Legalize Marijuana UPDATE W/ POLL

[Baked]

People need to relax... *puffs the magic dragon*

 

[crownjules]

Originally posted by: Eeezee
Marijuana does not kill "zero" people. You can easily kill yourself as a result of smoking weed (like getting in a car and then plowing it into something). It certainly does kill a lot fewer people than alcohol, though

This is not being killed my marijuana. This is being under the influence of it and then doing something stupid. When people say that marijuana has never killed anyone, they mean just by smoking it. In other words, you can not overdose or smoke a quantity that will kill you outright. This can not be said for alcohol, heroin, cocaine, etc..

My view is that the it should be legal. I used to be a stoner, not so much anymore but I still partake once in awhile. The stereotype that stoners are lazy POSes that amount to nothing is ridiculous. I held good grades, graduated college, and now hold a successful job. It's not about the drug, it's about a person's self-control. Marijuana is arguably less dangerous than alcohol and is not physically addicting. It should be my choice and my choice alone whether or not I want to use it and risk future harm to my body. On top of it all, the government would save a lot of money in their silly "war on drugs" and potentially make some.

 

[imported_hscorpio]

Originally posted by: Eeezee
Marijuana does not kill "zero" people. You can easily kill yourself as a result of smoking weed (like getting in a car and then plowing it into something). It certainly does kill a lot fewer people than alcohol, though

How about decriminalization? If you get caught with marijuana, you're given a fine. This saves taxpayer money in that I no longer have to pay money for a pot smoker to go to jail and the government will make more money from the fines! There is NOTHING wrong with decriminalization!

In that case you killed yourself in an automobile accident, the weed didn't force you to get behind the wheel impaired.

And decriminalization was already adressed. The situation you describe is in place in many states already.

 

[Josh]

yay for denver.

 

[exodus454]

Originally posted by: hscorpio
And decriminalization was already adressed. The situation you describe is in place in many states already.

but its worthless in a sense because its still illegal under federal law. federal decriminalization is what we need.

 

[imported_hscorpio]

Originally posted by: exodus454

Originally posted by: hscorpio
And decriminalization was already adressed. The situation you describe is in place in many states already.

but its worthless in a sense because its still illegal under federal law. federal decriminalization is what we need.

It won't make a difference if only small possession results in a fine at the national level. Possession is almost always dealt with by local law unless it's huge like pounds, then the feds come in.

Any plan that doesn't address the suplly side of marijuana is flawed.

 

[Muse]

Originally posted by: SampSon
No, don't legalize it, decriminalize it.

Legalization is the warcry of the ignorant.

Good point.

 

[Muse]

Originally posted by: Janet Reno
No adverse side effects? All the hommies I know who did it all the time ended up a bit slower than the others. And I KNOWS it's got something involved with the debilitation of short term memory.

Well, it's true that pot can be abused with negative consequences. You don't want to become a pothead, IMO. You don't want to have to smoke a couple of joints every day or twice a day. Use it, but not all the time. Don't need it. Maintain the ability to get along without it and do fine. Then you will get the most out of it, in any case.

 

[FrancesBeansRevenge]

Originally posted by: SMOGZINN
Yes, as far as we know no cannabis plant has every attacked and killed a human.
People have died from cancer caused by smoking cannabis. It has many of the same carcinogens as tobacco.
People have died from emphysema like complications from smoking cannabis. Like Tobacco it contains tar.
People have died from fires started when someone did not properly put out a joint. It burns at a similar temperature as tobacco.

hehe in those examples the persons were killed by inhaling smoke (inhaling ANY sort of smoke is inherently bad for the lungs obviously)or by fire.... not cannabis.

Like a growing number of cannabis users I only vaporize or cook with it thereby cutting out both the smoke and fire dangers (microprocessor controlled electronic heating element on the vaporizer I use). CASUAL USE by these delivery methods is AS HARMLESS AS ANY MOOD ALTERING SUBSTANCE CAN BE (not to be confused with completely harmless of course). Abuse and psychological addiction are of course possible downsides... but these can occur with any 'pleasure substance' as evidenced by America's addiction to fast food and has more to do with one's personality than the substance.

Also, more people die in car accidents due to SLEEP than cannabis yet you can NOT claim sleep is deadly. The danger is in the reduction of response whether it be due to intoxication, sleep, or putting on makeup in the rear view mirror.

Yet another category of death attributed to cannabis are the 'deal gone wrong' deaths/murders. These deaths actually belong to the 'black market' category as
the trade of ANY valuable but illegal substance carries with it these dangers. Remove the criminality and you remove the criminals.

Stupidity and irresponsibility kills, not cannabis.
And abuse of anything can be dangerous to your health and/or have negative effects of your life... especially, but not limited to, mind altering substances.

 

[imported_hscorpio]

Originally posted by: SMOGZINN
People have died from cancer caused by smoking cannabis. It has many of the same carcinogens as tobacco.

You might want to do some more research on cancer and cannabis before stating something like that as fact.

 

[shilala]

RRRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooollllllllllllllllllllllllllll
llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll another one.
Just like the other one.

 

[FrancesBeansRevenge]

Oops... double post. Must be all the fried brain cells.

 

[FrancesBeansRevenge]

Originally posted by: hscorpio

Originally posted by: SMOGZINN
People have died from cancer caused by smoking cannabis. It has many of the same carcinogens as tobacco.

You might want to do some more research on cancer and cannabis before stating something like that as fact.

Even though cannabis doesn't have quite as many carcinogens as tobacco (no matter what D.A.R.E. might tell you) it still has ENOUGH to be a serious health concern.

Why not join the vaporization revolution? Don't be fooled, all vaporizers are not created equal. There are MANY on the market but only 2 or 3 that work well enough to eliminate the need to smoke. One of those is my favorite the Volcano:

The new study used a gas chromatograph mass spectrometer (GCMS) to examine the gas components of the vapor. The analysis showed that the Volcano® vapor was remarkably clean, consisting 95% of THC with traces of cannabinol (CBN), another cannabinoid. The remaining 5% consisted of small amounts of three other components: one suspected cannabinoid relative, one suspected PAH, and caryophyllene, a fragrant oil in cannabis and other plants. In contrast over 111 different components appeared in the gas of the combusted smoke, including a half dozen known PAHs. Non-cannabinoids accounted for as much as 88% of the total gas content of the smoke.

The study used standard NIDA cannabis with 4% THC content. A quantitative analysis found that the Volcano® delivered 46% of the THC into vapor following three 45-second exposures of the sample to the heat. This compares favorably with the typical efficiency of marijuana cigarettes as observed in other studies, which depending on conditions can fall below 25% due to loss of THC in sidestream smoke. An important feature of the Volcano® is that it uses a balloon to capture the vapor, thereby avoiding leakage to the air. It is possible that higher THC efficiencies could have been reached with the Volcano® by stirring the sample around and exposing it to more heat.

The combusted sample achieved a relatively high THC efficiency of 78% upon complete combustion. The high efficiency seems due to the fact that the sample was completely consumed by combustion, and that smoke leakage was effectively prevented by the laboratory setup. Similar conditions do not obtain under normal circumstances when a marijuana cigarette is smoked and much of the THC is lost to the air or left in the unburned "roach."

Two other cannabinoids , cannabidiol (CBD) and cannabinol (CBN), were detected in the NIDA cannabis in trace amounts of 0.1%. Both the Volcano® and combustion delivered an apparent increase in CBD and CBN, but the variance of the data was too high to reach statistically significant conclusions.

Text

 

[imported_hscorpio]

Originally posted by: FrancesBeansRevenge

Originally posted by: hscorpio

Originally posted by: SMOGZINN
People have died from cancer caused by smoking cannabis. It has many of the same carcinogens as tobacco.

You might want to do some more research on cancer and cannabis before stating something like that as fact.

Even though cannabis doesn't have quite as many carcinogens as tobacco (no matter what D.A.R.E. might tell you) it still has ENOUGH to be a serious health concern.

Why not join the vaporization revolution? Don't be fooled, all vaporizers are not created equal. There are MANY on the market but only 2 or 3 that work well enough to eliminate the need to smoke. One of those is my favorite the Volcano:

I know about the benefits of vaporizers and have read the study your refering to.

My point was that the cannabis causes cancer claim is not at all based on any factual evidence. You can't just make the conclusion that cannabis causes cancer because it has many of the same tars that tobacco smoke has.

 

[FrancesBeansRevenge]

Originally posted by: hscorpio
I know about the benefits of vaporizers and have read the study your refering to.

My point was that the cannabis causes cancer claim is not at all based on any factual evidence. You can't just make the conclusion that cannabis causes cancer because it has many of the same tars that tobacco smoke has.

Fair enough.

From everything I've ever read the increased risk of cancer is related to the delivery method not neccesarily the substance. You can also vaporize tobacco and drastically reduce harm. Indeed smoking cannabis would be far more harmful to your lungs than vaporizing tobacco.

Inhaling the smoke of any combusted substance is bad for the health of your lungs. I'm not sure that can even be debated.

 

[imported_hscorpio]

Originally posted by: FrancesBeansRevenge

Originally posted by: hscorpio
I know about the benefits of vaporizers and have read the study your referring to.

My point was that the cannabis causes cancer claim is not at all based on any factual evidence. You can't just make the conclusion that cannabis causes cancer because it has many of the same tars that tobacco smoke has.

Fair enough.

From everything I've ever read the increased risk of cancer is related to the delivery method not necessarily the substance. You can also vaporize tobacco and drastically reduce harm. Indeed smoking cannabis would be far more harmful to your lungs than vaporizing tobacco.

Inhaling the smoke of any combusted substance is bad for the health of your lungs. I'm not sure that can even be debated.

I agree. But there is some research that indicates some cannabinoids disrupt the cancer causing processes believed to be in action when smoke is inhaled, which might explain the absence of heavy pot smokers with lung cancer. Also tobacco contains very powerful carcinogens not just those from combustion, which is why tobacco users that don't smoke (dip, chew) still can get cancer around the mouth.

Inhaling any smoke is not good for our respiratory system.

 

[AlienCraft]

Originally posted by: FrancesBeansRevenge

Originally posted by: hscorpio
I know about the benefits of vaporizers and have read the study your refering to.

My point was that the cannabis causes cancer claim is not at all based on any factual evidence. You can't just make the conclusion that cannabis causes cancer because it has many of the same tars that tobacco smoke has.

Fair enough.

From everything I've ever read the increased risk of cancer is related to the delivery method not neccesarily the substance. You can also vaporize tobacco and drastically reduce harm. Indeed smoking cannabis would be far more harmful to your lungs than vaporizing tobacco.

Inhaling the smoke of any combusted substance is bad for the health of your lungs. I'm not sure that can even be debated.

Well, smoking modern cigarettes is smoking freebased tobacco. The ammonia compunds acts in much the same way baking soda does, in that it's an endothermic reaction. (need to apply heat) to split the molecule and free the ion. Given that there are other substances in cigarettes such as to keep it from going out, enhance "flavor", etc. who knows what effects the combination of all these other elements really is.
I have a theory that Plain , Ol' Tobacco is probably not much more detrimental (in moderation) as alcohol.
Plain, Ol', unadulterated tobacco has never been studied, so far as I know.

 

[Udel]

I smoke every few days. Its such a smaller deal then you neo-cons think. Do as you will with your life.

 

[FrancesBeansRevenge]

Originally posted by: hscorpio
I agree. But there is some research that indicates some cannabinoids disrupt the cancer causing processes believed to be in action when smoke is inhaled, which might explain the absence of heavy pot smokers with lung cancer. Also tobacco contains very powerful carcinogens not just those from combustion, which is why tobacco users that don't smoke (dip, chew) still can get cancer around the mouth.

Inhaling any smoke is not good for our respiratory system.

Great points. The most unfortunate part of the 'War on Drugs' hysteria is the resulting lack of long term studies involving what might be one natures most versatile medicines.

Marijuana might cause new cell growth in the brain

 

[FrancesBeansRevenge]

Originally posted by: AlienCraft
Plain, Ol', unadulterated tobacco has never been studied, so far as I know.

That's also a good point. I wonder how much of the harm comes from the added chemicals versus naturally occuring chems.

 

[imported_hscorpio]

Originally posted by: FrancesBeansRevenge

Originally posted by: hscorpio
I agree. But there is some research that indicates some cannabinoids disrupt the cancer causing processes believed to be in action when smoke is inhaled, which might explain the absence of heavy pot smokers with lung cancer. Also nicotine itself is a very powerful carcinogen, which is why tobacco users that don't smoke (dip, chew) still can get cancer around the mouth.

Inhaling any smoke is not good for our respiratory system.

Great points. The most unfortunate part of the 'War on Drugs' hysteria is the resulting lack of long term studies involving what might be one natures most versatile medicines.

Marijuana might cause new cell growth in the brain

I edited my post because I didn't mean to say nicotine was a carcinogen all by itself, I meant tobacco thats not combusted into smoke.

 

[FrancesBeansRevenge]

Originally posted by: hscorpio
I edited my post because I didn't mean to say nicotine was a carcinogen all by itself, I meant tobacco thats not combusted into smoke.

I understood your intention even through my cannabinoid coated synaptic receptors.

 

[AlienCraft]

Originally posted by: Udel
I smoke every few days. Its such a smaller deal then you neo-cons think. Do as you will with your life.

Despite the propaganda of Republicans as to No Government Intrusion in Private Lives, their aim is to Do with Your life as They will.
The Republican Party has been hijacked by the Religous Right.

 

[imported_hscorpio]

Originally posted by: FrancesBeansRevenge

Originally posted by: hscorpio
I edited my post because I didn't mean to say nicotine was a carcinogen all by itself, I meant tobacco thats not combusted into smoke.

I understood your intention even through my cannabinoid coated synaptic receptors.

:laugh:

 

[sodcha0s]

Originally posted by: GeorgiaBadger

Originally posted by: sodcha0s
First let me say that I'm all for at LEAST decriminalizing marijuana. I have always said it is a far safer drug than alchohol in every way. I have driven stoned many, many times and all I can say about it is that it made me drive slower than normal, and I seemed to concentrate more on driving while influenced by it.

In 1995, based on thirty years of scientific research, editors of the British medical journal Lancet concluded that "the smoking of cannabis, even long term, is not harmful to health."

I can't say I agree here. Personally, I have noticed an effect on my memory, especially short term. I also can't seem to think as clearly at times, I forget peoples names constantly. Now it's not to the point of not being able to function, but it is annoying especially when I'm trying to tell someone a story or explain something, and I can't come up with the words. I haven't smoked for over 10 years, I have a federally funded, saftey sensitive job that requires random testing so I gave it up. But I smoked a lifetimes worth in my teen years, and in retrospect, I wish I had found something better to do.

dude - you're OLD - that's what happens naturally with aging

LMAO I'm not really that old, but I realize that is part of it. I'm almost 38, but these effects appeared in my early 20's when I was still smoking, and have never went away.