Is there any reason we shouldn't legalise weed?
t. never smoked before
>>7991043
Not any rational ones, no. But the government has a lot of reasons, mostly fiscal.
>>7991043
Do you really want a second tobacco industry?
Legalizing the drug itself is okay, but I think we should maintain a ban on commercial sale. Let people grow it themselves if they really want it that badly.
>>7991046
Like what? Instead of wasting tons of money cracking down on a drug that isn't even dangerous, they could increase tax revenue. There's no reason not to even if you hate weed.
only if we can legalize it from the high ground without endorsing it ie) in a context other than degeneracy enabling that seems to be the only thing to politically motivate kiddies.
>>7991051
But you can put weed in food or somesuch
>>7991054
the government is being paid off by big paper industries because they know hemp is cheaper and their tree farms will go to waste.
>>7991051
I don't mind if weed becomes a second tobacco industry. As long as they are forced to put all the deadly side effects like lung/gum cancer on every pack. Oh wait...
I'm a bit /sci/ and I smoke weed (not that that adds credibility). It should be legalized, taxed, regulated, and studied further.
>Lung damage can be avoided by alternate methods of intake
>IQ damage is extremely small based on studies; I know from experience smoking within the past few days makes you more hazy, so no suprise there. I'd expect to score lower than I normally would.
>Children should not be allowed to smoke it, obviously. Only legal adults, and even that, the later in life you start, the less likely you will become addicted/damaged.
Either way, it's a civil liberty issue. Tobacco and Alcohol are objectively more harmful, so I see no reason to not legalize weed (along with a few others).
>>7991054
The government seizes property to resell or use for itself, makes tons of money running drug trades, and uses it as a weapon against certain demographics to destabilize those people and devalue the area they live in.
The government plans over 100 years into the future. The stuff it does now will have effects so far into the future that barely anyone sees the pattern.
>>7991057
You don't nee to "legalize" it. You merely need to remove the laws prohibiting it. You don't need a law stating it is legal.
>>7991075
That is how it should be implemented. We should enable the white market without promoting it.
It's about reducing the severity for non-violent drug crimes
Even presidents joke about smoking weed once in highschool/college but at the same time thousands are locked up in jail right now for having done the same thing
Let states decide whether to legalize and remove the federal laws criminalizing it. Without the threat of federal intervention, more states will be willing to legalize, especially when they see other states raking in the tax money.
>>7991068
>Oh wait...
Senpai, carcinogens. You're not getting it safe if you smoke it.
>>7991092
Yeah, I say federal decriminalization is the best bet. I think public schools/other authorities should still educate about the 'dangers' of pot and how bad it is though, to give teenagers a relatively safe outlet to rebel and appease their nature. Otherwise if weed is legal and seen as harmless, the next drug to turn to would probably be cocaine or something. Not so good.
>>7991105
>make money off of jailing people
why the fuck do liberals want industries to be taxed and regulated so badly? do you idiots not realize that regulations are usually made by the corporations themselves to keep small companies from creating competition for them? Jesus Christ it's like you don't understand how government works.
>>7991174
The regulations and game played by corporations is far more preferable than the game played by niggaz and gangs
>>7991301
>le lesser of two evils meme
and not regulating is better than both.
>>7991174
>being surprised that a science board doesn't understand anything but science
This is the same group of people who cite government sources for drug related science.
Guys.... Listen!
Guys...
Wait for it.
Weed.
RoundUp ready weed.
This is the new Viagra!
>>7991043
because of slippery slope.
> weed is legal, why isn't lsd ?
> lsd is legal why isn't mdma ?
> mdma is legal, why isn't heroin ?
> heroin is legal, why isn't murder ?
>>7991308
you need some sourcing regulation, we can't have criminals retain their share.
>>7991070
>>Lung damage can be avoided by alternate methods of intake
Bongs supposedly dramatically reduce lung damage.
And unless you smoke like a Rasta, lung damage shouldn't be nearly as bad as it is for a typical tobacco smoker.
>>7991043
>420 blaze dat shit
Dude, weed. Remember that time we were wasted? LOL we were so fucked up!
>>7991384
aaand they increase the risk of tuberculosis
>>7991407
/soc/ is a gateway forum to Reddit....know the signs.
>>7991372
So what? Everyone should have the right to fuck with his body however he wants.
It has a number of harmful side effects, and definitely needs further study.
>>7991384
>Baked_not_fried.jpg
>he doesn't have legal weed where he lives
how barbaric
>>7991043
>Is there any reason we shouldn't legalise weed?
Go ahead and legalize it. You can't make private industry (i.e. the guys operating 18-wheelers, forklifts, construction and farm equipment, etc) not piss test whoever they want, whenever they want.
Dude, got fired again...where am I gonna get weed money?
>>7991420
Live too has a number of harmful side effects, and definitely no needs further study.
>>7991420
>harmful side effects
That's wrong though.
>What Evidence Supports Marijuana Use for Medical Indications?
Not much.
>COMMENT
>Evidence supporting use of cannabinoids for medical indications is weak and limited to a small subset of conditions for which their use is legal; moreover, the evidence is inferior to that required by the FDA for other pharmaceuticals. In addition, labeling of these products appears to be highly inaccurate. Editorialists list a wide range of concerns and criticisms and conclude that clinicians have been put in an untenable position by being asked to prescribe an FDA Schedule I controlled substance with little evidence of benefit and substantial evidence of harm.
http://www.jwatch.org/na38311/2015/06/25/what-evidence-supports-marijuana-use-medical-indications#sthash.jSWARkw5.dpuf
>>7991107
>slippery slope
Nigger do you know how expensive cocaine is?
>>7991372
LSD should be legal. MDMA should be prescribable. Heroin has no medicinal benefit.
Don't talk about drugs you've never done, kid.
>>7991043
Inb4 muh weed, muh northwest/northeast or from California bs
>>7991043
yes. to fuck with pothead cunts
>>7991043
>t.
This "t." What does is mean?
>>7991372
Same with gay marriage. Note all the transgender and trans public restroom initiatives now, then it will be pedophilia and bestiality -- nothing new it's happened before 3,000 years ago. People don't learn from history. They love their ignorance and "rights."
>>7991068
>the government is being paid off by big paper industries because they know hemp is cheaper and their tree farms will go to waste.
Maybe 50 years ago. The primary reason why the government won't change drug laws is because it pays for law enforcement. Whenever someone gets arrested and convicted for a crime, all of his belongings (or at least the ones that could have ostensibly been used for drug trafficking) undergo a process called 'civil forfeiture' where those physical belongings receive lawyers and undergo a brief trial where they are convicted and become property of the state. Those items are then liquidated/auctioned off and it makes shitloads of money.
Google it. I'm not even joking, and it's no less stupider than it sounds.
>>7991372
> heroin is legal, why isn't murder
Absolutely retarded jump in logic.
>>7991043
Is there any reason you would post this here ?
>>7991372
>because of slippery slope
Legalize it all.
The side effects of illegality are far worse than the damage of the actual drugs
>>7991522
He's obviously looking for scientific backing as to why cannabis ought to remain illegal.
By the way, why do you put a space between the end of your sentence and your question mark? It is grammatically incorrect and looks silly. It's as incorrect as putting a space between the end of a sentence and a full stop/period.
>>7991482
It is valid you pansy. You could die tomorrow if fate would have it. You could get in a car crash or something. Life is completely unpredictable.
Keeping any drug illegal is a waste of time and an infringement on people's rights, especially since alcohol is already legal and most people can handle that drug. Name one thing that's actually good about keeping drugs illegal and I assure you the black market and drug cartels are far worse than what you'd suggest.
