What do you guys think about the whole legalize it thing...

[C5Allroad]

It'd be heavily controlled, and then another thing to worry about when I'm on the road... Actually. Now that I think about, it already happens here in Miami, I was driving at 9:00PM once, this Lexus is250 pulls up, loud music, and then I start smelling dat kush.

To me this is kind of an eh thing to me. Don't really care if its legalized as long as people aren't under the influence while driving.

[noisyturtle]

I think people are aware of my stance on the matter.

[nubbinator]

It's less dangerous than alcohol, people want to pay taxes on it, and legally growing and selling it in the US brings jobs to the US (even the farm workers are being paid fair wages) and reduces cash flow to gangs and cartels.  It's a no-brainer to me to legalize it even though I doubt I'd use it. 

I do agree about the driving under the influence.  Don't toke and drive and you should be an adult before you use it.

[HoffmanMyster]

I do agree about the driving under the influence.  Don't toke and drive and you should be an adult before you use it.

I also agree with this.  But I have to wonder: why can't we just have a law that says "don't drive like a ****ing moron", and then we don't need to discuss it whenever stuff like this comes up?  Like, you could be totally high and still drive better than some people on the roads.  Why can't we just make terrible driving illegal?

[nubbinator]

Oh, I forgot, the one real concern is that it can be an environmental stressor for mental illness.  That said, meth is by far the #1 drug I see people used that got them really ****ed up mentally.  Very few of the conservatees I work with were potheads only.  So I am waiting to see if Colorado has an uptick in mental illness, but, overall, I support legalization.  It's a stupid thing that should never have been started in the first place.

[hwood34]

And the insane amount being spent on the war on drugs that hasn't worked in the slightest and has only succeeded in putting minor offenders in jail for insane amounts of time, costing us even more money

[heedpantsnow]

I say legalize.  Pretty much everything.  Tax the heck out of it, and spend half the money from enforcement and incarceration before on rehab.  Too much money going to fund cartels and criminals in other countries.  Yes some other countries might not like it in the short term, but hopefully it would benefit them as well in terms of less $$$ to cartels.

Maybe I don't understand the issues around driving while high.  Just don't do it.

[demik]

I do agree about the driving under the influence.  Don't toke and drive and you should be an adult before you use it.

I also agree with this.  But I have to wonder: why can't we just have a law that says "don't drive like a ****ing moron", and then we don't need to discuss it whenever stuff like this comes up?  Like, you could be totally high and still drive better than some people on the roads.  Why can't we just make terrible driving illegal?

yes. like the whole no cell phone ****.

still have idiots eating, putting on make up, reading, HOLDING THEIR PHONE TALKING ON SPEAKER.


how about people just ****ing drive and not do multiple things? can we try that?

[noisyturtle]

I would actually say I am more for restricted sale, rather than full legalization. Do you realize that since legalization in WA medical marijuana has become a taxable commodity, which means that patients that legitimately benefit from it who didn't pay any taxes on it now have to pay a 75% tax? Not only patients, but growers and medical dispensaries as well now are required to pay the same 75% tax as recreational stores while still keeping their prices affordable for long-term patients. And I'll let you in on something else, that's not sustainable for growers and medical dispensaries unless they increase their prices to match the tax and still walk away in the black.

If there is full legalization, there must be a separation between recreational and medical legislation or a lot of sick people won't be able to afford their medicine.

[HoffmanMyster]

Tax the heck out of it

Everybody says this, and I have to disagree.  Why should we tax people extra for wanting to have fun in a way that's slightly different from how "everyone else" does it?  Taxing behavior has never jumped out to me as the best solution.  If something truly is bad, there has to be a better way to "convince" people to stop it (or, yknow, just let 'em make their own bad decisions).  And if it's not an awful thing, then why should people be punished for doing it?

[dorkvader]

It's less dangerous than alcohol,

This is a poor argument for the legalization of marijuana and an excellent argument for bringing back the 18'th amendment.

Tax the heck out of it

Everybody says this, and I have to disagree.  Why should we tax people extra for wanting to have fun in a way that's slightly different from how "everyone else" does it? 

Agree. Sin tax makes as much sense as blue laws. I prefer my church and state separated tyvm.

[heedpantsnow]

I would actually say I am more for restricted sale, rather than full legalization. Do you realize that since legalization in WA medical marijuana has become a taxable commodity, which means that patients that legitimately benefit from it who didn't pay any taxes on it now have to pay a 75% tax? Not only patients, but growers and medical dispensaries as well now are required to pay the same 75% tax as recreational stores while still keeping their prices affordable for long-term patients. And I'll let you in on something else, that's not sustainable for growers and medical dispensaries unless they increase their prices to match the tax and still walk away in the black.

If there is full legalization, there must be a separation between recreational and medical legislation or a lot of sick people won't be able to afford their medicine.

Well that sortof sucks for them but then again my healthcare prices have skyrocketed since Obamacare came on the scene, paired with a lower limit for how much I can reimburse.  My point is not to cry but to say that rising prices on stuff is part of the game and in everything there is some portion (hopefully small) that is going to get screwed over.

[nubbinator]

It's less dangerous than alcohol,

This is a poor argument for the legalization of marijuana and an excellent argument for bringing back the 18'th amendment.

I disagree, but if you're going to state that, you can also argue that it's less dangerous than many commonly prescribed medications and tobacco.  It's also less addictive than tobacco.  The legalization of any substance like that should be based upon the science.  Marijuana was not made illegal because of any real science about it being bad, it was done so because of racism, a man's attempt to make a name for himself, and the "reefer madness" moral panic.  Current studies show its side effects to be less harmful than tobacco while also having more positive effects.  No science backs it up as being a scheduled drug, let alone a Schedule 1 drug.  The fact that it's a Schedule 1 drug while meth and oxy are Schedule 2 is a joke.

That said, I think the other points I made are equally important and more likely to convince some people. 

If you want to crack down on harmful drugs, crack down on legally prescribed pain pills and anti-anxiety meds.  People don't need a doctor prescribing them what amounts to heroin for BS reasons and your suburban yuppie housewives (or many others for that matter) don't need that Xanax and red wine.  Those two cause far more harm and problems to society than marijuana and they're legal.

[demik]

It's less dangerous than alcohol,

I disagree, but if you're going to state that, you can also argue that it's less dangerous than many commonly prescribed medications and tobacco.  It's also less addictive than tobacco.  The legalization of any substance like that should be based upon the science.  Marijuana was not made illegal because of any real science about it being bad, it was done so because of racism, a man's attempt to make a name for himself, and the "reefer madness" moral panic.  Current studies show it's side effects to be less harmful than tobacco while also having more positive effects.  No science backs it up as being a scheduled drug, let alone a Schedule 1 drug.  The fact that it's a Schedule 1 drug while meth and oxy are Schedule 2 is a joke.

That said, I think the other points I made are equally important and more likely to convince some people. 

If you want to crack down on harmful drugs, crack down on legally prescribed pain pills and anti-anxiety meds.  People don't need a doctor prescribing them what amounts to heroin for BS reasons and your suburban yuppie housewives (or many others for that matter) don't need that Xanax and red wine.  Those two cause far more harm and problems to society than marijuana and they're legal.

nubs too high to quote and reply right.

checkmate, stoners.

[demik]

how the **** did i manage that?!

[nubbinator]

how the **** did i manage that?!

demik gonna mock nub's posting

[demik]

sometimes i wonder if i'm retarded

[ConscienceDrop]

sometimes i wonder if i'm retarded

i don't

[lightsout714]

I don't agree with it. Sure you can get it now easily if you want it. But this makes it that more likely for young people to get into it. I don't feel it's harmless like many try to say. It commonly leads to other drugs and if not that often hinders a persons drive, goals, etc. Not all people of course there will always be the exceptions. The whole medical thing is a joke anyways. 99% of the people I have met or known with cards got them to get high.

All that said I live in Oregon we just voted it legal the other day.

[demik]

sometimes i wonder if i'm retarded

i don't

well nobody ****ing asked you, did they?

[HoffmanMyster]

It commonly leads to other drugs

Ever wondered why? When every "drug" is punished the same amount, it's more tempting to go further. Weed being legal wouldn't make more people do hard stuff, it would keep people at the weed stage because it's legal.

(I'm using absolutes, but obviously that's not the case)

[nubbinator]

sometimes i wonder if i'm retarded

It commonly leads to other drugs

Only that's a total myth.  Aside from that Times article, there are a plethora of studies showing the same thing.  Calling marijuana a gateway drug is like calling cars suicide machines.  A few people may end up doing something that kills them or gets them addicted to something else, but they're in the minority and there's no causal effect.

Alcohol is more highly correlated with heavy drug use. 

[lightsout714]

It commonly leads to other drugs

Ever wondered why? When every "drug" is punished the same amount, it's more tempting to go further. Weed being legal wouldn't make more people do hard stuff, it would keep people at the weed stage because it's legal.

(I'm using absolutes, but obviously that's not the case)

I don't personally agree with this. I think they just want to experiment with something different. Just like when a kid gets drunk and decides pot could be fun too.

[demik]

It commonly leads to other drugs

Ever wondered why? When every "drug" is punished the same amount, it's more tempting to go further. Weed being legal wouldn't make more people do hard stuff, it would keep people at the weed stage because it's legal.

(I'm using absolutes, but obviously that's not the case)

well, weed does nothing for me. im afraid only harder drugs would work. or maybe i THINK it does nothing for me because im really high.

point is, can't do harder drugs as im terrified of becoming addicted.

[noisyturtle]

I would actually say I am more for restricted sale, rather than full legalization. Do you realize that since legalization in WA medical marijuana has become a taxable commodity, which means that patients that legitimately benefit from it who didn't pay any taxes on it now have to pay a 75% tax? Not only patients, but growers and medical dispensaries as well now are required to pay the same 75% tax as recreational stores while still keeping their prices affordable for long-term patients. And I'll let you in on something else, that's not sustainable for growers and medical dispensaries unless they increase their prices to match the tax and still walk away in the black.

If there is full legalization, there must be a separation between recreational and medical legislation or a lot of sick people won't be able to afford their medicine.

Well that sortof sucks for them but then again my healthcare prices have skyrocketed since Obamacare came on the scene, paired with a lower limit for how much I can reimburse.  My point is not to cry but to say that rising prices on stuff is part of the game and in everything there is some portion (hopefully small) that is going to get screwed over.

So you are saying people who can't afford to pay for something they need for cancer treatment or seizures should be in the same category as people who just want to get baked on a Friday night legally?

[HoffmanMyster]

It commonly leads to other drugs

Ever wondered why? When every "drug" is punished the same amount, it's more tempting to go further. Weed being legal wouldn't make more people do hard stuff, it would keep people at the weed stage because it's legal.

(I'm using absolutes, but obviously that's not the case)

I don't personally agree with this. I think they just want to experiment with something different. Just like when a kid gets drunk and decides pot could be fun too.

Well I don't know what's in the minds of all the kids. But I'm pretty sure that if you're the kind of kid to smoke some pot because it's legal and then try something way more serious just for fun, you probably would have done the same thing if weed were illegal. There's obviously no way to prove that. But my point is that kids make dumb choices all the time and I don't think that making this legal would make that worse.

[lightsout714]

sometimes i wonder if i'm retarded

Show Image

It commonly leads to other drugs

Only that's a total myth.  Aside from that Times article, there are a plethora of studies showing the same thing.  Calling marijuana a gateway drug is like calling cars suicide machines.  A few people may end up doing something that kills them or gets them addicted to something else, but they're in the minority and there's no causal effect.

Alcohol is more highly correlated with heavy drug use.

I could care less about some study. I'm talking about what I saw with my own eyes. In my own life. I would bet that about 90% of people start with pot before they do any harder drugs. It's rare that someone would get high for the first time on meth or crack. Weed gets your foot in the door.

Of course everyone has an opinion I'm just stating mine from what I've seen in my own life and people around me.

[HoffmanMyster]

sometimes i wonder if i'm retarded

Show Image

It commonly leads to other drugs

Only that's a total myth.  Aside from that Times article, there are a plethora of studies showing the same thing.  Calling marijuana a gateway drug is like calling cars suicide machines.  A few people may end up doing something that kills them or gets them addicted to something else, but they're in the minority and there's no causal effect.

Alcohol is more highly correlated with heavy drug use.

I could care less about some study. I'm talking about what I saw with my own eyes. In my own life. I would bet that about 90% of people start with pot before they do any harder drugs. It's rare that someone would get high for the first time on meth or crack. Weed gets your foot in the door.

Of course everyone has an opinion I'm just stating mine from what I've seen in my own life and people around me.

A square is always a rectangle but a rectangle isn't necessary a square.

Correlation, causation, blah blah blah.

[lightsout714]

sometimes i wonder if i'm retarded

Show Image

It commonly leads to other drugs

Only that's a total myth.  Aside from that Times article, there are a plethora of studies showing the same thing.  Calling marijuana a gateway drug is like calling cars suicide machines.  A few people may end up doing something that kills them or gets them addicted to something else, but they're in the minority and there's no causal effect.

Alcohol is more highly correlated with heavy drug use.

I could care less about some study. I'm talking about what I saw with my own eyes. In my own life. I would bet that about 90% of people start with pot before they do any harder drugs. It's rare that someone would get high for the first time on meth or crack. Weed gets your foot in the door.

Of course everyone has an opinion I'm just stating mine from what I've seen in my own life and people around me.

A square is always a rectangle but a rectangle isn't necessary a square.

Correlation, causation, blah blah blah.

Ok

[nubbinator]

I could care less about some study. I'm talking about what I saw with my own eyes. In my own life. I would bet that about 90% of people start with pot before they do any harder drugs. It's rare that someone would get high for the first time on meth or crack. Weed gets your foot in the door.

Of course everyone has an opinion I'm just stating mine from what I've seen in my own life and people around me.

I mean, correlation=causation, amiright?  And **** what scientific studies have shown, my own personal anecdotes are more relevant than what studies have shown.  It's not like they have actual statistical significance in their studies and have controls to eliminate confounding variables or anything.  My experience, as wrong as it may be, is right because I believe it, even though the science out there contradicts it.

[lightsout714]

I could care less about some study. I'm talking about what I saw with my own eyes. In my own life. I would bet that about 90% of people start with pot before they do any harder drugs. It's rare that someone would get high for the first time on meth or crack. Weed gets your foot in the door.

Of course everyone has an opinion I'm just stating mine from what I've seen in my own life and people around me.

I mean, correlation=causation, amiright?  And **** what scientific studies have shown, my own personal anecdotes are more relevant than what studies have shown.  It's not like they have actual statistical significance in their studies and have controls to eliminate confounding variables or anything.  My experience, as wrong as it may be, is right because I believe it, even though the science out there contradicts it.

I feel like studies are not always accurate because people are not always honest. Things get skewed etc. Again I'm just going by life experience. I prefer that to what some suit wants to tell me in a university.

But I don't really think this can ever be proven either way because like stated above a person who is willing to try pot is already much more likely to try something else. So is it the weed or the person?

[heedpantsnow]

I would actually say I am more for restricted sale, rather than full legalization. Do you realize that since legalization in WA medical marijuana has become a taxable commodity, which means that patients that legitimately benefit from it who didn't pay any taxes on it now have to pay a 75% tax? Not only patients, but growers and medical dispensaries as well now are required to pay the same 75% tax as recreational stores while still keeping their prices affordable for long-term patients. And I'll let you in on something else, that's not sustainable for growers and medical dispensaries unless they increase their prices to match the tax and still walk away in the black.

If there is full legalization, there must be a separation between recreational and medical legislation or a lot of sick people won't be able to afford their medicine.

Well that sortof sucks for them but then again my healthcare prices have skyrocketed since Obamacare came on the scene, paired with a lower limit for how much I can reimburse.  My point is not to cry but to say that rising prices on stuff is part of the game and in everything there is some portion (hopefully small) that is going to get screwed over.

So you are saying people who can't afford to pay for something they need for cancer treatment or seizures should be in the same category as people who just want to get baked on a Friday night legally?

