CDZ Thoughts about pot legalization

[xdangerousxdavex]

I wonder how pot can kill or slow down cancer or AIDS. Those who decided to legalize pot gradually (as it goes now) definitely wanted federal-level legalization for recreational use some day or other. So, when marijuana was first allowed for medical use, the government knew that it would be finally legalized countrywide? Can’t understand such policy. Many people got addicted to drug they didn’t want to try some time ago, many people served years of their lives in jail, many people serve their time in jail right now.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

I wonder how pot can kill or slow down cancer or AIDS. Those who decided to legalize pot gradually (as it goes now) definitely wanted federal-level legalization for recreational use some day or other. So, when marijuana was first allowed for medical use, the government knew that it would be finally legalized countrywide? Can’t understand such policy. Many people got addicted to drug they didn’t want to try some time ago, many people served years of their lives in jail, many people serve their time in jail right now.

Was there a question not requiring a degree in medicine?

 

[Josf]

"Those who decided to legalize pot gradually (as it goes now) definitely wanted federal-level legalization for recreational use some day or other. So, when marijuana was first allowed for medical use, the government knew that it would be finally legalized countrywide?"

That is a very short sighted look into the past.

Elliot s Debates Home Page U.S. Congressional Documents

"On the 21st of March, Congress recommended the several provincial assemblies to exert their utmost endeavors to promote the culture of hemp, flax, and cotton, and the growth of wool, in the United Colonies;..."

 

[jwoodie]

"Medical" marijuana was BS from the get-go. Any alleged benefits could have been obtained through a prescription, but that wasn't the point, was it?

 

[Josf]

Claims of authority to dictate behavior are many.

Why is Marijuana Illegal Drug WarRant

"America’s first marijuana law was enacted at Jamestown Colony, Virginia in 1619. It was a law “ordering” all farmers to grow Indian hempseed."

Claim, claims, claims, and counter claims abound in human history. The facts are known to those who actually seek the facts in some cases.

 

[blunthead]

Claims of authority to dictate behavior are many.

Why is Marijuana Illegal Drug WarRant

"America’s first marijuana law was enacted at Jamestown Colony, Virginia in 1619. It was a law “ordering” all farmers to grow Indian hempseed."

Claim, claims, claims, and counter claims abound in human history. The facts are known to those who actually seek the facts in some cases.

I'd been opposed to the legalization of marijuana for recreational use for years, then had a change of heart. I had good reason to oppose legalization due to my own history of not being able to control my use of it, meaning that I know that a person can get addicted, psychologically, to it. But I decided that the substance's benefits, which include anti-anxiety properties, should be thought to outweigh it's dangers. Overall I believe it to be less dangerous than alcohol, the use of which of course is legal.

 

[warf]

Why are some harmful substances legal and some illegal?

Tobacco kills 400,000 a year. Marijuana kills zero. We know how much damage some can cause under alcohol.

Politicians talk about personal responsibility but don't want people to be able to exercise it.

 

[danielpalos]

"Medical" marijuana was BS from the get-go. Any alleged benefits could have been obtained through a prescription, but that wasn't the point, was it?

Maybe, but that would require a change to federal laws since the US Pharmacopoeia is under the authority of the federal DEA.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Think the only reason cannabis ('marijuana' is actually a derogative term) is still illegal by and large as well as federally is due to pharmaceutical lobbists making it so. Cannabis has tremendous curative properties. If it becomes fully legal, pharm companies will lose X amount of money as their half-measure treatments and snake oils aren't needed any longer.

Always ask who stands to benefit, then follow the money.

 

[Syriusly]

There is no rational reason to have pot illegal and alcohol and cigarettes legal.

We learned that prohibition doesn't work 80 years ago- and all of the consequences from alcohol prohibition happened with pot prohibition.
As states legalize pot, we can learn how to best regulate sale and usage- just as we did for alcohol.

Essentially I believe we should treat pot like we do alcohol.

 

[danielpalos]

Yes, there is no Appeal to Ignorance of our Commerce Clause.

 

[jwoodie]

Why are some harmful substances legal and some illegal?

Tobacco kills 400,000 a year. Marijuana kills zero. We know how much damage some can cause under alcohol.

Politicians talk about personal responsibility but don't want people to be able to exercise it.

False equivalency. We don't know the long term effects of marijuana, but we do know that it is the particulate matter in smoking of any kind that causes lung cancer, not nicotine. As for alcohol, it can be consumed without forcing others to ingest it. Also, alcoholism is an addiction, so why add more addictive substances to the marketplace? Your argument is equivalent to saying people shouldn't be inoculated against smallpox because it isn't as dangerous as Ebola.

 

[blunthead]

Think the only reason cannabis ('marijuana' is actually a derogative term) is still illegal by and large as well as federally is due to pharmaceutical lobbists making it so. Cannabis has tremendous curative properties. If it becomes fully legal, pharm companies will lose X amount of money as their half-measure treatments and snake oils aren't needed any longer.

Always ask who stands to benefit, then follow the money.

I think there's more to the problem of legalizing it than just that. I think the stigma surrounding it is mostly due to its adverse side effects (which those you use it consider not adverse at all) which societies have deemed outweigh any positive effects. Nowadays, though, the positive side effects, I mean mostly in terms of medicinal ones, are the focus and the balance is changing in favor of its use. The negative side effects will remain and impact society, especially with legalized recreational use, but the argument is that those side effects will impact society less than that of other already legal behaviors. Once the pharm. industry sees available profits they'll be all over endorsing the idea.

 

[Josf]

I'd been opposed to the legalization of marijuana for recreational use for years, then had a change of heart. I had good reason to oppose legalization due to my own history of not being able to control my use of it, meaning that I know that a person can get addicted, psychologically, to it. But I decided that the substance's benefits, which include anti-anxiety properties, should be thought to outweigh it's dangers. Overall I believe it to be less dangerous than alcohol, the use of which of course is legal.

The idea above is a common idea. The idea is shared whereby people think that they have control over other people. The idea brings everyone under the tent, so to speak, as if everyone is sharing this idea. The idea is demonstrably false.

Pick any subject of any importance, or significance, and then oppose "legalization" or even support "legalization" and see if your "tax payments" are used the way you want your "tax payments" used.

Those in charge here in the (false) United States (not those in charge of the actual government but those in charge of the false or counterfeit government) take all the wealth they can get their hands on (through easy to document methods) and they invest in maintaining their power to keep doing so. All of these so called "legalization" TOPICS, where "we" support, or "we" oppose, anything is part of the process of "legalized" extortion.

Right now many people are opposing the criminal take-over of the United States of America, and they are doing so effectively. Those criminals who have turned a federation of republics, all based upon trial by jury according to the common laws, and democracy (not majority rule by the way), into "legalized" organized crime are effectively opposed here in America; but effective opposition is not done by "voters." One competitive way that works to retake over government is a return to free money markets.

Once one (and preferably many) competitors take more market share than the so called Federal Reserve System/International Monetary FUND (both use the same unit of "value"), only two possible results after that point are possible: 1. The U.S. Dollar regains "World Reserve Currency" status. 2. The U.S. Dollar does not regain "World Reserve Currency" status.

Currently the criminals who now have control over the false United States (not the genuine United States of America) use their monopoly control over all drugs in these United States to finance their grip on "World Reserve Currency" status. This is not news.

 

[G.T.]

Think the only reason cannabis ('marijuana' is actually a derogative term) is still illegal by and large as well as federally is due to pharmaceutical lobbists making it so. Cannabis has tremendous curative properties. If it becomes fully legal, pharm companies will lose X amount of money as their half-measure treatments and snake oils aren't needed any longer.

Always ask who stands to benefit, then follow the money.

Nice conspiracy theory, but pharmaceutical companies already have and will have their hand in marijuana profits and so.....no, ehhh, wrong.


Its still illegal because of the cowardice of politicians to break its stigma and because of the Prison / Judicial systems' losses they would face.

 

[danielpalos]

Why are some harmful substances legal and some illegal?

Tobacco kills 400,000 a year. Marijuana kills zero. We know how much damage some can cause under alcohol.

Politicians talk about personal responsibility but don't want people to be able to exercise it.

False equivalency. We don't know the long term effects of marijuana, but we do know that it is the particulate matter in smoking of any kind that causes lung cancer, not nicotine. As for alcohol, it can be consumed without forcing others to ingest it. Also, alcoholism is an addiction, so why add more addictive substances to the marketplace? Your argument is equivalent to saying people shouldn't be inoculated against smallpox because it isn't as dangerous as Ebola.

Citation, please.

 

[jwoodie]

Citation, please.

Tobacco Smoke Carcinogens and Lung Cancer

Pulmonary Carcinogens in Cigarette Smoke
The mainstream smoke emerging from the mouthpiece of a cigarette is an aerosol containing about 1010 particles/mL (20). About 95% of the smoke is made up of gases, chiefly nitrogen, oxygen, and carbon dioxide. In experiments, these vapor-phase components are separated from the particulate phase by a glass-fiber filter. The particulate phase contains at least 3500 compounds and most of the carcinogens (20). The components of cigarette smoke and how they have changed over time have been reviewed previously (19,20,37,38).

 

[danielpalos]

Citation, please.

Tobacco Smoke Carcinogens and Lung Cancer

Pulmonary Carcinogens in Cigarette Smoke
The mainstream smoke emerging from the mouthpiece of a cigarette is an aerosol containing about 1010 particles/mL (20). About 95% of the smoke is made up of gases, chiefly nitrogen, oxygen, and carbon dioxide. In experiments, these vapor-phase components are separated from the particulate phase by a glass-fiber filter. The particulate phase contains at least 3500 compounds and most of the carcinogens (20). The components of cigarette smoke and how they have changed over time have been reviewed previously (19,20,37,38).

You are making this assertion:

We don't know the long term effects of marijuana, but we do know that it is the particulate matter in smoking of any kind that causes lung cancer, not nicotine.

Citation regarding the same effect from cannabis, please.

 

[xdangerousxdavex]

Nice conspiracy theory, but pharmaceutical companies already have and will have their hand in marijuana profits and so.....no, ehhh, wrong.
Its still illegal because of the cowardice of politicians to break its stigma and because of the Prison / Judicial systems' losses they would face.

I think pharmaceutical companies are still interested in prohibition of marijuana, but they have profit too of course. If it was illegal as it was before, companies would earn more.
The only positive in legalization is that bandit formations earn less. But only our children or maybe grandchildren will see what effect on the nation it'd cause.

 

[danielpalos]

I believe we are merely wasting the (other) Peoples Tax monies on a War on Drugs that is nowhere to be found enumerated in the Republican Doctrine; how Socially, irresponsible.