>>7991467
>Inhaling burning plant matter has no harmful side effects
>>7991482
Heavy like nonstop smoking. I've seen some heavy smokers and they're fine aside from being a bit too mellow.
>>7991533
>The side effects of illegality are far worse than the damage of the actual drugs
>some drugs are ridiculously addictive, like meth
>meth eventually renders you retarded
>you just said something retarded
I conclude you're using meth.
>>7991417
Why?
Never mind, I know where you're going with this. Suffice to say I don't share your values and my vision for the sort of country I'd like to live in doesn't include the likes of you.
>>7991562
There isn't a single civilization that doesn't use drugs. Choosing which one you like and which ones you don't is arbitrary and pointless.
>>7991546
>It is valid you pansy. You could die tomorrow if fate would have it. You could get in a car crash or something. Life is completely unpredictable.
How much have you smoked? This analogy is awful, because:
- When speaking of side effects, weed is banned to protect life.
- You can't ban life, even if you want to.
- You yourself said it's predictable, and therefore speculation, while we KNOW that weed has various side effects.
>and an infringement on people's rights
>the right to get high
After you're done blazing up, light yourself on fire, Shaggy.
>especially since alcohol is already legal and most people can handle that drug
Terrible, terrible argument. Alcohol is responsible for multiple illnesses, and thousands of people dead from drunk driving.
>and I assure you the black market and drug cartels are far worse than what you'd suggest
Again, more speculation.
>>7991550
Doesn't even have to be heavy.
>>7991508
Something in Swedish, it means "sincerely" or something similar in the context of being found at the bottom of a letter or email. Like
Sincerely,
A faggot.
>>7991574
>You yourself said it's predictable
meant to say unpredictable
>>7991547
Ask any number of people around the globe who have smoked all their lives and are perfectly fine, ignoramus. Do you believe everything that the CDC and EPA tell you?
>>7991552
Everybody stop replying to the lone anti-drug loser in this thread.
>>7991562
>why?
Liberty and freedom, the two things America were supposed to embody?
It doesn't matter if people hurt themselves. I could buy a gun and shoot myself in the leg right now. So why make drugs illegal? Some people need them to actually feel good for once.
>>7991600
>anti-drug loser
Please don't shun me, cool kids.
I change my mind...brain damage is awesome, yolo lol.
>>7991627
> mommy said drugs are bad
oh kid :^)
>>7991401
>aaand they increase the risk of tuberculosis
Bong *sharing* increases the risk of transmission of tuberculosis.
>>7991635
>this is the level of discourse on a science board
>he's not skeptical of mainstream claims
>he hasn't read of the evidence showing side effects
wewlad
>>7991574
>How much have you smoked? This analogy is awful, because:
>When speaking of side effects, weed is banned to protect life. You can't ban life, even if you want to.
Are you fucking serious? It's banned to protect life? Do you know how "dangerous" weed actually is you sheltered kid?
>You yourself said it's unpredictable, and therefore speculation, while we KNOW that weed has various side effects.
Since life is unpredictable it is completely pointless to fear so many things, which is why there's such a stigma around so many lifestyle choices in America that are frankly nobody's business.
Many of which are from government funded studies and found in the mentally ill, just because the mentally ill can't dole something doesn't mean it should be illegal for others to use it. Your argument boils down to "some people have weak willpower and can't stop using, therefore everyone should be denied weed" when the majority of weed smokers are fine.
>the right to get high
After you're done blazing up, light yourself on fire, Shaggy.
Civil liberties are apparently lost on you which is a shame. If you don't support somebody controlling their own body you're no better than a pro-life person speaking out against abortion.
>Terrible, terrible argument. Alcohol is responsible for multiple illnesses, and thousands of people dead from drunk driving.
And most people can handle alcohol, only a minority can't and we saw that prohibiting it was ultimately far worse. People also die from texting while driving and being distracted or tired too, yet the only thing we can do is spread awareness, not do an Orwellian thing and stop people before even committing a crime. Laws are in place to punish the guilty, not protect people from things that haven't even happened yet.
>Again, more speculation
No, look at Portugal with their drug laws. Portugal hasn't imploded into drug fielded anarchy like you'd like to believe.
>>7991105
>>7991154
The US gov has started contracting prisions deals to private corporations. These corporations benifit from high incrimination rates, so they lobby (bribe) politicians to make and keep laws in place that generate prisoners.
If only people in this country weren't so damn stupid.
>>7991643
>Are you fucking serious? It's banned to protect life? Do you know how "dangerous" weed actually is you sheltered kid?
I'm not saying it kills. I guess I should've used "health" instead, since it looks like I've triggered you.
>Many of which are from government funded studies and found in the mentally ill
No, not all of them. Don't engage in a discussion if you haven't even taken the time to look through the evidence.
>If you don't support somebody controlling their own body
Why the fuck should that be a right? Fuck off, you libertarian faggot.
>And most people can handle alcohol, only a minority can't and we saw that prohibiting it was ultimately far worse. People also die from texting while driving and being distracted or tired too, yet the only thing we can do is spread awareness, not do an Orwellian thing and stop people before even committing a crime. Laws are in place to punish the guilty, not protect people from things that haven't even happened yet.
>muh prohibition
>one historical event in one country in one time period can be extrapolated to every single time and place ever
>laws are orwellian
>No, look at Portugal with their drug laws. Portugal hasn't imploded into drug fielded anarchy like you'd like to believe.
And similar numbers can be found in Turkey, Romania, Bulgaria, etc. Places with drug laws, and relatively tough laws on this stuff.
>>7991642
Yeah we should definitely take this guys word who didn't even experience life at first hand.
I bet you live sheltered life with christian parents who tell you everything is dangerous and don't let you outside after 10 o clock :^)
>>7991676
>Yeah we should definitely take this guys word who didn't even experience life at first hand.
He thinks addiction is just an old wives tale...
>>7991401
I've actually never heard of this, but a quick search shows it appears to be a legitimate claim. Thanks for the info, Anon.
THE MORE YOU KNOW
>>7991676
topfuckingkek
You have no refutation, so the best thing you can argue is "w-w-well you didn't smoke weed yourself, so you can't say anything about it!"
I've never had cancer either, so I guess I should never donate to research. I mean, after all, what's the point if I haven't it experienced it myself?
>>7991699
Well it's a habit, not a disease. The disease model is false.
shouldn't be used under the age of 21
>>7991043
due weed tho
god put it on this earth for all of us to be happy and smoke together
>>7991707
> getting butthurt
Guess I was right. Go back to your sheltered christian home and tell your parents to cut off your internet. 4chan is a dangerous place :^)
I've smoked weed about 6 times, so I'm not a stoner by any means, and usually get nauseous, so it's not my drug of choice.
That said, there's not a lot of harm from legalizing it. It should be 18 and older, because there's evidence that it's bad for kids whose brains are still changing, but it's not incredibly harmful, both from an individual and public health perspective. The amount of lung cancer might increase, but my theory is that after legalization, for 1 or 2 years, the amount of people who smoke will skyrocket. It will then settle down to more normal levels, because it won't be something new and exciting.
Weed is not physically addictive, but it probably is psychologically addictive. However, I highly doubt we'll become a country of lazy stoners like faggot politicians like to say, simply due to the fact that weed effects everyone slightly differently. Some people won't like it, some will use it on the weekends to relax, and a small minority will become potheads, though that minority will be made up primarily of people who already smoke when it's illegal. Life will go on.
>>7991743
I dont mind it. It's kinda funny
/sci/<<<
>>7991666
>I should've used "health" instead, since it looks like I've triggered you.
