you have not presented factual information, the whole its addictive so it should be illegal argument you stated is laughable.

i just find it funny that you care so much what other people do with their lives, its not your life so dont worry about it.

as for the drug at hand (marijuana), no one is addicted to it in the sense that one would need more of the substance to make them feel normal. so that argument is out of the picture. hell, the worst thing that happens to someone who smokes too much marijuana is they feel lazy. OH NO!

tcarrier32 wrote: you have not presented factual information, the whole its addictive so it should be illegal argument you stated is laughable.

no i havent really presented much on this thread, but this is about the billionth time we have discussed this subject on here and jj's.

Glory Days wrote:

krazie45 wrote: Plenty of people do. Many people smoke it to increase their appetite, or to settle their stomachs after chemotherapy, or to relieve pressure from their eyes if they have glaucoma, or even just for the taste. Not everyone is trying to get high...

the number of people who use it for legit medical reasons is a very very small percent of actual users.

I disagree. While it is a smaller percentage, the fact that 12 states now have medical marijuana legalized presents the fact that many people are in need of it for medicinal purposes.

Your statement is your opinion, not a fact.

Glory Days wrote:

Strapping Young Lad wrote: So, alcohol is sold with the intent to not have people get drunk??? Also you can take one hit off marijuana or opium or cocaine for that matter and feel a mild, if any, effect.

But that's not even the point. The point is that people abuse alcohol in great abundance. Walk by a bar on a Saturday night. And that's fine. That's what alcohol is for. It can be used for relaxation. It's used to get drunk.The same can be said for opium. It's a strong painkiller. You can use it in small quantities, to relax and relieve the pain of age and working long hours. You can also use a greater amount and get really high. Just like you can have a drink w/ dinner after work, or you can drink a twelve pack and call ex-girlfriends.

you are thinking the young adult crowd. i would say the majority of adults arent doing keg stands and getting plastered on the weekend in frat houses....but there are exceptions. i would say the 18-28 age range drinks more alcohol that just about all the others combined....i did find a study that shows 12-20 year olds drink 20% of the alcohol consumed. http://www.menstuff.org/issues/byissue/teenalcoholex.html#onefifth

I hardly believe that to be true. While I do agree that the young adult crowd probably consumes the most alcohol, I don't believe they consume more than all other groups combined.

Glory Days wrote:

tcarrier32 wrote: Can anyone make a case for keeping marijuana illegal that doesnt refer to propaganda and actually uses factual information to make a point?

the factual information i present is just propaganda to you anyway, so why present it?

If you aren't going to present "factual" info. then why would you even try to debate on this thread? It's like going to a gun fight with no weapon. You should at least use facts to backup your position on the debate.

There are very, very few good (fact based) reasons for marijuana being illegal.

And if something being addictive (which marijuana isn't, at least physically) is reason to make it illegal then we need to head down to the statehouse stat so they can ban french fries, chocolate, and coffee.

dwccrew wrote: If you aren't going to present "factual" info. then why would you even try to debate on this thread? It's like going to a gun fight with no weapon. You should at least use facts to backup your position on the debate.

because it doesnt matter. people will claim medicinal purposes for certain conditions. yet i can show a more efficient, safer, legal, and man madel drug to do the same thing, but no one will care. they want marijuana. here is some "propaganda".

http://www.justice.gov/dea/ongoing/marinol.html

health effect propaganda:
http://www.drugabuse.gov/PDF/RRMarijuana.pdf

marijuana addiction propaganda:
http://www.marijuana-addiction.net/

http://www.uhs.wisc.edu/display_story.jsp?id=736&cat_id=38

Physical Dependence
Two decades ago, addiction medicine doctors and counselors believed that the difference between substance abuse and substance dependence was whether tolerance and withdrawal were present. Now it is known that, although tolerance or withdrawal may occur in individuals with addiction, the condition of addiction can exist without any sign of tolerance or withdrawal. Still, a common question of interest is, does marijuana produce physical dependence (that is, tolerance or withdrawal)?

By the twenty-first century, the answers to these questions are clear. Tolerance does develop to THC (the active chemical in marijuana). Moreover, withdrawal definitely occurs in some users. The effects of this withdrawal are generally the opposite of the effects of intoxication: anxiety and insomnia instead of relaxation; loss of appetite rather than hunger; excessive salivation instead of dry mouth; and also decreased pulse, irritability, and sometimes tremor. People who have used marijuana as a way to control underlying anger may also experience irritability, increased mood swings, and even an increase in aggressive behavior, as symptoms of withdrawal.

here's some more factual evidence. you can tell its good because it has no apparent bias.

Glory Days wrote:

Strapping Young Lad wrote: So, alcohol is sold with the intent to not have people get drunk??? Also you can take one hit off marijuana or opium or cocaine for that matter and feel a mild, if any, effect.

But that's not even the point. The point is that people abuse alcohol in great abundance. Walk by a bar on a Saturday night. And that's fine. That's what alcohol is for. It can be used for relaxation. It's used to get drunk.The same can be said for opium. It's a strong painkiller. You can use it in small quantities, to relax and relieve the pain of age and working long hours. You can also use a greater amount and get really high. Just like you can have a drink w/ dinner after work, or you can drink a twelve pack and call ex-girlfriends.

you are thinking the young adult crowd. i would say the majority of adults arent doing keg stands and getting plastered on the weekend in frat houses....but there are exceptions. i would say the 18-28 age range drinks more alcohol that just about all the others combined....i did find a study that shows 12-20 year olds drink 20% of the alcohol consumed. http://www.menstuff.org/issues/byissue/teenalcoholex.html#onefifth

Strapping Young Lad wrote: The point is to have adults choose what substances they prefer. Whether they want to use them in small doses or great. The point is to have the government back off and let us be responsible adults. Why have one addictive, potentially deadly substance be legal while others are punishable. Not everybody likes to get sloppy, nauseaous, and feel like shit in the morning. Some people would rather use substances that let them feel good while having a clear head, like opiates.

haha how is that a healthy behavior? thats called an addiction. when you need a substance to do that, you have a problem because you start to rely on the substance. thats the reason why they should remain illegal.

Obviously the problem with what substances are legal or illegal has little to do with harming a person or having addictive properties, because alcohol is plenty harmful and plenty addictive. If you really believe there aren't alot of people over the age of 28 who aren't getting drunk regularly then you're naive.

Binge drinking doesn't sound like healthy behavior to anyone with a knowledge of human physiology but it's still very legal. So, I don't know how anyone can play the healthy or addictive card in reference to alcohol and expect to prove any point.

For those who think a drug user is only harming themselves and not affecting anyone else. Here is some propaganda on the financial and other burdens on society.

http://www.justice.gov/ndic/pubs11/18862/impact.htm

http://www.nida.nih.gov/EconomicCosts/Index.html

Glory Days wrote: For those who think a drug user is only harming themselves and not affecting anyone else. Here is some propaganda on the financial and other burdens on society.

http://www.justice.gov/ndic/pubs11/18862/impact.htm

http://www.nida.nih.gov/EconomicCosts/Index.html

I assume you want to ban alcohol and cigs too right?

Glory Days wrote: For those who think a drug user is only harming themselves and not affecting anyone else. Here is some propaganda on the financial and other burdens on society.

http://www.justice.gov/ndic/pubs11/18862/impact.htm

http://www.nida.nih.gov/EconomicCosts/Index.html

Could you find bigger propaganda pieces. Meth is not marijuana which is pretty much what the first links talk about.

Either way, drugs are illegal and all of those things are still happening.

The bottom line is: you have no right to tell me what I can put in my body as long as I am not infringing on the rights of others. At that point it is a crime.

Glory Days wrote: wait your telling me you actually believe those numbers? did you forget a zero and mean 600,000?
http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/glance/tables/corrtyptab.cfm

Year 2000 State correctional population
Violent Crimes - 589,100
Drug crimes - 251,100
Property crimes - 238,500

I gave the number arrested and number incarcerated. You made the claim that people aren't incarcerated for marijuana when that is obviously false.

eersandbeers wrote:The bottom line is: you have no right to tell me what I can put in my body as long as I am not infringing on the rights of others. At that point it is a crime.

Agreed

derek bomar wrote: I assume you want to ban alcohol and cigs too right?

We arent debating alcohol and cigs. the topic is "should marijuana be legalized".

eersandbeers wrote:
Could you find bigger propaganda pieces. Meth is not marijuana which is pretty much what the first links talk about.

Either way, drugs are illegal and all of those things are still happening.

The bottom line is: you have no right to tell me what I can put in my body as long as I am not infringing on the rights of others. At that point it is a crime.

no different than using the equivalent of high times magazine as a source. maybe if the government wasnt paying for the majority of drug rehab or the government's job to take away the kids of meth heads or the government's job to remove crack houses from neighborhoods, you would have the right to put whatever you want in your body. but until then, the government will have a say.

eersandbeers wrote: I gave the number arrested and number incarcerated. You made the claim that people aren't incarcerated for marijuana when that is obviously false.

and like i pointed out, weed smokers are not incarcerated unless there is another reason like having a weapon or other drugs on them. if you get caught smuggling or selling a hundreds of pounds, you will be incarcerated. about 95% of federal marijuana charges were for trafficking.

Meth and Crack are not easy to function on. They are fleeting high's which cause the user to experience huge swings of high's then depressing lows.

Opium and Marijuana are very different in that regard.

I function on opiates everyday. I wouldn't be able to walk without them. I've used other forms of opiates recreationally and they are simply very relaxing, especially when you are in pain. I liken them to having a few drinks after work only they allow you to think clearly. It is far from meth or crack.

Opiates are hard to come by which is why people who can't access them will spend much of their time trying to get them instead of being productive. They make you feel so good, you want to feel like that again. When you have to work 10-12 hours you don't want to be suffering through back, joint, and knee pain all day. And many adults are suffering in pain. While working long hours.

I've said before if alcohol was illegal you'd see alcoholics expressing addictive behaviors just the same. If you want to get drunk you don't have to search for a supplier, wait for them to be available to deliver your drugs, then spend a lot of money.

You go right to the corner store and lay down less than 10 dollars, then you're on your way.

I can stop by the store and drink a fifth on my way to work, but a person can't use a good painkiller.

Why does that make sense???

Power to the stoners!!. Weed is pretty tough on the lungs though. Gave up smokin dope 32 years ago. For me, it made me very paranoid and lazy.

But for most people, weed is an OK escape. The bennies outweigh the risks as far as legalization goes as far as I can tell.

Glory Days wrote: and like i pointed out, weed smokers are not incarcerated unless there is another reason like having a weapon or other drugs on them. if you get caught smuggling or selling a hundreds of pounds, you will be incarcerated. about 95% of federal marijuana charges were for trafficking.

That's not completely true, though you've managed to twist it around to fit your argument. Smoking weed requires something, whether a bowl or a bong or papers or whatever. The combination of marijuana and one of these items makes it "paraphernalia". The possession of paraphernalia is a very serious crime that WILL land you in jail. Therefore weed smokers ARE incarcerated.

There is no reason that marijuana is illegal that is worth the amount of money we waste trying to stop its use. Especially considering the drug war is one of the most pathetically ineffective endeavors I've ever seen.

I Wear Pants wrote: There is no reason that marijuana is illegal that is worth the amount of money we waste trying to stop its use. Especially considering the drug war is one of the most pathetically ineffective endeavors I've ever seen.

There are a couple reasons why we maintain the immoral drug war:

1. Jobs - the DEA is a lobby like all other organizations. What are they going to do if they can't spend their time bugging harmless marijuana users?

2. Big Pharma - the pharma industry would lose billions if we legalized marijuana. Instead of pushing addictive drugs out to the American public, people could solve many of their aches and pains through the use of medical marijuana which has numerous benefits. Minus the addictive pill popping.

eersandbeers wrote:

I Wear Pants wrote: There is no reason that marijuana is illegal that is worth the amount of money we waste trying to stop its use. Especially considering the drug war is one of the most pathetically ineffective endeavors I've ever seen.

There are a couple reasons why we maintain the immoral drug war:

1. Jobs - the DEA is a lobby like all other organizations. What are they going to do if they can't spend their time bugging harmless marijuana users?

2. Big Pharma - the pharma industry would lose billions if we legalized marijuana. Instead of pushing addictive drugs out to the American public, people could solve many of their aches and pains through the use of medical marijuana which has numerous benefits. Minus the addictive pill popping.

An interesting article from Popular Science in 1938.

believer wrote: It's no secret that politically I'm very conservative.

But when it comes to marijuana I think it's absurd that it is not regulated, packaged, distributed, taxed, and sold not unlike alcohol and tobacco. The billions of taxpayer dollars wasted each year in a clearly vain attempt to control the currently criminalized weed is an exercise in futility.

If it were legal I would gladly choose it as my adult "substance" of choice over alcohol hands down.

If I were forced (forced mind you) to choose getting into a moving vehicle driven by someone who has been drinking versus someone who has been smoking, I'd opt for the smoker every time.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Glory Days wrote:

derek bomar wrote: I assume you want to ban alcohol and cigs too right?

We arent debating alcohol and cigs. the topic is "should marijuana be legalized".

eersandbeers wrote:
Could you find bigger propaganda pieces. Meth is not marijuana which is pretty much what the first links talk about.

Either way, drugs are illegal and all of those things are still happening.

The bottom line is: you have no right to tell me what I can put in my body as long as I am not infringing on the rights of others. At that point it is a crime.

no different than using the equivalent of high times magazine as a source. maybe if the government wasnt paying for the majority of drug rehab or the government's job to take away the kids of meth heads or the government's job to remove crack houses from neighborhoods, you would have the right to put whatever you want in your body. but until then, the government will have a say.

How in the same post are you going to say "we aren't debating alcohol and cigarettes, but you bring up meth and crack? Not very logical and also kind of hypocritical.

Glory Days wrote:
no different than using the equivalent of high times magazine as a source. maybe if the government wasnt paying for the majority of drug rehab or the government's job to take away the kids of meth heads or the government's job to remove crack houses from neighborhoods, you would have the right to put whatever you want in your body. but until then, the government will have a say.

Why is the government paying for rehab? I don't support that either.

But I'd still like to see your sources about how much government pays for rehab.

Clearly I don't have a right to do what I want with my body. For some reason, people support others dictating what you can and cannot do with your own property.

Glory Days wrote: and like i pointed out, weed smokers are not incarcerated unless there is another reason like having a weapon or other drugs on them. if you get caught smuggling or selling a hundreds of pounds, you will be incarcerated. about 95% of federal marijuana charges were for trafficking.

Why should trafficking marijuana be a crime?

dwccrew wrote:

Glory Days wrote:

derek bomar wrote: I assume you want to ban alcohol and cigs too right?

We arent debating alcohol and cigs. the topic is "should marijuana be legalized".

eersandbeers wrote:
Could you find bigger propaganda pieces. Meth is not marijuana which is pretty much what the first links talk about.

Either way, drugs are illegal and all of those things are still happening.

The bottom line is: you have no right to tell me what I can put in my body as long as I am not infringing on the rights of others. At that point it is a crime.

no different than using the equivalent of high times magazine as a source. maybe if the government wasnt paying for the majority of drug rehab or the government's job to take away the kids of meth heads or the government's job to remove crack houses from neighborhoods, you would have the right to put whatever you want in your body. but until then, the government will have a say.

How in the same post are you going to say "we aren't debating alcohol and cigarettes, but you bring up meth and crack? Not very logical and also kind of hypocritical.

he was asking my opinion.

eersandbeers wrote: Why is the government paying for rehab? I don't support that either.

But I'd still like to see your sources about how much government pays for rehab.

Clearly I don't have a right to do what I want with my body. For some reason, people support others dictating what you can and cannot do with your own property.

I did, a few posts ago. it was hidden deep in the article though:
http://www.nida.nih.gov/EconomicCosts/Chapter1.html#1.8
"For drug abuse, governments bore about $45.1 billion (46.2 percent) of the total of $97.7 billion; private insurance, $3.1 billion; victims, about $6.5 billion; and abusers and members of their households, $42.9 billion."

eersandbeers wrote: Why should trafficking marijuana be a crime?

because its a controlled substance. same goes for pretty much everything controlled by the government. do you also believe that anyone should be able to buy prescription drugs without a prescription?

Glory Days wrote: do you also believe that anyone should be able to buy prescription drugs without a prescription?

Absolutely. What I put into my body is not the concern of the government.

queencitybuckeye wrote:

Glory Days wrote: do you also believe that anyone should be able to buy prescription drugs without a prescription?

Absolutely. What I put into my body is not the concern of the government.

its not about what you put in, its the effect it has on society. and i have pointed out it does effect others than just the user. but ok. what about DUIs? no one is harmed until you crash into someone. why cant i drive drunk if i want to?

eersandbeers wrote: Why is the government paying for rehab? I don't support that either.

because people are irresponsible. they want to ruin their bodies and take risks, but want dont want to be responsible for it. the responsibility for that person gets passed off to everyone around them including the government.