Discussion in 'Congress' started by mal, Dec 2, 2009.
Legalize pot and prostitution
Should Congress Legalize ALL Drugs, Including Meth?
I think we should leave it to the experts. Let's ask Rush Limbaugh and Cindy McCain.
Don't be too hard on yourself. Nicotine is one of the most addictive substances known to man.
Also, alcohol is one of the few substances that can kill people who are withdrawing.
Yet, both of these substances are legal.
Good luck quitting, if you are still trying.
The same thing that gives you the right to not have a mob of society come over and kill you.
Really I'd be for legalizing pot because in my heart I agree government belongs out of our bloodstreams. BUT, it is beyond a reasonable doubt driving under the influence of alcohol or pot is dangerous to others. So I'd tie that legalization to just ridiculously tougher laws on drunk drivers, high drivers, and the bars that serve them.
We'll see how the pot thing goes over before we start on "x" or others.
The problem is the government controls the extremely deadly roadways, and the extremely inconsistent courts.
There would be numerous people still driving drunk with the tougher laws. Some people would get caught, others wouldn't. For those that got caught the rest of us would be forced to fund the trial, and fund their imprisonment.
Since the government controls all roadways the only way to cut down on drunk drivers is to step up enforcement. What does that equate to? Higher taxes, worse economy, and punishment for the innocent.
Commonly Abused Medications :: PrescriptionDrugAddiction.com - A Resource for Individuals and Families
It's complete bullcrap wherever it came from. Anytime one who inhales any carcinogens, they are doing damage to their Lungs and esophagus. In no way whatsover could that help someone suffering an asma attack. What a load of garbage.
I have heard that Pot has more tar than cigarettes, but I have no clue if that is true. As far as lung damage, I believe that cigarettes are far worse than marijuana simply because people smoke more of them. I think the legalization of Marijuana is a good debate, but legalizing the rest of them would be very harmful to society. In no way should marijuana be available for purchase by people under the age of 21. Just my opinion. ~BH
Actually, there is evidence that MJ works as an immunosuppressant.
MARIJUANA and IMMUNITY
In that regard, it would function just like a steroid (as you would find in any maintainance inhaler i.e. advair). Suppressing the immune system prevents asthma.
However, even if that's true (which hasn't been fully established) that's a far cry from saying it would beat a standard B2 agonist (like an albuterol inhaler). Before that could be stated, it would first have to beat a placebo, and there are no controlled studies on the matter. At best it's a lot of anecdotes, and that is not good science.
All that ignores the fact that, if you are inhaling smoke (though many patients with lung cancer that use MJ vaporize it), you probably aren't helping your lungs.
I fully believe that there are medical indications for MJ, and I think they should just legalize it, but the pro-medicinal MJ crowd doesn't help themselves when they make claims that are easily shot full of holes.
It would be nice if some real work was done on this and they found out that THC vapor that could be put in a standard inhaler was as effective as steroids, because steroids have terrible side effects.
I think joints are considered worse than cigs simply because there is no filter on them, but at you pointed out, on the whole, cigs are far worse because you have to chain smoke to maintain your "high".
Yeah, and I understand that geauxtohell . Actually bro, My Wife uses advair, and in no way whatsover would inhaling marijuana smoke beat that steroid.
Again, I agree. Maybe they are saying when it's in your system? I dunno. That would support THC in a pill form, but not many Marijuana advocates want to hear about that.
Exactly, and I too know marijuana can help people medically without a doubt as a treatment for nausiation, loss of appetite, stomach illness and sleeping disorders as well.
Very good point, and one of the best I have ever heard be suggested.
Yeah, No filters is another great point. Hell, You're on a role here geauxtohell! Maybe you and I should just stick to Social issues because we seem to agree alot. If you ask me, I personally am more concerned with the medical benefits of the one, than comparing the two. Great discussion though. I know it could help alot of people, but I also know it could hurt alot of very young people. We gotta find a balance and regulate it. ~BH
I'll agree with the inefficient court statement and add unequal courts to it.
I believe the answer isn't just to say "aw heck, this is too complicated to do" or "we've messed up in the past, let's give up".
The first idea is to tack xx extra onto any conviction received while the defendant is under the influence of any mind altering substance. Get into a bar fight drunk and break a window? Have fun with your extra 1000 hours of community service. Get stoned and run over your neighbor's mail box? Have fun riding the bus to work for 5 years.
Another I toy with is the mandatory automotive breathalyzer......well maybe just for anyone who gets convicted of an alcohol/pot related crime.
While I totally dude support anyone's right to fix the boringness of their lives with alcohol or pot I have 0 tolerance for misdeeds done under the influence. My feeling is you can't negatively affect my life just because you have a right to be stoned.
Separate names with a comma.