nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Why Is Marijuana Illegal?

I_AmThe_Walrus

Firstly, I want to express the fact that I am not a regular user of the drug itself, nor am I condoning it - I am just interested how society has labeled it negatively when they are unwilling to educate the ill-informed about the benefits.

1) It is not in any way, shape or form, addictive, mentally or physically.
2) It has unlimited and legitimate medical uses.
3) It is not a "gateway" drug.
4) If it was legal, organised crime would fall.
5) Government can tax it and give tourism a boost.

The funny thing about this whole farce is, Marijuana has been legal in the Netherlands since the 30's and according to the consumption stats, the Dutch use the recreational drug the least. Not one recorded fatality has occurred from the use of marijuana, yet alcohol and tobacco are severe killers and they're still available.

What are you thoughts? Should it be available for purchase, legally?

Find more posts tagged with

drugs

marijuana

Quick Links

Comments

Shulgin

DepecheHead101 wrote: »

The "War on Drugs" is a colossal failure and supporting it blindly should no longer be tolerated. Any politician who throws around politically expedient lines about being "Tough on Drugs” needs to explain why. They need to be told it is no longer acceptable in 2010 to ignore the facts that they get presented with on a regular basis. It’s no longer acceptable to overlook the dozens of newspaper articles that are published every week. The evidence is in and it’s reported on everyday. Banging on about “sending the wrong message” or being "Tough on Drugs" just doesn’t cut it anymore. In fact, it is dumb.

'Our Drugs War' was on this evening on C4.
Worth a watch. Part2 is aired next Monday.

watch it on 4OD
http://www.channel4.com/programmes/our-drugs-war/4od#3109766

Congratulations to Channel 4 for screening the most sensible film about drugs I’ve ever seen.
Whether or not you believe drugs should be de-criminalised, it’s blindingly obvious that if the intention of Britain’s drug policies is to stop people using them, then they’re absolutely not working.
Angus MacQueen’s calm, un-hysterical film asks the question we must all be wondering: what did the £1.5 billion we spent last year on fighting drugs actually achieve?
MacQueen’s stance is that the war on drugs is actually causing more harm than the drugs themselves by criminalising entire sections of the population, clogging our courts and filling our prisons without actually stemming the supply of drugs one little bit.
One expert’s figures show that police and customs are currently managing to seize just one per cent of all heroin being smuggled into Scotland.

Imagine, says MacQueen, if the police had to admit they were only able to solve 1% of all murders.
In the first of a three part series, MacQueen speaks to a former smuggler to discover how much it costs to pay off a customs officer, and also discovers how banning one substance simply causes users to switch to similar chemicals which are still legal but can be even more dangerous.
That is what happened when the government banned GHB: users switched instead to a chemical called GBL – easily available on the internet as an alloy wheel cleaner.
MacQueen meets Suzanne Dyer whose son Chris died as a result of an addiction to GBL.
Would making GBL illegal have saved his life? She thinks not.

mirror.co.uk

I_AmThe_Walrus

CALIFORNIA LAW TO LEGALIZE MARIJUANA AND ALLOW IT TO BE REGULATED AND TAXED. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
Allows people 21 years old or older to possess, cultivate, or transport marijuana for personal use. Permits local governments to regulate and tax commercial production and sale of marijuana to people 21 years old or older. Prohibits people from possessing marijuana on school grounds, using it in public, smoking it while minors are present, or providing it to anyone under 21 years old. Maintains current prohibitions against driving while impaired.

Voting commences November.

mojesius

Anyone else want to move to California?

FunkZ

mojesius wrote: »

Anyone else want to move to California?

Man, oh man! Just booked my flights. November yeah?

Cuddlesworth

I_AmThe_Walrus wrote: »

CALIFORNIA LAW TO LEGALIZE MARIJUANA AND ALLOW IT TO BE REGULATED AND TAXED. INITIATIVE STATUTE.
Allows people 21 years old or older to possess, cultivate, or transport marijuana for personal use. Permits local governments to regulate and tax commercial production and sale of marijuana to people 21 years old or older. Prohibits people from possessing marijuana on school grounds, using it in public, smoking it while minors are present, or providing it to anyone under 21 years old. Maintains current prohibitions against driving while impaired.

Voting commences November.

Which is great. But won't it still be illegal under federal law which supersedes state?

thebaz

i havn't smoked weed in years - started make me paranoid - but it should be legal to those over 18 , provided they are psychologically of sound mind - in fact most drugs should be legal , bar cocaine and lsd , that way people could safely get high on mdma/hash without sampling the head shops cheap detergent alternatives

I_AmThe_Walrus

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

Which is great. But won't it still be illegal under federal law which supersedes state?

Then what is the point of it all?

DepecheHead101

Federal law overrides state law, yeah, but it's still a step in the right direction. The DEA raid marijuana dispensaries in Cali and other states all the time but it's still going strong.

It's a statement, more than anything. And a bloody good one at that.

thebaz wrote: »

i havn't smoked weed in years - started make me paranoid - but it should be legal to those over 18 , provided they are psychologically of sound mind - in fact most drugs should be legal , bar cocaine and lsd , that way people could safely get high on mdma/hash without sampling the head shops cheap detergent alternatives

Controversial opinion on LSD there but I can see the logic. People are too stupid for recreational LSD. I can imagine an influx of bug eyed knackers trying to rob the phone off a postbox.

Still though, I'm not into selective freedom. It's just not right for me to constantly bring up the alcohol compasisons when smoking my dope and banging on about cognitive liberty, but then tell others 'but don't touch coke, mate'. Decrimanalize the lot of them and fully legalize the ones on the safer end of the scale. Prohibition doesn't help and does more harm than good. No matter what the drug or it's dangers.

Manic Moran

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

Which is great. But won't it still be illegal under federal law which supersedes state?

Yes. For pretty much the last decade the federal policy has been to only enforce the federal laws against individuals or organisations which are exceeding their authorised operations under a State's medical marijuana laws. Indeed, usually when they do so, it is at the request of local law enforcement who then get rid of a problem without having to pay for the expenses, it all goes on the Federal tab. Exactly what was the future policy will be remains unclear.

NTM

Mike 1972

Many of the US federal laws on cannabis are constitutionally speaking a complete crock of shyte regardless of what any packed supreme court says.

Federal juristiction only applies if the stuff is transported in/out if the country, across state lines or via a federal building, military base or national park.

I_AmThe_Walrus

Mike 1972 wrote: »

Many of the US federal laws on cannabis are constitutionally speaking a complete crock of shyte regardless of what any packed supreme court says.

Federal juristiction only applies if the stuff is transported in/out if the country, across state lines or via a federal building, military base or national park.

I.C.

Sea Sharp

Good stuff, I can finally live out my life-long ambition of being a California hobo who surfs and gets stoned all day.

[Deleted User]

I_AmThe_Walrus wrote: »

Maintains current prohibitions against driving while impaired.

Considering the amount of time it stays in the system, I wonder how police would enforce this.

kylith

Deleted User wrote: »

Considering the amount of time it stays in the system, I wonder how police would enforce this.

Do you mean how long it can be detected for if you're tested, such as hair samples? If so then that would only show that you have taken it in the past, but not that you are currently high. They can also test your hair to find out if you've ever drunk alcohol, but you couldn't be given a ticket for DUI for it.

ScumLord

kylith wrote: »

Do you mean how long it can be detected for if you're tested, such as hair samples? If so then that would only show that you have taken it in the past, but not that you are currently high. They can also test your hair to find out if you've ever drunk alcohol, but you couldn't be given a ticket for DUI for it.

As far as I know they don't test for the active ingredient at all, just one of the chemicals which does stay in your system for a long time. Makes the test pointless if true.

Galway K9

Is their not long terms effects on health? also i heard of sever side effects. ALso any drug or substance including food can become addictive depending on the individual and their personality.

Also alot of users use this drug to self medicate e.g. people with adhd.

Im not against it being legalised just stating what i know and heard.

charlemont

Galway K9 wrote: »

Is their not long terms effects on health? also i heard of sever side effects. ALso any drug or substance including food can become addictive depending on the individual and their personality.

Also alot of users use this drug to self medicate e.g. people with adhd.

Im not against it being legalised just stating what i know and heard.

your probably right about the ADD i have it but because i smoke/ quietened down/ grew up i dont have the d Hyperactivity.............by the way i dont take medication for ADD as its pointless, ADD obviously isnt a life threatening illness and anyhow the Ritalin is dodgy its same as speed , i dont want to be going around whacked/wired out of it everyday.....

runman

I_AmThe_Walrus wrote: »

This issue must be openly debated using only the facts. Groundless claims, meaningless statistics, and exaggerated scare stories that have been peddled by politicians and prohibitionists. ANNUAL DEATHS CAUSED BY DRUGS.

TOBACCO …………………… 400,000
ALCOHOL …………………… 100,000
ALL LEGAL DRUGS ……… 20,000
ALL ILLEGAL DRUGS ……15,000
CAFFEINE ……………………. 2,000
ASPIRIN ……………………… 500
MARIJUANA …………………. 0
—————————————-

And the smoking of marijuana with tobacco would make it a killer of course considering 90% of weed is smoked with tobacco.

Ask any GP about the affects of marijuana on people.. Definately has phychological affects on a fair few people..Anxiety, depression and the rest. Iv seen it many times.

HavingCrack

Because Alcohol and Tobacco companies were afraid they would see their profits fall and put pressure on governments to make marijuana illegal in the early-mid 20th century. That is the only real answer to be honest and the status quo has stayed the same since then.

I'm always suprised people bring up Holland as a shining example of marijuana heaven. Last time I checked Portugal has the most liberal drugs laws in Europe by far and has seen a massive decrease in crime as a result over the past 2 years.

Galway K9

charlemont wrote: »

your probably right about the ADD i have it but because i smoke/ quietened down/ grew up i dont have the d Hyperactivity.............by the way i dont take medication for ADD as its pointless, ADD obviously isnt a life threatening illness and anyhow the Ritalin is dodgy its same as speed , i dont want to be going around whacked/wired out of it everyday.....

welll ive ADHD too but dont do drugs but do abuse alcohol at times which im addressing.

My meds are strattera and a non stimulant medication so never wacked out or space. ritalin and those stimulants are deadly in my opinion.

Manic Moran

Mike 1972 wrote: »

Many of the US federal laws on cannabis are constitutionally speaking a complete crock of shyte regardless of what any packed supreme court says.

Federal juristiction only applies if the stuff is transported in/out if the country, across state lines or via a federal building, military base or national park.

Packed supreme court? Have you actually read the opinions and bothered to look at who concurred with which opinion? How often did you ever see Scalia and Ginsburg concurring with each other on a case with political intonations?

Not to mention, the 'liberals' on the court were in the majority.

The 'across state lines' argument was part of that made by the Federal Government. It was impossible to determine if the drug was made in the State it was found or if it had travelled across State lines. As a result, the current States Rights case, which has to do with firearms, has as part of the legislation requirements that the item in question have engraved into the metal the State of origin, thus preventing the inter-state commerce argument.

NTM

[Deleted User]

I couldn't really care less to be honest.

I_AmThe_Walrus

Lia_lia wrote: »

I couldn't really care less to be honest.

Would you care if alcohol was criminalised?

[Deleted User]

^ Nope.

Doriath

1) It is not in any way, shape or form, addictive, mentally or physically.

It's psychologically addictive.

2) It has unlimited and legitimate medical uses.

*limited

3) It is not a "gateway" drug.

It is a gateway drug. The way drug bans work is by having a social taboo against drugs to deter people experimenting. If people start using marijuana there isnt as much of a taboo against using other drugs. In the same way Mephedrome being legal worked.

4) If it was legal, organised crime would fall.

Lol no chance. All the weed dealers I've heard about are just normal people growing it and selling on the side.

Im sure Organized crime finances itself with more profitable drugs, weed is cheap and bulky compared to other drugs.

5) Government can tax it and give tourism a boost.

Sell your kidney to a rich man in the US and donate the money to the government!

The tourism you want is people coming over for drugs?!? thats a great idea for a family tourism destination, maybe have a few brothels to cater to sex tourism for the virgins too!

ScumLord

runman wrote: »

And the smoking of marijuana with tobacco would make it a killer of course considering 90% of weed is smoked with tobacco.

Ask any GP about the affects of marijuana on people.. Definately has phychological affects on a fair few people..Anxiety, depression and the rest. Iv seen it many times.

For gods sake, obviously doctors are going to hear stuff like that, it's not like people go into doctors to tell them how enjoyable their day was after having a nice spliff. People generally only ever have bad news for their doctors.

Sanjuro

D.R cowboy wrote: »

I will if you take back your thread, drugs destroy peoples lives every day and make it hell for people likes us, who have to live with those people in our society.

If everyone was high, nothing would get done.

Alcohol destroys lives every day. Cars destroy lives every day. Kitchen-ware destroys lives every day. Anybody with a modicum of sense would not think that society would fall apart if marijuana was legalised.

Ridiculous 'THINK OF THE CHILDREN' type arguments should be automatically disregarded.

ScumLord

Sanjuro wrote: »

Alcohol destroys lives every day. Cars destroy lives every day. Kitchen-ware destroys lives every day. Anybody with a modicum of sense would not think that society would fall apart if marijuana was legalised.

Ridiculous 'THINK OF THE CHILDREN' type arguments should be automatically disregarded.

There's also the Irish are to backward and uncivilised to change the laws argument which I assume means people prefer organised crime and violence.

Sheeps

:420:

thebigbiffo

Sheeps wrote: »

:420:

see ya then:cool: