Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum

View Poll Results: Do you think cannabis (marijuana/hashish) should be legal ?

Voters
134. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, there is absolutely no reason to make it illegal

    56 41.79%
  • If tobacco and alcohol are legal, then cannabis should be as well

    29 21.64%
  • Maybe, but we lack scientific evidence to know whether it is nocive or not

    5 3.73%
  • It should be legal only for medical reason (with prescription)

    28 20.90%
  • I am completely against it, but not against tobacco and alcohol

    3 2.24%
  • I would ban it altogether with cigarettes and alcohol

    13 9.70%
  • Don't know

    0 0%
Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 162

Thread: Should cannabis be legal in every country ?

  1. #76
    Regular Member bossel's Avatar
    Join Date
    28-09-03
    Location
    germany
    Posts
    790


    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by Mitsuo Oda
    Marijuana users have been known to become bored with the drug, so they look for a new high.
    Any statistics to support your view?

    Also, marijuana users usually hang out with other marijuana and/or other drug users.
    Do they? Any statistics? Here in Germany, they usually consume marijuana at home.

    You say that "Only a very small amount of marijuana users later step over to harder drugs". Yeah, making it a gateway drug.
    Very funny. Some 5% (IIRC) of marijuana users may try harder drugs later on, very much a gateway, yeah. I see, where you're coming from.

    But an amount is an amount, right?
    Nope. A broad, general statement as you make it is not justified by the numbers. But, hey, to everybody their own definition...

    Don't ask me. For me to know that, I would have to ask every single person in the Netherlands and America, just to get some type of number.
    Nope, just take some official statistics. Although the US statistics are probably flawed by the simple lack of data (& more probably the prejudice of the administration), this would at least give some data to "support" your point.

    I can't see where you pulled out hard drugs from that though. I was just talking about marijuana.
    Nope, you said it's a gateway drug. If you didn't mean hard drugs, what else?
    Marijuana as a gateway drug for marijuana?

    But there is a fair chance that they will.
    There is a fair chance that people who drink alcohol will drive drunk & may cause an accident. Prohibition again?

    If anything, that's an uneducated guess.
    Just because you don't understand how representative statistics or scientific research work, doesn't mean that it's uneducated. Uneducated guess is more what you do, since you don't even have any statistics to prove your point.

    A stat purposely twisted around or exaggerated to prove a point or make it in favor in the way a group or person wants it.
    That's why you should look at peer reviewed scientific sources & eg. not some crappy network like Fox.

  2. #77
    The Great Mitsuo's Avatar
    Join Date
    18-01-06
    Location
    In the computer
    Posts
    235


    Country: United States



    Quote Originally Posted by bossel
    Any statistics to support your view?
    Sure! I would love to!
    -"The risk of using cocaine is estimated to be more than 104 times greater for those who have tried marijuana than for those who have never tried it."
    (Marijuana: Facts Parents Need to Know, National Institute on Drug Abuse)

    gA 2002 SAMHSA report, Initiation of Marijuana Use: Trends, Patterns and Implications, concludes that the younger children are when they first use marijuana, the more likely they are to use cocaine and heroin and become dependent on drugs as adults. The report found that 62 percent of adults age 26 or older who initiated marijuana before they were 15 years old reported that they had used cocaine in their lifetime. More than 9 percent reported they had used heroin and 53.9 percent reported non-medical use of psychotherapeutics. This compares to a 0.6 percent rate of lifetime use of cocaine, a 0.1 percent rate of lifetime use of heroin and a 5.1 percent rate of lifetime non-medical use of psychotherapeutics for those who never used marijuana. Increases in the likelihood of cocaine and heroin use and drug dependence are also apparent for those who initiate use of marijuana at any later age.g

    Quote Originally Posted by bossel
    Do they? Any statistics? Here in Germany, they usually consume marijuana at home.
    Yeah, actually that's just my conclusion based on inferences in my area and observations. So sorry, no Stats there. (Yeah, I know, bad to assume that all countries are like that). But I would like to add, and this should be common sense. That users are more likely to encounter other people that sell or do other drugs. They have to buy it right? So, if they are off buying it, the dealer could say something like "Hey, if you thought that stuff was good, then you'll Love this stuff". I mean, they get the drugs from someone. That means they have a higher potential to get their hands on other drugs. Also, some people are very easily influenced by others. This is due to our social structure where all people that smoke marijuana are identified with all the other drug users, putting them higher at risk through interaction with these people.


    Quote Originally Posted by bossel
    Very funny. Some 5% (IIRC) of marijuana users may try harder drugs later on, very much a gateway, yeah. I see, where you're coming from.
    The FUNNY thing is that you don't realize that there are many different statistics floating around that say something completely different. Tell me, what does IIRC mean anyway? Is that a stat from a small city in Germany?
    Love the sarcasm by the way.

    Quote Originally Posted by bossel
    Nope. A broad, general statement as you make it is not justified by the numbers. But, hey, to everybody their own definition...
    I say YUP. It all goes by how you look at things.

    Quote Originally Posted by bossel
    Nope, just take some official statistics. Although the US statistics are probably flawed by the simple lack of data (& more probably the prejudice of the administration), this would at least give some data to "support" your point.
    Yes, Bossel. But I wouldn't say that the US statistics are more flawed than Germany or anywhere else. But, my point is that statistics are flawed, you can't live and breath every statistic that you read, even if yo think they are scholarly or credible, especially because of the statement you made "(& more probably the prejudice of the administration)". Just look at the Media, they will do what they please. Honestly though, I don't know how the media does things in Germany.


