• Welcome to BookAndReader!

    We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!

    Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.

marijuana????

kook, you are taking the extreme cases of the pot smoker and the extreme cases of the alcohol drinker, and basing the morals of society and the laws that govern them on the extremes. i'm not sure that's the best thing to do. Don't limit what most can do based on what a few can do.

I think a person should be able to do in their home whatever they want as long as they don't abuse that priveledge and take the burden of that abuse out into everybody else's world.

If you want to drink till you puke in your own house fine. If you want to smoke till your lungs fall apart that should be fine too, as long as you don't endanger other people in their everyday lives. Don't drive drunk, and don't drive stoned.

Canada's laws sound pretty good to me. I don't think a person should be able to light up a joint, or a cigarette at the table next to me and my family in any restaurant in the country, but my neighbor should not get busted and sent to prison form having a few ounces of pot in his house.

I actually think we agree on a few levels and just enjoy the sparring on the extreme level. You're a fun person to try to post against. Thanks. :D :D
 
I'm not sure that I'm taking an 'extreme' case here at all. I mentioned the wino as an example to illustrate the illegal nature of drinking in public. Even if I'm sober as a rock, having my first beer I cannot walk down the street carrying a bottle. I'm thinking that law is in place to prevent people from sitting on a park bench and getting soused, which is for the benefit of society. Unfortunately when you make laws, you have to think about what the minority would do and what extreme cases might arise from your decisions.

I think we do agree on a number of things, Moto. I have no problem with the way marijuana works here in Canada. Within peoples own homes they can pretty much smoke up to their hearts content and not be charged so long as the quantity they possess is under a certain limit. When you think about it, this isn't such a bad idea because it encourages moderation. And I think this is what you are saying as well.

The difficulty arises when we consider what does 'legalise' mean. Most of the arguments I've heard don't address this, and think that allowing any regulation at all by 'The Man' is a bad thing. Here's where I have issues.

I don't like to think I'm 'posting against' anyone here. I don't necessarily think this is about debate, persay, as we are all of a similar viewpoint. I am just trying to clarify the nature of the debate and raise a few points that should be considered the next time this comes up in conversation for you all.

That being said, I thank everyone for bearing with my occasionally ranty comments today. You've struck a nerve I happen to be very, very passionate about.
 
It's okay to rant, Kook. We all like to do it. You're right. We should define legalize, but first let's clarify that the government is not trying to make tobacco illegal but only performing its duty to inform people of the dangers. The gov't is also going a step further to protect those who don't smoke by making public smoking illegal. I feel there will eventually be designated public smoking areas and smoking tobacco at home will always be legal. They do levy high taxes on tobacco, especially in certain states here within the US.

This is exactly what I want to see with marijuana. Legal to be sold at Wal Mart, legal to be grown by anybody, including RJ Reynolds, legal at specified public dens, legal to be taxed as tobacco and alcohol, illegal at all other public locations, except certain, specified areas at outdoor events after permits are attained. Now, you see my definition of legalize. People shouldn't be going to jail except for irresponsible use. We throw drunken dads that beat their kids in jail. We put drunk drivers in jail. We throw public drunks in jail. We'll do the same to high drivers, parents, and public smokers.

I think legalizing it in this manner would be a great boost to the economy. High people buy stuff online; they buy food. Their would be a new sector of the economy catering to them: pipes, papers, etc.
 
read this:

#8 cash crop

The 135,323 marijuana plants seized in 2005 were estimated to be worth $270 million -- a record amount that places the crop among the state's top 10 agricultural commodities, based on the most recent statistics available.
Click to expand...

too bad there's not any taxes collected on this stuff...:confused: :rolleyes:
 
Motokid said:
I searched this forum, and I can't believe no one's asked this yet, and since the smoking discussion took off quite nicely...

Should marijuana be legalized?

Medicinal or in general? Why is it different than alcohol in the grand scheme of things?

And I hope the arguement that it leads to harder drugs is not the only direction this leads....
Click to expand...

No, in short.

I can understand there are health benefits, and so my feelings on this are mixed.

For recreational use, never ever. For one, I hope I don't offend anyone but it makes users look and act rather "dopey", IMO. There is evidence that it affects your psychological health. It stinks. It has health risks, too, such as provoking an asthma attack. In the UK, users mix it with tobacco, which immediately triples (at least) the harmful effects), though I seem to remember reading somewhere that users in the US don't mix it with tobacco. It is always going to be associated as being an illegal substance / dangerous / criminal, whatever, as long as every adult generation alive today is still alive.

Should it be legalised today, I can imagine myself in fifty years time (should I make it) and saying to my grandkids or great great nephews and nieces or whoever will listen "ahh, I remember when..." and wrinkling my nose in distaste, despite my living double the amount of years with it being legal than I did with it illegal. How on earth can a drug that alters your perception of reality, ever be legalised?!

This brings me to alcohol, magic mushrooms etc... to answer your question, there is no difference, other than the legality of these, and thus, the lower prices users have to pay to get hold of them. If alcohol were to be introduced today it would be illegal... it also stinks, makes users look and act, if not "dopey" then "hard" and "aggressive" etc, and also has reputable health benefits (e.g. a glass of red wine a day is good for your heart, etc). And despite the legality of alcohol, crimes are still committed by either someone who is alcohol-dependent offending in order to get hold of their "drug" and more commonly, crimes being committed whilst someone is under the influence of alcohol (formerly known as "drunk" where is this PC stuff going to stop?!).

I do agree to the use of magic mushrooms, however, after learning all about the wonderfully fascinating "Good Friday Experiment" in a recent lecture.
 
steffee said:
No, in short.

I can understand there are health benefits, and so my feelings on this are mixed.

For recreational use, never ever. For one, I hope I don't offend anyone but it makes users look and act rather "dopey", IMO. There is evidence that it affects your psychological health. It stinks. It has health risks, too, such as provoking an asthma attack. In the UK, users mix it with tobacco, which immediately triples (at least) the harmful effects), though I seem to remember reading somewhere that users in the US don't mix it with tobacco. It is always going to be associated as being an illegal substance / dangerous / criminal, whatever, as long as every adult generation alive today is still alive.

Should it be legalised today, I can imagine myself in fifty years time (should I make it) and saying to my grandkids or great great nephews and nieces or whoever will listen "ahh, I remember when..." and wrinkling my nose in distaste, despite my living double the amount of years with it being legal than I did with it illegal. How on earth can a drug that alters your perception of reality, ever be legalised?!

This brings me to alcohol, magic mushrooms etc... to answer your question, there is no difference, other than the legality of these, and thus, the lower prices users have to pay to get hold of them. If alcohol were to be introduced today it would be illegal... it also stinks, makes users look and act, if not "dopey" then "hard" and "aggressive" etc, and also has reputable health benefits (e.g. a glass of red wine a day is good for your heart, etc). And despite the legality of alcohol, crimes are still committed by either someone who is alcohol-dependent offending in order to get hold of their "drug" and more commonly, crimes being committed whilst someone is under the influence of alcohol (formerly known as "drunk" where is this PC stuff going to stop?!).

I do agree to the use of magic mushrooms, however, after learning all about the wonderfully fascinating "Good Friday Experiment" in a recent lecture.
Click to expand...

this post contains a number of logical fallacies.
 
here's what i found: the appeal to one's vanity by generalizing pot users as "dopey" looking; the assumption that drug use leads to violence, which is non-unique (just because violent people use drugs, that doesn't mean that drug use causes violence); stating, on behalf of everyone, that our generation's perception of marijuana won't change after it's legalized (this sounds biased); also, agreeing to the use of mushrooms because they have health benefits without quantifying what advantage they have over marijuana. anyway, i don't know the proper names for each one, but that's what i found in a nutshell.
 
To me, it's just sad that we are so focused about marijuana in this country(the U.S.) at the expense of recognizing the real menace to small towns and areas by the interstate-meth!. Couple that with the fact that our allies in Afghanistan grow illicit drugs and that they are back in business.......:rolleyes:
 
steffee said:
In the UK, users mix it with tobacco, which immediately triples (at least) the harmful effects), though I seem to remember reading somewhere that users in the US don't mix it with tobacco.
Click to expand...

To me your arguement would make more sense if you were stating that tobacco should be illegal, and pot should be legal. :confused:

And to state that magic mushrooms should be legal.....:confused: :confused:
Do you have any idea what LSD and magic mushrooms do? Have you ever tried either of them? Have you ever "tripped"? Have you ever seen anybody on a "bad trip"?
 
slaughterhigh said:
here's what i found: the appeal to one's vanity by generalizing pot users as "dopey" looking; the assumption that drug use leads to violence, which is non-unique (just because violent people use drugs, that doesn't mean that drug use causes violence); stating, on behalf of everyone, that our generation's perception of marijuana won't change after it's legalized (this sounds biased); also, agreeing to the use of mushrooms because they have health benefits without quantifying what advantage they have over marijuana. anyway, i don't know the proper names for each one, but that's what i found in a nutshell.
Click to expand...

I did say in my opinion users of marijuana look "dopey". I'll stick with that opinion.

I don't once say that drugs cause violence, and actually don't mention violence in my post at all :confused:

I didn't state on behalf of anyone, I said "I can imagine myself...". If I gave the impression that anybody at all feels that way, I apologise, because I merely meant it was my own opinion.

I don't, anywhere in my post, whatsoever, make any claims with regard to magic mushrooms and the effects of these on one's health. I have no idea of the effects on health, and was referring to a religious experiment on the effects of magic mushrooms and religious experience!!

motokid said:
To me your arguement would make more sense if you were stating that tobacco should be illegal, and pot should be legal.

And to state that magic mushrooms should be legal.....
Do you have any idea what LSD and magic mushrooms do? Have you ever tried either of them? Have you ever "tripped"? Have you ever seen anybody on a "bad trip"?
Click to expand...

In my opinion, tobacco should be illegal. "Pot" should remain illegal too. That's my opinion, though.

I didn't say magic mushrooms should be legal, but in the UK they are anyway, so that kind of ends the argument right there. I have never tried LSD or magic mushrooms and so no, I don't know the effects of them, or what is it like to experience a "bad trip", have you?... my comment on magic mushrooms was intended in humour anyway, after recently learning of an experiment on the effects of magic mushrooms and religious experience, so I apologise if this has been taken differently to how I intended. :eek:
 
SFG75 said:
To me, it's just sad that we are so focused about marijuana in this country(the U.S.) at the expense of recognizing the real menace to small towns and areas by the interstate-meth!. Couple that with the fact that our allies in Afghanistan grow illicit drugs and that they are back in business.......:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Meth as in methadone? Used to help users come off the drugs? :confused:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top