Decriminalization

[combustion07]

What is your standpoint on the legalization of weed? It hasn't really been a big factor until now if Obama wins its most likely going to happen. I'm for it.

[guitrguy]

Most people here are pro decriminalization to some extent or another. Highly doubtful Obama would do much of anything about it.

[combustion07]

Hes gave speeches supporting legalization in the past though, hes laid off on talking about while running though.

[RNR]

I think that American law needs to change immediately. There are still people getting prison sentences for being users. That's an injustice. I agree that Obama will most likely not touch the issue.

[combustion07]

Yeah my bro just got arrested last week for it.

[Dave de Sylvia]

I'm not entirely sure the President has any real authority to decriminalise marijuana. It's up to the individual states as far as I know, and a few have effectively decriminalised the drug.

[UmphreysHead]

Personally I think it should be regulated by states. Like now even though California has legalized it (to a degree), the medical patients can still get screwed by the federal government because the states laws and federal laws differentiate.

[Volumnius Flush]

I fully support the decriminalization of marijuana.

(From a conservative perspective.)

[Cоde Red]

It's just a plant.

[Volumnius Flush]

It's just a plant.

You know one argument some people use is, "Well it's all natural!"

Yeah, so are poisonous mushrooms and sea urchins.

[Meatplow]

Anslinger lied through his teeth to get these laws up and running in the first place so I believe they have no foundation apart from the beliefs of those that will also lie through their teeth to keep them reinstated.

In states where decriminalization has actually taken place for a brief period of time there was no significant increase of marijuana use or crime. The social stigma attached to it is a result of propaganda that has either been disproven or is on shaky ground.

In short, I think it is no more detrimental then the alcohol. The basic message should be to use it in moderation and have fun, all abuse comes from the user.

[dei]

I'm for it.

[Volumnius Flush]

I'm for it.

But the real question is why are you for it? Are you for it from a conservative or liberal reasoning?

[dinosaurxbrocore]

uh, thats a non-issue, its as black and white as "law is pointless and based on false ****"
You know one argument some people use is, "Well it's all natural!"

Yeah, so are poisonous mushrooms and sea urchins.

and poisonous mushrooms and sea urchins dont get you arrested

[Jude]

It has nothing to do with it being natural, it has everything to do with it being not harmful

[dinosaurxbrocore]

and it being awesome

[BassRevelation1029]

I don't care and I'm not for it.

It may have detrimental effects on health, but that doesn't make it illegal. I wouldn't mind it used for medicinal purposes, and it shouldn't ever be done in public.
You know one argument some people use is, "Well it's all natural!"

Yeah, so are poisonous mushrooms and sea urchins.

Pwned by VF

thats a new one

[Volumnius Flush]

It has nothing to do with it being natural, it has everything to do with it being not harmful

Yeah says who? Doctors? naa... Scientists? naa...

Plus it is said to cause lung cancer and breathing difficulties as well as killing brain cells. Harmless? naa...

I don't care and I'm not for it.


I don't care implies that you have no opinion... because you don't care! You arguably contradicted yourself.

[Jude]

No worse than cigarettes and alcohol both of which are legal

[dinosaurxbrocore]

I don't care and I'm not for it.

It may have detrimental effects on health, but that doesn't make it illegal. I wouldn't mind it used for medicinal purposes, and it shouldn't ever be done in public.

for what reason exactly?

[Volumnius Flush]

No worse than cigarettes and alcohol both of which are legal

Alcohol is far worse than marijuana. Plus it tears up your liver and causes you to kill people.

The only reason imo it's not legal is because the gov't doesn't know how to make money off of it.

[dinosaurxbrocore]

uh

****ing tax it?

[Jude]

Alcohol is far worse than marijuana. Plus it tears up your liver and causes you to kill people.

The only reason imo it's not legal is because the gov't doesn't know how to make money off of it.

No it was made illegal for largely racist and anti-countercultural reasons and due to its illegality, a stigma has become attached to it which makes uptight midwesterners think it's the work of the devil

All while they sip their cocktails or do shots

[BassRevelation1029]

I don't care implies that you have no opinion... because you don't care! You arguably contradicted yourself.
it means im not passionate about it like these silly potheads

it has everything to do with it being not harmful

this is a lame argument. It rests on "you can't prove its harmful" and throws the burden of proof on doctors to show its harmful, then cries propaganda when the results are not in their favor.

for what reason exactly?
same reason why cigarrettes shouldn't be smoked in public

[dinosaurxbrocore]

:lol:

fag

[Jude]

this is a lame argument. It rests on "you can't prove its harmful" and throws the burden of proof on doctors to show its harmful, then cries propaganda when the results are not in their favor.
What
Weed is about as, or less, harmful than a number of other legal substances and in any case the harm is only to the user
There's no logical justification for tobacco and alcohol being legal but not chronic

[Volumnius Flush]

No it was made illegal for largely racist and anti-countercultural reasons and due to its illegality, a stigma has become attached to it which makes uptight midwesterners think it's the work of the devil

All while they sip their cocktails or do shots

I understand why it was made illegal, I am addressing why they have kept it that way in the 21st century. They can not fathom how to make money off of it.

uh

****ing tax it?

Uhh, yeah... Which is why it (the price) would go up astronomically, duh!

[BassRevelation1029]

:lol:

fag
this kinda debate skill will get you a law degree in no time!

What
Weed is about as, or less, harmful than a number of other legal substances and in any case the harm is only to the user
so because it's "less harmful" it should be legalized?

There's no logical justification for tobacco and alcohol being legal but not chronic
Money.

[Jude]

I understand why it was made illegal, I am addressing why they have kept it that way in the 21st century. They can not fathom how to make money off of it.

No it would be easy to make money off it
The reason is because people have such a stigma against it that a politician who tried to legalize on a large scale would never get elected again

so because it's "less harmful" it should be legalized?
Yes
Either that or make booze and tobacco illegal, but be consistent one way or the other

[dinosaurxbrocore]

Uhh, yeah... Which is why it (the price) would go up astronomically, duh!

government officials care?

also, whole reason bud's so expensive as is is due to legality issues and prices of home growing kits, so yeah, mass production = perfectly fine with taxing imo

[Volumnius Flush]

No it would be easy to make money off it


Tell me how they make money off of it when hundreds of thousands of private growers would be allowed to sell it from their front porch, without it going through Uncle Sam's hands.

it means im not passionate about it like these silly potheads

Oh, right. Sorry...


same reason why cigarrettes shouldn't be smoked in public

Can you imagine the lawsuits for that? Second-hand smoke got me high and made me wig out! I'm suing you!

[iliketoplaydrums10111]

this kinda debate skill will get you a law degree in no time!


so because it's "less harmful" it should be legalized?

Money.

Why does the government try to control what we do to our bodies? If people wanna smoke, they're going too. Always have, always will

[Volumnius Flush]

government officials care?

also, whole reason bud's so expensive as is is due to legality issues and prices of home growing kits, so yeah, mass production = perfectly fine with taxing imo

The reason it's expensive is because you're not in Texas.

[dinosaurxbrocore]

i get prices around those of posters from canada

also, seriously, if **** was mass produced it would still be much cheaper, which you dont seem to get

but like, you can point out minor grammatical errors, some that do and some that don't exist, so you must be really really smart
this kinda debate skill will get you a law degree in no time!
yeah im definitely gonna take you seriously with that lame of an excuse


so because it's "less harmful" it should be legalized?
if its not even harmful in the first place, why should it be illegal?

[Iscariot]

considering it was simply a matter of racist legislation that got it banned in the first place yeah i'm all for decriminalizing it

most of the smear campaigns run against it's legalization is based on shady government promoted "research" anyway

it's pretty hard to prove any of the cons to smoking marijuana when doctors are barely allowed to perform any research with it

besides the research that has been done shows it's a benefit to medicine

[Volumnius Flush]

if its not even harmful in the first place, why should it be illegal?

Tell that to all the scientists and doctors who have studied it for many years. They are much more qualified than you to make that assessment, but hey! Maybe you're right!

[dinosaurxbrocore]

do you ever not barf idiocy?

[guitrguy]

The reason it's expensive is because you're not in Texas.
Are you talking about chronic or shwag though?

[Jude]

Tell me how they make money off of it when hundreds of thousands of private growers would be allowed to sell it from their front porch, without it going through Uncle Sam's hands.



They would make it illegal to sell without a license or whatever

or

Nobody would buy from the private growers anymore because the mass produced stuff would be cheaper and probably safer and more reliable

Anyway besides that it's retardedly inconsistent to ban it, it's also atrocious the number of people in prison over something that shouldn't be a crime and the money and resources wasted on imprisoning them

[iliketoplaydrums10111]

shwag is the absolute best weed ever omgom

[BassRevelation1029]

Why does the government try to control what we do to our bodies? If people wanna smoke, they're going too. Always have, always will

then let them do so, and let them face repercussions.
The reason it's expensive is because you're not in Texas.
:lol:
couldn't be any more true


yeah im definitely gonna take you seriously with that lame of an excuse
in other words, you're gonna cop-out and resort to childish name-calling to look like you have the higher opinion. Why not refute the "lame excuse?"

if its not even harmful in the first place, why should it be illegal?
You might want to read a few studies before you make such a baseless claim.

I have reason to doubt that you're not a doctor, nor have taken up any serious research.

[dinosaurxbrocore]

no i think its lame to think that people shouldnt be allowed to smoke around you just because you dont like it

also, theres just as much research saying that its fine

[Danger Bird]

The only detrimental effect of smoking marijuana that has been concretely proven is on the respiratory system. Any inhalation of burned organic material can be cancerous, but these effects can be easily offset by vaporizing, cooking with pot, or to a lesser extent using a bong.

Which is all irrelevant because I have a right to engage in unhealthy activities if I damn well please.

[Volumnius Flush]

Are you talking about chronic or shwag though?

Chron goes for 20 a g, dimes are 3.5-4 g's.

do you ever not barf idiocy?

Do you ever not poo poo?

[Iscariot]

Do you ever not poo poo?

sometimes you say the funniest things :lol:

[dinosaurxbrocore]

Chron goes for 20 a g, dimes are 3.5-4 g's.

so prices in texas are like prices everywhere else?

[iliketoplaydrums10111]

[QUOTE=BassRevelation1029;16394864]then let them do so, and let them face repercussions.
[\QUOTE]

Yea, but why are there repercussions for a choice that we made to do somthing, without hurting anyone? That makes no sense to me

[Iscariot]

some people don't seem to understand that the government exercising it's authority just because it can is a bad thing

[BassRevelation1029]

no i think its lame to think that people shouldnt be allowed to smoke around you just because you dont like it

and that fact that the smoke itself is harmful.

Playing loud music in public can be illegal, and its for the reason that people 'don't like it.'

now if that loud music caused deafness to innocent bystanders, its an even greater case to say its inappropriate for the public.


also, theres just as much research saying that its fine
to what extent? In what amount?

For starters, if it is smoked, its automatically harmful to your lungs, especially given that it has no filter. Now all of you will list alternative uses im sure, so check on the affects of THC.

Yea, but why are there repercussions for a choice that we made to do somthing, without hurting anyone? That makes no sense to me
you're hurting yourself. The government is your caretaker.

at least thats their argument for it. Don't worry, I don't buy it either.

[Danger Bird]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/25/AR2006052501729_pf.html

[Volumnius Flush]

so prices in texas are like prices everywhere else?

Well if you know the right people dimes go for 6-7 g's.

Also I am talking about rural Northern USA where it is scarce.

[Danger Bird]

But really, who cares if it's unhealthy? Should the government outlaw potato chips?

[Volumnius Flush]

some people don't seem to understand that the government exercising it's authority just because it can is a bad thing

Which is why I was so adamantly against this smoking ban.

[Iscariot]

yeah the smoking ban is bs

[BassRevelation1029]

But really, who cares if it's unhealthy? Should the government outlaw potato chips?

yes

[Jude]

There's no way to have an intelligent discussion with someone who thinks that

[Volumnius Flush]

yes

What are you, like the only black fascist? It must be pretty lonely at the top...

[guitrguy]

shwag makes my word go round.

[JohnXDoe]

i just bought $20 worth of weed for $40 so yeah i'm for it

never trust homies you don't know :(

[dinosaurxbrocore]

for realz, some spic sold me .7 of juicy fruit as a g for $20 dollars

and it totally did not look like a g, but he wouldnt budge and i didnt have my scale :(
Well if you know the right people dimes go for 6-7 g's.

Also I am talking about rural Northern USA where it is scarce.

uh, i live in a "rural" area in a northern state, and prices are fine

also, unless youre good friends with the kid whos growing, a 6-7g dimebag? :lol: bullpoop

[BassRevelation1029]

What are you, like the only black fascist? It must be pretty lonely at the top...

LoL

Im being semi-facetious. Semi.

[Volumnius Flush]

also, unless youre good friends with the kid whos growing, a 6-7g dimebag? :lol: bullpoop

If you know the dealer personally. Not the guys trying to pass themselves off as dealers. That is where the prices are jacked up.

[dinosaurxbrocore]

unless you know a grower, or youre in the bloods or something, no, those prices are unrealistic

[Volumnius Flush]

unless you know a grower, or youre in the bloods or something, no, those prices are unrealistic

Bs. Tell me I didn't see people get dimes for 6-7 g's.

[JohnXDoe]

for realz, some spic sold me .7 of juicy fruit as a g for $20 dollars
same. i don't do well with homeboys i don't know. they always think i'm a cop...and when they find i'm not..well i could be a sucker then

tight spot tonight, rolled up to my usual spot...all was dead. rolled up to another
(in my Audi am i dumb hell yeah) and teh dimes looked fat in the dark. handed over the money and nickel bags were switched in place of the dimes. homies stepped, and i was left sitting in my car out $20

but the weed is decent so better luck next time

made a call, should have a new hook up next month....

[combustion07]

Anybody ever have permafrost or Blueberry Trainwreck?

[dinosaurxbrocore]

same. i don't do well with homeboys i don't know. they always think i'm a cop...and when they find i'm not..well i could be a sucker then

tight spot tonight, rolled up to my usual spot...all was dead. rolled up to another
(in my Audi am i dumb hell yeah) and teh dimes looked fat in the dark. handed over the money and nickel bags were switched in place of the dimes. homies stepped, and i was left sitting in my car out $20

but the weed is decent so better luck next time

made a call, should have a new hook up next month....

that sucks man :/

luckily ive got a solid diesel hook up at the moment n_n

[combustion07]

people always try to rip me, I finally got a scale just in case.

[pedro durruti]

Anybody ever have permafrost or Blueberry Trainwreck?
i've had blueberry and trainwreck but i've never had both in the same sentence.. ha ha this thread is already discussing weed flavors

[combustion07]

Yeah my bad I got off topic, I just got all those in a mixbag yesterday, its gone now but it was amazing while it lasted.

[dinosaurxbrocore]

i've had blueberry and trainwreck but i've never had both in the same sentence.. ha ha this thread is already discussing weed flavors

strains*

[pedro durruti]

well... each strain usually has its own smell and taste, as well as quality of high

[combustion07]

Did you guys hear about Bobby Blacks campaign?

[Dave de Sylvia]

this is a lame argument. It rests on "you can't prove its harmful" and throws the burden of proof on doctors to show its harmful, then cries propaganda when the results are not in their favor.
Err, if you're going to criminalise a substance, the burden of proof is on you to prove that it's harmful. This should be obvious.

[Danish]

i just bought $20 worth of weed for $40 so yeah i'm for it

never trust homies you don't know :(

Sucka!

I think it's funny that the Americans on here talk about reefer in metric! I use imperial! Typically I get a half O for $80 (that's 14g), and it's high-quality.

The main reason I want to see marijuana legalized is to take it out of the black market. I was watching The Nature of Things with David Suzuki, and someone pointed out that if it was legalized, it would cost roughly the same as hydroponic tomatos. That's like $3/lbs.

The arguments for legalization far outweigh arguments for criminalization. Especially in Canada, where studies have shown that over 30% of people have smoked in the past year. Canada has the highest rate of marijuana use in the world. This is just educated speculation, but I would argue that the only reason marijuana isn't legal in Canada is because of pressure from the US.

[Danger Bird]

I was watching The Nature of Things with David Suzuki, and someone pointed out that if it was legalized, it would cost roughly the same as hydroponic tomatos. That's like $3/lbs.

/drools

[Volumnius Flush]

I think it's funny that the Americans on here talk about reefer in metric! I use imperial! Typically I get a half O for $80 (that's 14g), and it's high-quality.

If you are talking about fire, those prices suck although not as bad as I probably would expect. If you're talking about chron strains that is unbelievable.

[combustion07]

Fire K? I'm lost now...

[Volumnius Flush]

Fire K? I'm lost now...

Never heard anyone say, "Man! That's some fire!"? It is like midway between schwag and chron, I guess you would say mid-grade.

Goes mexican schwag, mexican fire, chron, basically.

Low --> Mids --> High --

[combustion07]

Oh, okay nevermind I get what your saying. Anybody know how those legalbud sites work where they ship it to your house?

[UmphreysHead]

Legalbud = waste of money. Some cool flavors but nothing besides that.

[Volumnius Flush]

Legalbud = waste of money. Some cool flavors but nothing besides that.

Ohh! He's talking about that crap in High Times. Biggest waste of money ever!

[Danish]

If you are talking about fire, those prices suck although not as bad as I probably would expect. If you're talking about chron strains that is unbelievable.

Very excellent reefer. Dunno the strain, but it's definitely premium.

[Volumnius Flush]

Very excellent reefer. Dunno the strain, but it's definitely premium.

I highly doubt it's high grade.

[WhoDidTheElf]

I'm for it simply because putting non-violent criminals in prison is rather silly.

[BassRevelation1029]

Err, if you're going to criminalise a substance, the burden of proof is on you to prove that it's harmful. This should be obvious.

The doctors conducting research have nothing to do with its criminalization
I'm for it simply because putting non-violent criminals in prison is rather silly.
Plenty of "non-violent" criminals are in prison. If thats your case, we should give a pass to extortionists, money-laundering thugs and even pick-pockets.

[combustion07]

Your a tard, and your argument is stupid. Be gone!
EDIT: just kidding

[WhoDidTheElf]

Plenty of "non-violent" criminals are in prison. If thats your case, we should give a pass to extortionists, money-laundering thugs and even pick-pockets.

Sigh.

People like that should have to repay their debts to society instead of rot in jail. Repeat offenders I could see possibly being sent to jail, but petty theft doesn't seem like something to send a person to Jail over.

[Volumnius Flush]

Sigh.

People like that should have to repay their debts to society instead of rot in jail. Repeat offenders I could see possibly being sent to jail, but petty theft doesn't seem like something to send a person to Jail over.

Big difference between jail and prison.

[WhoDidTheElf]

Big difference between jail and prison.

Err meant prison.

[Dave de Sylvia]

The doctors conducting research have nothing to do with its criminalization
What kind of an answer is that?

Fine: if you're going to support the criminalisation of a substance, the burden is on you to cite compelling third-party evidence that it is signficantly harmful.

Can you address the point in a meaningful fashion now?

[Danger Bird]

I agree with BassRevelation. Scientific evidence has nothing to do with why cannabis is illegal.

[Volumnius Flush]

But there is plenty of evidence to suggest it is detrimental to your health.

[Dave de Sylvia]

Of course it's detrimental to your health. The question is whether it's so dangerous that it requires a state-enforced prohibition.

[Volumnius Flush]

Of course it's detrimental to your health. The question is whether it's so dangerous that it requires a state-enforced prohibition.

There is really no other argument for its criminalization, except religious ones, which in a free country are invalid. And while alcohol kills thousands a year, how many does weed kill? I agree, it should be legalized.

[dinosaurxbrocore]

GUYS! Breaking news! As you know, I'm a medical professional, but this will seriously blow your mind. Inhaling marijuana smoke hurts your lungs and throat yo, keep that **** illegal nigga!

[1338 h4x0r]

You post like Marshall

[Volumnius Flush]

You post like Marshall

The only reason he's posting here is because I told him on AIM he should post in here more often. I didn't realize he couldn't handle the trust placed in a human being of average mental capacity to post in a manner conducive to stimulating debate and discussion.

[combustion07]

I think it should be legal, simply because of the fact that there are much worse things that are legal, its a simple theory really I don't see how anyone can argue that in a valid way.

[1338 h4x0r]

The only reason he's posting here is because I told him on AIM he should post in here more often. I didn't realize he couldn't handle the trust placed in a human being of average mental capacity to post in a manner conducive to stimulating debate and discussion.

I know him in person: he's well above-average mental capacity, and doesn't need to use a thesaurus to make points

[Volumnius Flush]

I know him in person: he's well above-average mental capacity, and doesn't need to use a thesaurus to make points

So what are you saying? You've hacked into my computer and found out that I often go to dictionary.com to find bigger words? Not that I do now... Mainly I use it to look up words you use that I don't know. Like hokey for example. My vocabulary suffices.

I know him in person: he's well above-average mental capacity, and doesn't need to use a thesaurus to make points

You mean you know her in person?

[dinosaurxbrocore]

The only reason he's posting here is because I told him on AIM he should post in here more often. I didn't realize he couldn't handle the trust placed in a human being of average mental capacity to post in a manner conducive to stimulating debate and discussion.

everything important has been said, any other point will be falsitudes and non-dipsetery

[1338 h4x0r]

So what are you saying? You've hacked into my computer and found out that I often go to dictionary.com to find bigger words? Not that I do now... Mainly I use it to look up words you use that I don't know. Like hokey for example. My vocabulary suffices.

East Texas is all about hokeyness, I'm surprised you didn't know it already. But then, you are awash in it.

[BassRevelation1029]

What kind of an answer is that?

Fine: if you're going to support the criminalisation of a substance, the burden is on you to cite compelling third-party evidence that it is signficantly harmful.

Can you address the point in a meaningful fashion now?
Once again, thats assuming that its criminalized because its harmful. The post you quoted was in response to this one:
It has nothing to do with it being natural, it has everything to do with it being not harmful
which dealt with whether or not it was harmful. You can see in my first post that I said its harmful qualities don't or shouldn't make it illegal.

[Danger Bird]

There is really no other argument for its criminalization, except religious ones, which in a free country are invalid. And while alcohol kills thousands a year, how many does weed kill? I agree, it should be legalized.

Do you really believe your religion prohibits marijuana use?

[Volumnius Flush]

Do you really believe your religion prohibits marijuana use?

No I really don't believe it does.

[Danger Bird]

Then what is a religious argument for criminalization?

[Volumnius Flush]

Then what is a religious argument for criminalization?

All I'm saying is one could be made.

[UmphreysHead]

weed = the devil would be one I'm assuming.

[Volumnius Flush]

weed = the devil would be one I'm assuming.

You must know nothing about religion.

[UmphreysHead]

You've never met a religious fanatic who's said that?

[Volumnius Flush]

You've never met a religious fanatic who's said that?

That is the most ignorant thing I've ever heard, and no, I've never heard anyone for that matter say that.

[Danger Bird]

http://www.aggressivechristianity.net/articles/maryjane.htm
http://www.breakawaymag.com/AllTheRest/A000000066.cfm

[Volumnius Flush]

http://www.aggressivechristianity.net/articles/maryjane.htm
http://www.breakawaymag.com/AllTheRest/A000000066.cfm

Funny last I checked there was no scriptural basis for this.

[Danger Bird]

Very true.

However your claim that religious fanatics don't spew bullshit like this is wrong.

[pooble]

and it shouldn't ever be done in public.


for what reason exactly?

same reason why cigarrettes shouldn't be smoked in public

:lol: fag

this kinda debate skill will get you a law degree in no time!

why wouldnt this thread turn out any other way

[Volumnius Flush]

Very true.

However your claim that religious fanatics don't spew bullshit like this is wrong.

I never claimed they don't spew it. I said I have never heard anything of the sort ever.

[UmphreysHead]

That's exactly what you did. http://www.sputnikmusic.com/forums/showpost.php?p=16398080&postcount=112 see the word that you italicized.

[Volumnius Flush]

That's exactly what you did. http://www.sputnikmusic.com/forums/showpost.php?p=16398080&postcount=112 see the word that you italicized.

You have the reading comprehension of a third grader. I said I have never heard anyone say that, not that they don't say it.

[Jude]

which dealt with whether or not it was harmful. You can see in my first post that I said its harmful qualities don't or shouldn't make it illegal.
Well if it was heroin or something then that would be a good reason to ban it as opposed that Mexicans or blacks use it

Or hippies use it as was the case with LSD

[UmphreysHead]

LSD actually does have medicinal properties though.

You have the reading comprehension of a third grader. I said I have never heard anyone say that, not that they don't say it.

Then why would I be ignorant for saying that religious fanatics do that?

[BassRevelation1029]

why wouldnt this thread turn out any other way

:lol:

[Volumnius Flush]

LSD actually does have medicinal properties though.



Then why would I be ignorant for saying that religious fanatics do that?

I didn't call you ignorant. Now I'm calling you ignorant. Before I was saying the argument that the so-called "zealots" made was ignorant. But if you can't see that, you are ignorant.

[BassRevelation1029]

I didn't call you ignorant. Now I'm calling you ignorant. Before I was saying the argument that the so-called "zealots" made was ignorant. But if you can't see that, you are ignorant.

lol

"you're too stupid to realize I wasn't calling you stupid"

[Volumnius Flush]

lol

"you're too stupid to realize I wasn't calling you stupid"

Yeah pretty much.

[dinosaurxbrocore]

ur dum

[RNR]

LSD actually does have medicinal properties though.

I think that it's a drug that everyone should do once in a while. Beneficial to the intellect when used in moderation.

[Danger Bird]

I didn't call you ignorant. Now I'm calling you ignorant. Before I was saying the argument that the so-called "zealots" made was ignorant. But if you can't see that, you are ignorant.

It's not our fault that you have to communication skills of a third grader.

[Volumnius Flush]

It's not our fault that you have to communication skills of a third grader.

"to communication skills of a third grader"

:lol:

Classic!

ur dum

Keep 'em coming. This is great!

[Danger Bird]

At least people can vaguely discern what it is I have typed.

[ringworm]

our prisons are slam full of non violent drug offenders

[Jude]

I think that it's a drug that everyone should do once in a while. Beneficial to the intellect when used in moderation.

Not everyone should do LSD or any heavy psychedelic. There's some people who just shouldn't touch them

Some of those people you can tell ahead of time, others you really can't but still

And I really don't know about "medicinal properties", it's hit and miss at best

[DBoons Ghost]

I fully support the decriminalization of marijuana, but I fear the same legislation might follow for other harsher drugs.

I smoke pot and I enjoy it immensely. I have always been on the fence about legalizing it, or decriminalizing it but I'll admit arguements presented here have changed my mind.

[Jude]

I fully support the decriminalization of marijuana, but I fear the same legislation might follow for other harsher drugs.

I doubt it. Weed and heroin/coke for example are in completely different leagues...weed is in the same tier as alcohol really

I smoke pot and I enjoy it immensely. I have always been on the fence about legalizing it, or decriminalizing it but I'll admit arguements presented here have changed my mind.

Nice. There really aren't any good arguments for keeping it illegal tbh.

[combustion07]

I think that it's a drug that everyone should do once in a while. Beneficial to the intellect when used in moderation.

What kind of medical properties does it have? I've done it twice, the first time I had a bad trip because it was my first drug experience...ever. And one more question, what kind of after effects are there to shrooms?
Thanks in advance

[Jude]

What kind of medical properties does it have? I've done it twice, the first time I had a bad trip because it was my first drug experience...ever. And one more question, what kind of after effects are there to shrooms?


The "medicinal properties" of psychedelic drugs are iffy, not recommended by almost any medical professional and as I said, hit or miss, at best. It can be a life changing and mind-expanding experience but that's hardly "medicinal." The effects of these drugs are too different on different people for them to be called "medicinal" at all really...what may cure one person's depression and change their life, may shake up another person really badly and unleash some mental problem they didn't have before. Let the tripper beware.

That said there's usually no way to know beforehand if it's a good idea for you to trip or not, unless you have a significant family history of mental illness. You really only find out after one trip, which for some people is a real bad one the first time around.

[combustion07]

The "medicinal properties" of psychedelic drugs are iffy, not recommended by almost any medical professional and as I said, hit or miss, at best. It can be a life changing and mind-expanding experience but that's hardly "medicinal." The effects of these drugs are too different on different people for them to be called "medicinal" at all really...what may cure one person's depression and change their life, may shake up another person really badly and unleash some mental problem they didn't have before. Let the tripper beware.

That said there's usually no way to know beforehand if it's a good idea for you to trip or not, unless you have a significant family history of mental illness. You really only find out after one trip, which for some people is a real bad one the first time around.

Yeah, I get what you mean. My second time I didn't trip real bad and I felt like I got something out of it. The first time was probably just a begginer freakout thing.

[dinosaurxbrocore]

jude droppin knowledge

[UmphreysHead]

The main medicinal properties I was talking about for LSD was the success it had with curing AA patients. I don't know about any other psychedelics, just that one.

[combustion07]

If you took too much, say a year ago, could you just slip into a random trip out of nowhere. My friend says thats been happening to him since we did it.

[stevensonmat2]

thats bullshit. you have flashbacks if you do alot over a short period of time. he may feel a little funky, but nothing signifigant.

[UmphreysHead]

Flashbacks are possible, but it's estimated that only 10% of people get them. And besides it lasts for mere seconds to maybe a few minutes.

http://www.erowid.org/chemicals/lsd/lsd_faq.shtml#flashbacks
Has a lot of information about them.

[Bordello]

ur mom lasts for mere seconds to maybe a few minutes

[Jude]

I had at least one flashback after my shroom trip that I can remember and maybe some other milder ones. I think the latest one was six months after the trip. It was way more than just a feeling disoriented, I actually started tripping again, just pretty briefly. But considering it was a bad part of the trip that came back it was pretty disturbing.

They're not really that big a deal from what I understand.

[pooble]

i want to try lsd sometime. a flashback or two would be cool too. "free trip"

im going to wait a while before trying it though.

mushrooms are all the psychedelics i need for now. grown in the ground, 100% natural.

[Volumnius Flush]

And now the federal government is making efforts to criminalize salvia divinorum. What is the deal with big government liberals and conservatives? Each party thinks they're for smaller government, but their actions speak louder than words. And remember the bill introduced in 2002 to ban salvia was sponsored by Representative Baca (D). So much for liberals believing in smaller government!

I, as a conservative, cannot support laws criminalizing marijuana or salvia. As a small-government conservative, I can not condone the federal gov't encroaching on our freedoms and rights as Americans and any law that produces an unchecked authority for the government to intrude in our daily lives.

[UmphreysHead]

I'm surprised it isn't already illegal.

[UmphreysHead]

I'm surprised it isn't already illegal.

[Chu]

It's decriminalised where I live.

I have read none of this thread btw.

[Danger Bird]

Why are you avoiding stating the reason you believe it should be illegal?

[pooble]

man.. salvia is a fu.cked up drug. shame they are trying to make it illegal... i think it would be a bad idea if it were thrown on the black market. but seeing how thats a bad thing it only makes sense that the government would try to do it.

[BassRevelation1029]

I'm not. That decision's not up to me.

[Danger Bird]

Do you think it should be decriminalized?

[BassRevelation1029]

Do you think it should be decriminalized?

No.

[UmphreysHead]

Why are you avoiding stating the reason you believe it should be illegal?

If you're talking to me I'm not saying that I think it should be illegal, I'm just surprised it isn't already.

[:amaze:]

having done salvia, i would have no problem making it illegal. that stuff is effed up, plain and simple. i will never, EVER do it again.




:amaze:

[UmphreysHead]

yeah it's effed up, if you have no previous intense psychedelic experience, and therefore have no business trying it.

[:amaze:]

even having experience, it was too crazy (15% good crazy, 85% bad crazy IMO).






:amaze:

[UmphreysHead]

What experience(s)?

[Jude]

Salvia sounds insane and I would never ever touch it but making it illegal would be really retarded

[:amaze:]

What experience(s)?

no DMT or Mescaline, but i think most all the other well-known hallucinogens.




:amaze:

[:amaze:]

Salvia sounds insane and I would never ever touch it but making it illegal would be really retarded

yeah, i guess i shouldn't say that i'd want it illegalized, but i would never ever recommend that someone take it (unless i really hated them).





:amaze:

[UmphreysHead]

most all the other well-known hallucinogens.




:amaze:

you'd be surprised at the vast amount out there...

I guess it's not that surprising that someone with a bit of psychedelic experience had a bad trip. It could've turned really horrible for methe few times I did it, luckily I know how to handle myself and basically can talk myself down.

[Jude]

yeah, i guess i shouldn't say that i'd want it illegalized, but i would never ever recommend that someone take it (unless i really hated them).





:amaze:
I still can't figure out why people do it since the majority of experiences that I hear are bad or disturbing.

Then again I had a bad and disturbing experience on shrooms but it came out very positive in the end so idk.

I guess whenever I hear people get too enthusiastic about these things they're usually crazy acid casualty types who are half in another universe anyway..although I suppose having tripped once and telling people it was a life changing experience (it was) makes me sound that way too, to the layman.

[Volumnius Flush]

having done salvia, i would have no problem making it illegal. that stuff is effed up, plain and simple. i will never, EVER do it again.

I have done it several times. I have been in a tv show while on it, I have heard voices, parts of cars transform into human beings. People morphing, it really sucks, I don't know why I did it so much.

[UmphreysHead]

what tv show was this. and how did you manage to be under the influence during it?

[:amaze:]

you'd be surprised at the vast amount out there...

I guess it's not that surprising that someone with a bit of psychedelic experience had a bad trip. It could've turned really horrible for methe few times I did it, luckily I know how to handle myself and basically can talk myself down.

i know there are plenty out there, thats why i said the well known ones.

and i was able to handle myself and calm down, but just the fact that it was so intense that i had to force myself to do that doesnt lead me to think of it as a good or fun thing to do.



:amaze:

[Volumnius Flush]

what tv show was this. and how did you manage to be under the influence during it?

I meant I hallucinated that I was in a tv show. It was some show based at my home. There was a cheerleader, a nerd, the preppie, and I was the jock. They were all waving and this theme song was playing in the background. I tripped hard.

[Jude]

ahaahhahahhaahahah

[UmphreysHead]

Oh that makes a lot more sense. I was like wtf you smoked and made it to the stage and like got settled in before the trip ran out.

[combustion07]

What is salvia?

[Volumnius Flush]

What is salvia?

It is a hallucenogenic drug. You can probably find information on it at http://www.erowid.com and http://en.wikipedia.org

Oh that makes a lot more sense. I was like wtf you smoked and made it to the stage and like got settled in before the trip ran out.

Yeah.

ahaahhahahhaahahah

What's so funny?

[combustion07]

And its legal? If so where can you get it at?

[UmphreysHead]

Any head shop pretty much. I think you can order seeds online to plant yourself too.

[combustion07]

Hmm, I don't know how I've went along without hearing about this, I looked it up on wikipedia and all the effects seem to be positive. Of course you can't really trust wikipedia though.

[Volumnius Flush]

Most people agree it sucks major. I will probably never do it again. And don't order the seeds, get the salvia divinorin-a extract. But only start out with like 20 or 30x your first time.

Oh. It's illegal in Missouri.

[UmphreysHead]

I've only met a handful of people who've liked it a lot, like maybe 3-4 people tops.

[Volumnius Flush]

They probably weren't doing 60x or 80x either.

[UmphreysHead]

60x is pretty much the standard around here. 40x and below is considered pussy.

[combustion07]

Most people agree it sucks major. I will probably never do it again. And don't order the seeds, get the salvia divinorin-a extract. But only start out with like 20 or 30x your first time.

Oh. It's illegal in Missouri.

WHAT!!!!!!!!
Damn, I live in Missouri, but if I can get a ride to Kansas its not illegal there is it?

[combustion07]

Oh I get it you were joking lol....

[Danger Bird]

No.

Why not?

[stevensonmat2]

Lol at all these omg saliva is effed posts. if you can't deal with it fine, but it shouldn't be illegal. i hate people who have bad trips and think the drug is bad when really their minds just aren't in the right place. (or maybe they aren't capable of handling strange new feelings)

salvia is strange, buts its a unique experience.

[Danger Bird]

People just confuse "is bad" with "should be illegal" in general

[Danish]

Lol at all these omg saliva is effed posts. if you can't deal with it fine, but it shouldn't be illegal. i hate people who have bad trips and think the drug is bad when really their minds just aren't in the right place. (or maybe they aren't capable of handling strange new feelings)

salvia is strange, buts its a unique experience.

And how many of these people have sick from drinking, yet they don't call for prohibition of alcohol...

[pooble]

hahahah man.. salvia IS effed up. i tried mushrooms before i did salvia and it was a radically different experience. 60 to 80x though? ive never even seen that on sale here though. the biggest ive seen is 40x i think. that sounds like it would kill a moose. i aint touching that.

[:amaze:]

you don't need more than 20x to get a full-blown trip. if you smoke too much, you will trip, but you will black it out and not remember it.

i've done it a couple times ... won't do it again, and wouldn't recommend it to anyone. though it is the most intense trip i've experienced, so i guess do it if that's all you're looking for.




:amaze:

[combustion07]

I hadn't heard of salvia until it was mentioned here and right when you guys start talking about it it popped up on the news.

[Futue te Ipsum]

I've never really understood the justification for making many drugs illegal. What criteria does it have to fit into? Addictive, dangerous (to self and others), or what?

Which is more dangerous out of Alcohol, tobacco, weed, E and magic mushrooms?
Which is more addictive?
Is it so wrong or abnormal that people would wish to change the way in which they perceive their surroundings, or how they react and feel? Why should the government care or intrude on things I do when they're harming nobody else (and with many drugs nobody at all).

Then you get to the practical questions. Is making drugs illegal making them less popular? How many people do you know that take weed? Do you? Is it hard to get? If not, do you think that it's true that all the government is doing is reducing the regulation and quality of the product whilst missing out on tax? I certainly don't believe any drug is hard to get in this country.

[Futue te Ipsum]

I've never really understood the justification for making many drugs illegal. What criteria does it have to fit into? Addictive, dangerous (to self and others), or what?

Which is more dangerous out of Alcohol, tobacco, weed, E and magic mushrooms?
Which is more addictive?
Is it so wrong or abnormal that people would wish to change the way in which they perceive their surroundings, or how they react and feel? Why should the government care or intrude on things I do when they're harming nobody else (and with many drugs nobody at all).

Then you get to the practical questions. Is making drugs illegal making them less popular? How many people do you know that take weed? Do you? Is it hard to get? If not, do you think that it's true that all the government is doing is reducing the regulation and quality of the product whilst missing out on tax? I certainly don't believe any drug is hard to get in this country.

[BassRevelation1029]

Why not?
Personal reasons. Health reasons. Social reasons.

[Danger Bird]

See. That's what I mean. Why do you refuse to elaborate?

And criminalizing something for personal reasons is stupid in just about every scenario I can imagine.

[UmphreysHead]

I don't like it when people smoke pot, so it should be illegal.

[BassRevelation1029]

See. That's what I mean. Why do you refuse to elaborate?
Because frankly its just not a salient issue.

Personally, I don't like idiots who live their lives high on mary jane and ask me why I don't smoke every day. Socially, the last thing we need is a society of stoners who will abuse legality to partake in foolishness. Despite what you may think, smoke has been proven to damage the lungs, especially in filterless smoke. You'll use a bong, you say? THC has negative effects as well.

Again, negative health effects shouldn't make it illegal. I say 'personal reasons' because I just don't like it, the effects it has on people, and the people when they are affected. As someone put it here once, they should legalize pot so the potheads have nothing to talk about anymore.

I don't like it when people smoke pot, so it should be illegal.
I also don't like my neighbor playing loud music in the street at night, so that should be illegal too.

o wait it is.

[UmphreysHead]

Personally, I don't like idiots who live their lives high on mary jane and ask me why I don't smoke every day. Socially, the last thing we need is a society of stoners who will abuse legality to partake in foolishness. Despite what you may think, smoke has been proven to damage the lungs, especially in filterless smoke. You'll use a bong, you say? THC has negative effects as well.

Again, negative health effects shouldn't make it illegal. I say 'personal reasons' because I just don't like it, the effects it has on people, and the people when they are affected. As someone put it here once, they should legalize pot so the potheads have nothing to talk about anymore.
So because you don't like potheads it should stay illegal? Maybe to you it's foolishness, but it has scientifically proven medicinal purposes.

I don't think anyone is arguing pro that smoke is good for you lungs. According to a lot of evidence I have researched/read THC has some negative effects, but none of which are life threatening or incredibly dangerous.

[free_thinkers_are_dangerous]

I'd be in favour of decriminalization, but not necessarily legalization. I don't think getting busted with a few joints should go on your criminal record, but I do think weed should be controlled more strictly than alcohol and tobacco.

[Smokey D]

Why? I don't really think it's more dangerous, at least from a mind-altering perspective, than alcohol. Probably less damaging in chronic use than alcohol as well.

[UmphreysHead]

Personally I think it should be regulated either as strictly or less strictly as Alcohol currently is.

[1338 h4x0r]

ban all drugs

[Smokey D]

Ban all strongly addictive drugs, maybe. The state doesn't have any role in telling me how I alter my consciousness if it doesn't cause any harm.

[1338 h4x0r]

A man can dream can't he?

[Smokey D]

Yes but thinking drugs should stop existing is a very different proposition to exercising state power to erradicate them.

[Apollyon]

Because frankly its just not a salient issue.

lol

Personally, I don't like idiots who live their lives high on mary jane and ask me why I don't smoke every day.

this is every person who smokes weed obviously

trying to derive logic from personal opinion is in no way moronic

Socially, the last thing we need is a society of stoners who will abuse legality to partake in foolishness.

can you back this up with fact and not "i said so this means it's true"

Despite what you may think, smoke has been proven to damage the lungs, especially in filterless smoke.

which is why people who smoke for the the non-dangerous beneficial effects use mediums such as vaporizers

You'll use a bong, you say? THC has negative effects as well.

what negative effects does THC have

source this please

and while you're doing that read this: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_bad_is_marijuana_for_you

Again, negative health effects shouldn't make it illegal. I say 'personal reasons' because I just don't like it, the effects it has on people, and the people when they are affected. As someone put it here once, they should legalize pot so the potheads have nothing to talk about anymore.

marijuana is associated with a culture

it's a key component in rastafarianism but you would probably consider these people "potheads" because they smoke regularly

never mind the fact they are productive and useful human beings

I also don't like my neighbor playing loud music in the street at night, so that should be illegal too.

o wait it is.

explain in full detail with backing sources how disturbing the peace is correlative to smoking marijuana

[Hababi]

Ban all strongly addictive drugs, maybe. The state doesn't have any role in telling me how I alter my consciousness if it doesn't cause any harm.

Strongly addictive drugs...like oxycontin?

Some mind altering drugs have just as much, if not more, potential long term damage...

[Jude]

I have a hard time justifying the state's ability to ban any drug unless it causes you to go into a viking-style berserker rage and kill everyone you see...but I also have a hard time justifying heroin, meth, crack etc. being legal.

However with weed there's no such problem. This really shouldn't be a debate and the absence of anybody except BassRevelation and possibly zero arguing against it, kind of illustrates that.

[Smokey D]

Strongly addictive drugs...like oxycontin?

The difference between illegal and strictly controlled isn't that great. You don't have to use your imagination to see they are essentially equivalent.

Some mind altering drugs have just as much, if not more, potential long term damage...

Maybe, but a person is entitled to ruin themselves. The only thing they aren't allowed to do is ruin other people.

[Hababi]

Maybe, but a person is entitled to ruin themselves. The only thing they aren't allowed to do is ruin other people.

Ok but how does that apply to banning, say, crack vs banning, say, LSD?

[Smokey D]

Ok but how does that apply to banning, say, crack vs banning, say, LSD?

Well, for one, crack has far worse effects than LSD.

But more consistently with my point, crack is far more addicitive than LSD and addiction is far more likely to cause other problems.

Although I'm not entirely sure I can justify banning even those drugs.

[Jude]

Ok but how does that apply to banning, say, crack vs banning, say, LSD?

Crack is extremely addictive LSD isn't

[BassRevelation1029]

So because you don't like potheads it should stay illegal?
Again, its illegality is not up to me. It wouldn't matter anyway since people still do it.

Maybe to you it's foolishness, but it has scientifically proven medicinal purposes.
I believe I've said that

I wouldn't mind it used for medicinal purposes

anywho, its not a cure, its a treatment. Aspirin won't 'cure' your toothache anymore than it soothes it.






can you back this up with fact and not "i said so this means it's true"
have you no common sense? If you haven't noticed, Americans will abuse anything.

what negative effects does THC have

source this please
http://www.drugabuse.gov/Infofacts/marijuana.html

and while you're doing that read this: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_bad_is_marijuana_for_you

So you ask me for a source, then turn around and cite this garbage? NONE of these people are professionals, and this is entirely opinionated. Go read from a medical professional.


never mind the fact they are productive and useful human beings
which is irrelevant. People who abuse liquor are deemed 'alcoholics' regardless of how useful they are to society (of course, 'useful' being entirely subjective).

explain in full detail with backing sources how disturbing the peace is correlative to smoking marijuana
Sorry, I can't spoonfeed everything to you. Especially when you take it out of context. To get you started, the issue isn't saying "smoking marijuana is disturbing the peace," but "smoking in public is likened to disturbing the peace."
Go back and read http://sputnikmusic.com/forums/showthread.php?t=557661
This thread to see how smoking in public can be related to a disturbance like playing loud music.

[free_thinkers_are_dangerous]

Why? I don't really think it's more dangerous, at least from a mind-altering perspective, than alcohol. Probably less damaging in chronic use than alcohol as well.

I think it would need stricter regulation mostly because it's harder to detect that someone is under the influence (would roadside blood tests become the norm when someone is pulled over and looks stoned? Would employers still have the right to demand that their employees be clean?) and it's more harmful to smoke in the same room as somebody else as to drink.

It sort of sounds like I'm completely against weed because that's the side of my views I'm explaining, but I do agree that someone who is stoned is almost always safer to be around than someone who is drunk, and that a joint here and there probably isn't much worse for you than knocking a few beers back every now and then. I'm definitely opposed to harsh penalties for being caught with weed (maybe the equivalent of a traffic ticket for smoking in public, but nothing more than that, and imo smoking weed in your own home should be about as punishable as jaywalking in the suburbs), but until its effects are better known (ie the link with schizophrenia, or how long after smoking could a doctor be trusted to perform surgery) I don't think the government should be giving the green light for corner stores to start selling it.

My only sticking point to support legalization is really that there be a good system of checks and balances. If there would be enough control to make sure nobody walking down the street gets stoned second hand, or that there isn't a medical risk that up until now hasn't been explored, I'd be all for it, especially because a legitimate marijuana industry would end up giving a better product and get rid of the violent aspects of dealing. I just think that those controls would probably need to be more strict than the controls on alcohol.

[FIGHTCRIMEALLTHETIME]

remember that movie super size me
well if you made that same movie only it was called like bong rip me or something where the guy just smoked a bowl a day out of a bong for a month
ya i dont think he would get as fuked up as from eating mcdonalds so i think mcdonalds should be illegal too

[defrabbi3000]

I can only really comment on the UK weed scene, but im all in favour of legalisation. Have been since i was 14, first for dumb reasons [i smoke pot i r kool!] now for slightly better reasons and someone brushed on it earlier. reliability. big issue in the UK right now is the "skunk" people are being sold is coated to weigh it down. Not coated with anything harmless mind you, but regular sized beads of glass just too big [over0.2mm] to be dealt with by your body safely get inhaled. One guy analysed his skunk and found frosted-glass etching spray blasted into it, sand has been added and even buds coated in oil have been found. now your lovely 3.5g eighth of skunk is 3.5g of undetermined shite in a bag. If weed was legalised then this heinous assault on our lungs could be stopped by properly grown and taxed government plants, but why would the labour party care about masses of young peoples health when their time is nigh and theyre just trying to shove through as many crackpot idea's as they can.

btw i am in no way indicating support of david cameron [blair v2.0], hes an *** and they should bring back portillo

[defrabbi3000]

also what are your prices like in US cos i saw some stuff in the thread but was kinda confused by your terminology [dimes at 6-7g? wtf? isnt a dime a coin]

i get good untainted skunk at 3.3-3.5g for £20 or weed and hash at roughly double the amount for similar price.

[defrabbi3000]

oh and for the road, THC is but one cannabinoid there are plenty more in there to worry about ;)

[Futue te Ipsum]

so yeah I missed the part where you guys actually put forward a decent reason forward for making weed illegal

[dinosaurxbrocore]

anywho, its not a cure, its a treatment. Aspirin won't 'cure' your toothache anymore than it soothes it.
better make aspirin illegal then, eh?

have you no common sense? If you haven't noticed, Americans will abuse anything.
and only americans!

which is irrelevant. People who abuse liquor are deemed 'alcoholics' regardless of how useful they are to society (of course, 'useful' being entirely subjective).
what does alcoholism have to do with the legality of marijuana?

your arguments dont hit any points, and your only reason against marijuana being legal so far seems to be "I DONT WANNA INHAEL SMOEK **** OFF THINGS PEOPLE BEEN DOIN FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS NON SMOEKERZ IN CHEARGE NAO YO"

[UmphreysHead]

anywho, its not a cure, its a treatment. Aspirin won't 'cure' your toothache anymore than it soothes it.
Is there a point here? An incredibly high amount of legally prescribed do nothing more than "soothe" something.


have you no common sense? If you haven't noticed, Americans will abuse anything.
What's your point? Americans abuse everything so marijuana shouldn't be legal/decriminalized?

http://www.drugabuse.gov/Infofacts/marijuana.html
So you ask me for a source, then turn around and cite this garbage? NONE of these people are professionals, and this is entirely opinionated. Go read from a medical professional.

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/hemp/marieff.htm

which is irrelevant. People who abuse liquor are deemed 'alcoholics' regardless of how useful they are to society (of course, 'useful' being entirely subjective).
So what?

[BassRevelation1029]

your arguments dont hit any points
of course not when you take it completely out of context.

Go back to childish namecalling you're better at that.

Is there a point here? An incredibly high amount of legally prescribed do nothing more than "soothe" something.
my point is that its not a cure, so none can argue of its necessity.

What's your point? Americans abuse everything so marijuana shouldn't be legal/decriminalized?
yes, which is why potato chips should be regulated.

http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/hemp/marieff.htm
Thanks for the link. I only have one complaint

"a publication of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws"

how many of you would shout and complain if I cited a creationist institution when arguing against evolution?

[UmphreysHead]

my point is that its not a cure, so none can argue of its necessity.
No one can argue any form of medicine is really necessary then.

yes, which is why potato chips should be regulated.
Yeah, so should food. So should lawn mowers, so should water, so should computer. Are you serious here dude?


Thanks for the link. I only have one complaint

"a publication of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws"

how many of you would shout and complain if I cited a creationist institution when arguing against evolution?
Remind what the name of your website was... Oh that's right, drugabuse.gov.

[Sammy_L_D]

Don't smoke, don't care.

I have nothing against medicinal marijuana.

[Smokey D]

Tell a cancer patient morphine is not necessay because it's not a cure.

[BassRevelation1029]

No one can argue any form of medicine is really necessary then.

no you can't. I hope you realize the difference between "Hemp is helpful for my illness" and "I need hemp to live." I'm making sure we're clear that "proven medicinal purposes" does not translate to the cure that we've been desperately searching for.

Yeah, so should food. So should lawn mowers, so should water, so should computer. Are you serious here dude?
how do you abuse lawn mowers?

are you serious?


Remind what the name of your website was... Oh that's right, drugabuse.gov.
part of the national institute of health. Based on science.
Far cry from "reform our smoke laws so we can enjoy ourselves"
Tell a cancer patient morphine is not necessay because it's not a cure.
Tell a cancer patient morphine is their only choice.

[Smokey D]

Who's doing that though?

[Danger Bird]

how do you abuse lawn mowers?

Stick your willy in it. Lawn mowers have great potential for misuse.

[BassRevelation1029]

Who's doing that though?

probably the same person who said hemp is the only treatment.
Stick your willy in it. Lawn mowers have great potential for misuse.
:lol:

I stand corrected.

[Danger Bird]

Hell yeah you do. They're spinning motorized blades, use your imagination.

[UmphreysHead]

no you can't. I hope you realize the difference between "Hemp is helpful for my illness" and "I need hemp to live." I'm making sure we're clear that "proven medicinal purposes" does not translate to the cure that we've been desperately searching for.
I don't think anyone is making the argument "if we don't smoke pot we will never be cured."


how do you abuse lawn mowers?

are you serious?
I believe you were the one who said "americans will abuse anything" and thinks potato chips should be regulated.


part of the national institute of health. Based on science.
Far cry from "reform our smoke laws so we can enjoy ourselves"

Both websites are biased. My website was also based on science and studies too.

[Danger Bird]

Extremely true.

[BassRevelation1029]

I believe you were the one who said "americans will abuse anything"

lol you took that literally like abusing children

and thinks potato chips should be regulated.
There's nothing wrong with that.

Both websites are biased. My website was also based on science and studies too.
Take time to juxtapose the context of the two links. The link you posted dealt with the common myths of the drug, none of which I expressed. I did say it has affects on the brain, but not serious brain damage. If you look the two studies even agree in some places.

[UmphreysHead]

lol you took that literally like abusing children

There's nothing wrong with that.
If you're going to tell me that potato chips need to be regulated, then yeah I'm going to take it as you talking about absolutely everything.


Take time to juxtapose the context of the two links. The link you posted dealt with the common myths of the drug, none of which I expressed. I did say it has affects on the brain, but not serious brain damage. If you look the two studies even agree in some places.
Part of the page that I gave dealt with some of the "myths" that were talked about on your page.

I was doing it to show that pro and con pages have conflicting data so we can't entirely be sure which one to believe.

[combustion07]

BassRevelation1029, I've never been so pissed off by what people say on the internet in my life. Quit with your stupid opinions that don't make sense.

[BassRevelation1029]

Part of the page that I gave dealt with some of the "myths" that were talked about on your page.

I was doing it to show that pro and con pages have conflicting data so we can't entirely be sure which one to believe.
However, as I just said, there was no conflicting data between the two links.

BassRevelation1029, I've never been so pissed off by what people say on the internet in my life. Quit with your stupid opinions that don't make sense.
show me why my opinion is stupid and I will stop arguing.

[Danger Bird]

You're basically arguing against freedom. Adults need to be held responsible for their own health in everyday choices like smoking and potato chips. The government has better and more important things to do than regulate basic everyday behavior, despite your own personal prejudice against marijuana users.

[BassRevelation1029]

You're basically arguing against freedom.

why is this inherently bad? You may not agree with it, but what basis do you have to say I am wrong for arguing against freedom?

Adults need to be held responsible for their own health in everyday choices like smoking and potato chips.
says who?

The government has better and more important things to do
Than take care of its people? A government, ours namely, is a body that has an emphasis on the people. To argue that the government has better things to do than its principle reason of existence is preposterous.

[Danger Bird]

Stop trolling/being facetious/whatever. The government obviously needs to take a role in the lives of its citizens in serious matters but it can't function efficiently if its going to try to step in and control every little thing in everyone's lives. Not even the most totalitarian of regimes have attempted to regulate snacking habits.

[BassRevelation1029]

Stop trolling/being facetious/whatever.

Is this your defense? to simply say I'm trolling? You've done nothing but make baseless claims that you think should be "obvious" because you've never stepped out of your comfortable ideology.

The government obviously needs to take a role in the lives of its citizens in serious matters
I provided reasoning for this. You didn't.

but it can't function efficiently if its going to try to step in and control every little thing in everyone's lives.

Please elaborate on this.

Not to mention, if this was just "another little thing," the government wouldn't concern itself with it.

Not even the most totalitarian of regimes have attempted to regulate snacking habits.
and this line serves what purpose? To imply that regulating is 'totalitarian,' and totalitarian is bad? What a useless appeal.

[Danger Bird]

Please elaborate on this.
I mean just what I say, that the government cannot make itself powerful enough to concern itself with such trifles, especially not in this country where we are having such basic problems with infrastructure. Look at what a disaster it was trying to provide relief after Katrina.

Not to mention, if this was just "another little thing," the government wouldn't concern itself with it.
Great reasoning. Blind trust of the government. They're always looking out for us, right?

and this line serves what purpose? To imply that regulating is 'totalitarian,' and totalitarian is bad? What a useless appeal.

This line doesn't imply that being totalitarian is bad at all, I'm saying that not even those concerned with total control could possibly imagine controlling such trivial elements of people's lives in a practical manner, especially when it serves basically no purpose for the greater good of society.

[BassRevelation1029]

I mean just what I say
you said "can't function efficiently." I want to know what you mean by this

Great reasoning. Blind trust of the government. They're always looking out for us, right?
its not a "little thing" to the government who gives it a great deal of attention.

look, you made the same reasoning:
The government obviously needs to take a role in the lives of its citizens in serious matters
this is a serious matter to the government. They feel they must take a role.

This line doesn't imply that being totalitarian is bad at all, I'm saying that not even those concerned with total control could possibly imagine controlling such trivial elements of people's lives in a practical manner

again, 'trivial' is subjective. Its not trivial to the government

especially when it serves basically no purpose for the greater good of society.
its directly in favor of the greater good. Or so they can argue.

[combustion07]

show me why my opinion is stupid and I will stop arguing.

Is there anyway I can quote every post you've made in this thread?

[Dave de Sylvia]

Its not trivial to the government
You keep invoking the government. You don't seem to have addressed the question of whether or not the government should legislate in this matter to begin with.

[132WalrusesInMexico]

I work in one of the most liberal cities in the US. The only thing that happens if you're caught with pot here is you get a $25 civil infraction fee.

I don't smoke, but I'm all for legalizing it.

[Sleep]

i don't smoke weed anymore because it makes me really anxious (i prefer mushrooms), and "lolz420!!" stoners can piss me off, but i am completely and utterly FOR the legalisation of marijuana. it seemed like we were heading down that road years ago, but now with the harper government, canada seems to be going in the wrong direction. demonising marijuana has nothing to do with its effects (if that were so, alcohol and tobacco would be illegal) and everything to do with the people that tend to use it.

when i used to smoke weed, i would sit there with my friends in a park having wonderful conversations, not harming a single person, and i would just think to myself "i can't believe people get fined or put in jail for this." it's absolutely ridiculous. i couldn't get my head around how it was a crime.

any argument against the legalisation of marijuana would, logically and for consistency purposes, have to be applied to alcohol as well. unfortunately, we tried that in the 20s, and that turned out to be a complete failure. and still, people think prohibition is the answer to the drug problem (or the answer to the fact that they simply do not like stoners, which is a totally legit reason :rolleyes:), and it boggles my mind. making a substance illegal does not get rid of it, it only creates a black market for it. we have tried this, it has not worked. not only does prohibiton fail to achieve the desired effect of stopping people from using a substance, but it also leads to a whole new litany of problems: dangerous substance use, gang violence, a lack of education for users...

and the people who think marijuana should be kept illegal because it makes kids unmotivated may as well go after video games and television and facebook and the internet and friends and everything else that could possibly ever serve as a distraction from a student becoming a fully productive consumer. in fact, let's legislate set hours of study time or "productive time" every single day as well. kids don't smoke marijuana to become "unmotivated," maybe kids are "unmotivated" so they smoke marijuana (i put "unmotivated" in quotations because straight-A students and jocks and class presidents get high just as often as "drop-outs").

or if we're going to make marijuana illegal because it's "unhealthy," (besides the obvious fact that the criminalisation of alcohol and tobacco would have to follow), why stop there? let's make mcdonalds and taco bell and friggin donuts illegal. unhealthy foods contribute immensely to heart disease, a FAR greater problema and a much more prominent killer in north america than any effect of marijuana use.

[Otherside]

Thanks for the link. I only have one complaint

"a publication of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws"

how many of you would shout and complain if I cited a creationist institution when arguing against evolution?

lol i cant believe no one complained when you posted a link to a government sponsored website talking about marijuana, oh the irony

[Dave de Sylvia]

The government knows what's best for us!

[RNR]

:D I love when people say that and are actually serious.

Even if they did, which they don't. It wouldn't be their place to create and enforce laws to protect us from ourselves.

[BassRevelation1029]

Is there anyway I can quote every post you've made in this thread?
way to back out.
You keep invoking the government.

um no mr. other dude invoked the government. I questioned why he called them wrong for getting into the matter.

let's make mcdonalds and taco bell and friggin donuts illegal. unhealthy foods contribute immensely to heart disease, a FAR greater problema and a much more prominent killer in north america than any effect of marijuana use.
Good idea. Except drug/tobacco use can be harmful with the first use; fatty foods and alcohol require greater use.

Great overall post
lol i cant believe no one complained when you posted a link to a government sponsored website talking about marijuana, oh the irony
:smash:

I'm so glad you caught that

[Der Übermensch]

You keep invoking the government. You don't seem to have addressed the question of whether or not the government should legislate in this matter to begin with.

Well they already have, so isn't that a moot point? The Federal Government has a number of anti-drug statutes in place. In places where drugs of some form or other are semi-legal (California med ganja) although State level there have been instances of federal authorities still coming in and arresting people who were legally allowed to have the stuff on a state level (10th Amendment issue?).
So invoking the federal government DOES matter, as they need to strike down the current statutes that would impede any state level legislation to be properly carried out.

[Danger Bird]

Except drug/tobacco use can be harmful with the first use; fatty foods and alcohol require greater use.

Um, no, actually you could easily kill yourself the first time you use alcohol, whereas it's impossible to OD on marijuana.

this is a serious matter to the government. They feel they must take a role.

What? I thought we were talking about potato chips.

[Dave de Sylvia]

Well they already have, so isn't that a moot point?
Didn't you used to be an anarchist? I think most of what's being discussed here could fall under the heading of moot points, but I would have thought the question of whether it falls under the government's remit to control a particular substance (or control a particular anything) is pretty fundamental.