    Quote Originally Posted by bossel
    Nope, you said it's a gateway drug. If you didn't mean hard drugs, what else?
    Marijuana as a gateway drug for marijuana?
    Are you being Serious? Well, If I must.
    This is what I said in my earlier post- "Another thing is that, the people who don't do it because they are afraid of getting caught will start, because they won't be worried about getting charged with possession and ticketed.
    It will create more users if it's legalized"

    OK, I will talk you through this. Right now, and in that statement, I am not and was not talking about "Gateway", nor did I have the word "Gateway" in that sentence. Ok, now that that's out of the way, read it carefully again.
    I will summarize it for you. This was my comment about an earlier statement made by someone in the thread -"People will be less tempted to use because it's easier to get a hold of, and since it won't be against the law, people wouldn't smoke it because that's the real thrill of smoking it, is the fact of getting caught."-
    So to shortly summarize my statement for you- I think that many people avoid doing it because it is illegal. But if it becomes legal, then more people would start because they wouldn't get in trouble. Pending an age limit and etc.

    So now do you see where that statement came from?


    Quote Originally Posted by bossel
    There is a fair chance that people who drink alcohol will drive drunk & may cause an accident. Prohibition again?
    You're right, there is a fair chance of that happening. But why would you want it doubled to a "Great chance" just to add in some marijuana. What next? Ecstasy? Cocaine? It's like adding more and more street debry on the roads that we drive on.
    Ok, imagine if we got rid of alcohol. Do you know how many bars and business's would go out of business? Millions. It would cause an economic disaster.
    Also, if it were legalized, I am not in excess to believe that the tobacco companies, once given the go ahead to commence the growing operations, wouldn't conduct business any differently with marijuana than they have with tobacco.

    Quote Originally Posted by bossel
    Just because you don't understand how representative statistics or scientific research work, doesn't mean that it's uneducated. Uneducated guess is more what you do, since you don't even have any statistics to prove your point.
    Of course I know how they work, and they're a joke. To me you have to take everything, especially representative statistics with a grain of salt. But then again, according to you, I am an uneducated guesser. right? Well, I am safe to say that I am not taken very easily. Which is more of what you do.

    Quote Originally Posted by bossel
    That's why you should look at peer reviewed scientific sources & eg. not some crappy network like Fox.
    Exactly. Mostly every one knows that. No one can trust the Liberal Media. But if you're implying that I look at Fox for my scientific sources then you're mistaken. Because with my post in twististics, you should have realized that I don't believe everything I hear.

    So, in my conclusion to this issue, I obviously don't want it legalized in America. Sabro also made an excellent point on this subject. But if other countries want it legalized then they can be my guest, I can't stop them.

  3. #78
    Regular Member bossel's Avatar
    Join Date
    28-09-03
    Location
    germany
    Posts
    790


    Country: Germany



    Quote Originally Posted by Mitsuo Oda
    -"The risk of using cocaine is estimated to be more than 104 times greater for those who have tried marijuana than for those who have never tried it."
    Ah, good one. Sadly it's DEA propaganda. & it doesn't say very much (actually: nothing) about cause & effect. An IOM report states the following:

    "Because it is the most widely used illicit drug, marijuana is predictably the first illicit drug that most people encounter. Not surprisingly, most users of other illicit drugs used marijuana first.81,82 In fact, most drug users do not begin their drug use with marijuana--they begin with alcohol and nicotine, usually when they are too young to do so legally.82,90"

    There is absolutely no proof for a causal relationship between smoking marijuana & later hard drug abuse.

    That users are more likely to encounter other people that sell or do other drugs. [...] This is due to our social structure where all people that smoke marijuana are identified with all the other drug users, putting them higher at risk through interaction with these people.
    The social gateway theory, then. Not implausible, but not a reason to prohibit marijuana use. On the contrary, if you decriminalise it & make it rather freely available (in pharmacies, eg.) the common marijuana user would probably not come into contact with drug dealers.

    Tell me, what does IIRC mean anyway? Is that a stat from a small city in Germany?
    You're not a frequent internet user? IIRC is the common abbreviation for "if I remember correctly."

    Yes, Bossel. But I wouldn't say that the US statistics are more flawed than Germany or anywhere else.
    That depends whether you have official stats by the administration (which they most probably influenced to support their "War on Drugs") or by independent institutes (independent means not under the influence of lobby groups, sometimes hard to establish, though).

    Are you being Serious? Well, If I must.
    This is what I said in my earlier post- "Another thing is that, the people who don't do it because they are afraid of getting caught will start, because they won't be worried about getting charged with possession and ticketed.
    It will create more users if it's legalized"
    & it doesn't, simple fact established by the comparable numbers in the Netherlands.

    One example, THE LIMITED RELEVANCE OF DRUG POLICY: CANNABIS IN AMSTERDAM AND IN SAN FRANCISCO
    "Results. With the exception of higher drug use in San Francisco, we found strong similarities across both cities. We found no evidence to support claims that criminalization reduces use or that decriminalization increases use."

    OK, I will talk you through this. Right now, and in that statement, I am not and was not talking about "Gateway", nor did I have the word "Gateway" in that sentence.[...]
    So to shortly summarize my statement for you- I think that many people avoid doing it because it is illegal. But if it becomes legal, then more people would start because they wouldn't get in trouble. Pending an age limit and etc.
    So now do you see where that statement came from?
    from here
    Quote Originally Posted by Mitsuo Oda
    Marijuana is a gateway drug. If people stop getting the excitement from smoking it, they will have the urge to go into harder drugs. That's proven.
    If more people use marijuana when it's legalised (as you claim) & if marijuana is a gateway to harder drugs (as you claim), then the use of hard drugs would also significantly increase.
    "So now do you see where that [question] came from?"

    You're right, there is a fair chance of that happening. But why would you want it doubled to a "Great chance" just to add in some marijuana. What next? Ecstasy? Cocaine? It's like adding more and more street debry on the roads that we drive on.
    Only if the numbers of users were to increase which is far from proven.

    Ok, imagine if we got rid of alcohol. Do you know how many bars and business's would go out of business? Millions. It would cause an economic disaster.
    Then, economy is more important to you when it comes to alcohol, but not in case of marijuana. It would create a lot of jobs as well. Just look at the Netherlands with all those "coffee" shops.

    No one can trust the Liberal Media.
    You shouldn't trust any media, but trust is not necessary.

  4. #79
    The Great Mitsuo's Avatar
    Join Date
    18-01-06
    Location
    In the computer
    Posts
    235


    Country: United States



    Bossel said: "You're not a frequent internet user? IIRC is the common abbreviation for "if I remember correctly.""
    Haha, yeah you're right, I'm not a frequent internet user. The only ones that I really know are LOL, BRB, AND OMG.
    My bad dude, I apologize for that stupid remark.
    So with me, try to avoid internet slang. I am Internet slang challenged.
    Bossel said: "Ah, good one. Sadly it's DEA propaganda. & it doesn't say very much (actually: nothing) about cause & effect. An IOM report states the following:
    "Because it is the most widely used illicit drug, marijuana is predictably the first illicit drug that most people encounter. Not surprisingly, most users of other illicit drugs used marijuana first.81,82 In fact, most drug users do not begin their drug use with marijuana--they begin with alcohol and nicotine, usually when they are too young to do so legally.82,90"
    There is absolutely no proof for a causal relationship between smoking marijuana & later hard drug abuse."
    Well, any stat can be called propaganda. How do you know that the sources you get it from aren't in it for personal gain? Like the DEA for example.
    I hope you can understand what I'm talking about, when it comes to stats. All these facts and stats are quite meaningless to me. Because, I can go through several different sources, and many sources would say exactly what you're saying, and the other sources would say exactly what I am saying. But the question is, can you determine what is propaganda and what isn't?
    Bossel said- "The social gateway theory, then. Not implausible, but not a reason to prohibit marijuana use. On the contrary, if you decriminalise it & make it rather freely available (in pharmacies, eg.) the common marijuana user would probably not come into contact with drug dealers."
    Very true. But by legalizing it, it would put people at ease, and be more willing to try it. I mean, it's bad enough that people are getting drunk and hurting themselves and others. Why legalize another thing that can do that? It just gives people more options. Instead of getting alcohol, they can get some marijuana too? By legalizing marijuana only promotes drug use. It can give people the wrong idea.
    Also by legalizing it, it would cause a huge economical impact on the United States. The Illegal drug trade is 1/5 of the US economy. It would hurt our economy, because it takes all that money out of circulation.
    Bossel said- "If more people use marijuana when it's legalised (as you claim) & if marijuana is a gateway to harder drugs (as you claim), then the use of hard drugs would also significantly increase.
    "So now do you see where that [question] came from?""
    Hmm, nice depth. I wasn't really thinking about that when making that comment. But......
    Yes, I do claim that, as do many other professionals and scientists. But too bad I can't give you any stats to prove that, because to you, I would only be giving you propaganda. I would also say that many people that I know who HAVE tried marijuana, also claim that they wouldn't have tried harder drugs if it weren't for marijuana. They say that it made them wonder. So my reality is telling me it is a gateway drug. It also depends on the person. Some people have an addictive personality. Wouldn't you agree?
    Bossel said- "Only if the numbers of users were to increase which is far from proven."
    Perhaps in the netherlands, and europe. I propose that the people in America are more easily influenced than in any other country. Have you seen the number of girls here walking around with tiny dogs like they were an accessory? All thanks to Paris Hilton. (Not saying it's a bad thing, but annoying as hell). If one celebrity or even a role model is seen smoking this stuff. Then guess who follows.

  5. #80
    Angel of Life Kara_Nari's Avatar
    Join Date
    13-05-05
    Location
    Seoul, South Korea
    Age
    40
    Posts
    147


    Country: South Korea



    I just wanted to pop by and say that I think Marijuana should be decriminalised in each country. The punishment for being caught with any amount is very harsh here in Korea. However I am glad in a way that its so bloody hard to get here, because it helped me to stop.
    If they make marijuana legal, its not really such a big deal. People can still choose if they want to do it, like cigarettes and alchohol. Just because they're legal doesnt mean every Tom, Dick and Harry are out there getting drunk or smoking heavily.

    When I took drugs, it wasnt about 'replacing' the high that marijuana gave me, it was more of an alternative for a different feeling.

    Kara-Nari Smarty-Pants Wiz-Girl of the Southern Pacific Queen of Communication and International Arbitration and Diplomatic Solutions to Hairy Territorial Issues Her Majesty the Empress コクネ・ you quite rightly deserve the title for your individuality !

  6. #81
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    18-04-06
    Posts
    28


    Country: Bahrain



    Quote Originally Posted by Mitsuo Oda
    People already abuse Alcohol. So why would we want people to have easier access to marijuana? Marijuana is already being abused, and it's not even legalized.
    So you have no point. Those who want to use it do it anyway. Everyone already knows it is not particularly harmful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mitsuo Oda
    Not to mention the many more braincells that are killed by smoking reefer than by drinking alcohol.
    No brain cells are killed by THC. Evidence suggests the contrary, that it has a protective effect.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mitsuo Oda
    Tobacco isn't a drug.
    Nicotine is a drug. The above is like saying cannabis isn't a drug.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mitsuo Oda
    If Marijuana is legalized, that will make it more succeptible for people to use it.
    It is already easily available to anyone that wants it. Shortages are effectively non-existent.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mitsuo Oda
    Thus, bringing more accidents. Marijuana is a hallucinogen, alcohol isn't. Marijuana can be a much more dangerous substance. (It can have worse affects on the brain then alcohol)
    It is significantly less likely to lead to accidents. It only marginally impairs physical co-ordination at normal doses and has been found to have almost no effect on driving ability. As the dose increases so does the impairment, but we're talking about orders of magnitude less impairment than that induced by alcohol.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mitsuo Oda
    Also, legalizing it will give people the ability to consume both alcohol and marijuana at the same time, making a more dangerous affect on the human body.
    I'm glad to hear that prohibition makes this impossible. You do understand and realise that cannabis is readily available anywhere, anytime to anyone that wants it. Not really any different to it being illegal except the price is a bit higher and it wastes a lot police time and resources.
    If alcohol is having the dangerous effect you mention shouldn't we ban it?
    Quote Originally Posted by Mitsuo Oda
    I have heard that you can smoke it and have no affects at all, but then later in life start having hallucinations. (I have just heard that, not saying I know for
    Complete rubbish.
    I heard the moon was made out of cheese, then Wallace and Gromit went there and confirmed it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mitsuo Oda
    Seriously though, How far are we willing to go, just to have some extra "fun"?
    As far as I have to. It is my choice. Do you lecture rock climbers about how dangerous it is? What about skydivers? And people who ride bicycles? You can get badly hurt doing those things and people do all the time. It really is time our government did something about this and banned these dangerous activities to protect people from themselves.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mitsuo Oda
    People say, "If we make Marijuana illegal, then we should get rid of Alcohol, and tobacco",
    The government pretense is that some drugs are illegal because they are dangerous. The argument immediately falls apart because they allow, and make lots of money off, two very dangerous drugs that kill millions. And no I don't support the idea these two drugs should be illegal, people have every right to do themselves in.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mitsuo Oda
    Well, then I say this. "If we allow Marijuana to become legal, then we should legalize ecstasy" Too far? Nah!
    Absolutely correct, methampetamine, MDMA, LSD, psilocybin, 2C-B, everything, should be legally available to adults.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mitsuo Oda
    If we legalize it, then I think a push for legalization for other drugs will happen.
    I certainly hope so. Maybe my children or grandchildren will live in a saner world where we don't have goverment thugs harassing people for their choice of chemical entertainment.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mitsuo Oda
    We have to remember, we want to stop drugs, not promote it.
    We don't, there is no reason why we would. We accept that people, being human, are going to want to take drugs and experience things. What we want is to minimise any direct harm that might occur.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mitsuo Oda
    Also, Marijuana use makes people more willing to try other drugs,
    Please not that old rubbish again.
    Some people who eat popcorn go on to eat chocolate. Popcorn is a gateway snack.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mitsuo Oda
    "Hey, maybe if I take a stronger drug,
    Maybe, no big deal. There's no real harm in taking some cocaine instead of having a beer. Maybe taking LSD is your Saturday afternoon kick while others are out drinking and being hooligans. Go for it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mitsuo Oda
    My point is, legalizing drugs only promotes drugs.
    They're self-promoting already. Only conformists actually believe the drivel we get fed by the anti-drug propaganda machine.
    And let's not forget that anti-drug campaigners are the biggest promoters of drugs. They go from school to school telling children about a wide range of interesting chemicals of which they had not previously heard. They also emphasise that taking them is bad and naughty. This is remarkably effective, at telling teenagers about all their options and encouraging them to give them a try.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mitsuo Oda
    We should try to limit our access to drugs.
    We absolutely should, that's why they should be made legal. It is easier for a 12 year old to buy heroin, than a light beer. Because purveyors of illegal substances don't ask for ID, your local alcohol (drug) dealer has to have a license and ask for ID.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mitsuo Oda
    Besides it can make you stupid.
    It can't.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mitsuo Oda
    So, closely monitored, distributed by prescription for medical reasons is fine with me.
    And the black market will continue. Adults will exercise their right to make their own choice about whether to use drugs and which drugs to use. No-one cares what the government thinks.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mitsuo Oda
    They may have a massive supply of it, and sell it to people for less money, than what the gov sells it for
    So what? Same thing as people who operate illegal alcohol production facilities for the purpose of sale. The average person would rather buy from a reliable source. Anyway your scenario of low-priced under the counter cannabis immediately eliminates the welathy violent drug kingpin. We'd be left with a few entrepeneurs making some money on the side. And why take the risk of arrest and jail time when you can just get a cannabis license?
    Quote Originally Posted by Mitsuo Oda
    people will be growing it up the wazoo.
    And? I can brew my own beer, wine and spirits. I can even give it to my friends at a party, but I cannot sell it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mitsuo Oda
    So, how can the government supervise this?
    They shouldn't, it is none of their business, unless it is offered for sale. And then their only concerns are that you have paid for your license, that they are getting their taxes and that you're not selling to minors.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mitsuo Oda
    I still think Marijuana is too hard to regulate
    In which case you're arguing against yourself. If it can't be regulated then criminalization is a de facto waste of resources.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mitsuo Oda
    Marijuana is a gateway drug.
    A myth. Long debunked. Most people start with alcohol, therefore it should be labelled the gateway drug.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mitsuo Oda
    If people stop getting the excitement from smoking it
    Never happens. There is near zero tolerance even amongst heavy users who have been smoking for decades.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mitsuo Oda
    Another thing is that, the people who don't do it because they are afraid of getting caught will start
    History has shown that the chances of getting caught are somewhere near zero. Even in countries where the penalties are severe people go ahead and try it anyway. Anyone who wanted to just try it could do so with absolute safety.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mitsuo Oda
    Either way, it's not good.
    It is fine, since in general recreational drugs are not exceptionally harmful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mitsuo Oda
    A gateway drug is a drug that gives users a much higher potential to try other drugs.
    In order to prove your point you would have to demonstrate that those people would not otherwise have used other drugs. Most people try cannabis first because it is more easily available than anything else. On the other hand I've met numerous people who tried LSD, cocaine or heroin first, simply because those were the drugs most readily available when they decided to explore chemically-induced altered states other than alcohol. Strictly speaking alcohol and in some cases tobacco was the gateway drug. For some it can even be caffeine.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mitsuo Oda
    A stat purposely twisted around or exaggerated to prove a point or make it in favor in the way a group or person wants it.
    It is called a sample. You can never test every instance so you test a sample. The sample has to be carefully chosen so as not to skew the results. Basic statistics really.

  7. #82
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    18-04-06
    Posts
    28


    Country: Bahrain



    Quote Originally Posted by Mitsuo Oda
    Marijuana: Facts Parents Need to Know, National Institute on Drug Abuse
    NIDA? You may as well quote the Tooth Fairy. She does much more reliable research on the subject.

    The researchers at NIDA, particularly Ricaurte and Nahas have been caught lying, fabricating results and doing sloppy research so often it isn't even funny anymore. At any real research institution they would have been fired a long time ago. They and NIDA are a disgrace to science.

  8. #83
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    18-04-06
    Posts
    28


    Country: Bahrain



    Quote Originally Posted by Tokis-Phoenix
    people in england only smoke spliffs with 50/50 pot and tobacco on average
    A particularly stupid and bizarre thing to do. You're much better off sticking with straight cannabis.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tokis-Phoenix
    pot in america is also far stronger than the stuff we smoke over here in england
    That is just nonsense. Top quality cannabis is grown within and imported into the UK. Although hash is more common because it is easier to smuggle.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tokis-Phoenix
    we only smoke half the amount people in america do
    Not true. You smoke the same amount of cannabis and you smoke a whole lot of tobacco as well. People who don't add in tobacco simply make smaller joints. And no-one ever feels compelled to finish a joint - if there is too much it gets put away for another time.
    Ignoring the drug laws may well be the most widespread flouting of the law by ordinary people ever seen. It makes the average, otherwise law-abiding, person view the police as scum who'll go out of their way to ruin a person's life over something as arbitrary as choosing the wrong intoxicant. Depending where you live the uniformed police are often fairly easy-going about small quantities of cannabis, MDMA and such, but member of narcotics squads of invariably genuine scum of the earth, lower than the lowest, foulest drug dealer.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tokis-Phoenix
    drug dealers to mix all kinds of nasty things with cannabis to make it seem more potent so they can sell it for more
    Like? You can cut other drugs to make them go further, but there isn't much you do with cannabis, except maybe mix in other plants, and anyone with even half a brain would be able to tell the difference.

  9. #84
    Regular Member heliobacter's Avatar
    Join Date
    17-04-06
    Age
    34
    Posts
    8


    Country: Austria



    Quote Originally Posted by Mitsuo Oda
    ... Tobacco isn't a drug. Yes it can hurt you in some ways, bad teeth, bad lungs, but not even close to the same affect as marijuana.
    noo, nooo nicotine's just a harmless neurotoxin.
    do you have a clue how many people die every year of tobacco consumption?
    how many legs my father as a MD has to cut off every year?

    Estimated Annual Risk of Death Selected Causes, USA, 1989

    ========================Annual deaths
    ===================Per million exposed persons
    Smoking---------------------------7000
    Alcohol-----------------------------541
    Traffic accidents--------------------187
    Drowning----------------------------22
    Passive smoking----------------------19
    All other air pollutants-----------------6
    Lightning-----------------------------0.5

    Source : United States Surgeon-General, 1989

    and do you know how many people were killed by cannabis so far? NO ONE.
    to reach the lethal dosage of THC, you would have to smoke tons of grass, what's physically impossible.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mitsuo Oda
    If Marijuana is legalized, that will make it more succeptible for people to use it.
    how make something more susceptible that can be grown easily in one's backyard? btw, seeds can be bought practically everywhere, legally (don't know how things in the US are, but i guess you've got growshops too.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mitsuo Oda
    Marijuana is a hallucinogen, alcohol isn't. Marijuana can be a much more dangerous substance. (It can have worse affects on the brain then alcohol)
    erm... yes. marijuana is a hallucinogen. maybe i just don't have as good stuff as you, but i haven't had a single hallucination, and i smoke regularily on weekends for about 3 years now

    Quote Originally Posted by Mitsuo Oda
    I have heard that you can smoke it and have no affects at all, but then later in life start having hallucinations. (I have just heard that, not saying I know for sure)
    ok, now you mix it up with LSD, i'm fine with that. it's the same thing anyway.
    sorry but i think you don't know anything about this drug. you obviously neither have experience with it, nor have you tried to do some serious research, besides flicks like "reefer madness" from the 1930s

    don't get me wrong, i don't want to play it down in any way. THC consumers can develop a strong MENTAL addiction, and i've seen quite a few friends who have changed in a bad way when they started smoking weed. of course it is a drug and therefore shouldn't be taken lightly.

    but in my humble opionion, alcohol is WAY worse. i've had 2 mental blackouts in my life, and both because i've drunk too much. the next day, friends told me what i did, things like chatting girls up, although a had a girlfriend i really loved, called my best friends idiots and so on.
    i've NEVER did anything i regretted the next day when i was stoned.

    just my 2 cents, no offense meant

  10. #85
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    18-04-06
    Posts
    28


    Country: Bahrain



    Quote Originally Posted by Maciamo
    Besides, it's also proven that a glass of red wine a day is good for health.
    Except those heath benefits do not require the ingestion of red wine. The healthy parts are available from numerous sources, therefore it is a poor excuse for drinking wine.
    Responsibility
    Is it not likely that Americans have no concept of personal responsibility because such an attitude is encouraged? The government always goes on about how people should take responsibility, but then members of the same government are unable to own up to their own crimes, they interfere everywhere - forgetting, as people mostly do, that freedom is all about risk and responsibility - and they do nothing about a blame society where everything is always someone or something else's fault - drugs made me do, I wasn't warned that coffee is hot, etc.
    There is no logic to the war on some drugs. In the US much of it stems from the warped ideas of puritanism and its general hatred of pleasure.

  11. #86
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    18-04-06
    Posts
    28


    Country: Bahrain



    Quote Originally Posted by Maciamo
    I didn't know cannabis cigarettes had more tar than tobacco, and therefore was more harmful for lungs.
    It is well known. It isn't as simple as that though. Firstly cannabis users smoke far less than tobacco smokers. Secondly THC is an anti-inflammatory so cannabis smoke does not cause the extended inflammation of the lungs seen in tobacco smokers. It has been found that cannabis smokers and those who smoke both cannabis and tobacco show age-related decline in lung function equal to that of non-smokers. Both show higher incidence of lung cancer, the risk being related to relative amounts of tar ingested. Based on the latter the average cannabis smoker will still have much lower risk of lung cancer.
    There is no need to pretend cannabis is safe. Life isn't safe. Telling people the possible risks is sufficient. I take part in full contact fighting and motorcycle racing, both dangerous activities, but I know the risks and they are acceptable to me.
    Quote Originally Posted by Maciamo
    I believe that magic mushrooms and opium are much more dangerous. Hallucinogenes (including LSD, mescaline, ecstasy, magic mushrooms...) should definitely be banned as they can leave someone mentally disturbed for life (if they have a "bad trip"). One time is enough if you are unlucky. Never even try.
    The probabilities are very, very low. Banning them makes no difference. Obviously people are using these drugs anyway so we have gained nothing other than criminalising a fairly harmless activity.
    Nothing wrong with researching this, studying those rare people with a genetic predisposition to psychosis who have it triggered by hallucinogenic drugs to see if we can find common factors. With the drugs legal you could visit your doctor to be tested to see if you're one of those rare people. Or you could just take the chance. It's a calculated risk, but what in life isn't?
    Bad trips are something else, a traumatic experience, but people get over them. Usually quite quickly. Education will dramatically reduce bad trips - users who know how to deal with them when they start do not have truly scary experiences. It is like taking a painkiller when you feel the first inklings of a headache, rather than waiting until it takes hold.
    And you can turf MDMA (ecstasy) out of that list. It isn't a genuine hallucinogen.
    Quote Originally Posted by Maciamo
    Opium, morphine and heroine are painkiller and give a sensation of extreme well feeling, but have terrible side-effect and dependency. If sex is addictive (and it is), then heroine is 10 times more. Can you imagine quitting sex for the rest of your life ? Once you've tried heroine, it's the same, you can't imagine not trying again. Don't even think of touching it.
    The addictiveness of heroin is wildly exaggerated. Sex isn't addictive. Sex addiction is an invention not a real addiction.
    Quote Originally Posted by Maciamo
    Can you imagine quitting sex for the rest of your life? Once you've tried heroine, it's the same, you can't imagine not trying again. Don't even think of touching it.
    Hardly a valid comparison. Sex is a biological drive which has nothing to do with addiction. Even if you've never had sex your body is going to tell you that you should.
    Once you've tried heroin it is quite easy to imagine not trying it again. Never listen to current or ex-junkies. Every ex-addict and current addict will tell you whatever drug they use is super-mega-addictive and impossible to quit. What about the majority of users who quietly go about their lives using these same drugs regularly with no trouble whatsoever? You might as well take advice on alcohol from an alcohol junkie.
    Quote Originally Posted by Maciamo
    Cocaines and amphetamines are stimulants. They make you feel like a super human, boost up intelligence and physical strength and you never feel tired... until the effect stops and the reverse is happening. If you don't continue the intakes, you'll feel miserably depressed, devoid of energy and sullen. That's how dependency starts. Notice that it's more physical, while heroine's was very psychological.
    If you don't continue you go to sleep. You won't feel miserably depressed, just tired. Much of the down is due to lack of food and sleep. To get an idea of how you might feel try staying awake for 48 hours eating and drinking almost nothing. Throw in some vigorous physical activity too.
    Used sensibly amphetamine, specifically d-amphetamine (tradename Dexedrine) is a very useful drug. Problems were also much lower when you could easily get it from your local doctor. Once it became hard to get legally trade went underground, the authorities spent time and money trying to crush it, dl-methamphetamine took over, offering a higher profit margin, and eventually the authorities through their continuing efforts managed to get that replaced with d-methamphetamine. So today the only amphetamine you'll typically find on the street is the strongest of them all, d-methampetamine. It is also the hardest to use sensibly. That's prohibition for you. Happens every time.
    The war on drugs has been very expensive, and ultimately completely pointless. In 30 years the authorities have made absolutely no progress in stopping drug use. It doesn't surprise me. Taking drugs is just part of human nature.

  12. #87
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    18-04-06
    Posts
    28


    Country: Bahrain



    Quote Originally Posted by Satori
    Doctors usually come back with the assertion that pot has too many side effects...By comparison, pot's side effects are almost minimal.
    They also like to harp on about how it makes you spaced out etc. They've obviously never been on any serious medications of any kind, never mind psychiatric medication. Even your basic SSRI or tricyclic can dull your mind to the point where by comparison being stoned is the height of mental nimbleness. You actually have no idea how much those medications mess up your head until you come off them.

  13. #88
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    18-04-06
    Posts
    28


    Country: Bahrain



    Quote Originally Posted by thomas
    but pointing out health hazards and trying to reduce the number of potential patients are no infringement of our personal freedom.
    I don't see anyone saying that is infringement. They're welcome to educate, but banning is not acceptable. I pay my taxes too. Can I come scrutinise your life to make sure you aren't engaging in any activities that might cost the health system money? You might be playing a sport that can cause injury, or watching too much TV, eating foods of which I disapprove, etc. Furthermore smokers and drinkers pay extra tax. In fact it has been repeatedly shown that the government enjoys a nett profit. Users of other drugs cost the country money, but that is the government's choice. They have chosen to incur a nett loss on other recreational drugs. Tough luck, don't expect me to support them or care about their whining about what drugs cost the country.

  14. #89
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    18-04-06
    Posts
    28


    Country: Bahrain



    Quote Originally Posted by Fantt
    Smoking crack may not hurt anyone other than the smoker, but adults should probably not be allowed to smoke it around children. Meth labs shouldn't be allowed in neighborhoods because of explosion risks.

    greatly reduce the crime associated with illegal drugs - especiallly crimes involve gangs, which would suddenly find their main source of funding cut off.

    I think all drugs should be made legal for personal use by adults and the government should use a tiny percentage of the drug war monies on providing free preventative and treatment for addictions.
    Smoking crack around children would not do them any direct harm. The amount of smoke produced is even close to a few puffs on a cigarette. Unless we're going to ban parents from smoking we can't interfere with other drugs. I'm against interferring with parents in this fashion.

    The meth lab explosion risk is actually quite small. It happens very, very seldom. Even in a suburban neighbourhood and trained chemist would never make a mistake if they have access to the right equipment. Blame the government for any explosions that do occur.

    Legalise prostitution as well and most gangs will have the two main sources of income axed. They'd be left with protection rackets which don't do well if people are also allowed to defend themselves by shooting the scumbags who threaten them.

    The drug war costs the US alone $30 billion plus per year. Take that back, empty the prisons and add taxes from drug sales, and we'd have more than adequate funding for education, treatment and all those social programs that allegedly cost too much money (millionaires are always moaning about how tax they pay). There'd probably even be money left over for tax cuts. Of course all gangsters in the DEA would have to get a real job which doesn't involve violence, theft and general harassment (the DEA are just gangsters with badges).

  15. #90
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    18-04-06
    Posts
    28


    Country: Bahrain



    Quote Originally Posted by sabro
    Every day it causes problems on my campus and the negative effects in poor communities like where my high school is located, are more than apparent. The number of kids as young as fourth grade that are expelled after their second posession offense is alarming. Diversion, counselling, the threat of being thrown out of school doesn't work.
    Every day?

    The number of kids? Well give us that number. Are students caught with alcohol also expelled or is this just a version of the drug war discrimination against some? Not really any different to religious persecution.

    What would happen if we switched things around and you could buy alcohol from the guy on the shady corner, but cannabis required ID? Are these children using cannabis because it is easier to get than alcohol or just because they prefer it. I'd definitely rather deal with constantly stoned children than constantly drunk ones.

    That aside you blame cannabis without evidence. In my community alcohol destroys families. Let me re-phrase that, people who abuse alcohol destroy their families. It isn't really the alcohol because the vast majority of users in this same community handle their alcohol use. This applies to all drugs, every single one.

    Quote Originally Posted by sabro
    The costs in terms of family and social programs and the damage to the lives and education of children is simply not worth it just to let a few pot heads get high.
    The cost is basically zero. And those 'potheads' are getting high anyway. I guess you like gangsters shooting people in your neighbourhood. Me I want them stopped, and ending this idiotic war on drugs is part of the solution.

  16. #91
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    18-04-06
    Posts
    28


    Country: Bahrain



    Quote Originally Posted by ralian
    Isnft it our responsibility as an adult to participate in building a safe city?
    No. Life is dangerous, get used to it. On the other hand their is no evidence that drug use in itself inherently makes things significantly more dangerous. Worried about drunken fights at bars? Then don't go. Worried about drug use at clubs? Stay home where you can be protected from the world.
    Quote Originally Posted by ralian
    If you are healthy, why do you have to use them?
    For fun? Do you exactly know the effect it has on you?
    Why should anyone care? There are a large variety of fun activities that are very dangerous. They're still fun and so far the interferring nannies in government have not yet proposed making them illegal. Should they ever be dumb enough to push their interference further I will gladly take up arms against them.
    Frankly the majority of drug users are intelligent hard-working, well-paid people you'd never even be able to guess were drug users. They have families, friends and will live long, happy lives.

  17. #92
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    18-04-06
    Posts
    28


    Country: Bahrain



    Quote Originally Posted by Frank D. White
    the person who feels they can't live without the drug, but can't come up with the money legally, to buy it. I don't want to be their victim when they steal, rob, or even kill to get the money they need.
    So you're in favour of legalization then. Not so much cannabis of course since it is relatively cheap and easy to acquire, but the more expensive drugs that though being illegal and hence overpriced lead to crimes such as robbery.
    Quote Originally Posted by Frank D. White
    I'm not to sure I want to depend on someone who is stoned to provide a service for me either? Would you want a paramedic trying to save your life or driving you in an ambulance at high speed while stoned?
    But they can do these things on alcohol then? Legalizing a drug does not suddenly give someone permission to perform dangerous activities while intoxicated. Statements like the above are exactly like the scare tactics used by the anti-drug mob. The majority of users of illegal drugs are ordinary people just like you.
    Quote Originally Posted by Frank D. White
    I think if pot were as available as alcohol we would double our problems we now have with booze alone!
    It's already as available, perhaps more so since there are no real restrictions on its sale. Not the kind of restrictions there are for alcohol.

  18. #93
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    18-04-06
    Posts
    28


    Country: Bahrain



    Quote Originally Posted by misa.j
    It is smoking after all, which has a secondhand smoking problem, can be inhaled by children or infants.
    Secondhand smoke has never been demonstrated to be seriously harmful. Furthermore cannabis smokers smoke miniscule quantities compared.

    Quote Originally Posted by misa.j
    I agree w/ Frank on not wanting to be treated or have a ride by a stoner.
    Rather a stoned person than a drunk person in both cases. A stoned person has far superior co-ordination to a drunk person and is much better able to stay sharply focussed. Research has shown that it hardly impairs driving ability except at high doses. Low doses can actually increase the ability to focus on a single activity, particularly simple activities like driving (yes, driving is a very trivial activity). If someone is stoned enough to actually impair their ability, then it can de facto not be hidden that they are intoxicated.

    But where do people get the idea that legalizing a drug gives blanket permission for use in all circumstances. What complete nonsense.

  19. #94
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    18-04-06
    Posts
    28


    Country: Bahrain



    Quote Originally Posted by cathy
    On the contrary, you are one of the rare, smart human that care for your body.
    I eat healthy, I play hard, I work hard, I party hard. One way or another, sooner or later, I am going to be dead, a rotting corpse. I keep my body tuned just like my motorcycle, and I put it to good use. When I die I won't say you know my body is in such good condition I'm glad I kept it safely locked away, no I'll say I had fun and I wouldn't undo any of it.
    Holier than thou people are always annoying.
    Quote Originally Posted by cathy
    Using for any other reason is an addiction
    Not true. You might as well say motorcars are for transport and any other use is an addiction.
    The underground black market make bootleg alchoholic beverage with: cheap perfume,window cleaner, shoe polish, and other toxic ingredients.
    Complete rubbish. The only involvement organised crime has with alcohol and tobacco is stealing shipments for resale and smuggling so they can pocket the money meant for taxes.

