikipedia has an awesome aggregation of all the health impacts of alcohol: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_consumption_and_health

 

Everyone assumes that when I compare weed to alcohol I'm trying to imply that weed is safe. Wrong. I'm trying to point out that alcohol is dangerous, it's legal yet weed is no worse than it and illegal.

 

So I think you are the one who is letting their personal experience cloud their judgement. The zulus use dope for fighting on. How does that fit with your cosy white 1960s view?

 

Marijuana is not native to Africa. Are you sure they didn't use wild dagga (also known as marihuanila)? Dagga is also the nickname for marijuana in Africa now, but before it was introduced, Leonotis leonurus (dagga) was what was used. It has some slight chemical similarities in structure, and from my experience produces all the euphoric/positive/social effects of weed without any of the depressant/narcotic/sedative effects. This would make far more sense as the drug the Zulus used if what you said is true.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonotis_leonurus

[Thorton_AP]

Meh, I've just never felt the need to bother trying.

 

Same with stuff like cigarettes. I was a late bloomer to drinking even (26) and I hardly do it. /shrug

[~Di]

He's right. Tobacco is "legal", but government severely restricts licenses to grow tobacco. Proposition 19 simply means that use and possession of marijuana will no longer be illegal.

 

Interestingly, I read from a reasonably reliable source that Prop 19 means:

- Personal growing and use is legal

- Commercial growing is illegal without a government licence

- The government doesn't have to give out any licences.

- The government can (and will) tax commercial licences.

 

So any commercial, non-black market sale will be taxed and government regulated. Given cost reductions of 80% predicted (from like $300 to $40 for an ounce) I find it hard to see how the black market could compete UNLESS the government intentionally restricted supply. Given the opportunity to eleminate the black market in weed, I can't see why the government would restrict demand much.

 

So I guess my point is that Prop 19 legalises non-commercial growing and recreational use, as well as commercial growing and selling - but the commercial side is kind of also a seperate issue as the government could simply elect not to grant licences.

 

I think what you have posted is pretty much the same as what I have posted. The Proposition allows the state to tax and regulate, but it will require much legislative chaos to figure out how that will be done, and will the proposition will not take affect until the feds have exhausted all legal attempts to overturn it.

[~Di]

I don't use pot either. Never have. I think it's dumb to use a substance purely to pickle one's brain enough to get stoned... i.e., be less aware of one's surroundings and lose enough inhibitions to cheerfully make a fool of oneself. I do drink, although not to excess, and I used to smoke... both have potentially lethal consequence on the body. I've yet to hear of a single death caused by pot's consequence to the body, so making it illegal seems hypocritical to me.

 

I'm in favor of legalizing it because doing so will solve a pot-load (pardon the pun!) of problems. First, it will thin out our prisons considerably, saving much taxpayer money. Second, it will eliminate the temptation of drug cartels to send their minions into our forests and private lands to grow pot fields illegally, much to the woe of any hiker or property owner who stumbles into them. Third, we'll save a ton of money on law enforcement when cops don't have to arrest and incarcerate people with a few ounces of weed in their pocket. Fourth, it offers a potential source of future revenue IF the state decides to license commercial pot growers. And finally, it breaks the back of the illegal weed sales by drug cartels, so crime rates are gonna drop, baby.

 

Proposition 19 just doesn't seem to have a downside to me. So I'm voting for it. That doesn't mean that I plan to grow plants on my deck, or that I approve of people using the stuff. I don't approve of drunks or smokers either, but hey, it's legal, it's their bodies, and as far as I'm concerned, adults have the right to control what they do and do not wish to consume.

Edited July 9, 2010 by ~Di

[Arkan]

I need to move to Cali. Here in WV it's been dryer than....something... THAT IS VERY DRY! I swear I had something for this.

[Walsingham]

Firstly I was being a bit patronising, and generally a **** so I apologise for that. I'm sure it will happen again, by apologies anyway...

 

All I'm saying on the subject of danger is that asserting marijuana (dope to me) has no negative effects is factually incorrect, and alienates perfectly reasonable people away from the legalisation argument. It's factually incorrect because there are studies which sugegst there are associated problems, and you can SEE with your own eyes people with a dependency on marijuana. Getting smoked up is a comon feature of those funsome murdersome militias one see around the world. It deadens your intellect, and some variants contain high levels of simulants that can make you hallucinate and exhibit extreme agitation.

 

I believe that legalisation is essential if we are to stand a chance of excising or mitigating the impact of drugs on our society. It's too important to indulge in comforting platitudes about how the use of the drug has no impact on anything. It does. It just doesn't have the kind of impact which should be fought by overstretched law enforcement.

[Wrath of Dagon]

Everyone assumes that when I compare weed to alcohol I'm trying to imply that weed is safe. Wrong. I'm trying to point out that alcohol is dangerous, it's legal yet weed is no worse than it and illegal.

False argument, glue is even more dangerous when abused, yet we don't outlaw glue.

 

Edit: All that's going to happen when pot is legalized is it'll get cheaper and more socially acceptable, more kids will get hooked and destroy their lives, and society will have more problems, not less.

 

Edit2: Also, you can enjoy alcohol without getting drunk, you can't enjoy pot without getting stoned.

Edited July 9, 2010 by Wrath of Dagon

[Purkake]

Wrath is our official grumpy old man

[Nepenthe]

I need to move to Cali. Here in WV it's been dryer than....something... THAT IS VERY DRY! I swear I had something for this.

 

If you hadn't smoked, you would've had it.

[Hurlshort]

Edit: All that's going to happen when pot is legalized is it'll get cheaper and more socially acceptable, more kids will get hooked and destroy their lives, and society will have more problems, not less.

 

Edit2: Also, you can enjoy alcohol without getting drunk, you can't enjoy pot without getting stoned.

 

On edit 1, I'm not sure how it can get more socially accepted. You have popular movies based completely around their use (from Cheech and Chong to Harold and Kumar.) Because it is something that can be grown rather easily, you already have a lot of kids doing it (data is hard to track down, but around 50% of Americans have tried it.) It is already a societal problem. It may create more need for rehab centers, but it will cut down on the criminal element.

 

I've also spent a bit of time at rehab centers, per my sister who went through a rough few years. I don't believe anyone was actually in rehab for marijuana. It is a major gateway drug, but as an actual destroyer of lives, it is limited. You hear the term angry drunk a lot more than angry stoner.

 

On edit2, I agree completely. This is the real kicker, exactly what is moderate pot usage? I think a joint a day is probably a lot more unhealthy than a beer or a glass of wine a day.

[Gorgon]

Firstly I was being a bit patronising, and generally a **** so I apologise for that. I'm sure it will happen again, by apologies anyway...

 

All I'm saying on the subject of danger is that asserting marijuana (dope to me) has no negative effects is factually incorrect, and alienates perfectly reasonable people away from the legalisation argument. It's factually incorrect because there are studies which sugegst there are associated problems, and you can SEE with your own eyes people with a dependency on marijuana. Getting smoked up is a comon feature of those funsome murdersome militias one see around the world. It deadens your intellect, and some variants contain high levels of simulants that can make you hallucinate and exhibit extreme agitation.

 

I believe that legalisation is essential if we are to stand a chance of excising or mitigating the impact of drugs on our society. It's too important to indulge in comforting platitudes about how the use of the drug has no impact on anything. It does. It just doesn't have the kind of impact which should be fought by overstretched law enforcement.

Yes, there are problems for people who use too much, same as alchohol, I thought we covered this already. All I can say is that I'm pretty underwhelmed by your so called personal experience of these things. Speaking as someone who has lived the majority of his life in an environment where hash usage was the norm.

[Orogun01]

Everyone assumes that when I compare weed to alcohol I'm trying to imply that weed is safe. Wrong. I'm trying to point out that alcohol is dangerous, it's legal yet weed is no worse than it and illegal.

False argument, glue is even more dangerous when abused, yet we don't outlaw glue.

 

Edit: All that's going to happen when pot is legalized is it'll get cheaper and more socially acceptable, more kids will get hooked and destroy their lives, and society will have more problems, not less.

 

Edit2: Also, you can enjoy alcohol without getting drunk, you can't enjoy pot without getting stoned.

Glue isn't meant to be consumed, weed is.

 

Pot isn't as addictive as other drugs, kids have a bigger chance to become alcoholics. That said, I think it should continue to be illegal.

[Orogun01]

Firstly I was being a bit patronising, and generally a **** so I apologise for that. I'm sure it will happen again, by apologies anyway...

 

All I'm saying on the subject of danger is that asserting marijuana (dope to me) has no negative effects is factually incorrect, and alienates perfectly reasonable people away from the legalisation argument. It's factually incorrect because there are studies which sugegst there are associated problems, and you can SEE with your own eyes people with a dependency on marijuana. Getting smoked up is a comon feature of those funsome murdersome militias one see around the world. It deadens your intellect, and some variants contain high levels of simulants that can make you hallucinate and exhibit extreme agitation.

 

I believe that legalisation is essential if we are to stand a chance of excising or mitigating the impact of drugs on our society. It's too important to indulge in comforting platitudes about how the use of the drug has no impact on anything. It does. It just doesn't have the kind of impact which should be fought by overstretched law enforcement.

There are alternatives to legalization, merely changing the level on the drugs act. It would remain a controlled substance while more resources could be diverted to the really dangerous drugs.

[Wrath of Dagon]

On edit 1, I'm not sure how it can get more socially accepted. You have popular movies based completely around their use (from Cheech and Chong to Harold and Kumar.) Because it is something that can be grown rather easily, you already have a lot of kids doing it (data is hard to track down, but around 50% of Americans have tried it.) It is already a societal problem. It may create more need for rehab centers, but it will cut down on the criminal element.

But I'm saying it'll be an even bigger problem if it's legalized. I think you'll appreciate the issue more once your own kid reaches a certain age. No mattter how you try to bring him (her?) up, if the society is sending an opposite message you've got an uphill fight.

 

I've also spent a bit of time at rehab centers, per my sister who went through a rough few years. I don't believe anyone was actually in rehab for marijuana. It is a major gateway drug, but as an actual destroyer of lives, it is limited. You hear the term angry drunk a lot more than angry stoner.

If it's a major gateway drug, than it is a destroyer of lives. Even in limited use I believe it reduces a person's potential. If alcohol were illegal already, I would be against legalizing it, nor would I be against making it illegal.

 

Wrath is our official grumpy old man

[Humodour]

All that's going to happen when pot is legalized is it'll get cheaper and more socially acceptable, more kids will get hooked and destroy their lives, and society will have more problems, not less.

 

God damn you're clueless. Weed is not physically addictive, unlike opiates, cocaine, alcohol and even caffeine. You can form a psychological dependence to weed, but the risk is low (less than 10% of those who use it - 10% being the number of smokers who smoke it daily, but anybody with 1st year psychology under their belt would be able to point out that frequency of enjoyment is not equal to level of addiction), and no different from the risk of getting 'hooked' on alcohol.

 

But the real thing that annoys me about your ignorance is that you think weed destroys lives! Holy crap the **** you come up with sometimes man.

 

Also, you can enjoy alcohol without getting drunk, you can't enjoy pot without getting stoned.

 

Clearly you've never smoked. I'm not even sure you've drunk alcohol. You can get tipsy on alcohol without getting drunk and you can get buzzed on weed without getting stoned - anybody with any sort of life experience or common sense can tell you that there is a gradient of effects.

 

In fact it requires a fair few cones and a concerted effort to get actually stoned, rather than just buzzed. It's very much like the alcohol gradient in my experience, and I don't even have a tolerance as I don't do it enough.

Edited July 9, 2010 by Krezack

[Humodour]

If it's a major gateway drug, than it is a destroyer of lives. Even in limited use I believe it reduces a person's potential. If alcohol were illegal already, I would be against legalizing it, nor would I be against making it illegal.

 

Cool. Go trample somebody else's civil rights, please.

[ShadySands]

I don't believe anyone was actually in rehab for marijuana.

 

 

In all seriousness though I have a hard time buying into the gateway drug theory. Yes, alcohol and tobacco and marijuana are usually the first drugs people try but that's because they are the most common and easiest to get.

[Hurlshort]

On edit 1, I'm not sure how it can get more socially accepted. You have popular movies based completely around their use (from Cheech and Chong to Harold and Kumar.) Because it is something that can be grown rather easily, you already have a lot of kids doing it (data is hard to track down, but around 50% of Americans have tried it.) It is already a societal problem. It may create more need for rehab centers, but it will cut down on the criminal element.

But I'm saying it'll be an even bigger problem if it's legalized. I think you'll appreciate the issue more once your own kid reaches a certain age. No mattter how you try to bring him (her?) up, if the society is sending an opposite message you've got an uphill fight.

 

 

Oh, I already take the issue quite seriously. I am very against marijuana use, as I said, my sister went through hell and back and marijuana was clearly the gateway to that. I already have an uphill fight here, society is already sending the message that marijuana isn't a big deal. I teach 7th graders, so I'm right there on the cusp with these students as they prepare to make stupid decisions as teenagers. What I am saying is very few of them are concerned with the legality of the issue. If they choose not to do pot, it is going to be because they are making a smart decision about their health and future. It is illegal for them to drink and smoke as well as teenagers, and yet plenty of them will do those things.

 

What I'm really saying is it's already a big problem, so stop wasting resources criminalizing it, and start educating people on it. Also, it won't hurt to clean out the bloated prison system a bit in California.

[Humodour]

I've read up on marijuana as a gateway drug and it seems to be bull****. The stats I saw indicate the vast majority of marijuana users (including those who did it rarely or only once or twice) went no further than marijuana their whole lives.

 

I'm happy to have somebody like Hurlshot or Enoch (who I respect to not try and warp the truth, unlike Wrath or Gromnir) shed some light on that issue. I might do a search in the morning.

Edited July 9, 2010 by Krezack