Should maryjuanna be legal for non medical reasons?

Please keep this civil lets show how well we can debate with no name calling. Me i think it should be legal. To me its safer then drinking plus has health benefits

I would like to be able to try it as a sleep aid.

There are some strains that will make you sleep like a baby. Its like crazy what some srains can do. Belive it or not there is a strain to helpwith most illenses .but i think the pill industry wants to keep it banned becuase it works

ironhorse said:

I would like to be able to try it as a sleep aid.

Click to expand...

CBD is legal in all 50 states. I used to take a version of it for mild pain and a version as a sleep aid. It works. It gets expensive tho'.

Yes. My body; my choice.

As with all choices, harming others is a crime. Use responsibly.

I had to move out of my own condo for a month because some jobless loser pothead in the condo next to mine decided to smoke up practically any time he was awake. It came right through the walls and floorboards. I asked him nicely to take it outside but he refused.

I'm a pilot, have DoD contracts, and do work for the Federal courts, along with security clearances. I can't show up to an airport, base, or courthouse reeking of pot. I could lose everything just because some inconsiderate jerk wants to get high any time he's awake.

I eventually 'phoned a friend' and I'm not entirely sure what transpired but the pothead and his girlfriend moved out of the condo within a week. I called in an environmental cleanup company to defunkify my place. The slumlord next door had to rip out all of the carpeting in the entire unit and repaint all of the walls to get the stench out.

I'm not sure what I would have done if I was just a regular citizen. I'd be screwed. The only reason they left was because my "friends" showed up and gave them a talking to. I have a lot of friends given the work I do, some of them are apparently rather persuasive.

Another example of the inconsiderate ruining a good thing for those of us who “smoke” responsibly. I’m sorry you had to deal with that nonsense.

Should maryjuanna be legal

Click to expand...

IMO, yes.

Though, frankly I don't know much about what research studies have found on the impacts beyond the straightforward CBD and THC aspects.

Could easily handle it with the "Driving While Impaired" and "Public Intoxication" statutes, while otherwise leaving the gov't out of it.

So long as you don't abuse the stuff to the point of becoming a risk or threat to others (whether it was 'laced' and you failed to account for this, or you failed to control your use of it), then such resulting behavior is all on you ... and you ought to be held to account for such inflicted risk/threat.

But, otherwise, if it's just something taken like, say, the occasional drink, and it's done responsibly, then I have a hard time seeing why Uncle needs to get their knickers in a knot.

And if it does turn out that it "fries" the brain after awhile ... well, it's a self-limiting problem, as there isn't much of a market for "fried brain" except among those that don't give a darn about theirs and/or want to go down that way.

As for teens partaking -- that's on the parents and parenting (or, rather, the lack thereof). Again, that's on them, the families.

JMO

From a long time officers point of view I think out of most all of todays vices Marijuana is the most easy to deal with. I have never really had to fight much at all with weed smoker. Drunks are far more worse as well as meth addicts and harder drug users. When I say weed smokers are usually easy to deal with I am speaking of the natural weed smokers. I have seen all kinds of violent behavior from synthetic marijuana and there is no comparison.

Although I am not really against marijuana in general I am against anything that may lead to problems with teens and their development. In my area I can see a very distinct difference in the focus and lifestyle of kids that smoke weed and those that do not. The weed smokers often can not control their young minds and will try other things. They tend to "party" much more and just gravitate to the lazy lifestyle and never really stick with anything. On the other hand the kids that stay away from this lifestyle tend to start working earlier and just start a real productive life much sooner.

It is not just marijuana as this can be alcohol or other recreational drugs. There are exceptions to the rule however in general I have found a very real difference. The younger smokers are not really violent or even doing other criminal acts yet again they are just slower to become a responsible adult and spend their time getting high rather than being serious about life. I will say I know many great people who smoke weed and do so as a responsible adult. I also know good people who drink like an adult. I have even met meth addicts that when not on meth they can be decent people. Again there are exceptions to every rule.

My step father was a true hero to me. He stepped in to a ready made family when I was 7 years old and was wonderful to my mother as well as myself and my brother. He was an old school hippie type when young and yet he went to the military for a few years and worked his entire life after to raise me and support my mother. I truly owe that man for being who I am today. I got my work ethic and integrity by watching him as a child. Fast forward to my teens and I finally realized he smoked weed almost daily. The single best man I have ever known was a heavy weed smoker and kept it hidden for years. He died of cancer at 60 years old and I miss him to this day. I am not sure if the smoking led to his cancer however none the less he was just a wonderful role model until his very last day and I never though less of him when I discovered his habit.

TPA said:

I had to move out of my own condo for a month because some jobless loser pothead in the condo next to mine decided to smoke up practically any time he was awake. It came right through the walls and floorboards. I asked him nicely to take it outside but he refused.

I'm a pilot, have DoD contracts, and do work for the Federal courts, along with security clearances. I can't show up to an airport, base, or courthouse reeking of pot. I could lose everything just because some inconsiderate jerk wants to get high any time he's awake.

I eventually 'phoned a friend' and I'm not entirely sure what transpired but the pothead and his girlfriend moved out of the condo within a week. I called in an environmental cleanup company to defunkify my place. The slumlord next door had to rip out all of the carpeting in the entire unit and repaint all of the walls to get the stench out.

Click to expand...

This is why smoking anything, whether cigarettes, cigars, or pot, should be treated the same. Unless it's your own detached house, if you want to smoke then do so outside the building. Cigarette smoke can make condos or apartments pretty smelly also. I know this from when both my parents were smokers.

TPA said:

I'm not sure what I would have done if I was just a regular citizen. I'd be screwed. The only reason they left was because my "friends" showed up and gave them a talking to. I have a lot of friends given the work I do, some of them are apparently rather persuasive.

Click to expand...

Yeah, sometimes having certain kinds of "friends" can be useful when the normal channels fail to work.

Yes. And, personally, I could not care less if it's safer than drinking or if it has health benefits.

People should be allowed to enjoy OR kill themselves with all manner of poison whether it be liver and brain problems from alcohol, lung cancer from weed, tongue and throat cancer from tobacco, or outright death from cyanide or arsenic. Just don't directly adversely affect others with it or because of it. Like stenching up their stuff. Or driving under the influence. I personally think the world would be better if we just let people juice themselves all they wanted to and then we just dispose of the leftovers.

We don't need to hire them, or feed them, or help them, or pity them. People should be free to do any of those things, of course, but they should definitely not be REQUIRED to do any of those things.

People are stupid. There really isn't anything more to it than that.

recalled said:

People are stupid.

Click to expand...

Hey, I take offense and resemble that remark.

im as smart as a kangeroo but not as smart as a rat

raggie33 said:

im as smart as a kangeroo but not as smart as a rat

Click to expand...

Kangarat!

recalled said:

People should be allowed to enjoy OR kill themselves with all manner of poison whether it be liver and brain problems from alcohol, lung cancer from weed, tongue and throat cancer from tobacco, or outright death from cyanide or arsenic. Just don't directly adversely affect others with it or because of it. Like stenching up their stuff. Or driving under the influence. I personally think the world would be better if we just let people juice themselves all they wanted to and then we just dispose of the leftovers.

Click to expand...

Who pays for that? There's a direct cost to abusing the body. When someone ODs on drugs, they'll often end up in the ER. Who pays for that? The rest of us. Medicare/Medicaid/Insurance...we all pay for that. Fire/EMS calls to deal with drug users are paid by the taxpayers. Hospital ERs have to have enough capacity to handle them plus the regular emergencies. We're all paying for that.

Then there's the cost to society. Take a look at Kensington, Philadelphia. Don't the people who live in that neighborhood have the right to enjoy life without having to step over passed out druggies? Needles and trash strewn about the streets? All of the small crimes which drug users commit to further their habit. In many parts of California, if you leave anything visible in your car, your windows will be smashed and items stolen.

A few years back we were in Portland, OR for a wedding. My fiancée wanted to visit Voodoo Doughnuts. Didn't happen because the sidewalk in front of the store was covered with drug users and homeless in various states of consciousness and some were rather aggressive. We left without going into the store.

Then there's the costs to the individual. At one time, each of these drugged out people were someone's little baby boy or little girl. Full of hope, promise, a future.

These aren't 'selfless' crimes. It directly and indirectly affects everyone.

Also, the marijuana being sold today is NOT the stuff the local dope peddler was selling outside the high school in the 1970s-1990s. It's up to 30x stronger than what was sold back then. That's not hyperbole, literally the amount of THC went from 1-3% in the 1970s to 20-30% today. Today's MJ is not a mild euphoriant. This is now a full-on psychedelic. That also affects the addictiveness as well. 3% from the 1970s may well have not been addictive. Crank that up to 20-30% and withdrawal becomes a real problem. Also keep in mind that the human brain isn't fully myelinated until age 25, yet we have people taking up the habit in their early teens. At the very least, the old stuff didn't reek as badly nor did the scent travel as far.

recalled said:

People should be allowed to enjoy OR kill themselves with all manner of poison whether it be liver and brain problems from alcohol, lung cancer from weed, tongue and throat cancer from tobacco, or outright death from cyanide or arsenic. Just don't directly adversely affect others with it or because of it. Like stenching up their stuff. Or driving under the influence.

Click to expand...

^ This.

Which is why basic statutes (on public behaviors) ought to easily cover its use. Works with being impaired in public or on roadways. Works with damaging the property of others. Works with engaging in threatening behavior toward others that puts them at risk. Ought to be sufficient for pot.

And if individuals want to partake so strongly that it damages their lungs and/or brains and/or something else ... that ought to be on them. Their ante, their game, their responsibility. (Not an insurance company to cover their torn-up lungs or brain issues, for example.)

im talking about reposable use like those who do it in a respectful manner stupid spell check ..

btw today alone more folks will die from alcohol then how many died by marijuana in a decade.

TPA said:

Who pays for that?
...
At the very least, the old stuff didn't reek as badly nor did the scent travel as far.

Click to expand...

"Who pays for that?"
They do, or at least they *should*. Note that part about not imposing any direct adverse cost on anyone else.

"When someone ODs on drugs, they'll often end up in the ER."
Because for some f*cktard reason, society has gone full retard and decided that these ODs should be provided "free" or subsidized healthcare. Again, see that part about direct adverse cost. I don't know what percentage of ODs are survivable, but my guess is it's pretty low, or I expect it wouldn't be an OD. Don't take them to the ER. Time, effort, and money saved. The local county health department offers "free" Narcan, in case I feel the need to render aid to someone that is having a bad time with their illegal drugs. If I lived closer to it, I would take as many of those "free" Narcan doses as possible and deplete them into the trash. Repeatedly. It's honestly not worth my time to drive there, though.

In a separate but related note, I despise "fixes" made by government that are the result of problems that government created. We would NOT all be paying for that if we weren't forced to. Some would pay because they want to, and good for them. I would not.

"Don't the people who live in that neighborhood have the right to enjoy life without having to step over passed out druggies?"
They sure do! It would seem those druggies are not following the rule of not being a direct adverse cost. If we let them have whatever they want and they then OD, there would be that expenses of collecting their corpse and burning it, though. Luckily that would probably be a one-time expense per OD. And in the long run, no doubt far, far cheaper to everyone else.

"Then there's the costs to the individual."
They are free to cost themselves whatever they want to charge themselves. SELF-INFLICTED charges and expenses. It isn't like this is the first time anyone has been exposed to drugs. There is a fair amount of information that has indicated it is generally bad for you. Anyone taking those drugs probably has heard about it being bad for you, or at least *might* be bad for you. So, in short, f*ck them for doing it to themselves. I wouldn't be crying over someone that felt the need to cut off their own limbs or intentionally blind themselves, either.

"Also, the marijuana being sold today is NOT the stuff the local dope peddler was selling outside the high school in the 1970s-1990s."
Although not necessarily directed at me, I never said it was. In a bit of relevance, I did say, "People should be allowed to enjoy OR kill themselves with all manner of poison..." Heroin? Go for it. Fentanyl? Have a grand time with it. I don't care one bit what they use, but they need to not put any direct negative cost on others.

"Also keep in mind that the human brain isn't fully myelinated until age 25"
Agreed. So, because some people are stupid, we lump them together with everyone else that ISN'T as stupid but then carve out some special level of exception or coddling. I don't buy it, but evidently a lot of other people do. Mind you, a lot of people are stupid. And while I am often called heartless, I am seldom called irrational or illogical.

People seem to think that problem humans are somehow to be treated better than everyone else, whether it be drug abusers or outright criminals. That is about as stupid as a thought can get. If is a machine that causes problems, we destroy it. If it is a dog or cat that DOESN'T cause problems, we collect it and destroy it. But a human that costs thousands of dollars and maybe causes you physical harm? Throw money at them and praise them. WTF.

I say again: People are stupid. There really isn't anything more to it than that.