Progarchives.com has always (since 2002) relied on banners ads to cover web hosting fees and all. Please consider supporting us by giving monthly PayPal donations and help keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
Joined: April 15 2012
Location: My Bedroom
Status: Offline
Points: 14169
Topic: Should marijuana be legalised? Posted: September 19 2012 at 11:41
I think it should. It's generally better for you than alcohol and cigarettes, and doesn't have many negative effects. But we should put high taxes on it like alcohol and cigarettes and give it an age restriction.
Joined: February 16 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Status: Offline
Points: 31169
Posted: September 19 2012 at 12:17
Yeah, though I take issue with the first assertion. It's been shown that moderate intake of alcohol can provide actual health benefit, whereas the same can not be said for moderate marijuana use (I'm talking long term health effects, not the pain relieving effect that marijuana can have for cancer patients, for example).
Joined: May 29 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8368
Posted: September 19 2012 at 12:38
The government has no business telling people what they can and can't put in their bodies. This includes alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, trans fat and coca-cola.
Joined: May 16 2009
Location: Blighty
Status: Offline
Points: 6797
Posted: September 19 2012 at 12:42
I used to think yes no question. But now I don't know. Being less bad for you than Cigs and Alcohol isn't a reason to make it legal. I think M is probably not good for you if you smoke too much of it on a regular basis and I'm fairly sure its a lot stronger than it was 20 year ago or so. I also worry about the consequences of drug driving. I know for sure that this would increase.
So certainly not without a pretty comprehensive education on effects on health etc
Joined: May 29 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8368
Posted: September 19 2012 at 12:49
akamaisondufromage wrote:
I'm fairly sure its a lot stronger than it was 20 year ago or so.
Drugs get stronger, more concentrated and more dangerous when you criminalize them, because smugglers need to get the maximum potency in the smallest weight and volume. Heroin and Cocaine used to be legal and were sold as an ingredient in cough medicine. Those drugs were not nearly as strong as they are now that they have become criminalized.
Joined: May 18 2005
Location: C. Schinesghe
Status: Offline
Points: 13536
Posted: September 19 2012 at 13:12
thellama73 wrote:
The government has no business telling people what they can and can't put in their bodies. This includes alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, trans fat and coca-cola.
Ditto!
"Music is much like f**king, but some composers can't climax and others climax too often, leaving themselves and the listener jaded and spent."
Joined: May 16 2009
Location: Blighty
Status: Offline
Points: 6797
Posted: September 19 2012 at 13:21
thellama73 wrote:
akamaisondufromage wrote:
I'm fairly sure its a lot stronger than it was 20 year ago or so.
Drugs get stronger, more concentrated and more dangerous when you criminalize them, because smugglers need to get the maximum potency in the smallest weight and volume. Heroin and Cocaine used to be legal and were sold as an ingredient in cough medicine. Those drugs were not nearly as strong as they are now that they have become criminalized.
This may well be the case, but, I still worry about legalizing it on health grounds. And also on the grounds I hate the smell of it - you smell it everywhere, as it is, when illegal. And on the grounds I don't want a bunch of stoned idiots who think they drive better after a joint! Yeah right same as the idiots that think they drive better after a drink or two.
I'm not convinced either way.
I think a lot of people say legalize it, cos its cool to say that. But then part of me thinks if it was legal it would be less coool and then well who knows
Joined: October 03 2008
Location: Là, sui monti.
Status: Offline
Points: 10841
Posted: September 19 2012 at 13:24
thellama73 wrote:
The government has no business telling people what they can and can't put in their bodies. This includes alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, trans fat and coca-cola.
More: laws against public drunkness and DUI should be repealed.
Joined: May 29 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8368
Posted: September 19 2012 at 13:35
CPicard wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
The government has no business telling people what they can and can't put in their bodies. This includes alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, trans fat and coca-cola.
More: laws against public drunkness and DUI should be repealed.
Agreed, although it took Pat some time to convince me of the second point.
Joined: May 27 2005
Location: NE Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 28057
Posted: September 19 2012 at 13:40
thellama73 wrote:
CPicard wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
The government has no business telling people what they can and can't put in their bodies. This includes alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, trans fat and coca-cola.
More: laws against public drunkness and DUI should be repealed.
Agreed, although it took Pat some time to convince me of the second point.
What was the reasoning? Punish bad driving and not mere BAC?
Joined: May 16 2009
Location: Blighty
Status: Offline
Points: 6797
Posted: September 19 2012 at 13:40
thellama73 wrote:
CPicard wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
The government has no business telling people what they can and can't put in their bodies. This includes alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, trans fat and coca-cola.
More: laws against public drunkness and DUI should be repealed.
Agreed, although it took Pat some time to convince me of the second point.
And how did he convince you that Driving Under the Influence (I assume that is what it is) should be ok?
Joined: February 16 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Status: Offline
Points: 31169
Posted: September 19 2012 at 13:42
stonebeard wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
CPicard wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
The government has no business telling people what they can and can't put in their bodies. This includes alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, trans fat and coca-cola.
More: laws against public drunkness and DUI should be repealed.
Agreed, although it took Pat some time to convince me of the second point.
What was the reasoning? Punish bad driving and not mere BAC?
Joined: May 29 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8368
Posted: September 19 2012 at 13:53
Padraic wrote:
stonebeard wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
CPicard wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
The government has no business telling people what they can and can't put in their bodies. This includes alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, trans fat and coca-cola.
More: laws against public drunkness and DUI should be repealed.
Agreed, although it took Pat some time to convince me of the second point.
What was the reasoning? Punish bad driving and not mere BAC?
Yep.
* (I'm not the Pat that convinced him)
Basically, yes. He pointed out that driving in heavy rain is just as dangerous, but that's not illegal. Also, if two people are stopped for reckless driving, and one has been drinking he will get a much more severe punishment despite not having been any more reckless than the sober man, which seems unfair.
Joined: May 16 2009
Location: Blighty
Status: Offline
Points: 6797
Posted: September 19 2012 at 14:02
thellama73 wrote:
Padraic wrote:
stonebeard wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
CPicard wrote:
thellama73 wrote:
The government has no business telling people what they can and can't put in their bodies. This includes alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, trans fat and coca-cola.
More: laws against public drunkness and DUI should be repealed.
Agreed, although it took Pat some time to convince me of the second point.
What was the reasoning? Punish bad driving and not mere BAC?
Yep.
* (I'm not the Pat that convinced him)
Basically, yes. He pointed out that driving in heavy rain is just as dangerous, but that's not illegal. Also, if two people are stopped for reckless driving, and one has been drinking he will get a much more severe punishment despite not having been any more reckless than the sober man, which seems unfair.
Driving in heavy rain is not as dangerous as DUI not in modern cars. The one that has been drinking started driving badly as soon as he got in the car. Whether one is punished more than the other isn't relevant. They both should be punished the degree is up to the courts. If the other is deliberately reckless then it should be the same.
Maybe I would agree if they took out all the seatbelts in cars and then the drink / reckless driver would pay the full cost of his her actions
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
This page was generated in 0.180 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Should marijuana be legalised?
Topic Options
akamaisondufromage wrote:
