Society Should cannabis be legal in every country ?

[The AnteLyfe]

I think the government should stay out of our lives as much as possible, so yes I feel it should be legal

but to the effect that it must be consumed in designated areas (as with alcohol, you shouldn't be allowed to walk down the street smoking a joint)...

As long as you aren't giving anyone second-hand smoke by doing it, I figure it ought to be legal...

~ a "retired" smoker, 8 months and goin strong

 

[Fantt]

Anything that adults can do alone or with each other which causes no harm to others not participating should be legal. Any harm they do to themselves is their own concern. That said, I still think that driving while under the influence of any inhibiting substance should be illegal. The situation gets a lot muddier when children are involved. 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.

Making drugs legal would cause their prices to plummet because the government created black market would be gone. This extreme lowering of prices would 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.

 

[alexriversan]

those who do not need to use their brain organ, can have a good trip to amsterdam, for the purpose of smoking a couple of hash joints totally legal.

however, more intake does not produce a better high, soon all obtained is a yellow lemon tree without lemons and DROWSYNESS.

one who quit cigarettes.

 

[ralian]

I don't agree with the legalisation of cannabis. It should be used only for medical purpose.
If you are healthy, why do you have to use them?
For fun? Do you exactly know the effect it has on you?

Driving while you are stoned is dangerous and can kill someone.
Just because somebody is doing, it does not mean it's OK.
Isn?ft it our responsibility as an adult to participate in building a safe city?

 

[bossel]

Driving while you are stoned is dangerous and can kill someone.

Same goes for alcohol & a lot of medical drugs.

 

[Tokis-Phoenix]

The BBC website has a lot of interesting facts on cannabis;

http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/hottopics/cannabis/index.shtml#for_against1

"Cannabis has an effect on the heart, similar to the effects of exercise. It may be just as good for the heart as going to the gym". I never knew that :38: . I used to smoke it regually a long time ago, but gave up partly because i could and partly because i didn't see the point in doing it anymore- plus it was expensive stuff :eek2: .

 

[Silverbackman]

Yes it should be legal. It isn't the government's place to decide what people do with their bodies. To certain people it maybe perfectly fine, while to others it may not be. It is up to the user to decide.

It is even more hypocritical to have alcohol and tobacco legal when cannabis isn't.

 

[Mitsuo]

There are a lot of great points made here. I am going to have to say that I want it to be illegal.

I think it should only be distributed by prescription. 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. Not to mention the many more braincells that are killed by smoking reefer than by drinking alcohol. I suggest that we limit the legalization of drugs (alcohol, and of course marijuana). 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. We already have people getting in accidents because of alcohol consumption. If Marijuana is legalized, that will make it more succeptible for people to use it. 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) 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 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)

To compare marijuana with tobacco, is to me, ludicrous. Seriously though, How far are we willing to go, just to have some extra "fun"?

People say, "If we make Marijuana illegal, then we should get rid of Alcohol, and tobacco", Well, then I say this. "If we allow Marijuana to become legal, then we should legalize ecstasy" Too far? Nah! If we legalize it, then I think a push for legalization for other drugs will happen. We have to remember, we want to stop drugs, not promote it.

Also, Marijuana use makes people more willing to try other drugs, like cocaine, mushrooms, LSD, I can go on. If Marijuana makes people feel good, then they will think "Hey, maybe if I take a stronger drug, then maybe I will feel even better!" I guess the same could be said for alcohol.

My point is, legalizing drugs only promotes drugs. We should try to limit our access to drugs.
We need to set a good influence for our future. Allowing the use of marijuana will only promote drug use. Besides it can make you stupid.

So, closely monitored, distributed by prescription for medical reasons is fine with me.

 

[Tokis-Phoenix]

There are a lot of great points made here. I am going to have to say that I want it to be illegal.
I think it should only be distributed by prescription. 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. Not to mention the many more braincells that are killed by smoking reefer than by drinking alcohol. I suggest that we limit the legalization of drugs (alcohol, and of course marijuana). 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. We already have people getting in accidents because of alcohol consumption. If Marijuana is legalized, that will make it more succeptible for people to use it. 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) 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 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)
To compare marijuana with tobacco, is to me, ludicrous. Seriously though, How far are we willing to go, just to have some extra "fun"?
People say, "If we make Marijuana illegal, then we should get rid of Alcohol, and tobacco", Well, then I say this. "If we allow Marijuana to become legal, then we should legalize ecstasy" Too far? Nah! If we legalize it, then I think a push for legalization for other drugs will happen. We have to remember, we want to stop drugs, not promote it.
Also, Marijuana use makes people more willing to try other drugs, like cocaine, mushrooms, LSD, I can go on. If Marijuana makes people feel good, then they will think "Hey, maybe if I take a stronger drug, then maybe I will feel even better!" I guess the same could be said for alcohol.
My point is, legalizing drugs only promotes drugs. We should try to limit our access to drugs.
We need to set a good influence for our future. Allowing the use of marijuana will only promote drug use. Besides it can make you stupid.
So, closely monitored, distributed by prescription for medical reasons is fine with me.

I think a point that you forget is that legalising the drug will lower its price and thus cut down on the crime associated with it- pot in america is also far stronger than the stuff we smoke over here in england, plus people in england only smoke spliffs with 50/50 pot and tobacco on average max while in america they smoke full weed ones- i am just going on what other people who have smoked pot in america have told me though and the ways that i know are most common over here. So not only do we smoke weaker stuff but we only smoke half the amount people in america do.
But anyways, thats not my point. Making it more illegal/against the law makes it more dangerous in some senses- dealers can put any price they want on it, its harder to get hold of so people who want it have to go to greater lengths to get it, dealers can also put any sort of crap in it and no one will know any better half the time. By legalising it, now only will the government be able to supervise it and its quality easier as once it is more out in the open and socially accpetable, many people that need help or have worries concerning it will be able to know what to do and feel less social pressures upon them, there will be less crime associated with the drug because prices will be more stable (and probably far lower) and people will know what to expect and want quality-wise.
In amsterdam, where cannabis is legal in england, they have very low crime rates in comparison to the rest of the country where such a drug is illegal- no, there isn't a boom in heroin addicts or thugs or people going onto harder drugs, society is stable and people work like normal addults and enjoy normal things. They don't have a low life expectancy there and the hospitals aern't any more packed full than the rest of the country. I think a lot of the fears and issues concerning pot/cannabis is blown out of proportion by the fact it is illegal and the fears, social pressures and rumors that spread in such a situation.

"44% of 16 to 29 year-olds have tried cannabis at some point in their lives. Half of them have used it in the last year

In 1998, 76% of people arrested for drugs offences in Britain were charged with possession of cannabis"

Despite it being illegal, it seems that most people that want to do it, do it regardless of it legality- which is why i think making it legal wouldn't encourage a boom in cannabis users either way. It would also save a huge amount of the polices time and money since the vast majority of arrests seem to revolve around cannabis possesion.
Most of the health problems associated with cannabis come down to the tar content of it when smoked, the and the issues with people that already have health problems or genetic issues like weak hearts or schizophrenia. Cannabis is not alone in though though, there are already many legal drugs not advised for people with mental or physical health issues, and the tar problem with cannabis can be solved by simply not smoking the stuff, but instead by taking it in some other form like eating it.
A good point made by somone on the BBC discussion area on pot;

""The death rate due to alcohol abuse alone is higher than that for all illegal drugs lumped together (as discussed on the BBC news today in a story about a tripling in liver damage due to drinking). Add to that the damage done by tobacco (how many smoking related diseases are there?) and you wonder why some drugs are legal and others are not.
Cannabis does not cause acute toxicity like alcohol and doesn't result in the alcohol-related violence seen in town centres when pubs empty. Despite this alcohol is advertised on TV, bill-boards etc and UK plc makes lots of tax money from its sale."

I think the problem we have shouldn't be with cannabis but the drug dealers.

 

[Mitsuo]

I totally see your point. It's a very big concern. Drug Dealers are a major problem. But what about those dealers that grow their own? They may have a massive supply of it, and sell it to people for less money, than what the gov sells it for. Which then people would want to buy from them. If it becomes legalized, people will be growing it up the wazoo. So, how can the government supervise this? I doubt they will make growing it legal. If they do, it gives these dealers a better way of receiving it and selling it for a smaller price, also sticking whatever they want in it like you mentioned above.

Growing is another BIG problem. So, I think the marijuana is the problem.

Most likely, instead of selling the actual pot, (or cannibis), they will start selling the plant.

 

[Tokis-Phoenix]

I totally see your point. It's a very big concern. Drug Dealers are a major problem. But what about those dealers that grow their own? They may have a massive supply of it, and sell it to people for less money, than what the gov sells it for. Which then people would want to buy from them. If it becomes legalized, people will be growing it up the wazoo. So, how can the government supervise this? I doubt they will make growing it legal. If they do, it gives these dealers a better way of receiving it and selling it for a smaller price, also sticking whatever they want in it like you mentioned above.
Growing is another BIG problem. So, I think the marijuana is the problem.
Most likely, instead of selling the actual pot, (or cannibis), they will start selling the plant.

If you legalise the use/possesion of cannabis(in a suitable quantity though, don't want anyone hoarding the stuff), but continue to make dealing against the law illegal, i think that would be a better situation- a bit like how you cannot sell alchohol without a license, but you can still drink alchohol if you are the right age for it.
The time and money saved by the police not having to catch users could be spent on the dealers who will remain against the law, so even if they could be able to compete with the new legal cannibis prices, they would be at far higher risk from being caught and sent to court/prison anyway, making the dealers efforts even less worthwhile.
Most dealers only deal cannabis because there is so much money to be made from it anyway, i think if it was legalised, a proper quality mark set and the prices lowered, many dealers would simply see no reason to deal the stuff anymore. And i think with legalised cannabis around, many people will prefer to buy the legal stuff legally instead of going to all the effort of buying the illegal stuff and putting themselves at risk.
So overall, i think legalising the herb would cut down on drug dealers and crime and save police time and money. I think by the government selling the drug legally, it would also be able to keep a better eye on the quality of the stuff- its very easy for drug dealers to mix all kinds of nasty things with cannabis to make it seem more potent so they can sell it for more, although this often changes the "taste"/smell or appearance, a lot of people don't know any better- poor quality cannabis is often what causes bad effects on people, and not the cannabis itself. If the government set a benchmark for good quality or acceptable cannabis i'm sure a lot less people would end up buying some the crap dealers try and sell to people. The government could also breed/alter various forms of cannibis to make them healthier or less dangerous to take .

 

[Mitsuo]

I still think Marijuana is too hard to regulate. Even if the people who grow the plant and don't sell it, they can still use it without having to pay for it. How would the government regulate that? They wouldn't be able to. I also think that dealers would still be out there selling it for a lower price. Like you said, some people don't know better. Well, your right they don't. Some people wouldn't even think about the other "stuff" that the dealers might put into it, and they would go off and buy it. Maybe they prefer random crap in it. Who knows.

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.

Sure that would be great for the government to make a healthier form of cannibis. But only if it's distributed through medical purposes.

I can't remember who said it, but they said that if it stays illegal, then people would want to do it even more, because they like to disobey the law. Well, I disagree. Really, it depends on the person. 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.

People don't do the drug because it's against the law, they do it because it gives them an elevated feeling or even more common, Peer Pressure.

 

[bossel]

Marijuana is a gateway drug.

Though there may be still some (primarily USAmerican) scientists who try to prove the contrary, marijiuana is not a gateway drug. Has been shown in several European studies (eg. Kleiber in the 90s). Only a very small amount of Marijuana users later step over to harder drugs.

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.

Then, how many more users of Marijuana are there in the Netherlands than eg. in the US? & how many more hard drug users are in the NL (since acc. to you there is some automatism on the way to hard drugs)?

 

[No-name]

the question is asking if I think marijuana should be legal in other countries as well as my own. I am content to let other countries make that decision for themselves. As for me, I won't smoke it whether it is legal or not. 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.

Should we legalize it in the US? I would not support it. 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.

 

[Mitsuo]

Though there may be still some (primarily USAmerican) scientists who try to prove the contrary, marijiuana is not a gateway drug. Has been shown in several European studies (eg. Kleiber in the 90s). Only a very small amount of Marijuana users later step over to harder drugs.
Then, how many more users of Marijuana are there in the Netherlands than eg. in the US? & how many more hard drug users are in the NL (since acc. to you there is some automatism on the way to hard drugs)?

Yes, it is a gateway drug. Marijuana users have been known to become bored with the drug, so they look for a new high. Also, marijuana users usually hang out with other marijuana and/or other drug users. When those marijuana users hang out with them, they are more inclined to take the drugs offered to them, like cocaine, ecstasy, LSD.

Another thing to point out is that many teens that smoke the stuff feel that it's ok to take different drugs that's offered to them, since, to them, they haven't had any kind of problems. So they feel invincible and that nothing wrong will happen.

You say that "Only a very small amount of marijuana users later step over to harder drugs". Yeah, making it a gateway drug. You're just helping me out by saying that. Because I don't recall saying a big amount or even giving an amount of users at all that step over to harder drugs. But an amount is an amount, right? I don't care what the amount is: a small amount, a big amount. Either way, it's not good.

I said "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"

Then you said "Then, how many more users of Marijuana are there in the Netherlands than eg. in the US? & how many more hard drug users are in the NL (since acc. to you there is some automatism on the way to hard drugs)?"
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. It probably wouldn't be accurate because people do lie about their own habits.
I can't see where you pulled out hard drugs from that though. I was just talking about marijuana.

Actually, I never said that if you smoke marijuana, that you automatically go on to hard drugs. A gateway drug is a drug that gives users a much higher potential to try other drugs. By saying gateway, I am not saying that all of them do step over. But there is a fair chance that they will.

Besides, the statement "Only a very small amount of marijuana users later step over to harder drugs" cannot be relied on. How can a statistic be made from that? There are probably millions of people doing drugs that are undocumented. If anything, that's an uneducated guess.

That stat reminds me of the Iraq war. How they say: 60% of americans disagree with the war and 40% are in favor- The funny thing is, I don't remember voting on that, or even being asked that. That 60% could have been taken from 10 people, with six disagreeing and 4 agreeing with the war.

I call it twististics. 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.

 

[bossel]

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.

 

[Mitsuo]

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

 

[bossel]

-"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

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.

 

[Mitsuo]

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. :blush:
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.

 

[Kara_Nari]

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.