Well, <i>one</i> main difference between alcohol and cannabis is the length of the effects. Alcohol is a substance that meshes nicely with the body - it's eliminated relatively quickly. THC, on the other hand, is <i>fat soluble</i>, meaning it embeds itseld in muscles and the like. It can take anywhere from a week to two months to work its way out. <b>This</b> is my main point against legalization - while a drinker will wake up with nothing more than a hangover and a few dead brain cells, a marijuana user will wake up with subdued senses, a less-than-regular blood pressure (THC is a depressant, after all), and potentially harmful chemicals in their guts.
I just don't understand why people want such things legalized - is it a sort of rebellion? Marijuana offers no positive effects over other such things, and even has quite a few negatives.There are plenty of other <i>legal </i>things that you can destroy yourselves with....such as....alcohol <!--emo&:0--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wow.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wow.gif'><!--endemo-->
I relaize I'm talking about this from a strictly biological view - I still can't get my head around the moral implications of people wanting Marijuana legalized, let alone discuss them. It <b>even still</b> makes no sense to me.
Can any of you smokers truthfully and honestly tell me just <b>why</b> you do what you do?
*edit* and I refuse to read the slanted "journalism" or Erowid. Weren't you, Greypaws, the one who was talking strictly about refusing to believe bullcrap that the media feeds you? Erowid serves some of the same old weak crap that we've been hearing and laughing at for many years. They seem to sure enjoy the "<i>It's all good</i>"-mentality.
<!--QuoteBegin--GreyPaws+Aug 26 2003, 08:47 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (GreyPaws @ Aug 26 2003, 08:47 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Actually it was used in Germany as a therapeutic drug since 1972 or so. It is very useful in a controlled setting for treating people with multiple personality disorders. As well as a few other mental illnesses. It was never meant to be used as a party drug, and I truly feel sad for all of the people this drug could have helped if it did not get abused. (MDMA has been around since before WW1) Since it became popular in the early 80's it was put on the list of controlled substances in 1985. Most Emergency Room visits relating to MDMA are actually caused by the things drug dealers add to the pills to make more money. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> At one time cocaine was the most widely perscribed drug in the USA.. doesn't make it good.
<!--QuoteBegin--404NotFound+Aug 26 2003, 10:25 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (404NotFound @ Aug 26 2003, 10:25 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--GreyPaws+Aug 26 2003, 08:47 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (GreyPaws @ Aug 26 2003, 08:47 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Actually it was used in Germany as a therapeutic drug since 1972 or so. It is very useful in a controlled setting for treating people with multiple personality disorders. As well as a few other mental illnesses. It was never meant to be used as a party drug, and I truly feel sad for all of the people this drug could have helped if it did not get abused. (MDMA has been around since before WW1) Since it became popular in the early 80's it was put on the list of controlled substances in 1985. Most Emergency Room visits relating to MDMA are actually caused by the things drug dealers add to the pills to make more money. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> At one time cocaine was the most widely perscribed drug in the USA.. doesn't make it good. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> doesn’t make it bad either, I'm sure you’d love the dentist if we didn’t have Novocain
<!--QuoteBegin--Dubbilex+Aug 26 2003, 10:08 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Dubbilex @ Aug 26 2003, 10:08 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Well, <i>one</i> main difference between alcohol and cannabis is the length of the effects. Alcohol is a substance that meshes nicely with the body - it's eliminated relatively quickly. THC, on the other hand, is <i>fat soluble</i>, meaning it embeds itseld in muscles and the like. It can take anywhere from a week to two months to work its way out. <b>This</b> is my main point against legalization - while a drinker will wake up with nothing more than a hangover and a few dead brain cells, a marijuana user will wake up with subdued senses, a less-than-regular blood pressure (THC is a depressant, after all), and potentially harmful chemicals in their guts.
I just don't understand why people want such things legalized - is it a sort of rebellion? Marijuana offers no positive effects over other such things, and even has quite a few negatives.There are plenty of other <i>legal </i>things that you can destroy yourselves with....such as....alcohol <!--emo&:0--><img src='http://www.natural-selection.org/forums/html/emoticons/wow.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wow.gif'><!--endemo-->
I relaize I'm talking about this from a strictly biological view - I still can't get my head around the moral implications of people wanting Marijuana legalized, let alone discuss them. It <b>even still</b> makes no sense to me.
Can any of you smokers truthfully and honestly tell me just <b>why</b> you do what you do?
*edit* and I refuse to read the slanted "journalism" or Erowid. Weren't you, Greypaws, the one who was talking strictly about refusing to believe bullcrap that the media feeds you? Erowid serves some of the same old weak crap that we've been hearing and laughing at for many years. They seem to sure enjoy the "<i>It's all good</i>"-mentality. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I posted 2 links, one to a "drug friendly" site and one to a supposed legit organization that studies the drug.
edit: and if you would like I'll post links to prominent medical journals in the US that support the findings of the above 2 links.
edit2: <a href='http://www.drugtext.org/library/research/mdma/archive/14/default.htm' target='_blank'>Here you go</a> I dont have time to dig up the really good ones but this sums it up
<!--QuoteBegin--GreyPaws+Aug 26 2003, 10:31 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (GreyPaws @ Aug 26 2003, 10:31 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I posted 2 links, one to a "drug friendly" site and one to a supposed legit organization that studies the drug. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Well I couldn't very well believe the <i>theDEA.org </i> site and still uphold my stance, now could I <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
I <b>have</b> read it; however, I won't make exceptions in my habit of disbelieving most <i>any</i> controversial informative piece on the internet. Both are interesting reads, but curiously discordant with one another. Therefore, the "truth" of each article can't very well be discerned, so I prefer to make my own decisions on the matter based on past experiences <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
*edit* Anyways, please continue with the real discussion - I didn't intend to be a hell-raising derailer <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad.gif'><!--endemo-->
Blanket legalisation shouldn't ever happen. Although those who use or want to use drugs that are not made legal may feel that's a form of discrimination, it simply makes no sense to legalise some, because it's not always just the user who feels the effects. PCPs for example cause a lot of irrational behaviour and an awful lot of nasty and violent crime - they don't *just* get you high.
However, the lives of an awful lot of heroin addicts, for example, would be much easier (and safer) with a legal and above all <i>clean</i> source of the drug. That there is the main point counting in favour of legalisation to me - that people won't be pumping as much utter trash into their bodies. It's common knowledge that dealers will often cut their drugs with whatever they want, and that not all substances they're cut with are benign.
Another big thing counting in legalisation's favour is the decriminalisation of it all - prices will come down since drugs would be available over the counter, meaning that users won't feel like crime is the only way to afford their habit. It's a point made rather simplistically here, but it's a well-known argument so hopefully I can get away with not elaborating on it.
Legalisation wouldn't be an easy task - substances will need to be exhaustively tested before made available for public consumption - an expensive and arduous undertaking - and the public has to be educated on the effects and side-effects of what they're using. Considering that a report came out in Britain recently about how few people understand how little alcohol they can drink to be under the alcohol limit, that last point could be an awful lot more difficult than it sounds. Not to mention of course that a lot of narcotics are highly addictive, and so people need to know what they're getting into. Part of the reason for keeping drugs illegal is to protect a country's citizens from such hardships.
---
Re: Prohibition
This is a great example of how a government can't take a substance out of a society after it has become widely-used and loved. It's analogous to baking - once you've mixed the flour with water, there's no way to seperate them. Look at attempts to take cigarettes out of public places, and how badly people react to that. It's viewed as a denial of freedom, and so if drugs were to be made legal for public consumption, there would be no way to take them out of society. They might be able to be taken off sale, but that would spark a huge resurgence in underground drugtaking. Not something any government would want.
---
Re: Shooting gallerys, or places where people will be imbibed with narcotics by trained staff
A real no-brainer, this one. If people have to go to great lengths to get high, they'll find other, easier ways to do it - they'll buy from other, less legal, sources. The old problem of the criminal element with drugs will still be there. You'll get are a people willing to do that for a safe source, sure, but a lot of people will balk at the suggestion they can't do what they want to their bodies in their own homes.
(edited to remove a half-baked point which would at best be ignored, and atworst be flamebait)
erowid is a widely respected journal of information and post user experiences. the DEA is written by Saintjude who frequents the <a href='http://www.dancesafe.org' target='_blank'>dancesafe</a> message boards.
i have the highest respect for the information on erowid, im slightly less up for listening to theDEA.org, even though saintjude seems to be a pretty skilled chemist.
for deadpan factual/ scientific information on MDMAs effects on the brain goto <a href='http://www.dancesafe.org/slideshow/' target='_blank'>this link right here</a>. really even if you want nothing to do with it, this cuts through all that rubbish that it eats hole in your brain, but isnt stupidly pro either. I find dancesafe to be an excellent place to get information, the message boards are filled with intelligent highly articulate posters.
<!--QuoteBegin--Dubbilex+Aug 26 2003, 07:08 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Dubbilex @ Aug 26 2003, 07:08 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I just don't understand why people want such things legalized - is it a sort of rebellion? Marijuana offers no positive effects over other such things, and even has quite a few negatives.There are plenty of other <i>legal </i>things that you can destroy yourselves with....such as....alcohol <!--emo&:0--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wow.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wow.gif'><!--endemo-->
I relaize I'm talking about this from a strictly biological view - I still can't get my head around the moral implications of people wanting Marijuana legalized, let alone discuss them. It <b>even still</b> makes no sense to me.
Can any of you smokers truthfully and honestly tell me just <b>why</b> you do what you do? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Well, first off, marijuana has medicinal benefits that alcohol does not.
(Bear the forum rules in mind - if you want to dispute this source, please provide a link to one that you consider more reputable.)
There are MANY substances around that are more harmful than marijuana and are legal as prescription-only drugs (many opiates, for example, which can be highly addictive and/or cause damage to the nervous system).
That in itself should be enough, but since you also asked about recreational use: it simply feels more pleasant than alcohol. It doesn't give you a hangover. It doesn't make you sick to your stomach. It doesn't pile on calories like beer does. It doesn't impair your coordination nearly as much - in fact, I had friends in college who played Counter-Strike while stoned and were absolutely GODLY with an AWP in ways that they never were otherwise. I myself can attest to increased abilities in Starcraft as well (my theory was that the micro-managing and resource monitoring and the other details that normally I'm too impatient to do well are much more interesting in an altered state, and hence get done better). I haven't smoked in years now (it's fun, but not compelling/addictive in the way that cigarettes, caffeine, and even alcohol are), but if I was I'd probably have some interesting stories about NS as well. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->
In short, it's very different, and has positive effects not to be found in legal substances. There are, of course, negatives as well, but those are generally mitigated by moderation, as with most things. If you get stinking drunk every night, your liver will eventually quit on you.
<!--QuoteBegin--Melatonin+Aug 27 2003, 01:45 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Melatonin @ Aug 27 2003, 01:45 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> still, and i think everyone who smokes likes to forget this (i know i do), just as beer cains your liver, smoking dont help your lungs :s <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Everything has a price. Again, moderation. Let your body heal in between bouts of fun. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->
Well considering that there are maybe what, 3 marijuana smoking related deaths (if such a thing even exists) in the US a year makes me sort of doubt the level of carcinagens in it.
Sure it's not good for your lungs, but the point is cigeretts are a multitude of times worse and are perfectly legal, AND they have filters on them. If marijuana were legal there would be nothing stopping people from selling filtered joints.
Umm there is already a legalize marijuana thread, why is it being discussed specifcally here?
<!--QuoteBegin--dr.d+Aug 27 2003, 01:55 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (dr.d @ Aug 27 2003, 01:55 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Umm there is already a legalize marijuana thread, why is it being discussed specifcally here? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Because people refuse to use the right **** thread. That's why.
Drugs were used in WW2 in the German Nazi war machine... i think the Nazi army used <b>[methemphetamins]</b> "Make the perfect soldier" because <b>[methemphetamins]</b> blocked pain/made you feel sup3r. Of course with the end of the world war, this stopped. This is not to say that the other side didn't use drugs either; as you've probably seen in war movies when someone is near death they ask the medic for some Morphene; morphene blocks/numbs pain and again, makes you feel sup3r, however the soldier was near death and it was used for medical purposes only.
Drugs have their uses, and to remove all drugs from use would make modern medical procedures impossible (OM*G THE PAIN! THE PAIN!!!1) however i completly agree that some highly addictive and destructive drugs <b>[in large quantities/doses]</b> like crack, cocain, pot, nicotine, among many others should be removed and illegalized. That is to say however, non-medical use should be removed. If modern medicine could somehow remove the addictivness of pot, mind-alterningness of acid, and lethality of heroine <b>[in large quantities/doses]</b> but somehow keep the "positives" (anti-bacterial/pain killer/etc, the things that could possibly have SOME use in medicine) of the raw drug's form, or maybe even the refined drug's form they should be used in only the most extreme cases and under medical supervision.
"Forget evil and you only allow it to come back stronger" someone once said. Thus, i think that harmful drugs should be illegal, however if they have some very minor medical use they should not be discarded so readilly. Every ounce of information on the item's benefits should be weighed to determine: "Is it worth it to legalize this as a medical drug only? Or to fight against it's illegal use?"
Who knows, a drug that we discard and state as illegal just might be the cure for cancer or aids in some highly modified and medical-only form... maybe even a cure for a disease not yet present. <!--emo&::nerdy::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/nerd.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='nerd.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--Maveric+Aug 27 2003, 02:07 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Maveric @ Aug 27 2003, 02:07 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> If modern medicine could somehow remove the addictivness of pot <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Um... done. It's not and never has been addictive. Show me a study showing otherwise. <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif'><!--endemo-->
Because marijuana is a drug? Could be. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
Mav pot is neither highly addictive or highly destructive and MDMA didn't exist until around 1978 so I doubt it was used in WWII. Hitler attempted to use methemphetamins as a way to make the perfect soldier but failed and ultimately became horribly addicted to them which in his later years caused very serious insanity.
The problem with having certain drugs be strictly for medical use is because current laws prohibit study of them. Medical research on marijuana was disallowed for about 30 years, and when it was finally done everything that was claimed to be harmful about it was discredited. Currently this is happening with MDMA private organizations are being forced to stop research on the drug under the pretense of upholding laws prohobiting it's use.
Also no drug has lethality aside from perhaps cyonide. The only lethal thing about drugs is the dosage, and as far as "mind-alternetness" goes alcohol has mind altering effects and is perfectly legal.
<!--QuoteBegin--dr.d+Aug 27 2003, 05:15 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (dr.d @ Aug 27 2003, 05:15 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> MDMA didn't exist until around 1978 so I doubt it was used in WWII <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> i believe it was used as far back as 1918 (possibly earlier), in the treatment of mental illnesses, helping to enourage communication with doctors... it was just largely forgotton untill recently.
<!--QuoteBegin--Melatonin+Aug 27 2003, 06:36 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Melatonin @ Aug 27 2003, 06:36 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--dr.d+Aug 27 2003, 05:15 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (dr.d @ Aug 27 2003, 05:15 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> MDMA didn't exist until around 1978 so I doubt it was used in WWII <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> i believe it was used as far back as 1918 (possibly earlier), in the treatment of mental illnesses, helping to enourage communication with doctors... it was just largely forgotton untill recently. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> It was patented by the germans before ww1 but it was not used on humans until 1972. I posted pretty much all the relavent information about MDMA in my other replies. Check the clickes and the posts.
<!--QuoteBegin--dr.d+Aug 27 2003, 03:15 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (dr.d @ Aug 27 2003, 03:15 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> methemphetamins <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> /slaps hand to head
Oh darnit! thats what it was! (edited the post to say methemphetamins) and yes, i meant the dosage, i just forgot that little extra bit... <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif'><!--endemo-->
Why were they made illegal in the first place? How the hell can you ban things that naturally grow?
How about we go ban granite? huh? that damn rock has always bugged me. Why? well it causes cancer and makes the baby monkey cry! Did i mention the testicular cancer? yea!
<!--QuoteBegin--Trevelyan+Oct 27 2003, 06:58 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Trevelyan @ Oct 27 2003, 06:58 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> First things to be legalised is weed and shrooms.
Why were they made illegal in the first place? How the hell can you ban things that naturally grow? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Actually in many places Magic Mushrooms are NOT illegal unless they are dried. Also in America magic mushroom SPORES are not illegal. Which explains my many science experiments living around the basement <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->.
One huge benefit of legalizing pot would be that it would make it harder for young kids to get it. Right now any kid in Jr High with SOME knowledge or interest can pick it up and I don't think that's right at all. It's my personal opinion that the age restrictions should be in the area of 16-17.
MDMA would be alot better if it was legal because when you buy E you're never sure if it's actually E or some combination of mystery drugs with pretty designs. Not everyone has access to test kits. Although at some raves they give them away. Pretty much saying "We know some of you will be using it, might as well know what you're taking". It's great stuff though and would help alot of shy people learn to open up. Also helps shallow people be a little more respecting of others.
Legalizing drugs within a capitalist society is not going to stop their use.
Drugs have been a government tool for some time. The British systematically flooded large swaths of China with opium, to keep people hooked. When the economy decays, there are several things that occur: people turn to movements or they turn to other things, like drugs. If a nationalist, or otherwise revolutionary movement, had developed in China, that blamed the British for problems, this would have severely threatened British interests. If the Chinese were a doped population that kept working without taking any real stand against what was hurting them, Britain could remain wealthy getting rich off the backs of the Chinese people.
Similarly, do you remember how the black people in LA used to riot? They haven't stopped because things got better for them: there is serious evidence that the CIA is responsible for importing cocaine from their Contra puppets in Nicaragua to be turned into crack in an attempt to keep the people down, attempting to stop another dangerous "harlem renaissance" and all the Black Panther movements that could produce!
If average peoples' lives could be improved beyond the sad fate of the wage-slave, we might not see so much drug use in the USA. I don't support banning drugs. That is a stupid way to stop a bad manifestation of a bad society: the key is ending the society of exploitation. Most drug use will stop once people are no longer so downtrodden and using drugs to escape, but I figure that cats will keep smoking harmless stuff like marijuana for years, that stuff is great.
I agree with Melatonin that a blanket legalization of all drugs would be irresponsible. I believe the argument is valid that the law should not dictate morality (and that people should be able to do to themselves whatever they want), as long as it doesn't affect anyone else. However, while there are drugs that are generally harmless to society (marijuana) there certainly are drugs that could be dangerous to someone else, if you use it. The basic example? Drinking and driving. It is illegal to drink and drive because chances are you'll hurt someone else. Along those lines, drugs that would make it more likely for you to hurt someone else should not be legalized (or should be legalized, but illegal when doing activities that the drug impairs, e.g. driving)
With my opinion stated, there are a few points I would like to address:
Jammer: <!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Second, what good does more drug use serve? -"People just need to get away from their problems for a while" until they sober up- then they see that there problems are still bad and need to escape again, wash, rinse, repeat. You're now addicted. It only prevents the problem from being dealt with. -Recreational use is just as bad. If people do it for fun, they'll still get addicted to and they'll want to have fun more often. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> This is true. However, the entertainment industry in general thrives off of this fact -- that entertainment is generally a way for people to escape their own lives/problems for a little while. Why do you think Romantic Comedies exist? As for people getting addicted to things that are fun, that's the nature of positive reinforcement. However, people get addicted to playing video games; Are you also arguing that playing video games should be illegalized? Are you arguing that *anything* fun should be illegalized because people will want to do it more often? I'm not sure that is a sound argument.
Jammer: <!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->One final thing: Our society is sue happy. Don't think for a second that 'legal' producers would avoid wrongful death suits. Our courts would be swamped, the buisness would drowned, and only black markets would flourish despite the 'legal' availibility of them. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> People die of cigarettes and alcohol all the time. We're not swamped with wrongful death suits because of cigarettes and alcohol -- what makes you think that we'll be swamped due to the effects of any other drug? Most company cover their behinds and issue disclaimers (e.g. Surgeon General's Warning on Cigarettes) anyway.
Jammer: <!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> MJ is less harmful than alcholol. Alcohol is legal, so shouldn't MJ be? NO. Just a graver ill is legal doesn't give reason to make another ill legal. ... First, I'm not advocating prohibition because it won't work. I'm saying it shouldn't have been legal in the first place, but since it is, lets just deal with it. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> You contradict yourself here. Marijuana used to be legal too. You could think of the period we're going through as kind of a Marijuana 'prohibition'. In fact, a good argument as to why marijuana should be legalized is because we're going through much of the same issues with illegal marijuana as we were with the prohibition: organized crime around the illegal substance, bootlegging, cutting with dangerous chemicals (prohibition alcohol often had lead in it), etc. I agree with you that prohibition won't work. People who wanted to drink didn't stop drinking because it was illegal. Similarly, people who want to smoke don't stop smoking because it's illegal. They just have to deal with more impurities, and we have to deal with spending more tax money on jails to hold people who've never done anything more than ingest something into their own bodies. Did you know that since marijuana is classified as a schedule 1 drug, possession of it is a felony -- a crime on the same level as murder, rape and child pornography? (<a href='http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/felonies.html' target='_blank'>Source</a>) Somehow, in the law-maker's minds, all those are equal transgressions of the law. Is that fair? It doesn't matter -- we have to pay tax money to keep those people in jail.
Let me ask you this: Do you ever get annoyed with cops that issue traffic tickets? Ever crossed your mind that they should be doing something more useful to the community like preventing theft or something? Many people feel the same way about drug enforcement officers, except that smoking mj is LESS dangerous to others than speeding.
Dubbilex: <!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Well, one main difference between alcohol and cannabis is the length of the effects. Alcohol is a substance that meshes nicely with the body - it's eliminated relatively quickly. THC, on the other hand, is fat soluble, meaning it embeds itseld in muscles and the like. It can take anywhere from a week to two months to work its way out. This is my main point against legalization - while a drinker will wake up with nothing more than a hangover and a few dead brain cells, a marijuana user will wake up with subdued senses, a less-than-regular blood pressure (THC is a depressant, after all), and potentially harmful chemicals in their guts. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Negative. While THC truly is fat soluble, this is only relevant for drug tests -- the effects don't persist the entire time the drug is detectable in the body, unless you're a very heavy user of marijuana (Source: "Dose-related neurocognitive effects of marijuana use.", Bolla K. I. et al, Dept of Neurology Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine) but similarly, if you're a very heavy user of alcohol, you're going to be drunk most of the time anyway.
Dubbilex: <!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I relaize I'm talking about this from a strictly biological view - I still can't get my head around the moral implications of people wanting Marijuana legalized, let alone discuss them. It even still makes no sense to me. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Here are strictly biological reasons to get Marijuana legalized: Each year, thousands of cancer patients die because taking their cancer medication makes them too sick. Solution? Marijuana is the most effective anti-emetic known to mankind (Source: David Presti, Ph.D, UC Berkeley). Unfortunately, it's illegal. Moral reasons: Having marijuana illegal is a form of structural violence. What is structural violence? Basically, it's an existance of a state of affairs which causes a preventable (keyword) harm to people or the environment. Example: cancer patients unable to take marijuana as a supplement to their treatment, and thus dying. Other examples: Exploiting brazilian farmers (and their environment!) to grow GMO soybeans instead of cultivating marijuana seeds, a comparable nutrient source.
Anyway, I need to go to, but posting this makes me feel better. <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo--> Keep in mind the forum rules -- if you want to dispute a sourced point on my post, please provide a source you consider more reputable that backs you up.
Well, legalizing SOME drugs does have it pros. I live in Holland, the land of wooden shoes and pot. Well, there are no more drug addicts overhere, (in fact less than in France). the government has set up some "free-drugs" programs, were addict junks were handed out free drugs, were supervised, and gradually kicked off. This way, they don't have to steal to get their daily dosis.
Comments
I just don't understand why people want such things legalized - is it a sort of rebellion? Marijuana offers no positive effects over other such things, and even has quite a few negatives.There are plenty of other <i>legal </i>things that you can destroy yourselves with....such as....alcohol <!--emo&:0--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wow.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wow.gif'><!--endemo-->
I relaize I'm talking about this from a strictly biological view - I still can't get my head around the moral implications of people wanting Marijuana legalized, let alone discuss them. It <b>even still</b> makes no sense to me.
Can any of you smokers truthfully and honestly tell me just <b>why</b> you do what you do?
*edit* and I refuse to read the slanted "journalism" or Erowid. Weren't you, Greypaws, the one who was talking strictly about refusing to believe bullcrap that the media feeds you? Erowid serves some of the same old weak crap that we've been hearing and laughing at for many years. They seem to sure enjoy the "<i>It's all good</i>"-mentality.
<!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
At one time cocaine was the most widely perscribed drug in the USA.. doesn't make it good.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
At one time cocaine was the most widely perscribed drug in the USA.. doesn't make it good. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
doesn’t make it bad either, I'm sure you’d love the dentist if we didn’t have Novocain
I just don't understand why people want such things legalized - is it a sort of rebellion? Marijuana offers no positive effects over other such things, and even has quite a few negatives.There are plenty of other <i>legal </i>things that you can destroy yourselves with....such as....alcohol <!--emo&:0--><img src='http://www.natural-selection.org/forums/html/emoticons/wow.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wow.gif'><!--endemo-->
I relaize I'm talking about this from a strictly biological view - I still can't get my head around the moral implications of people wanting Marijuana legalized, let alone discuss them. It <b>even still</b> makes no sense to me.
Can any of you smokers truthfully and honestly tell me just <b>why</b> you do what you do?
*edit* and I refuse to read the slanted "journalism" or Erowid. Weren't you, Greypaws, the one who was talking strictly about refusing to believe bullcrap that the media feeds you? Erowid serves some of the same old weak crap that we've been hearing and laughing at for many years. They seem to sure enjoy the "<i>It's all good</i>"-mentality. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I posted 2 links, one to a "drug friendly" site and one to a supposed legit organization that studies the drug.
edit: and if you would like I'll post links to prominent medical journals in the US that support the findings of the above 2 links.
edit2: <a href='http://www.drugtext.org/library/research/mdma/archive/14/default.htm' target='_blank'>Here you go</a> I dont have time to dig up the really good ones but this sums it up
Well I couldn't very well believe the <i>theDEA.org </i> site and still uphold my stance, now could I <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
I <b>have</b> read it; however, I won't make exceptions in my habit of disbelieving most <i>any</i> controversial informative piece on the internet. Both are interesting reads, but curiously discordant with one another. Therefore, the "truth" of each article can't very well be discerned, so I prefer to make my own decisions on the matter based on past experiences <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
*edit* Anyways, please continue with the real discussion - I didn't intend to be a hell-raising derailer <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/sad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad.gif'><!--endemo-->
just in case u dont wanna scroll
<a href='http://www.drugtext.org/library/research/mdma/archive/14/default.htm' target='_blank'>clicky</a>
However, the lives of an awful lot of heroin addicts, for example, would be much easier (and safer) with a legal and above all <i>clean</i> source of the drug. That there is the main point counting in favour of legalisation to me - that people won't be pumping as much utter trash into their bodies. It's common knowledge that dealers will often cut their drugs with whatever they want, and that not all substances they're cut with are benign.
Another big thing counting in legalisation's favour is the decriminalisation of it all - prices will come down since drugs would be available over the counter, meaning that users won't feel like crime is the only way to afford their habit. It's a point made rather simplistically here, but it's a well-known argument so hopefully I can get away with not elaborating on it.
Legalisation wouldn't be an easy task - substances will need to be exhaustively tested before made available for public consumption - an expensive and arduous undertaking - and the public has to be educated on the effects and side-effects of what they're using. Considering that a report came out in Britain recently about how few people understand how little alcohol they can drink to be under the alcohol limit, that last point could be an awful lot more difficult than it sounds. Not to mention of course that a lot of narcotics are highly addictive, and so people need to know what they're getting into. Part of the reason for keeping drugs illegal is to protect a country's citizens from such hardships.
---
Re: Prohibition
This is a great example of how a government can't take a substance out of a society after it has become widely-used and loved. It's analogous to baking - once you've mixed the flour with water, there's no way to seperate them. Look at attempts to take cigarettes out of public places, and how badly people react to that. It's viewed as a denial of freedom, and so if drugs were to be made legal for public consumption, there would be no way to take them out of society. They might be able to be taken off sale, but that would spark a huge resurgence in underground drugtaking. Not something any government would want.
---
Re: Shooting gallerys, or places where people will be imbibed with narcotics by trained staff
A real no-brainer, this one. If people have to go to great lengths to get high, they'll find other, easier ways to do it - they'll buy from other, less legal, sources. The old problem of the criminal element with drugs will still be there. You'll get are a people willing to do that for a safe source, sure, but a lot of people will balk at the suggestion they can't do what they want to their bodies in their own homes.
(edited to remove a half-baked point which would at best be ignored, and atworst be flamebait)
the DEA is written by Saintjude who frequents the <a href='http://www.dancesafe.org' target='_blank'>dancesafe</a> message boards.
i have the highest respect for the information on erowid, im slightly less up for listening to theDEA.org, even though saintjude seems to be a pretty skilled chemist.
for deadpan factual/ scientific information on MDMAs effects on the brain goto <a href='http://www.dancesafe.org/slideshow/' target='_blank'>this link right here</a>. really even if you want nothing to do with it, this cuts through all that rubbish that it eats hole in your brain, but isnt stupidly pro either.
I find dancesafe to be an excellent place to get information, the message boards are filled with intelligent highly articulate posters.
I relaize I'm talking about this from a strictly biological view - I still can't get my head around the moral implications of people wanting Marijuana legalized, let alone discuss them. It <b>even still</b> makes no sense to me.
Can any of you smokers truthfully and honestly tell me just <b>why</b> you do what you do? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well, first off, marijuana has medicinal benefits that alcohol does not.
<a href='http://www.medmjscience.org/' target='_blank'>http://www.medmjscience.org/</a>
(Bear the forum rules in mind - if you want to dispute this source, please provide a link to one that you consider more reputable.)
There are MANY substances around that are more harmful than marijuana and are legal as prescription-only drugs (many opiates, for example, which can be highly addictive and/or cause damage to the nervous system).
That in itself should be enough, but since you also asked about recreational use: it simply feels more pleasant than alcohol. It doesn't give you a hangover. It doesn't make you sick to your stomach. It doesn't pile on calories like beer does. It doesn't impair your coordination nearly as much - in fact, I had friends in college who played Counter-Strike while stoned and were absolutely GODLY with an AWP in ways that they never were otherwise. I myself can attest to increased abilities in Starcraft as well (my theory was that the micro-managing and resource monitoring and the other details that normally I'm too impatient to do well are much more interesting in an altered state, and hence get done better). I haven't smoked in years now (it's fun, but not compelling/addictive in the way that cigarettes, caffeine, and even alcohol are), but if I was I'd probably have some interesting stories about NS as well. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->
In short, it's very different, and has positive effects not to be found in legal substances. There are, of course, negatives as well, but those are generally mitigated by moderation, as with most things. If you get stinking drunk every night, your liver will eventually quit on you.
Everything has a price. Again, moderation. Let your body heal in between bouts of fun. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->
Sure it's not good for your lungs, but the point is cigeretts are a multitude of times worse and are perfectly legal, AND they have filters on them. If marijuana were legal there would be nothing stopping people from selling filtered joints.
Umm there is already a legalize marijuana thread, why is it being discussed specifcally here?
Because people refuse to use the right **** thread. That's why.
Drugs have their uses, and to remove all drugs from use would make modern medical procedures impossible (OM*G THE PAIN! THE PAIN!!!1) however i completly agree that some highly addictive and destructive drugs <b>[in large quantities/doses]</b> like crack, cocain, pot, nicotine, among many others should be removed and illegalized. That is to say however, non-medical use should be removed. If modern medicine could somehow remove the addictivness of pot, mind-alterningness of acid, and lethality of heroine <b>[in large quantities/doses]</b> but somehow keep the "positives" (anti-bacterial/pain killer/etc, the things that could possibly have SOME use in medicine) of the raw drug's form, or maybe even the refined drug's form they should be used in only the most extreme cases and under medical supervision.
"Forget evil and you only allow it to come back stronger" someone once said. Thus, i think that harmful drugs should be illegal, however if they have some very minor medical use they should not be discarded so readilly. Every ounce of information on the item's benefits should be weighed to determine: "Is it worth it to legalize this as a medical drug only? Or to fight against it's illegal use?"
Who knows, a drug that we discard and state as illegal just might be the cure for cancer or aids in some highly modified and medical-only form... maybe even a cure for a disease not yet present. <!--emo&::nerdy::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/nerd.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='nerd.gif'><!--endemo-->
Um... done. It's not and never has been addictive. Show me a study showing otherwise. <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif'><!--endemo-->
GG "War on Drugs".
The problem with having certain drugs be strictly for medical use is because current laws prohibit study of them. Medical research on marijuana was disallowed for about 30 years, and when it was finally done everything that was claimed to be harmful about it was discredited. Currently this is happening with MDMA private organizations are being forced to stop research on the drug under the pretense of upholding laws prohobiting it's use.
Also no drug has lethality aside from perhaps cyonide. The only lethal thing about drugs is the dosage, and as far as "mind-alternetness" goes alcohol has mind altering effects and is perfectly legal.
i believe it was used as far back as 1918 (possibly earlier), in the treatment of mental illnesses, helping to enourage communication with doctors... it was just largely forgotton untill recently.
i believe it was used as far back as 1918 (possibly earlier), in the treatment of mental illnesses, helping to enourage communication with doctors... it was just largely forgotton untill recently. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
It was patented by the germans before ww1 but it was not used on humans until 1972. I posted pretty much all the relavent information about MDMA in my other replies. Check the clickes and the posts.
/slaps hand to head
Oh darnit! thats what it was! (edited the post to say methemphetamins)
and yes, i meant the dosage, i just forgot that little extra bit... <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif'><!--endemo-->
Why were they made illegal in the first place? How the hell can you ban things that naturally grow?
How about we go ban granite? huh? that damn rock has always bugged me. Why? well it causes cancer and makes the baby monkey cry! Did i mention the testicular cancer? yea!
YaY for Propaganda!!!!!!111111#1
Why were they made illegal in the first place? How the hell can you ban things that naturally grow? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Actually in many places Magic Mushrooms are NOT illegal unless they are dried. Also in America magic mushroom SPORES are not illegal. Which explains my many science experiments living around the basement <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->.
One huge benefit of legalizing pot would be that it would make it harder for young kids to get it. Right now any kid in Jr High with SOME knowledge or interest can pick it up and I don't think that's right at all. It's my personal opinion that the age restrictions should be in the area of 16-17.
MDMA would be alot better if it was legal because when you buy E you're never sure if it's actually E or some combination of mystery drugs with pretty designs. Not everyone has access to test kits. Although at some raves they give them away. Pretty much saying "We know some of you will be using it, might as well know what you're taking". It's great stuff though and would help alot of shy people learn to open up. Also helps shallow people be a little more respecting of others.
Mushrooms taste disgusting...
{preacher mode}
just remember all you kids in the know, drugs have long term effects too..
Drugs have been a government tool for some time. The British systematically flooded large swaths of China with opium, to keep people hooked. When the economy decays, there are several things that occur: people turn to movements or they turn to other things, like drugs. If a nationalist, or otherwise revolutionary movement, had developed in China, that blamed the British for problems, this would have severely threatened British interests. If the Chinese were a doped population that kept working without taking any real stand against what was hurting them, Britain could remain wealthy getting rich off the backs of the Chinese people.
Similarly, do you remember how the black people in LA used to riot? They haven't stopped because things got better for them: there is serious evidence that the CIA is responsible for importing cocaine from their Contra puppets in Nicaragua to be turned into crack in an attempt to keep the people down, attempting to stop another dangerous "harlem renaissance" and all the Black Panther movements that could produce!
If average peoples' lives could be improved beyond the sad fate of the wage-slave, we might not see so much drug use in the USA. I don't support banning drugs. That is a stupid way to stop a bad manifestation of a bad society: the key is ending the society of exploitation. Most drug use will stop once people are no longer so downtrodden and using drugs to escape, but I figure that cats will keep smoking harmless stuff like marijuana for years, that stuff is great.
With my opinion stated, there are a few points I would like to address:
Jammer:
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Second, what good does more drug use serve?
-"People just need to get away from their problems for a while" until they sober up- then they see that there problems are still bad and need to escape again, wash, rinse, repeat. You're now addicted. It only prevents the problem from being dealt with.
-Recreational use is just as bad. If people do it for fun, they'll still get addicted to and they'll want to have fun more often.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This is true. However, the entertainment industry in general thrives off of this fact -- that entertainment is generally a way for people to escape their own lives/problems for a little while. Why do you think Romantic Comedies exist? As for people getting addicted to things that are fun, that's the nature of positive reinforcement. However, people get addicted to playing video games; Are you also arguing that playing video games should be illegalized? Are you arguing that *anything* fun should be illegalized because people will want to do it more often? I'm not sure that is a sound argument.
Jammer:
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->One final thing: Our society is sue happy. Don't think for a second that 'legal' producers would avoid wrongful death suits. Our courts would be swamped, the buisness would drowned, and only black markets would flourish despite the 'legal' availibility of them.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
People die of cigarettes and alcohol all the time. We're not swamped with wrongful death suits because of cigarettes and alcohol -- what makes you think that we'll be swamped due to the effects of any other drug? Most company cover their behinds and issue disclaimers (e.g. Surgeon General's Warning on Cigarettes) anyway.
Jammer:
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
MJ is less harmful than alcholol. Alcohol is legal, so shouldn't MJ be? NO. Just a graver ill is legal doesn't give reason to make another ill legal.
...
First, I'm not advocating prohibition because it won't work. I'm saying it shouldn't have been legal in the first place, but since it is, lets just deal with it.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You contradict yourself here. Marijuana used to be legal too. You could think of the period we're going through as kind of a Marijuana 'prohibition'. In fact, a good argument as to why marijuana should be legalized is because we're going through much of the same issues with illegal marijuana as we were with the prohibition: organized crime around the illegal substance, bootlegging, cutting with dangerous chemicals (prohibition alcohol often had lead in it), etc. I agree with you that prohibition won't work. People who wanted to drink didn't stop drinking because it was illegal. Similarly, people who want to smoke don't stop smoking because it's illegal. They just have to deal with more impurities, and we have to deal with spending more tax money on jails to hold people who've never done anything more than ingest something into their own bodies. Did you know that since marijuana is classified as a schedule 1 drug, possession of it is a felony -- a crime on the same level as murder, rape and child pornography? (<a href='http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/felonies.html' target='_blank'>Source</a>) Somehow, in the law-maker's minds, all those are equal transgressions of the law. Is that fair? It doesn't matter -- we have to pay tax money to keep those people in jail.
Let me ask you this: Do you ever get annoyed with cops that issue traffic tickets? Ever crossed your mind that they should be doing something more useful to the community like preventing theft or something? Many people feel the same way about drug enforcement officers, except that smoking mj is LESS dangerous to others than speeding.
Dubbilex:
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Well, one main difference between alcohol and cannabis is the length of the effects. Alcohol is a substance that meshes nicely with the body - it's eliminated relatively quickly. THC, on the other hand, is fat soluble, meaning it embeds itseld in muscles and the like. It can take anywhere from a week to two months to work its way out. This is my main point against legalization - while a drinker will wake up with nothing more than a hangover and a few dead brain cells, a marijuana user will wake up with subdued senses, a less-than-regular blood pressure (THC is a depressant, after all), and potentially harmful chemicals in their guts.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Negative. While THC truly is fat soluble, this is only relevant for drug tests -- the effects don't persist the entire time the drug is detectable in the body, unless you're a very heavy user of marijuana (Source: "Dose-related neurocognitive effects of marijuana use.", Bolla K. I. et al, Dept of Neurology Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine) but similarly, if you're a very heavy user of alcohol, you're going to be drunk most of the time anyway.
Dubbilex:
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I relaize I'm talking about this from a strictly biological view - I still can't get my head around the moral implications of people wanting Marijuana legalized, let alone discuss them. It even still makes no sense to me.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Here are strictly biological reasons to get Marijuana legalized: Each year, thousands of cancer patients die because taking their cancer medication makes them too sick. Solution? Marijuana is the most effective anti-emetic known to mankind (Source: David Presti, Ph.D, UC Berkeley). Unfortunately, it's illegal.
Moral reasons: Having marijuana illegal is a form of structural violence. What is structural violence? Basically, it's an existance of a state of affairs which causes a preventable (keyword) harm to people or the environment. Example: cancer patients unable to take marijuana as a supplement to their treatment, and thus dying. Other examples: Exploiting brazilian farmers (and their environment!) to grow GMO soybeans instead of cultivating marijuana seeds, a comparable nutrient source.
Anyway, I need to go to, but posting this makes me feel better. <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo--> Keep in mind the forum rules -- if you want to dispute a sourced point on my post, please provide a source you consider more reputable that backs you up.
Rhuadin
Yay