However, there are some who need marijuana to reduce their anxiety levels down to what we could call normal. People who suffer PTSD might fall under this category.

I am pretty convinced that the benefits outweigh the harm. Water can cause harm if you drink enough of it. I have no idea why it needs to be excused. As long as no one is forcing you to partake then what do you care?

I am quite happy to accept that there are many legitimate medical uses for Cannabis, which are proven to be efficacious, and these are readily documented elsewhere. Recreational Cannabis users do tend to be rather self righteous about their use of it as far as I can see, and don't like being seen as drug users, which in fact they are. I don't care at all if others use it, their choice, as is mine not to. I might think they are foolish, but there you are.

(and quite honestly you might benefit from a little once in a while)

ROTFLMAO, that has just got to be one of your classic comments of all time :-))) If you think for one teeny weeny moment that I would ever poke my nose into this cesspool of a Politics forum without being in full 100% possession of all my faculties, then you are rather sadly mistaken. Rattling ones cage are we?

Not at all. It was just an observation.

Oh my word, that has quite made my evening. And as to that I am about to open a bottle of a rather nice red wine that a friend gave me for mending his computer. Cheers Es :-)

Enjoy your drug of choice.

---

Reality Internet Personality

This thread will be saved for posterity, and the higher authorites at Berkeley University.

California's Medical Marijuana Program

---

Reality Internet Personality

Cannabis use is criminal.

Not where I live, you are guilty of making a sweeping over generalization.

...and here the mounties aren't allowed to smoke it while in uniform.

Mountie says he has 'legal right' to smoke medical marijuana in uniform

That is a rather sad reference Es.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/10/06/ron-francis-pot-smoking-mountie-who-suffered-from-ptsd-found-dead/

Yes, I know. PTSD is a very difficult. I think having his uniform taken away was the final straw.

---

Reality Internet Personality

Cannabis use is criminal.

Not where I live, you are guilty of making a sweeping over generalization.

...and here the mounties aren't allowed to smoke it while in uniform.

Mountie says he has 'legal right' to smoke medical marijuana in uniform

He has the 'Right' to take any Prescribed Drug, which may impair his judgment, while working?

Apparently he believes he has No Judgment to Impair. I agree.

I don't think many people think he was right.

What is telling is that he was a mountie who could legally use marijuana as long as he was not on duty.

---

Reality Internet Personality

This thread will be saved for posterity, and the higher authorites at Berkeley University.

California's Medical Marijuana Program

Please continue. This thread is full of support of non medical use, and that is a crime in most nations. I don't give a flying F if it's socially acceptable, it is still a crime. Would you support murder too, if that became socially acceptable? (It is socially acceptable in Syria and Iraq)

But by all means, don't be responsible, and law abiding. All eventual respect I had for you is totally gone. You don't care about that either, so please continue spreading the news about the wonderful pot, even though recreational use is illegal, criminal. For all I care pot heads should be thrown in jail.

This thread will go to the history as the most irresponsible, not at all moderated thread. Seems as if all mods nowadays supports pot heads.

This is an American forum on American servers in the state of California and as such is subject to their laws.

Freedom of speech is enshrined in the American constitution, so a healthy discussion on the pros and cons of marijuana is not illegal.

I am quite sure that the mods will step in should anyone here do anything that is actually illegal, such as trying to sell pot via the forum.

And BTW, no I am not a feminist any longer. You took that right out of me.

Fortunately for me (and thanks to feminism) I don't need your approval to have an opinion. That your "feminism" was conditional on that, shows that you really, never were one.

---

Reality Internet Personality

This thread will be saved for posterity, and the higher authorites at Berkeley University.

California's Medical Marijuana Program

Please continue. This thread is full of support of non medical use, and that is a crime in most nations. I don't give a flying F if it's socially acceptable, it is still a crime. Would you support murder too, if that became socially acceptable? (It is socially acceptable in Syria and Iraq)

But by all means, don't be responsible, and law abiding. All eventual respect I had for you is totally gone. You don't care about that either, so please continue spreading the news about the wonderful pot, even though recreational use is illegal, criminal. For all I care pot heads should be thrown in jail.

This thread will go to the history as the most irresponsible, not at all moderated thread. Seems as if all mods nowadays supports pot heads.

This is an American forum on American servers in the state of California and as such is subject to their laws.

Freedom of speech is enshrined in the American constitution, so a healthy discussion on the pros and cons of marijuana is not illegal.

I am quite sure that the mods will step in should anyone here do anything that is actually illegal, such as trying to sell pot via the forum.

And BTW, no I am not a feminist any longer. You took that right out of me.

Fortunately for me (and thanks to feminism) I don't need your approval to have an opinion. That your "feminism" was conditional on that, shows that you really, never were one.

Since I've had it with your style, I'm going to block you so I don't need to have a raised heart rate every time I see one of your posts. Mod or not, you're blocked.

Well thank goodness for that.

---

Reality Internet Personality

Hard working people don't use pot

So you are accusing a very good friend of mine of being a liar, because he is a recreational smoker, you are saying that he doesn't hold down a normal job and work hard 5 days a week.

I am afraid to tell you that when I was working I knew several people who worked hard 5 sometimes 6 days a week and were "pot heads" as you describe at weekends.

---

Equal Protection is in regard to Constitutional Rights. There is also Federal Authority over Interstate Commerce.

The State Marijuana Laws are about Internal, not Interstate Commerce. Many States have different Laws, Statutory Rape Laws as one example (ages involved), which The Fed's have no Authority.

Yes, the Fed's have no Authority over a bunch of State laws. However, not even 'Interstate Commerce' (The Fed's FAVORITE go-to catch-all for justifying their actions) applies in the case of.... "Controlled Substances" like, marijuana.

The Federal Government at first regulated 'drugs' on the basis of its Constitutional power to TAX. These regulations eventually got overturned for one reason or another, but by then the precedent had been set.

US Constitution Article I Section 8

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.
.
.
.

Excise Tax.

The US Federal Government has the right under the Constitution to tax certain goods.

http://facultypages.morris.umn.edu/~ratliffj/psy1081/drug_laws.htm

The 1914 Harrison Tax Act ('narcotics') started the trend, which was then reinforced by the 1937 Marijuana Tax act which wasn't overturned until 1969.

It was illegal to possess, sell, or use a 'drug' without proof the Tax has been paid, and since the Federal Government did not issue such proof this essentially banned them.

Direct Federal prohibition of various 'drugs' didn't start until 1965 with the Drug Abuse Control Amendments and continued with the 1970 Controlled Substances Act.

From the page I linked:

Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970 (Controlled Substance Act of 1970)-- Specifically stated that drugs under act were now under Federal jurisdiction and dealt with both narcotics and other "dangerous" drugs. Also dealt with prevention and treatment. Treated marijuana differently-- making a separate commission to study this and report in 1972. Continuing with the trend started in 1965, and in contrast to early acts, this one was to control drugs directly, not through taxes-- moving enforcement out of Treasury to Justice and established the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA). Attorney General in charge of enforcement; but Health, Education, and Welfare (through the FDA) in charge of defining what needs to be controlled, considering:
1) pharmacologic actions
2) other scientific knowledge about it and related drugs.
3) risk to public health
4) dependence (psychic or physiologic) potential
5) whether the drug was a pre-curser for other drugs listed.
Alcohol, nicotine, and caffeine excluded.

(Most) States have laws against Marijuana. 2 have repealed them. But that is a QUITE separate issue from the Federal Laws against Marijuana. Ignore those at your peril.

Will the Federal Government change its laws re: Marijuana? I have no clue. Remember, it has been tried before, even by a President in the 1970s (Carter). But there is a VERY vocal group of people opposing a change in the Federal Law re: Marijuana. It is going to take a HUGE popular groundswell of support to change those laws. Hence, my 'political theater' comment.

Hard working people don't use pot

So you are accusing a very good friend of mine of being a liar, because he is a recreational smoker, you are saying that he doesn't hold down a normal job and work hard 5 days a week.

I am afraid to tell you that when I was working I knew several people who worked hard 5 sometimes 6 days a week and were "pot heads" as you describe at weekends.

As I said hard working people don't use pot.

On to the moon humanity went, and not with weed in the lunar lander.

Had they not smoked weed, they would have been able to work harder. Ie being hard working.

Maybe you think they worked hard, but you would really have seen hard working if they didn't smoke weed. The parliament will debate this I'm sure. Where I do not know, but we sing along....

I don't know your friend, so I can't judge his ability to work hard. However without weed hard would be harder.

Hmm OK in that case we had better stamp out pot and all the national debt will be cured overnight as thousands of workers will suddenly be able to work harder.
I suspect you will find that pot is smoked by a lot more people than you seem to think.

Here in the UK, the police have the option to either caution or fine someone who has a small amount of cannabis on them if the are happy it is not for selling. The fine is an on the spot fine so no criminal record.

I have seen several American "reality cop shows" where possession of cannabis is treated as a misdemeanor. So I suppose in you estimation society is doomed as the "pot heads" will soon have the upper hand.

Personally I never got into it as it was just to expensive and now having got this far I hope I won't need it to dull pain in old age, but I would not hesitate to use it if I felt it would help.

---

The real question is why are you so keen on keeping the stigma? I am still not convinced that the risks of marijuana are enough that we need to stigmatise it...and as Julie has pointed out, making something illegal actually increases its attractiveness to teens.

Which again, is why you decriminalize it. And why keep the stigma? Because its bad for you. Again, the science is pretty clear on that.

To sum up. Read the report, not the newspaper summaries. I stand by my argument that all the data is not yet in. As supported by the (actual) report that Chris posted at the beginning of this thread.

Honestly we have banned things for less. Do you really want to tell people its safe to use a substance that has been linked to increased risk of psychosis, cognitive impairment, birth failures and is also addictive? Yeah sure, the evidence isn't a 100% conclusive, but that cuts both ways. Its also far from proven to be safe for use, and even when its inconclusive it hardly paints a very nice picture of cannabis.

But hey, lets just assume its safe.

On top of that, this is only cannabis, which okay, might not be that bad (but still bad). But you are talking about legalizing all drugs, including the stuff like crack, heroin, cocaine and meth. And be honest there, those things are not like cannabis. That stuff is just plain bad for you. The science on that is clear.

I'm sorry that you don't understand how addiction works. To get addicted to something you have to be exposed to it. Drug dealers use many methods to get their client to try the drugs. I am pretty sure that if drugs are legal and regulated giving out free samples at the school gates would not be allowed...and if the legal trade drives the illegal trade out of business then this won't be happening.

That is a very positive assumption, and one I can assure you that is also never going to happen. The simple fact is that a legalized drug trade would also be a heavily regulated drug trade. Exactly because legal drug dealers can't sell their drugs at school there will still be illegal drug dealers who break the law so they can sell their poison at schools. Legalizing the drug trade will not solve this.

And there is proof for this. Take a look at the US gun market. Guns are legally sold there to the public, but this is a controlled market. Legal gun dealers cannot sell to just anyone and they can't just sell everything. So what do we see? Right, an black market for guns that sells to customers who can't get what they want in the legal market.

That may or may not be true. I think it is unlikely because when something is not illegal people are MORE likely to seek help, not LESS likely. There is simply a greater supply of these drugs than there ever has been. They have to be going somewhere. It was not the multibillion industry then that it is today.

Oh yeah right, because addicts usually seek help by themselves. Because addicts are so good at recognizing that they got a problem and because addicts make such great life decisions. Especially with people addicted to hard drugs my guess is that they need to be forced into the rehab system by an outside force, such as the police rather than that they go in there on their own accord.

The amount of heroin being produced simply does not back this statement up.

Well clearly it does given that there are now more addicts than before. Unless you are suggesting that the system is counting people as heroin addicts when they in fact are not addicted to heroin.

There are so many assumptions about what you think I understand here that I'm not going to bother answering.

I'm not the one suggesting to put relapse triggers everywhere for people with a history of hard drug abuse.

It is clear that you do not understand the addictive nature and health problems associated with alcohol use, which every scientist will tell you is a far worse drug than marijuana.

I wasn't talking about marijuana, I was talking about hard drugs. Again, you are the one that suggested to legalize all drugs, not just marijuana.

Besides, I know more people that can handle their alcohol well, while I know almost no one who handles his weed well. If weed is such a safe drug, then why are, of the handful of people I know who use it, nearly all of them addicts, while of the much larger group of people I know who drink alcohol, maybe 1 can be said to have a potential drinking issue? Statistically this shouldn't be. Not to these extremes.

As it also quite obvious, banning illegal drugs is also impossible. They are addictive and so the demand, once created, is self sustaining.

You know thats not a reason to just legalize it. Technically making some form of behavior illegal has never stopped anyone from still doing it. Murder is illegal, but people still do kill each other. Rape is illegal, but it happens all the time. Driving past the speed limit is illegal, but plenty of people still do it. So I guess then that according to your logic, we should just legalize all those things as well?

The thing with alcohol and fast food is that the flood gates for those things have already been opened and they have been opened for decades or in the case of alcohol, centuries. The flood gates for illegal drugs have so far been kept close, but once you start legalizing the whole thing, you will open them and we will never be able to close them again.

Well this is certainly separating the open minds from the closed minds.

It also shows that some here just don't understand that medical cannabis doesn't contain THC (the high), it only has the CBD content (good for many chronic problems).

Cheers.

Well this is certainly separating the open minds from the closed minds.

It also shows that some here just don't understand that medical cannabis doesn't contain THC (the high), it only has the CBD content (good for many chronic problems).

Cheers.

Well, some here seems to have such an open mind that their brain fell out.

Naw, just using pot to regenerate what little they had in the first place :-)

The third mod supporting use of an illegal substance. This is really getting disturbing. Is this Seti@home, or Seti@weed? What would scientific media say, if they got their hands on a link to this thread, I really wonder.....

I Don't Wonder. Much of The Media is Stoned To The Bone.

The World Likes Weed or Thangs Like 'it'.

People Love da High.

We Rule. Open Minds are Full of Dope. heeeheeeheee

Stay North Young Man.

' '

---

May we All have a METAMORPHOSIS. REASON. GOoD JUDGEMENT and LOVE and ORDER!!!!!

The third mod supporting use of an illegal substance.

Well I didn't actually say I supported it I said that there are a lot of people using it who you might not suspect, you probably won't be arrested for carrying small amounts.

Also I am not as convinced as you that it turns people in to psychotic wrecks.

And yes I would use it for pain relief if it helped.

PS. This is the politics forum, it is why it exists, for calm rational discussion of important topics!!

---

The third mod supporting use of an illegal substance. This is really getting disturbing. Is this Seti@home, or Seti@weed? What would scientific media say, if they got their hands on a link to this thread, I really wonder.....

Probably think what a golden opportunity to create a study group & ask the Bimbo in the White House for some funding :-)

Which again, is why you decriminalize it. And why keep the stigma? Because its bad for you. Again, the science is pretty clear on that.

Did you even read my post.

Its not that clear...and it is starting to look like the benefits outweigh the risks.

Honestly we have banned things for less. Do you really want to tell people its safe to use a substance that has been linked to increased risk of psychosis, cognitive impairment, birth failures and is also addictive?

ffs, will you just read the damn article? None of these risks have been proven.

Yeah sure, the evidence isn't a 100% conclusive, but that cuts both ways. Its also far from proven to be safe for use, and even when its inconclusive it hardly paints a very nice picture of cannabis.

But hey, lets just assume its safe.

I know lots of people who have been life long users of cannabis and suffered no long term ill effects. I know lots and lots of people who have suffered terrible effects from the use of alcohol. There is no reason to stigmatise people for doing something that is relatively harmless when used in a sensible way.

On top of that, this is only cannabis, which okay, might not be that bad (but still bad). But you are talking about legalizing all drugs, including the stuff like crack, heroin, cocaine and meth. And be honest there, those things are not like cannabis. That stuff is just plain bad for you. The science on that is clear.

Agreed, they are actually bad. However, I do not think that making them illegal is helping. In fact it is making the problem worse.

That is a very positive assumption, and one I can assure you that is also never going to happen. The simple fact is that a legalized drug trade would also be a heavily regulated drug trade. Exactly because legal drug dealers can't sell their drugs at school there will still be illegal drug dealers who break the law so they can sell their poison at schools. Legalizing the drug trade will not solve this.

They will be very little profit in getting people addicted to a drug that they will be able to by legally. If these dealers are out of business then I don't they will be selling the drugs at schools.

And there is proof for this. Take a look at the US gun market. Guns are legally sold there to the public, but this is a controlled market. Legal gun dealers cannot sell to just anyone and they can't just sell everything. So what do we see? Right, an black market for guns that sells to customers who can't get what they want in the legal market.

Guns are not addictive and actual gun ownership in the US has actually decreased. Only a few die hard nut jobs are determined to own a gun.

The amount of heroin being produced simply does not back this statement up.

Well clearly it does given that there are now more addicts than before. Unless you are suggesting that the system is counting people as heroin addicts when they in fact are not addicted to heroin.

Any person who uses heroin more than a few times ends up physically addicted. So considering how the production and sales of heroin have rocketed since it was made illegal I'd say that policy has been a catastrophic failure.

I'm not the one suggesting to put relapse triggers everywhere for people with a history of hard drug abuse.

Yeah..you lost me.

I wasn't talking about marijuana, I was talking about hard drugs. Again, you are the one that suggested to legalize all drugs, not just marijuana.

So you agree that marijuana is not particularly addictive?

Besides, I know more people that can handle their alcohol well, while I know almost no one who handles his weed well. If weed is such a safe drug, then why are, of the handful of people I know who use it, nearly all of them addicts

That says more about your social circle than anything.

while of the much larger group of people I know who drink alcohol, maybe 1 can be said to have a potential drinking issue? Statistically this shouldn't be. Not to these extremes.

I know a large amount of people that smoke weed and a large amount of people that drink. I'd definitely say that alcohol is a bigger problem for people.

You know thats not a reason to just legalize it. Technically making some form of behavior illegal has never stopped anyone from still doing it. Murder is illegal, but people still do kill each other. Rape is illegal, but it happens all the time. Driving past the speed limit is illegal, but plenty of people still do it. So I guess then that according to your logic, we should just legalize all those things as well?

Are you suggesting that you would go around murdering and raping people if it weren't illegal? Not sure what point you are making here and if it reflects well on you.

The thing with alcohol and fast food is that the flood gates for those things have already been opened and they have been opened for decades or in the case of alcohol, centuries. The flood gates for illegal drugs have so far been kept close, but once you start legalizing the whole thing, you will open them and we will never be able to close them again.

You are in such denial if you don't understand that those gates are already open. I applaud you for the sheltered life you have led.

---

Reality Internet Personality

There is no reason to stigmatise people for doing something that is relatively harmless when used in a sensible way.

There lies the problem.

There is no reason to stigmatise people for doing something that is relatively harmless when used in a sensible way.

There lies the problem.

Truely, more than a few will NOT use it in a sensible way... Just like with ethanol-containing beverages, tobacco, etc.

The fact is many use cannabis and have productive lives, as with alcohol, and there are some who abuse it. Moderation is the key. When I was younger I used to engage in the sport of mountaineering. The key to survival was you can get close to the edge but don't go over that is a good metaphor for life. Don't go over the edge.

---