Drugs Are Bad, M'Kay?

[Linaze]

I don't care if it is or isn't possible politically, I just want to hear your opinion.

 

[Pyritie]

My opinion is indifference

 

[Fussiler1]

I say yes, legalize cannabis. Why?

• Because it's not nearly as dangerous as some people seem to believe, and the vast majority does not get addicted after doing it once, twice or even five times.
• If alcohol is legal, shouldn't cannabis, which has not at all caused as much harm as alcohol, be legal as well, according to the laws of logic?
• Because it would be a punch in the face on the organized criminality around the world, since a large part of their income would be lost.
• Finally because this way people wouldn't as easily get in touch with the heaver and the actually dangerous drugs.

Well?

Is this thread because you're possibly a Rasta and possibly a Bob Marley fan?
Also, I suppose people would generalize this as 'drugs' and then want more dangerous stuff legalized.
But hey, at least weed's legal in the Netherlands,

 

[Linaze]

I'm not a rasta, and not a Bob Marley fan at all (even though his face is on my current avatar).

 

[Riptokus]

It already is legal for medical purposes where I live.

I am curious as to why you compare it to alcohol, when it's much more comparable to cigarettes.

My wife gets physically ill when she is around marijuana smokers, I get physically ill when I am around tobacco smokers. We react badly to some of the junk in that stuff.

Both groups have people who don't respect the air of others. Both groups leave their trash laying around.

Alcoholics are generally much nicer than these two groups of people, because at least alcoholics generally clean up their messes after the fact. Smokers of those two kinds though, trash is left over to rot for years as a general rule after they come around, and while less visible, is much more common.

If you doubt this, observe 5 groups of alcoholics drinking, 5 groups of smokers smoking, and 5 groups of tokers toking.

The smokers and tokers litter many more pieces of trash per individual than the drinkers.

So don't bash the drinkers with your pot-loving ways, bash the smokers instead!

 

[Fussiler1]

I'm not a rasta, and not a Bob Marley fan at all (even though his face is on my current avatar).

Ah, sorry, my bad.

 

[Linaze]

I shouldn't bash the drinkers, even if a large part of crime commited is caused indirectly by alcohol?
I guess the above will lead to -> "Smoking weed causes a lot of crime as well" - Not counting possesion or selling, not really, stoned persons do not go out and fight each other nor do they drive like ducks.

 

[Mechanical Man]

It makes no sense to criminalize some harmless plant. I mean, it doesn't attack and bite me when I go close to it. It can have some good uses. So of course it should be legalized. But for smoking, that's different thing. I don't care if they arrest some people when caught smoking it or having THC or whatever this produces in their body.

 

[Elenai]

Thugs in Columbia are not payed by beer trafficking.

Having a scotch in moderation doesn't cause second hand violation of a pedestrian's airspace, lungs, and health.

Having a beer, doesn't give off the same "area of effect damage" as a joint.

Having too much of both is dangerous. But one is worse than the other for the mere sake of its nature, how it is imbibed, and what it inevitably can lead to when the purpose (the buzz) is gone.

People don't have to drink alcohol to get drunk, or a buzz, many drink for taste. Wine is an example, where for alcohol its purpose is taste. Certain kinds are even very elegant and refined...Wine goes well with chicken, and a lovely dinner with a romantic affair, or a toast at a wedding, or to good health, and the economy around it is stable, doesn't rely on criminal elements, and is civilised.

Smoking pot is disgusting...its only purpose in smoking it is not for taste but for the buzz it provides (medical or not), smoking a joint at a 5 star french restaurant is thoroughly uncouth, taking a deep toke of a bong at a wedding is worse, it is simply uncivilised...

...I need not go on with the fallacy of comparing the two, even at moderate levels of usage.

 

[Linaze]

Well, joints aren't intended for neither weddings nor 5 star french restaurants. I fail to see the problem with 4 friends each taking 1 or 2 joints at someone's home.

 

[Elenai]

Thugs in Columbia are a good enough reason for me.

The cons outweigh the pros exceedingly.

To legalise it would just add yet another piece of massively expensive bureaucracy (paid for by tax payer money! of whom the vast majority disagree with its usage anyway!) that we can't afford, for a negative, uncivilised substance that shouldn't be encouraged in the first place...

It isn't viable, it offers nothing of value for general public use.

...and it is a filthy habit.

 

[HappyTauren]

Strangely, I am with Elenai on this one. That shit fucking STINKS. Yeah, so do cigarettes, but I don't support that shit either! I'd illegalize cigarettes (not cigars though) and anything that has a direct impact on others around (my lungs have gone to hell because I've got a lot of smokers around). I don't even get why people smoke that shit. I mean, what the hell, not only does it stinks, it also does a lot of damage to lungs (not sure about cannabis, but cigarettes do) and it does damage to others' lungs too. Did I mention it stinks goddamn hard? Also I can't imagine going to a restaurant with a huge cloud of cannabis smoke up.

 

[TriggerHappy]

Yes it should be legal.

• It's hardly dangerous, people have been smoking it for their entire lives and only suffer minor consequences but nothing serious.
• The benefits of it outweigh the negative effects (getting hungry, or tired) by far. Music sounds way better, food tastes better and it lets you think about things with more depth. It basically enhances everything.
• It also helps people with insomnia or anxiety disorders and pain.

But lets just forget about how medically beneficial it is for a second. Would it be such a bad thing for it to be available for recreational use? I mean alcohol is far more dangerous, kills people, ruins lives, AND is available for recreational use. And Elenai's argument was that "thugs" in Columbia are getting paid for it. You do know that medical marijuana is grown in USA? Legalizing it would actually help the economy.

Another point Elenai raised was that not everyone drinks alcohol to get drunk, some people do it just for the taste. Who says people don't do that for weed either? High grade weed is actually very tasteful and it varies depending on the strain. As for the people who think it's disgusting and a "nasty habit", there MANY ways of ingesting it, not only smoking. You can put it in food, lollipops, butter... basically anything.

I know someone is going to bring this up, so I might was well get it out of the way. "People who smoke weed are dumbasses". No. Dumbasses who smoke weed are dumbasses. Weed didn't make them that way.

I don't know what else to say. You people who don't believe it should be legal are going to keep thinking that way. It's politically wrong to smoke weed and that's how the government and the news are going to portray it.

 

[Riptokus]

I shouldn't bash the drinkers, even if a large part of crime commited is caused indirectly by alcohol?
I guess the above will lead to -> "Smoking weed causes a lot of crime as well" - Not counting possesion or selling, not really, stoned persons do not go out and fight each other nor do they drive like ducks.

Actually, no, the above would lead to

Smoking cigarettes leads to a lot of crime as well.

After all, it's in every gangster's mouths, in some form, even when alcohol isn't there.

See?

 

[WherewolfTherewolf]

Mind Altering substances in general are idiotic, whether or not this is the governments job to enforce though I really have no opinion, having alcohol and over the counter medications seems a bit hypocritical, but then again there's a lot of hypocritical things about government.

 

[Linaze]

Cigarettes leads to crime because criminals smoke them? I can't see how that makes sense.

 

[Mechanical Man]

Ehh, even most common grass can be smoked... that's not a reason we should banish all grass from earth...

 

[WherewolfTherewolf]

I don't particularly like the "its a plant" argument for weed, just makes the stoners look idiotic and hard to take seriously.

Its not because its grass and it can be smoked, its because the chemical found within it causes undesirable effects and causes addiction. Essentially the law against weed is to protect against addiction (along with many other reasons good or bad).

Arguing that something is natural doesn't mean its any more or less better - and your lungs aren't naturally supposed to inhale anything except air anyways, as you can't breath other gases/vapors.

 

[TwistedImage]

I say yes, legalize cannabis. Why?

• Because it's not nearly as dangerous as some people seem to believe, and the vast majority does not get addicted after doing it once, twice or even five times.
• If alcohol is legal, shouldn't cannabis, which has not at all caused as much harm as alcohol, be legal as well, according to the laws of logic?
• Because it would be a punch in the face on the organized criminality around the world, since a large part of their income would be lost.
• Finally because this way people wouldn't as easily get in touch with the heaver and the actually dangerous drugs.

1. So if you don't get addicted to something after doing it five times it should automatically be legal?
2. Personally, I think alcohol shouldn't be legal, but at least it doesn't stink like weed.
3. Said criminality would no longer be criminal, they could advertise and would, if anything, earn MORE money.
4. Yes, they would. Easier, in fact. If you got a taste of the weak stuff you'd inevitably want stronger.

 

[Elenai]

* It's hardly dangerous, people have been smoking it for their entire lives and only suffer minor consequences but nothing serious.

Hardly? Drug wars good friend, the fact it costs a heck of alot, and it seems to make Riptokus' wife ill just for smelling it. By the way...have you ever gone through a withdrawl? ...it isn't fun.

* The benefits of it outweigh the negative effects (getting hungry, or tired) by far.

...unbiased medical journal proof? I'd say the child labour, and the people getting shot over drug wars is pretty darn bad compared to the 'benefit' of getting a quick jolly.

Music sounds way better, food tastes better and it lets you think about things with more depth. It basically enhances everything.

...when you have to take a drug to enjoy an already perfectly enjoyable life, it is no longer worth living.

* It also helps people with insomnia or anxiety disorders and pain.

So does warm milk, and an asprin...

But lets just forget about how medically beneficial it is for a second. Would it be such a bad thing for it to be available for recreational use?

Yes, the bureaucracy to regulate it would be far too expensive, and the market for it SHOULD NOT be increased, and I as a future tax payer DO NOT want to pay for regulating a stupid addiction that I think is ignorant to even get into. Cigarettes are legal, but there is a bureaucracy to regulate it, and people don't even want those. They serve no purpose, and are negative.

I am not going to pay the consequences for a pothead's selfish joy ride with a plant.

I mean alcohol is far more dangerous, kills people, ruins lives, AND is available for recreational use.

Just be cause water drowns people and we have recreational pools does not mean we should have to legalise the bottling of sewage water just because people want to drink urine, and diarrhea.

PS: OVER use of alcohol causes this, and it is far less corruptive, and has far less "area of effect damage" as I said before in an earlier post.

"Drinking A scotch doesn't invade a pedestrian's lungs with crud, or make his/her clothes stink.

And Elenai's argument was that "thugs" in Columbia are getting paid for it. You do know that medical marijuana is grown in USA? Legalizing it would actually help the economy.

Bureaucracy, Bureaucracy, Bureaucracy...tax payer money to fund it. We do not need another useless agency to spread a negative substance that is useless.

Really, I'll be right down obvious, I don't want my future 10 year old child getting into the crap just because a small minority decided to legalise a useless substance, that I have to pay out of every paycheck to maintain a clogged, inefficient government office that I don't even agree with, my neighbors don't agree with, and the vast majority of doctors and drug-addiction agencies abhor.

It is a stupid investment, that would only benefit a very few people.

And when do you draw the line?...its a slippery slope.

Also: "it'll help the economy"

People who try to legalise gambling casinos and build them use that very same argument.

Let me enlighten you on a fundamental truth: Just because it might bring in tourism or money, doesn't mean it is helpful. For one thing, it is certainly going to be addictive, and for another thing, it will not help the 'real economy', it will only put more money in the hands of a minority few: IE: Make the poor man poorer, and the rich man richer. Just look at any state with casinos and look at the statistics on how the 'helps the economy' flows. It doesn't help the middle class, or the poor, it makes people poor! And destroys lives, destroys culture, and replaces it with a bastardised version of it. "Vegas is fun" But its a hellhole of depravity too, and the house always wins.

Weed isn't going to help diddly squat with the real economy, and will infact, make it far worse, as people pay for the b'cracy, pay for their addictions, and pay for the consequences it brings into their lives, while they grow poor and destitute, addicted to a substance that has long since lost its savour, makes them stink, makes them undesirable, and leaves them with yet another dept to pay that they can't afford! While a select few fat cats get all the wealth! And more lobbyist crap gets flung into office! Along side the stupid b'cracy that they built to regulate it!

Idiocy!

Another point Elenai raised was that not everyone drinks alcohol to get drunk, some people do it just for the taste.

many, let me cite the following country cultures:

Spain, Mexico, the vast majority of South America, Japan, Germany, France, Ireland, parts of Britain and Scotland, Decent hardworking Americans who enjoy a beer in the evening, high class restaurants, decent social events, ...The Vatican.

The problem is...Alcohol was devised and drank because: A) the water was bad, and B) it is somewhat good for you, C) it tastes good.

Too much of it makes you drunk...

Weed on the other hand...is 99% of the time only ever smoked for its high. Weed certainly does not quench your thirst, or provide a clean alternative to bad water...

And there isn't this "Too much" margin. You toke to get high, you don't toke for taste, toke too much, THEN get high. Where as you can drink for taste, but drink too much and get drunk.

Who says people don't do that for weed either? High grade weed is actually very tasteful and it varies depending on the strain. As for the people who think it's disgusting and a "nasty habit", there MANY ways of ingesting it, not only smoking. You can put it in food, lollipops, butter... basically anything.

And some people smoke cigars, lets drop the smoking age to 4...some people eat cats in china, lets start putting it in gummy bears. ...for that matter...lolipops? >_> Good grief how irresponsible...

But really, it doesn't change the whole fact that a bureaucracy will be required, for something that shouldn't even be around anyway, and should be discouraged.

You don't need a join to enjoy life...at-all.

I know someone is going to bring this up, so I might was well get it out of the way. "People who smoke weed are dumbasses". No. Dumbasses who smoke weed are dumbasses. Weed didn't make them that way.

No, just the thought that they were dumb enough to get into it in the first place...

You know, the whole argument presented by those who imbibe this drug is just full of hypocrisy...And I'm getting a rather bit tired of it.

I don't know what else to say. You people who don't believe it should be legal are going to keep thinking that way. It's politically wrong to smoke weed and that's how the government and the news are going to portray it.

For good reason.

 

[Linaze]

Present to me a case of someone who smoked too much and died, not someone who was shot in some drug war, but someone who died directly by smoking. You'll notice when searching that the number of death-cases are extremely low compared to legal stuff such as ciggarettes or alcohol.

It's also worth mentioning that it's not at all as expensive as some might believe, for 15-20$ I got enough for an entire night, far cheaper than going to some club and purchasing alcohol.

OT: Elenai, I take it you are against abortion, prostitution and death help as well?

 

[overload119]

Watch a movie called The Union. It is a documentary that is all about this. Really good.

 

[Zombie]

Because it's not nearly as dangerous as some people seem to believe, and the vast majority does not get addicted after doing it once, twice or even five times.

You can do booze 20 times in a row, you still won't get addicted. It's a custom rather than a physical addiction. All that aside, the real effects of weed can depend on a lot of things, that's why the scientific view on this stuff differs aswell.

If alcohol is legal, shouldn't cannabis, which has not at all caused as much harm as alcohol, be legal as well, according to the laws of logic?

Ban alcohol too. If not, then note the fact that alcohol is harmless, even considered healthy when consumed in sane amounts.

Because it would be a punch in the face on the organized criminality around the world, since a large part of their income would be lost.

They'd just go official with the stuff they have. Would be easier to build a legal business over an already existing field than starting from the zero.

Finally because this way people wouldn't as easily get in touch with the heaver and the actually dangerous drugs.

Nah, it's be a first step to the more dangerous things. People'd start protesting to legalise the heavier stuff aswell, as time goes.

 

[Elenai]

I can only wonder at how much that 15 dollars cost someone... -_-

It doesn't matter if you yourself die or not from pot, what does matter is that it does indeed kill, and harm at some point along the line, destroys social ties, and degrades the surrounding culture. A selfish joy ride doesn't excuse it, especially since quite clearly the investment required in legalising what shouldn't even be a problem to begin with (IE: you shouldn't use it to begin with...) is a poor one at best, and atrociously draining at worst.

And what does abortion, and prostitution have to do with it?

 

[Linaze]

There was a "OT:" in front of the abortion and prostitution thingy I mentioned, and that means it's got little to nothing to do with the topic. What I thought though, was that since you're so heavily against cannabis, it wouldn't surprise me at all if you were against other things liberalists are fighting for.

 

[Elenai]

I am against things not because of party, or politics, but because of what is right.

Forgive me for not entirely noticing the OT:

But I will indeed emphasize, "I don't fight it because it is liberal, I fight it because it is wrong."

 

[WherewolfTherewolf]

What I thought though, was that since you're so heavily against cannabis, it wouldn't surprise me at all if you were against other things liberalists are fighting for.

I would say that a lot of Liberals would not want to be connected with Drugs, the same way a lot of Conservatives would not want to be connected with opposing Gay Marriage.

Politics has been so focused on politics people seem to forget that it is possible to make up your own mind and have your own opinions, and not those fed to you by an organized mob *cough* political party.

 

[Mechanical Man]

I don't particularly like the "its a plant" argument for weed, just makes the stoners look idiotic and hard to take seriously.

Its not because its grass and it can be smoked, its because the chemical found within it causes undesirable effects and causes addiction. Essentially the law against weed is to protect against addiction (along with many other reasons good or bad).

Arguing that something is natural doesn't mean its any more or less better - and your lungs aren't naturally supposed to inhale anything except air anyways, as you can't breath other gases/vapors.

There could be undesirable effects also in more common plants, but not yet discovered, since no one is going to try to smoke every single plant. After all, some people are drugging with inhaling glue, but does this mean that glue should not be avaliable anymore?

Dunno, what you meant with your first paragraph, but I'm not a junkie, I never smoked anything and I don't have plans to smoke any shit in future, I don't support smoking this plant, I hate smokers, but if I like to have cannabis in my garden, because I like the appearance of the plant, there is no reason I can't have them, but I don't intend to smoke it, as people don't smoke their flowers, living walls and other elements of their gardens.

 

[WherewolfTherewolf]

Ah sorry, every time someone starts an argument about Weed, one of the first arguments from those in support (who do smoke the stuff) is almost always:

"Its a plant, it's natural, it can't hurt you, it comes from the earth"

I think this is terrible basis to try and form an argument, as many naturally occurring plants are dangerous - Poison Oak is very dangerous, it's not illegal to smoke it but it's common sense not to. I would think anything that can impair your judgment like weed would be common sense not to smoke, but then again I would think it would be common sense not to drink alcohol either but society proves me wrong there.

 

[Devine]

Realise, Legalise.
I support this.
Edit: Don't call it Ganja for the love of god.

 

[TwistedImage]

OT: Elenai, I take it you are against abortion, prostitution and death help as well?

If you're not against prostitution you are pretty much worthless, sex-addicted scum. I'm done with this topic, gee.

 

[Elenai]

Wait...people are actually FOR legalising prostitution?

...

I give up on humanity.

 

[WherewolfTherewolf]

Well I would think the Prostitutes would be for it, then there's the people that blow all their money on Prostitutes (Lol, their buying STD's), and then of course there's politicians

 

[TheDivineBoss]

Wait...people are actually FOR legalising prostitution?

...

I give up on humanity.

EHEHEHE.

I'll give you a visa so you can visit us, or just spend a night in 020.


And pass the Dutchie on the left hand side please.

 

[Mechanical Man]

Ah sorry, every time someone starts an argument about Weed, one of the first arguments from those in support (who do smoke the stuff) is almost always:

"Its a plant, it's natural, it can't hurt you, it comes from the earth"

I think this is terrible basis to try and form an argument, as many naturally occurring plants are dangerous - Poison Oak is very dangerous, it's not illegal to smoke it but it's common sense not to. I would think anything that can impair your judgment like weed would be common sense not to smoke, but then again I would think it would be common sense not to drink alcohol either but society proves me wrong there.

Of course you won't plant something which is dangerous for the surrounding vicinity and ecosystem. But if you have enough safe place, why not planting Poison Oak, if you really like it. Just it mustn't hurt if somebody would come by. But Cannabis isn't shooting gamma rays.

I'm not against coca either. But I'm against cocaine.

 

[Kimbo]

Congratulations for sharing your illegal activities!
Reported. (doubt they will do shit though =_=)

 

[Panda]

Lovely Kim. Ill go shoot myself now.

 

[Hakeem]

So if you don't get addicted to something after doing it five times it should automatically be legal?

Yes. More precisely, no; everything is legal by default. The question is why any given thing should be illegal.

That said, we now enter this debate on neutral grounds. And I mean neutral grounds.

Personally, I think alcohol shouldn't be legal, but at least it doesn't stink like weed.

Does to me. Alcohol breath is potent. It's not kind at all.

Then again, so is garlic. Taking a crap also makes you stink. You know those people that literally smell like crap but don't smell it themselves because they live with it day in and day out?

Do we outlaw garlic? Pooping? Not bathing? Of course not. Odor has nothing to do with making something illegal.

Basically, "Is smells, therefore (moreso) it should be illegal," does not follow.

Said criminality would no longer be criminal, they could advertise and would, if anything, earn MORE money.

Good for them. Making money. You realize that there is nothing wrong with them making money now that it is legal? You may have, but I had to point it out lest it be lost in the rhetoric.

By the way...have you ever gone through a withdrawl? ...it isn't fun.

What withdrawals? I know nicotine has a reputation for being hard to kick. I'm afraid Zombie.'s account of alcohol is also plausible to me. There are alcoholics anonymous groups and whatnot, but I can't say for sure that that's physical addiction. I don't know if alcohol actually has any withdrawal symptoms.

...unbiased medical journal proof?

The burden of proof is on you. Everything is legal by default, healthy or not. When the question is about whether or not it ought to be illegal, the burden of proof is on the one who says it should be anything other than the default of being legal.

I told you, I meant neutral ground. I don't care what the majority says.

(Though, since it is currently illegal, the burden of proof is currently skewed to rest on the people who must prove it isn't damaging. If oxygen were illegal, for example, it would stay illegal because during the metabolic process, oxygen molecules result in free radicals, which really do tear your cells apart.)

I'd say the child labour, and the people getting shot over drug wars is pretty darn bad compared to the 'benefit' of getting a quick jolly.

If it was legal, there would be no war. Also, [citation needed] on weed being a big "war causing" drug. As far as I know, weed grows pretty much everywhere, so smuggling is highly pointless, though still possibly existing.

...when you have to take a drug to enjoy an already perfectly enjoyable life, it is no longer worth living.

I'm not to sure of this line of logic. While I will also never do any recreational drugs for basically this very reason, I already live a perfectly enjoyable life without a girlfriend.

Yes, the bureaucracy to regulate it

Bureaucracy to regulate what? Being legal means there is no need for regulation. Compared to the millions of dollars spent investigating, confiscating, and disposing of millions of acres of a plant I'm not even sure is worse than any other plant when combusted.

I as a future tax payer

Do you have any idea how much money the government could make if they legalized and taxed weed?

Cigarettes are legal, but there is a bureaucracy to regulate it, and people don't even want those.

No, they are semi-legal. Minors are not allowed to do anything with them. This is where the bureaucratic cost comes from. You argument is against bureaucracy or government, not weed or cigarettes, or alcohol for that matter.

Just be cause water drowns people and we have recreational pools does not mean we should have to legalise the bottling of sewage water just because people want to drink urine, and diarrhea.

Is there even a law against that? As far as I know, there isn't, because then you could get arrested for pissing in a bottle.

We do not need another useless agency to spread a negative substance that is useless.

Like the useless agency that puts ads all over TV to "inform" people about the drugs' negatives?

It is a stupid investment, that would only benefit a very few people.

No, because any old gardener can grow it. The profits would by no means be centralized if it were truly legal.

Some people eat cats in china, lets start putting it in gummy bears. ...for that matter...lolipops?

Missing the point. The point is the plant has many natural uses. What use is a cat in a lollipop? There are uses for the cannabis family besides inhaling the combustion.

Congratulations for sharing your illegal activities!
Reported. (doubt they will do shit though =_=)

Hey! I'm right here! How do you think that makes me feel?


Well, I can't post my points and just close it now can I? <.<

 

[Fussiler1]

Mhm. It's legalized in the Netherlands, and there aren't much negative effects, really.
But it's not like the government gets tons of money of it.
In fact, I believed they didn't even put taxes on it.

 

[Tleno]

Smoking even ordinary cigates in unheathy, I don't even want to talk about the canabis... plus it causes addiction, just like other drugs and alcohol... so its wron, it should be banned and strong alcohol and smoking should be banned too.

 

[Devine]

Smoking even ordinary cigates in unheathy, I don't even want to talk about the canabis... plus it causes addiction, just like other drugs and alcohol... so its wron, it should be banned and strong alcohol and smoking should be banned too.

Canabis is less addictive than alcohol. Have you even tried canabis? It doesn't destroy your liver, doesn't make you (all that) sick in the morning after (most people don't even feel anything). Besides, it's cheaper than alcohol if you compare how high you are for the same amount of money. Yet alcohol is legal and weed isn't. Does that make any sense to you?

 

[Tleno]

Hmmm... you say that... Lcohol should be replaced with canabis?

 

[Devine]

Hmmm... you say that... Lcohol should be replaced with canabis?

No. I'm saying weed should be legalised.

 

[Hakeem]

We ought to stop thinking in terms of legalizing it. The way we should phrase it is, "Cannabis has no reason to be illegal."

 

[TheDivineBoss]

Legalisation of controversial items like the green stuff is only do-able in small countries.

 

[Kimbo]

Canabis is less addictive than alcohol. Have you even tried canabis? It doesn't destroy your liver, doesn't make you (all that) sick in the morning after (most people don't even feel anything). Besides, it's cheaper than alcohol if you compare how high you are for the same amount of money. Yet alcohol is legal and weed isn't. Does that make any sense to you?

No. But it CAN be addictive, it can mentally FUCK you up if you have certain mental vulnerabilities (that are common and most people arnt aware of) which will be doing more damage than alcohol, taking too much will fuck you up (although much like anything) for a short while and make you unpredictable, dangerous, irresponsible or unreliable, some people DONT like the smell, apparently (not fact) it contains a HELL of a lot more tar than a normal cigarette, you also gain alot more weight (munchies) and thus it will cost you more and can ruin your diet. If you become addicted/abuse to it, you will then lose a hella of a lot of weight.

 

[Steel_Stallion]

Well then smoke it responsibly. Point is it isn't much more harmful than a cigarette or alcohol. Depriving those who would smoke it responsibly just because a few idiots can't control themselves isn't a reason to keep it illegal.

And it's not addictive, not in the sense of something like nicotine; any addictions you get are purely psychological. But then again, practically anything can be psychologically addictive.

 

[Devine]

No. But it CAN be addictive, it can mentally FUCK you up if you have certain mental vulnerabilities (that are common and most people arnt aware of) which will be doing more damage than alcohol, taking too much will fuck you up (although much like anything) for a short while and make you unpredictable, dangerous, irresponsible or unreliable, some people DONT like the smell, apparently (not fact) it contains a HELL of a lot more tar than a normal cigarette, you also gain alot more weight (munchies) and thus it will cost you more and can ruin your diet. If you become addicted/abuse to it, you will then lose a hella of a lot of weight.

People with mental vulnerabilities can drink beer but they can't smoke weed? What makes you think/what proof do you have that weed would do more damage than alcohol in that area? Just about anything is addictive and anything will kill you if you consume too much of it. If you drink liters and liters of water, you'll die too. So what's your point, really?
You know what else smells bad? Traditional powerplants. Should we abolish those? Or what about poo and natural gazes? :3
How will weed cost me more than alcohol? I really don't see any logic there. Also, it's pretty damn hard to get addicted to weed.

 

[Elenai]

I've seen alot of people saying "Weed isn't addictive" blah blah blah, etc.

...I issue a challenge.

Stop doing weed, IE: quit cold turkey, for three, to six months.

...or heck, maybe just one month.

Starting now: Today on 3/13/2010

If it is so nonaddictive, and so harmless...surely you can quit cold turkey and not feel a thing.

Six months, three months...one month if you really just can't handle the thought of quitting for so very long...

Lets see if you can do it so easily.

 

[Kimbo]

I've seen alot of people saying "Weed isn't addictive" blah blah blah, etc.

...I issue a challenge.

Stop doing weed, IE: quit cold turkey, for three, to six months.

...or heck, maybe just one month.

Starting now: Today on 3/13/2010

If it is so nonaddictive, and so harmless...surely you can quit cold turkey and not feel a thing.

Six months, three months...one month if you really just can't handle the thought of quitting for so very long...

Lets see if you can do it so easily.

Im sorry..but I do have to say this.
Do YOU know this from personal experience? Like stated, weed is NOT physically addictive, only psychologically, LIKE COFFEE, LIKE VIDEO GAMES, LIKE POSTING IN THIS THREAD. Meaning in most cases to the average user who is addicted to it you will just get a headache for a day or 2 =_=. And no, just because you have tried it once, 2-3-4 times DOESN'T make you addicted to it.