Do you want a ban on tobacco too since according to you it impacts people negatively? I don't even think smoking is that much of a serious risk but you sound like the kind of person hellbent on policing the existence of others and from a logical and practical standpoint that's completely pointless and controlling. I'm sure you wouldn't appreciate someone telling you not to eat unhealthy foods or sit on our ass all day but I'm simply assuming you're not some super teetotaler bodybuilder.
>No, not all of them. Don't engage in a discussion if you haven't even taken the time to look through the evidence.
I have looked through quite a bit of it and government or drug institute funded studies are notorious for fudging the data to get the answers they desperately want while also misrepresenting the actual results so they skew it negatively, such as the study trying to scare people by come connecting constant weed use as an adolescent to more grey matter in the brain and then painting it as a bad thing. If there are objective independent studies that point to some consistent and logical risks then I would like to see them.
>Why the fuck should that be a right? Fuck off, you libertarian faggot.
I hope you have someone break down your door and steal all of your alcohol and junk food someday. Body integrity is a thing that is a natural right. To deny that right is one of the most authoriarian things around and has zero benefit to the people of society, especially when the government encourages people to portray any drug use negatively.
>muh prohibition
>one historical event in one country in one time period can be extrapolated to every single time and place ever
People who don't acknowledge history are doomed to repeat it, keeping drugs illegal and stigmatized has helped absolutely no one
>laws are orwellian
Quite a few of them are, actually. Have you been paying attention?
No. There is no just warrant for the state to decide what you are allowed to put inside your own body.
>>7991490
>Heroin has no medicinal benefit.
Heroin is quite possibly the best analgesic we have. If you don't understand the importance of patient compliance in medicine you have no right to be talking in medical terms.
We should legalize bleach injections
>>>/pol/70484360
>>7992600
Seein as how they're doing that to kids that obviously is a stupid and invasive thing to do. Drugs only affect the person using them.
>>7992585
this
Even if you believe weed harms people and turns them into useless stoners, it should be legalised for the good of society. Just look at how much more effective the drug policies in the Netherlands, Portugal, etc. are at preventing harm to individuals and society, compared to hardline war on drugs bullshit like in much of the USA. These real world examples invalidate most "slippery slope" and other such bullshit.
More practically though, there are many political and economic interests that prevent weed from being legalised. These stem from the deeper problems in our society (i.e. massive corruption).
>>7991043
>letting other people control what you can and can't do with your body
unless you're a brainlet too stupid to figure out what's "best" for yourself, was this ever a good idea?
>>7991756
>the amount of lung cancer might increase
Weed improves lung function though.
>>7993171
But smoke is a foreign object. There's zero chance in hell that smoking a joint doesn't cause some harm to your lungs.
Bongs would be a better choice, the water cools the smoke so it isn't so damn hot. Might even be better for your lungs, though I have no source on that.
>>7993270
smoke being hot isn't the reason it's damaging, otherwise steam rooms wouldn't be good for your respiratory system. It's the combustion reaction that turns the plant matter in weed into harmful carcinogens. Vaping the weed or making an edible would be perfectly safe as far as studies show.
>>7993273
Even vaping has been suggested to have harmful side effects. I mean, breathing in a lot of very moist air isn't good for your lungs either if you do it every day.
DUDE
>>7993270
>There's zero chance in hell that smoking a joint doesn't cause some harm to your lungs.
[citation needed]
>inb4 "it's just common sense lol!"
>>7991655
But the gov is paying the corporations, they're just being given back their own money
>>7992585
If it affects the rest of society (e.g people becoming addicted and increase in drug related crimes), then there is warrant
>>7994090
Drug related crimes decrease when drugs are legal, and addicts already exist and can screw their own lives up if they want. Get a clue conservatoad.
>>7994106
I was just pointing out that there can be warrant for substance control
>>7993273
Sorry,i didn't mean to imply smoke heat as a source of damage.
>>7991043
Some of the side effects of cannabis are antiinflammatory effects and neuroprotection.
All drugs should be legal this is silly. legalizing is not promoting or endorsing. Harming yourself is not illegal. prohibition causes more harm than good.
>>7991068
>Oh wait...
Just brain damage. No big deal, right?
>>7993634
WEED
>>7994555
>believing in capitalism and free market causes brain damage
Man I never thought I'd see this level of autism on /sci/
>>7994582
No, capitalism and the free market are good things that push progress. Marijuana should be legal so that the government can tax it to hell and back, and to have better grounds for prosecuting unauthorized drug dealers. Marijuana and alcohol both cause brain damage regardless of whether or not they are legal.
>>7994557
LMAO
>>7994636
>marijuana and alcohol both cause brain damage
Spoken like a nerd who never tried either :^).
I'm starting to think people who contribute to drug threads with the intent to demonized drugs have no clue how they work.
>>7991043
Minor brain damage for those <18. But that's minor compared to nicotine and alcohol.
>>7994898
I have never been able to experience a meaningful relationship with my extended family because they all are in prison or dead do to use of drugs and alcohol. I am the first person in my generation of my family to graduate high school, eight others before me couldn't do it do to use of drugs and alcohol. My father uses alcohol to escape the pains of real life every day, and he hasn't been lucid enough to personally connect with for several years. I lost many friends in high school because their obsession with marijuana got to the point where they couldn't maintain even a hint of focus on anything except getting more marijuana. I never was able to meet my grandfather as he drank himself to death.
Based on all of my experiences in life thus far I have concluded that alcohol and marijuana must cause some sort of negative changes to how the brain functions.
So you are correct in saying that I haven't tried either (I never will), but I definitely have a clue on how they work.
>>7995039
Fun fact: if drugs and alcohol literally didn't exist then your family would have just destroyed their lives with gambling.
>>7995044
Ok, had they destroyed their lives with gambling I would dislike gambling. Drugs and alcohol do exist. Imagining a what if scenario isn't really relevant.
>>7995057
Yes it is relevant, as it goes to show that drug abuse (note that not all use is abuse is only a symptom of a deeper root cause (such as depression, mental issues and/or stress).
Also, "addiction-genes" are not automatically switched on, they need to be in an environment which triggers them first.
> No the guy you were talking to, by the way.
Legalize THC
Keep weed illegal
>>7995084
I see, you are correct then in saying it is relevant. The deeper root causes can initiate abuse yes, but from my personal experience the abuse only makes the issue worse, which I believe to be a form of damage to mental capacity.
Even when it isn't abuse but just moderate use I have found that people completely change their personalities and attitudes. Part of which is because I have been around people younger than 18 whose brains are still developing. Although I have my family to serve as an example to me that substances impair brain function regardless of age, perhaps in a decade or so I will no longer see this.
>>7995109
Fair enough. I smoked weed during high school (and maybe once or twice per year nowadays) and it did affect me negatively in two ways; I got HPPD (permanent visual distortions) and my short term memory went to shit and remained shitty until about two days after the most recent time I had smoked. As for my friends with whom I smoked I did not observe any differences in behaviour at all, many of them still smoke every weekend or so, yet do very well on all fronts despite of it (most of them are highly intelligent and are studying in STEM-fields).
On the other hand I know people who were heavy users who did appear to be hindered in their mental development by various drugs including cannabis, similar to how people who become alcoholics early on in life tend to completely stop developing social skills as they rely on the booze to make them sociable as a crutch.
I'm a bit too tired to even know what the fuck I'm rambling on about at this point; sorry. I guess what I mean to say is that drugs, as most other things, aren't bad by themselves, but they can have a very negative impact on certain people under certain conditions and make bad personal situations worse. Prohibition and criminalization of drug use is not the answer to an issue which is psychological and societal, I'd much rather see treatment and education in their place.
>>7995202
Wow, reading through that post I realize just how tired I am. I apologize for my incohesive mumbo-jumbo.