I've been on drugs for epilepsy. Not once did my doc ever say pot was required. I've known a lot of folks with cancer. Not one of them was ever prescribed pot. I'm not a doctor, but I think that the number of cases where a patient had to use pot, with no alternative, might be pretty low. So yes let's screw those people or make some special concession or tax exemption for them. Like I said I would try to minimize it but there's always someone who gets screwed in pretty much any new program/law/initiative.

[HoffmanMyster]

sometimes i wonder if i'm retarded

Show Image

It commonly leads to other drugs

Only that's a total myth.  Aside from that Times article, there are a plethora of studies showing the same thing.  Calling marijuana a gateway drug is like calling cars suicide machines.  A few people may end up doing something that kills them or gets them addicted to something else, but they're in the minority and there's no causal effect.

Alcohol is more highly correlated with heavy drug use.

I could care less about some study. I'm talking about what I saw with my own eyes. In my own life. I would bet that about 90% of people start with pot before they do any harder drugs. It's rare that someone would get high for the first time on meth or crack. Weed gets your foot in the door.

Of course everyone has an opinion I'm just stating mine from what I've seen in my own life and people around me.

A square is always a rectangle but a rectangle isn't necessary a square.

Correlation, causation, blah blah blah.

Ok

Do you even realize the logical fallacy?

[heedpantsnow]

I could care less about some study. I'm talking about what I saw with my own eyes. In my own life. I would bet that about 90% of people start with pot before they do any harder drugs. It's rare that someone would get high for the first time on meth or crack. Weed gets your foot in the door.

Of course everyone has an opinion I'm just stating mine from what I've seen in my own life and people around me.

I mean, correlation=causation, amiright?  And **** what scientific studies have shown, my own personal anecdotes are more relevant than what studies have shown.  It's not like they have actual statistical significance in their studies and have controls to eliminate confounding variables or anything.  My experience, as wrong as it may be, is right because I believe it, even though the science out there contradicts it.

I feel like studies are not always accurate because people are not always honest. Things get skewed etc. Again I'm just going by life experience. I prefer that to what some suit wants to tell me in a university.

But I don't really think this can ever be proven either way because like stated above a person who is willing to try pot is already much more likely to try something else. So is it the weed or the person?

I'm a bit pessimistic but it often seems like it's easy to design a research project that proves whatever theory you want, often depending on who is paying for it.

[lightsout714]

sometimes i wonder if i'm retarded

Show Image

It commonly leads to other drugs

Only that's a total myth.  Aside from that Times article, there are a plethora of studies showing the same thing.  Calling marijuana a gateway drug is like calling cars suicide machines.  A few people may end up doing something that kills them or gets them addicted to something else, but they're in the minority and there's no causal effect.

Alcohol is more highly correlated with heavy drug use.

I could care less about some study. I'm talking about what I saw with my own eyes. In my own life. I would bet that about 90% of people start with pot before they do any harder drugs. It's rare that someone would get high for the first time on meth or crack. Weed gets your foot in the door.

Of course everyone has an opinion I'm just stating mine from what I've seen in my own life and people around me.

A square is always a rectangle but a rectangle isn't necessary a square.

Correlation, causation, blah blah blah.

Ok

Do you even realize the logical fallacy?

Let's hear it.

[lightsout714]

I could care less about some study. I'm talking about what I saw with my own eyes. In my own life. I would bet that about 90% of people start with pot before they do any harder drugs. It's rare that someone would get high for the first time on meth or crack. Weed gets your foot in the door.

Of course everyone has an opinion I'm just stating mine from what I've seen in my own life and people around me.

I mean, correlation=causation, amiright?  And **** what scientific studies have shown, my own personal anecdotes are more relevant than what studies have shown.  It's not like they have actual statistical significance in their studies and have controls to eliminate confounding variables or anything.  My experience, as wrong as it may be, is right because I believe it, even though the science out there contradicts it.

I feel like studies are not always accurate because people are not always honest. Things get skewed etc. Again I'm just going by life experience. I prefer that to what some suit wants to tell me in a university.

But I don't really think this can ever be proven either way because like stated above a person who is willing to try pot is already much more likely to try something else. So is it the weed or the person?

I'm a bit pessimistic but it often seems like it's easy to design a research project that proves whatever theory you want, often depending on who is paying for it.

I do agree with this. Not that I'm saying said study was biased.

[HoffmanMyster]

sometimes i wonder if i'm retarded

Show Image

It commonly leads to other drugs

Only that's a total myth.  Aside from that Times article, there are a plethora of studies showing the same thing.  Calling marijuana a gateway drug is like calling cars suicide machines.  A few people may end up doing something that kills them or gets them addicted to something else, but they're in the minority and there's no causal effect.

Alcohol is more highly correlated with heavy drug use.

I could care less about some study. I'm talking about what I saw with my own eyes. In my own life. I would bet that about 90% of people start with pot before they do any harder drugs. It's rare that someone would get high for the first time on meth or crack. Weed gets your foot in the door.

Of course everyone has an opinion I'm just stating mine from what I've seen in my own life and people around me.

A square is always a rectangle but a rectangle isn't necessary a square.

Correlation, causation, blah blah blah.

Ok

Do you even realize the logical fallacy?

Let's hear it.

:blank:  it's that correlation does not equal causation. Yet your entire argument depends on that being the case.

[nubbinator]

I feel like studies are not always accurate because people are not always honest. Things get skewed etc. Again I'm just going by life experience. I prefer that to what some suit wants to tell me in a university.

But I don't really think this can ever be proven either way because like stated above a person who is willing to try pot is already much more likely to try something else. So is it the weed or the person?

I'm not even going to bother responding any more than this to you because it's obvious that you have let your own biases cloud your vision.  When you cannot accept what replicated studies have said, you're deliberately choosing to remain ignorant.  That's the number one problem in the US today, people refusing to accept the data and instead relying on their own life experiences.  Guess what, your anecdotes are statistically worthless.

[lightsout714]

sometimes i wonder if i'm retarded

Show Image

It commonly leads to other drugs

Only that's a total myth.  Aside from that Times article, there are a plethora of studies showing the same thing.  Calling marijuana a gateway drug is like calling cars suicide machines.  A few people may end up doing something that kills them or gets them addicted to something else, but they're in the minority and there's no causal effect.

Alcohol is more highly correlated with heavy drug use.

I could care less about some study. I'm talking about what I saw with my own eyes. In my own life. I would bet that about 90% of people start with pot before they do any harder drugs. It's rare that someone would get high for the first time on meth or crack. Weed gets your foot in the door.

Of course everyone has an opinion I'm just stating mine from what I've seen in my own life and people around me.

A square is always a rectangle but a rectangle isn't necessary a square.

Correlation, causation, blah blah blah.

Ok

Do you even realize the logical fallacy?

Let's hear it.

:blank:  it's that correlation does not equal causation. Yet your entire argument depends on that being the case.

I had not originally read the link from Time which I just did. Can't say I disagree with their opinion.

But for me I do feel that is weed is legal. Young people may be more inclined to try it. Maybe some that would not have before. Now since they have already crossed that bridge something a little different may sound interesting.

Or maybe just weed use on its own. People that may not have messed with it while it was legal may become users now that it is more socially accepted.

[lightsout714]

I feel like studies are not always accurate because people are not always honest. Things get skewed etc. Again I'm just going by life experience. I prefer that to what some suit wants to tell me in a university.

But I don't really think this can ever be proven either way because like stated above a person who is willing to try pot is already much more likely to try something else. So is it the weed or the person?

I'm not even going to bother responding any more than this to you because it's obvious that you have let your own biases cloud your vision.  When you cannot accept what replicated studies have said, you're deliberately choosing to remain ignorant.  That's the number one problem in the US today, people refusing to accept the data and instead relying on their own life experiences.  Guess what, your anecdotes are statistically worthless.

Maybe your lack of life experience in this area means you have to rely on some study.

Anyways the study says there is a huge correlation between pot use and heavy drug use. They go hand in hand. No one can really prove that if a person had never smoked weed they would have never tried hard drugs. So can this even be answered?

My point that I originally was trying to make is that I feel that legalizing weed does not help the current drug epidemic in this country.

[HoffmanMyster]

I feel like studies are not always accurate because people are not always honest. Things get skewed etc. Again I'm just going by life experience. I prefer that to what some suit wants to tell me in a university.

But I don't really think this can ever be proven either way because like stated above a person who is willing to try pot is already much more likely to try something else. So is it the weed or the person?

I'm not even going to bother responding any more than this to you because it's obvious that you have let your own biases cloud your vision.  When you cannot accept what replicated studies have said, you're deliberately choosing to remain ignorant.  That's the number one problem in the US today, people refusing to accept the data and instead relying on their own life experiences.  Guess what, your anecdotes are statistically worthless.

Maybe your lack of life experience in this area means you have to rely on some study.

)

Dude. Science is not some crutch for the inexperienced.

[nubbinator]

I wish I could be as blissfully ignorant as you lightsout.  And, just for the record, I have no horse in this race, I just like to make informed decisions based upon available data.  Anecdote ≠ data.

And since you say there is a huge correlation, prove it.  The data will not back you up.  Like Hoff said, science is not a crutch for lack of life experience, it is an aggregate that has controls and has a large enough data set to be statistically significant. Your life experiences, as important as they are in forming you, are not data.

[IvanIvanovich]

Legalize everything. Let people darwin award themselves out of existence. Winning all around.

[singaporean123]

I'm planning to make a visit to America some day and enjoy a whole month of vacation then.

I would be really happy if I could get high on some oregano

[IvanIvanovich]

Don't worry... someone will sell you grass clipping from the front yard at a bargain.

[noisyturtle]

I'm planning to make a visit to America some day and enjoy a whole month of vacation then.

I would be really happy if I could get high on some oregano

That reminds me of when I was a young street tuft in Boston. There was this moss that grew on the back wall of the bodega near my dad's house that looked quite a lot like preground bud when you let it dry out. We used to put a pinch of actual dank into a bag of dry moss to make it smell like ganj and then sell it to the Harvard and MIT students. Best part is some of them actually came back to buy more )

[tp4tissue]

we already lose billions of man hours to call of duty...

we're losing to every other nation in educational standards..


If we allow drug induced entertainment...


I am at a loss as to who's going to hold down the fort...  I've seen pot heads fight.. most of them are not at capacity beyond graphics designer, musician, professional pothead, now send these guys into war... idk..

[Findecanor]

My stance on marijuana is that it should be fully legal to ingest but not to smoke outside of specialized rooms and areas.
It is the act of smoking among non-users that is immoral, because then you impose your drug upon others. You never see such a thing as a "considerate smoker" - because if they were then they would not smoke where you would be able to see them or smell their smoke, now would you ...
Yes, I based this opinion first on tobacco, which should be outlawed by the same reason.

E-cigs are OK because they do not expose others to vapour.. For some strange reason e-cigs are not entirely legal over where I live, which is something that needs to be changed.
Are there E-cigarettes with marijuana? I don't mind if you use them, lick "magic" lollipops and eat "magic" brownies as long as you don't give them to others without telling what they are.

Marijuana was not made illegal because of any real science about it being bad, it was done so because of racism, a man's attempt to make a name for himself, and the "reefer madness" moral panic.

I believe it is a bit of both. It is not outlawed just in the USA, you know.
There is real science against marijuana that shows that some people suffer from psychotic episodes from the drug, while others don't.

If you want to crack down on harmful drugs, crack down on legally prescribed pain pills and anti-anxiety meds. 

I agree absolutely. Those are prescribed too liberally over here as well.

I have once been prescribed at the same time both pain killers and anti-anxiety meds that contained barbiturates ...  I have also been prescribed two other different drugs that shouldn't be taken together - and those two from the same doctor.
You always need to read the documentation on the drugs yourself to figure out if and how to take them. You need to realize that your health is your own responsibility and that doctors are only ordinary infallible people like the rest of us.
People die from inappropriate medication. Just read up on Heath Ledger ...

I am at a loss as to who's going to hold down the fort...  I've seen pot heads fight.. most of them are not at capacity beyond graphics designer, musician, professional pothead, now send these guys into war... idk..

I'd bet that many laws and policies in the USA are based on the idea of being able to provide soldiers to the military.

[paicrai]

looks like this thread needs some kush to relakz

[saint_james]

Legalize everything. Let people darwin award themselves out of existence. Winning all around.

^^^this^^^