  20. #95
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    18-04-06
    Posts
    28


    Country: Bahrain



    Quote Originally Posted by Duo
    OAt least in this way, he can receive info on the potency and effects of the drug, and not just buy anything in random out in the street that he has no idea how it has been "cut" or with wat.
    It has been shown that users are more cautious and responsible when they can accurately titrate their dose. Knowing exactly what you're taking and how much eliminates the standard scenario with street drugs where the user not being sure of the potency will generally take too much rather than too little so as not to waste their expensive drugs. Being cheap and knowing the dosage allows a user to cheaply and easily experiment to find exactly what dose works. And most drugs have essentially no long-term tolerance unless used daily. If used a few times a month a person can use the same dose for years.

  21. #96
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    18-04-06
    Posts
    28


    Country: Bahrain



    Quote Originally Posted by heliobacter
    noo, nooo nicotine's just a harmless neurotoxin.
    do you have a clue how many people die every year of tobacco consumption?
    how many legs my father as a MD has to cut off every year?
    I wouldn't call it a neurotoxin. It is a vasoconstrictor. Another reason why it causes more problems in the lungs than THC, the latter is a bronchodilator so it opens the lungs helping them to clean out the tar. Nicotine will constrict blood vessels all over the body whereas THC does not.

  22. #97
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    18-04-06
    Posts
    28


    Country: Bahrain



    Quote Originally Posted by Twisted
    In Holland we have government officials that have admitted they have used drugs in the past and nobody thinks it's a big deal.
    Good for them. I can respect that. Can't respect high and mighty moralising twits.
    Quote Originally Posted by Twisted
    You're pretty pathetic if you need alcohol to have a good time
    How can you judge other people's brain chemistry? Or what they choose to do for fun. It is seldom about needing to ingest alcohol to have a good time, but rather that a darn good time becomes an even better time when everyone gets relaxed. Enter alcohol. Or MDMA.
    Aren't people who have brain chemistry that requires serotonin boosters just pathetic? How can they need to change their brain chemistry to feel better?
    I presume you do not use any chemicals for non-medicinal purposes, i.e. specifically prescribed for a particular ailment. I'm including caffeine.
    Quote Originally Posted by Twisted
    to smoke to keep your nerves in order
    It is a rare person that does not have some nervous habit. People who smoke hold their cigarettes, others have to resort to other measures.

  23. #98
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    18-04-06
    Posts
    28


    Country: Bahrain



    Quote Originally Posted by thomas
    how to deal with hard drugs (cocaine, heroine, "new drugs")
    What makes a drug hard? Is LSD a soft drug? Why not? Is alcohol a hard drug? Why not? Fact is that all drugs cause no major problems for a majority of users. That even applies to the heavily demonised heroin. Sure we always hear about the nuts who trashed their lives, but never about the banker who takes it a few times a week.
    New drugs? What has being new to do with anything? Some 'new' drugs aren't new at all. MDMA and MDA being prime examples of two old drugs that enjoyed a resurgence in popularity. Are they hard drugs?
    The whole distinction is pointless. All we need do is keep tabs on how many people use and how many get into trouble. Easier when it is legal and people don't have to lie. Then we can investigate what treatments help. Methadone was a dumb idea in general, but there are the very rare people that it does help. 12 step programs have a dismal success rate, but that aside abstinence is the only solution for some abusers. For others learning moderation is the ticket. We also have to learn that an abuser of one drug will not necessarily abuse any others - rehab centres typically try to force their clients to quit all substances (except hypocritcally often not tobacco) - this increases their failure rate because they re-inforce the nonsense that all drugs and drug use are the same.

  24. #99
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    18-04-06
    Posts
    28


    Country: Bahrain



    Quote Originally Posted by DragonChan
    They say the crime rates for people on weed is low, but they don't have any tests that can prove whether or not you've smoked up
    Users without blood, I would never have guessed it.
    Cannabis and other drug users are unlikely to commit crimes other than breaking stupid drug laws. People who do take drugs and then commit crimes aren't made to do so because they're on drugs. You really think some psycho gang member wired on methampetamine would have stayed at home and baked cookies if he had been sober?
    If you've ever compared the behaviour of alcohol intoxicated and cannabis intoxicated people you will quickly see which group is likely to behave in an anti-social manner. It is invariably the alcohol intoxicated group.
    Of course they can test for cannabis. Anyway roadside tests should be impairment tests not blood concentration tests. I have friends with enough alcohol tolerance that they can walk a straight line when I can no longer even sit up. Same build and same amount of alcohol, but they drink regularly and I don't. We've even tested ourselves in these circumstances and we both have similar blood-alcohol levels, their brains just don't respond as much.
    I don't care whether cannabis or any other drug has medicinal uses, the government is way out of line telling people what they can and can't put into their bodies for their own amusement.

  25. #100
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    18-04-06
    Posts
    28


    Country: Bahrain



    Quote Originally Posted by Maciamo
    Singapore is for me the pinnacle of eagerly conformist society, ready to please the West by adopting its concepts and moral to extremes
    I don't know the origins of the attitude in Singapore, but it is fundamentally a police state. They spy on their citizens and arrest people for speaking against the government. They interfere in every aspect of life. The only reason they aren't declared public enemy number one is that they happen to be capitalists. It is OK to be a police state as long it isn't communist.

Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Jesus healed using cannabis
    By thomas in forum World News
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 23-11-13, 19:04
  2. World Map of the Penis Size Worldwide (country) by Country.
    By Riccardo in forum Anthropology & Ethnography
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 12-10-13, 16:35
  3. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 13-03-07, 02:51
  4. Italy decriminalises possession of cannabis
    By Maciamo in forum European News & Hot Topics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 14-11-06, 14:57
  5. Cannabis and Multiple Sclerosis
    By csi in forum Opinions
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 19-02-05, 17:08

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •