Should Marijuana Be Legalised? Medically, ethically, economically, and legally, drug use and sale freedoms have been a part of national and international politics for decades, if not longer in varying forms. Most notably is cannabis/marij
uana/
weed/green
/the wacky tobacky, an illegal narcotic in the majority of Western law books, that...
Should Marijuana Be Legalised? Medically, ethically, economically, and legally, drug use and sale freedoms have been a part of national and international politics for decades, if not longer in varying forms. Most notably is cannabis/marij
uana/
weed/green
/the wacky tobacky, an illegal narcotic in the majority of Western law books, that has been the focal point of drug debate since coming into vogue in the early days of the 1950's and 1960's counter culture. From Nancy Reagan just saying no, to Bill Clinton smoking but not inhaling, MJ plays a key position in modern politics on all sides of an ever complicated debate.
This thread seeks to provide a podium for all present sides, through intelligent debate and presentation of evidence.
Link LibraryCannibis Statistics, privatly owned independent siteWikipedia articleMarijuana and Medicine Study, 1999 IOMA science blogNational Institute of Drug AbuseUS Drug Enforcement Administration fact siteVirginia Law Review study of the History of LegalizationErowidNote* These links range from private to public, educational to federally controlled. They will contradict each other. They serve as a base for research, and a basic overview of the most prominent sides.
Fatty foods, alcohol, tobacco, microwaves, cell phones, automobiles, and any number of other things have been proven to be harmful to human health, and yet they are all legal for adults to buy and use freely. Saying that something has risk factors associated with it is a long way from saying that people should be thrown in jail for indulging in that something.
But that's just it!
It's not destroying lives!
Also, Godwin's law. (and it wasn't just a jew problem).
The sad thing I'm noticing... people who smoke pot on a regular basis are both smarter and more successful.
Edit: I once heard a theory that smarter people will tend to smoke marijuana for enjoyment, because they realize how little harm it actually does. I think it was on the history channel.
Post edited 8/17/08 10:18PM
Here's the thing, the support for your argument is faulty.
You are trying to claim that certain adverse health effects outweight the benefits of marijuana. But there is no way to prove this is true. As long as there are any negative effects, it is impossible to prove that they do or do not outwieght positive effects.
It is my opinion that the negative effects of marijuana are so small that they are vastly trumped by the positive effects. But that isn't even the issue. The real issue is, are the negative effects of making marijuana illegal greater than the positive effects? The answer here, from my point of view, is an overwhelming, "yes." We waste billions of dollars trying to keep people from smoking, but virtually everyone who wants to smoke, does.
So what's the point of making it illegal?
True but most of us don't stand next to the microwave/eat fast food every day/get tumors from cell phones/hurt people or ourselves with cars.
The negative effects on society of these items are negligable. (except maybe fast food seeing as obesity is rampant)
The point is we can do one of two things: Outlaw every substance that can cause harm and watch the uproar or not legalize widely unused substances that would become another threat to human health.
Automobiles destroy more lives than marijuana. If marijuana should be illegal, why is driving legal?
And there is no real response to this.
What positive effects are those?
I don't see it as waste. I think it goes towards helping people.
Bull shit. 119 people, on average, are killed each day by automobiles.
Never in the history of man has marijuana been proven to kill a single person.
Because driving is nessicary in society. you dont ship food with pot. you dont save time in transit with pot (even though it may seem like it =P)
This is very important. Let me emphasize this properly.
EVERYTHING THAT EXISTS IN THIS WORLD CAN CAUSE HARM
If you drink too much water in a given time period, you will die from water poisoning. Do you want to outlaw water?
Your argument is 100% flawed.
But what about the Gateway theory? how many dope smokers moved on to harder substances and died of that.
And also how many of those driving deaths are related to drug use?
Your nit picking
I don't know. maybe the more sucessful people are just looking for something exciting in their lives and they choose pot because of both gitting high and the adrenaline rush from knowing they're doing something illeagle.
Purely speculation of course.
Care to prove this gateway theory? How can you prove that they wouldn't have used harder stuff if they hadn't used marijuana? Correlation and causation are two different things. You can show that statistically people who smoke marijuana are more likely to use other drugs, but you cannot prove that them smoking marijuana caused them to use otehr drugs. It is downright impossible.
In regards to the second part of your post, I don't have clue. I'd be willing to bet it's less than 10%, but I could be wrong.
Your argument is bullshit, straight up.
Caffeine can be harmful. It is harmful in many ways. Want to outlaw it?
Sugar is harmful in large quantities. Illegal?
Laundry detergent is harmful if swallowed. Illegal?
Dirt is harmful if ingested. Illegal?
The argument you are using does not stand.
Give me a sec to find the study. I cited it in my list of citations. It was performed on rats though so im sure you'll disagree with the results.
Sure it does. who swallows dirt in quantities to cause harm?
Who swallows detirgent?
How much caffine is leathal? does it lead to more dangerous substances?
" with sugar. Diabeties i know but i blame lack of physical activity for that.
Ah here we go:
Children. It only takes one tiny organism in a pinch of dirt to cause harm.
Children.
How much marijuana is lethal?
You can't argue the fact that for any level of activity, there is such a thing as too much sugar. Even the most active person in the world could eat too much sugar.
oh wow.
Really?
I've got nothing, your argument is *that* bad, I can't even find a starting point to begin tearing it apart.
And what do we do with children? we attempt to keep them away from thes harmful substances. Just like adolecents and adults with pot.
Never said pot was leathal but again the gateway effect. driving while impaired.
Care to cite a source on the last one?
Good. your unplesant and sarcastic. I don't really want to hear from you.
12 rats is hardly conclusive.
In the world of science, we have to look at something called statistical significance. Basically, this is a number that tells us, based upon how many results we have, and what they are, the likelyhood that some effect actually exists. With 12 rats, The difference would have to be pretty large to be solidly significant.
So, unless you have the numbers summary (look for something called a p-value, or an r-squared number, something like that), or a study that used more than 12 subjects, I can't really accept those conclusions.
Furthermore, despite the fact that I did not mention it earlier, even if this effect does exist, it alone does not warrant banning marijuana.
Here's a question - how many people are killed by marijuana each (insert time period)?
You can accept or not accept whatever you want but there is evidence supporting the gateway effect. i have seen none refuting it.
No alone it does not but id like to think it combined with th list of other marijuana related problems would be enough to keep it illeagl.
None are killed directly as i believe i have stated. but how many die indirectly?
Do you want me to list off the reasons nobody here wants to hear anything further from you?
Do we make household cleaners illegal because some children manage to drink them and have negative side effects? No.
Unless you have a source that shows a signficant number of deaths caused by marijuana, that argument doesn't fly. Every person I know who smokes doesn't ever drive while high. That's anecdotal evidence, so I can't really use it to support an opinion either way, but it's cause for a hypothesis.
I don't have a souce that says everyone can eat too much sugar. It would appear, to me, to be common sense. It is fact that you can drink too much water (source). I'd assume people could figure out that there is such a thing as too much sugar.
In fact, there is such a thing as too much anything. Moderation is key.
Here's one.
While I'd love to agree with you this may not be true. There are a number of experiments that can be definitive with a sample size of twelve. The significance may be there, as p may be > .05, but the power will be high or low depending.
Anyway, in certain conditions, n=12 is sufficient.
That said: I'd need to read the real article to determine whether or not this study is valid.
Post edited 8/17/08 10:45PM
Thats really what i think the problem with these threads are. Everyone is saying that its not bad but would the argument really hold up in front of someone who can actually make it leagle?
No thanks i've heard them all before.