Should weed be legal? [Discussion]

[iamdarkyoshi]

Weed/alcohol/cigarettes/whatever else you guys do these days should ALL be illegal (unless you have a doctor's prescription) in my opinion. But we all know how well that would turn out...

[KB_TheDireWolf]

For medical use yes.

[QueenDemetria]

Of course I want it legal so I can 420 blaze it with my Optic-FAZE clan Dewrito buddies...

 

 

jk, I don't care TBH.

[Kobathor]

I'm not a pot head.  I don't like it myself nor would I use it, but I understand the science and history behind it.  You also were too vague on alcohol while using a bad example..   

There were 3 other people that quoted me, you aren't one of the wannabe potheads. Should've been more specific, sorry. 

 

Also, smoking tobacco is different from smoking a modern cigarette. To quote the other part of your post. 

[Sauron]

I know smoking anything is bad for you.  Weed just isn't as bad as tobacco as it doesn't have the heavy tar side effects.  But, it's one of the few things that can treat aspects, not cure them, of cancer and other health issues that the other 2 cause.  Radiation and chemo are the primary treatments for cancer, but they cause a lot of pain.  Weed can help with depression too, but there is problems with weed.

 

Someone who frequently gets high has and can develop permanent short term memory, it can change the shape of parts of the brain though the brain does adapt to said change aka that's not really bad rather weird, though, other things include breathing problems, it can increase heart rate for a period of time, and smoking it while pregnant can have issues on a child's development. However, it doesn't have the level of things that tobacco and alcohol can do to you.  But, also another issue is that they are likely to pay less attention while high.   

 

The fact that it can help against cancer doesn't mean it's good for everyone. There are plenty of medicines that can treat headaches but 10 pills will kill you. Under prescription, fine, but selling it like candy is nonsense imo.

[Memories4K]

Except we know for a fact people usually aren't self responsible. The consequences of drugs go beyond simply harming the user, someone who is high on drugs is a threat to everyone around him.

Again, their choice.

You can literally say that about anything.

If you want to play authoritarian then you have to be consistent on your views of individualism vs. collectivism.

Why is caffeine legal?

Why is there such easy access to nutmeg?

Why is it legal for me to take any kind of nicotine?

[Volbet]

Haha, say weed is bad and you automatically get 3 wannabe pothead to end you. 

 

Pathetic. 

 

If weed isnt addictive, tell that to all the potheads that are addicted to weed. Please. 

I can only assume that the 3 includes me, and if that is correct then i just have to ask: Why did you quote me if you didn't want me to respond? 

If I hadn't been quoted I wouldn't have bothered to respond at all, and you would have one less "wannabe pothead" going at you. 

 

Also, calling you opponent a "pothead" is not great way to argue your point. Even if the person you are arguing against is living in a permant high state that doesn't impact their arguments. 

Dismantle the arguments instead of the person.

 

As for the addictive properties of weed, it depends on how a person defines "addictve", as I have said earlier in this thread. 

There is no evidence to suggest that weed creates a physical addiction akin to the addiction you form with alcohol or opiates.

However, a menal addiction can form, but it depends on the person smoking it. 

[Kobathor]

I can only assume that the 3 includes me, and if that is correct then i just have to ask: Why did you quote me if you didn't want me to respond?

I didn't quote you guys cause I'm on my phone and quoting + deleting your GIGANTIC posts on weed takes to long. 

 

Also I'm pretty sure if you're in a permanent high state you shouldn't be trusted. 

[Volbet]

I didn't quote you guys cause I'm on my phone and quoting + deleting your GIGANTIC posts on weed takes to long. 

 

Also I'm pretty sure if you're in a permanent high state you shouldn't be trusted. 

That depends on the argument that high person is making. 

I don't care what type of drug people are under the influence of, as long as their arguments make sense. 

And if their arguments don't make sense I will counter them. Calling people potheads as a counter is pretty much the same as throwing in the towel, since it demonstartes nothing about the truth value of your own arguments.

 

Debating is pretty much like playing soccer. If you are going to tackle you have to attack the ball, not the man. 

[Sauron]

Again, their choice.

You can literally say that about anything.

If you want to play authoritarian then you have to be consistent on your views of individualism vs. collectivism.

Why is caffeine legal?

Why is there such easy access to nutmeg?

Why is it legal for me to take any kind of nicotine?

 

Caffeine isn't dangerous to others, even in quantities that are dangerous to the user (and you need to drink a LOT of coffee before you get there). I had never heard of nutmeg before, but if it's dangerous then that should be illegal too as far as I'm concerned. I also think cigarettes should be illegal for that matter. Sorry, but it is not their choice when they put my health on the line.

 

Authoritarian or not, there must be boundaries for a society to work well. There's a difference between taking some risks knowing that the benefits outweigh them (for example allowing cars) and just allowing people to hurt themselves and potentially others for no reason other than "they felt like it". I'm liberal in a lot of things, but on some I just won't bulge.

[as96]

I also think cigarettes should be illegal for that matter. Sorry, but it is not their choice when they put my health on the line.

I don't smoke so I couldn't care less but no, cigarettes have no reason to be illegal, do they hurt the user's health? Yes, but they are not a danger for other people, it's already illegal to smoke inside in public buildings (with some exceptions I think) and outside you can just keep distance if you are worried about it.

[Stuff_]

I think most drugs should be legal, and regulated by the government in some form. There's absolutely no reason to wrestle with the drug lords and try to fight them and keep it out. There is massive amounts of money in that illegal industry. If you legalize and regulate it, you (in theory) have a decent solution to drug smuggling.

 

Of course, the counterargument is that they are obviously bad for your health, and people will start abusing them.

I respond by, oh well. Those people are likely ones we need to eradicate from this world anyway.

[Omon_Ra]

I didn't quote you guys cause I'm on my phone and quoting + deleting your GIGANTIC posts on weed takes to long. 

 

Wait, I thought potheads were supposed to be the lazy ones? Calling me a 'pothead' does nothing for your cause and only drives home the point that the continued classification of marijuana as a Schedule 1 substance is only maintained by perpetuation of ignorant, uneducated beliefs, not facts or science, to maintain the prohibition. Guess what, it's not working. Why does America have the biggest prison population per capita in the world? How much money has been spent on the drug war to neither stem the flow of marijuana and other illicit drugs nor seemingly reduce demand? One of the biggest drug problems the United States faces right now is a massive heroin epidemic; and that blame can be planted squarely on the pharmaceutical companies, not street corner dealers.

 

Caffeine isn't dangerous to others, even in quantities that are dangerous to the user (and you need to drink a LOT of coffee before you get there). I had never heard of nutmeg before, but if it's dangerous then that should be illegal too as far as I'm concerned. I also think cigarettes should be illegal for that matter. Sorry, but it is not their choice when they put my health on the line.

 

Authoritarian or not, there must be boundaries for a society to work well. There's a difference between taking some risks knowing that the benefits outweigh them (for example allowing cars) and just allowing people to hurt themselves and potentially others for no reason other than "they felt like it". I'm liberal in a lot of things, but on some I just won't bulge.

 

You say caffeine isn't dangerous to others, but have you ever tried talking to serious coffee drinker who hasn't had their coffee in the morning?  Nutmeg is a common spice that when one consumes enough of it they a) get really sick b ) can cause altered mind states. I first heard about it in 'The Autobiography of Malcom X' and he explained how in prison people used to eat a bunch of it to basically trip. Morning Glory seeds can make you trip. Hell, running gives you an endorphin high. Too much water and you'll die. It just brings about the classic quote, 'The difference between a poison and a medicine is dosage.' If I want to hurt myself, that's my prerogative. IMO, sitting in front of a TV watching reality shows for hours is hugely dangerous to people, we should ban reality TV shows. Your argument that 'society must have boundaries' opens another can of worms, but I basically think that the boundaries that society needs can be created and modified as our understanding and society changes.

[chicksoup]

yeah because then the government can take money from those people instead of my taxes

keep on dreaming

[Kobathor]

I know that, but my point was that I'd rather that be legal as a drug than tobacco and alcohol.  Personally, I think it should be prescribed while tobacco and alcohol should just upright be banned.

 

 

But, smoking a modern cig will still give you cancer and pushes tar into the lungs.

I meant there's more than one way to smoke tobacco, not just cigarettes. You already know that though. Either way, it's bad for you. Which you also know. 

[Nup]

-snip-

 

I never said that they're the only ones who do. I know they are not a majority, they are simply a very vocal minority. 

 

I was commenting on how legalization would/might change that crowd, is all. 

[Kobathor]

Wait, I thought potheads were supposed to be the lazy ones? Calling me a 'pothead' does nothing for your cause and only drives home the point that the continued classification of marijuana as a Schedule 1 substance is only maintained by perpetuation of ignorant, uneducated beliefs, not facts or science, to maintain the prohibition. Guess what, it's not working. Why does America have the biggest prison population per capita in the world? How much money has been spent on the drug war to neither stem the flow of marijuana and other illicit drugs nor seemingly reduce demand? One of the biggest drug problems the United States faces right now is a massive heroin epidemic; and that blame can be planted squarely on the pharmaceutical companies, not street corner dealers.

I can see you're an expert on drugs, how drugs work, how the drug war works, and how America works.

 

Also, I've known two actual potheads in my short life, and they were the laziest, most narcissistic deadbeats I'd ever known. One went to therapy, and is not a waste of oxygen anymore, but the other is (last I checked) still sitting in his parent's basement smoking pot, not getting a job or education, doing nothing. Because Marijuana has consumed his livelihood. 

[Sauron]

I know that, but my point was that I'd rather that be legal as a drug than tobacco and alcohol.  Personally, I think it should be prescribed while tobacco and alcohol should just upright be banned.

 

alcohol in reasonable doses has no nasty side effects unless you already have problems. what I'd do is make being drunk illegal.

[Sauron]

I don't smoke so I couldn't care less but no, cigarettes have no reason to be illegal, do they hurt the user's health? Yes, but they are not a danger for other people, it's already illegal to smoke inside in public buildings (with some exceptions I think) and outside you can just keep distance if you are worried about it.

 

yes, cigarettes are bad for the health of those near a smoker. it's bullshit that I, a non smoker, should have to suffer someone else tarring my lungs for no reason.

[Speedstack79]

this poll shows how effective some websites are at being "echo chambers" , when looking at how pro-weed a website like reddit is, I would expect this poll to be like at least 90% in favor... bad thing about that is some people believe those websites are an accurate representation of the population...

[Nup]

this poll shows how effective some websites are at being "echo chambers" , when looking at how pro-weed a website like reddit is, I would expect this poll to be like 90% in favor... bad thing about that is some people believe those websites are an accurate representation of the population...

 

What is an "echo chamber"? 

[techswede]

yes, cigarettes are bad for the health of those near a smoker. it's bullshit that I, a non smoker, should have to suffer someone else tarring my lungs for no reason.

Oh grow up.

The tiny amounts you breathe in if you pass a smoker won't harm you. 

[Omon_Ra]

I never said that they're the only ones who do. I know they are not a majority, they are simply a very vocal minority. 

 

I was commenting on how legalization would/might change that crowd, is all. 

 

Indeed. Which begs the question, what do those burnout/stoner types have to talk about once it's legal?? Have you considered the majority of 'potheads' aren't as vocal because of the social stigmas, legal ramifications and employment risk should they be more vocal about it? It will be interesting to see what happens to the 'stoner' stereotype once it becomes legal. And let's face it, it's going to be.. between Colorado, Washington, Alaska, Oregon, and now the motherf*cking nation's capital legalizing, it's only a matter of time until the Federal government gives up.

 

I can see you're an expert on drugs, how drugs work, how the drug war works, and how America works.

 

Also, I've known two actual potheads in my short life, and they were the laziest, most narcissistic deadbeats I'd ever known. One went to therapy, and is not a waste of oxygen anymore, but the other is (last I checked) still sitting in his parent's basement smoking pot, not getting a job or education, doing nothing. Because Marijuana has consumed his livelihood. 

 

So because of your experiences with two people it should be banned for all people? And let's say marijuana never existed at all, do you think person B would be a contributing member to society, or would have found some other reason/substance to stay in their parents' basement doing nothing? And while person B's lifestyle is not one I would choose, who is to say he isn't happy? Correlation does not mean causation. Marijuana can be used as an easy excuse to basically 'drop out' of life, but I'd be willing to bet a lot of those people would 'drop out' without marijuana anyways. The bad apples are the ones you always remember, but I can almost guarantee you've dealt with daily marijuana smokers every day of your life and never even knew it. Do you listen to music? Enjoy art? Watch movies? Like food? Who are your favorite musicians, artists, filmmakers, chefs? I'd be willing to bet the gross majority of them all created something you enjoy while high on marijuana. Are they a detriment to society?

[Speedstack79]

What is an "echo chamber"? 

"a situation in which information, ideas, or beliefs are amplified or reinforced by transmission and repetition inside an "enclosed" system, often drowning out different or competing views."

 

it would be me like going on linustechtips or /r/pcmasterrace a lot and seeing everyone (mostly) prefers PCs over consoles, and I just assume society as a whole heavily favors PCs over consoles. That would be wrong assumption because a ton of people still play on consoles... that would be an example of an echo chamber

[Memories4K]

Caffeine isn't dangerous to others, even in quantities that are dangerous to the user (and you need to drink a LOT of coffee before you get there). I had never heard of nutmeg before, but if it's dangerous then that should be illegal too as far as I'm concerned. I also think cigarettes should be illegal for that matter. Sorry, but it is not their choice when they put my health on the line.

 

Authoritarian or not, there must be boundaries for a society to work well. There's a difference between taking some risks knowing that the benefits outweigh them (for example allowing cars) and just allowing people to hurt themselves and potentially others for no reason other than "they felt like it". I'm liberal in a lot of things, but on some I just won't bulge.

MDMA or marijuana ingested orally is not dangerous to others by that same logic.

You only need a few sips of coffee to start to experience the effects of caffeine, a few grams caffeine from under-regulated sources like coffee, soda, tea, chocolate, ice-cream, pain medication, energy drinks, and other commonly consumed foods will most certainly be dangerous to the user.

But for someone who knows what to look for, it won't be sufficiently cardiotoxic.

Nevertheless, it is a "dangerous drug" (like anything else) that is commonly used recreationally and culturally accepted almost everywhere.

 

They're not putting your health on the line by using it recreationally.

Unlike second-hand smoke, most "dangerous" drugs are consumed orally or intravenously which marijuana may also be used in the way of weed bars and such.

 

I agree there must be boundaries, society needs rules, but i don't agree that we should be the pot calling the kettle black.

Hurting themselves?

Again, i can maybe take 80-120mg of say MDMA and with the proper precautions through say anti-oxidants and inhibitors to block any neurotoxic damage to any axons or serotonergic neurons.

Just like how caffeine can be safely consumed.

 

You have to be consistent, if we're supposed to walk as fast as our dumbest guy then we might as well ban all guns, cars, pools, and fast food in order to fight gun violence, vehicular manslaughter, animal/infant drowning, and the obesity epidemic in my country...except none of that would suffice because all these things have value to them, even recreational value.

Hunting, Sunday drives, Swimming, and Eating for reasons not out of nutritional fulfillment like eating contests/food tastings.