For or Against Marijuana

Surely the easiest way to judge whether a drug should be legalised is to compare it to an already legal drug? What other criteria is better for the debate other than already legal drugs?

Feel free to do so, using it as an example is a great way to judge whether a drug should be legalized.

However, Starting an argument in that kind of nature just doesn't add up. Completely irrelevant to my post.
 
I do not think that alocohol is better, nor did I state anything alike in this thread.

Either way, you asked for more risks...

These are the basic Marijuana dangers:
  • [FONT=Helvetica, Arial Narrow, Arial]Impaired perception[/FONT]
  • Diminished short-term memory
  • Loss of concentration and coordination
  • Impaired judgement
  • Increased risk of accidents
  • Loss of motivation
  • Diminished inhibitions
  • Increased heart rate
  • Anxiety, panic attacks, and paranoia
  • Hallucinations
  • Damage to the respiratory, reproductive, and immune systems
  • Increased risk of cancer (Theory.)
  • Psychological dependency
Again, I didn't compare it to Alochol - This thread is about if we should legalize weed or not. Not comparing the both.


The "basic dangers" lol. All of those "basic dangers" are very vague (and are they all whilst under the influence, or long term? because many of those look like the very reason people take it).

The reason I compare it to alcohol is because we're deciding whether it should be legalised, so it makes sense to compare it to some legal drugs to see whether it's as bad, don't you agree?
 
The "basic dangers" lol. All of those "basic dangers" are very vague (and are they all whilst under the influence, or long term? because many of those look like the very reason people take it).

The reason I compare it to alcohol is because we're deciding whether it should be legalised, so it makes sense to compare it to some legal drugs to see whether it's as bad, don't you agree?

I take it that the name sounds funny to you, fair enough. And most of them are under the influence, when you're high.

There's a difference using Alcohol as an example, then putting words into my mouth and correcting me whilst doing it, i.e starting an argument of whatever drug is the most dangerous.
 
I take it that the name sounds funny to you, fair enough. And most of them are under the influence, when you're high.

There's a difference using Alcohol as an example, then putting words into my mouth and correcting me whilst doing it, i.e starting an argument of whatever drug is the most dangerous.

If alcohol is more dangerous than marijuana, then either marijuana should be legal or alcohol should be illegal. IF danger is the thing we judge on.

Would you agree with this?
 
The "basic dangers" lol. All of those "basic dangers" are very vague (and are they all whilst under the influence, or long term? because many of those look like the very reason people take it).

The reason I compare it to alcohol is because we're deciding whether it should be legalised, so it makes sense to compare it to some legal drugs to see whether it's as bad, don't you agree?

Why allow another unhealthy product on the market for consumption? Shouldn't we put more emphasize to restrain the consumption on the already toxic products instead of allowing more toxic ones?

See, the ****** can't argue with that.
 
Last edited:
Yes, that would make sense.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_causes_of_death_by_rate

Alcohol trumps "drug use", and deaths by marijuana use are 0 (direct deaths, not including indirect like driving accidents, although alcohol-related driving incidents are many times higher than marijuana ones).

I'm sure you'll agree that someone under the influence of alcohol is more likely to cause harm to themselves/others as well.

Now just to discuss the long term effects (which apparently doesn't include death, in the case of marijuana - but can with alcohol... even the withdrawals).
 
In my opinion, all drugs should be legalised, it is up to the individual wether or not they want to take drugs, they will do it wether it is legal/illegal, therefore if I had the choice, I'd make it legal, simply so we can tax the items. I've never smoked or done drugs, I've drank, because I like drink 🙂 'Tis my friends.
I bet crime rates would go down too, people commit crimes so they can pay the money for the drugs, if it was legal, it wouldn't be as high a price, so the drugtaker wouldn't need to resort to crime, or risk getting in huge debt with a drug dealer. Simples.
 
In my opinion, all drugs should be legalised, it is up to the individual wether or not they want to take drugs, they will do it wether it is legal/illegal, therefore if I had the choice, I'd make it legal, simply so we can tax the items. I've never smoked or done drugs, I've drank, because I like drink 🙂 'Tis my friends.
I bet crime rates would go down too, people commit crimes so they can pay the money for the drugs, if it was legal, it wouldn't be as high a price, so the drugtaker wouldn't need to resort to crime, or risk getting in huge debt with a drug dealer. Simples.

Legalization would increase the number of casual users which, in turn, would increase the number of drug abusers. And with more drug users, abusers, and addicts would mean more health problems and lower economic productivity.

Now the argument based on the analogy between alcohol and tobacco versus psychoactive drugs is weak because its conclusion -- psychoactive drugs should be legalized -- does not follow from its premises. It is illogical to say that because alcohol and tobacco take a terrible toll (for example, they are responsible for 500,000 premature deaths each year), a heavy toll from legalization is therefore acceptable. Indeed, the reverse seems more logical; prohibit the use of alcohol, tobacco, and psychoactive drugs because of the harm they all do. Additionally, marijuana, heroin, cocaine, crack, and the rest of the psychoactive drugs are not harmless substances -- they have serious negative consequences for the health of users and addictive liability.

Although legalization might result in savings in expensive criminal justice costs and provide tax revenues, increased public-health costs and reduced economic productivity due to more drug-dependent workers would offset the financial benefits of legalization.



 
I think it should be legalized because many many people smoke it already, so legalizing it really wouldn't be doing much. :dontknow:
 
marijuana

marijuana

What do you think of marijuana? do you for it or against it? for me i am for it and always will be for it. here are some facts.

1st fact:
https://www.nida.nih.gov/infofacts/marijuana.html all lies


2nd fact:
The government made it against the law to Grow it,because they thought it would threaten the Paper industries with hemp.

3rd fact:
Marijuana has not killed one person or been a Modem for crime.

4th fact:
Marijuana has NO affects on a persons mental OR philosophical health

5th fact:
In the untied states constitution it states:
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." that means under constitution we are alowed to do whatever the people want to do IF it is not stepping on some ones rights.
 
Of course... Everything 'bad' about weed should be labeled "all lies" because that's the way it is, huh? 🙂

Anyway, back to realism. I'm not going to say that marijuana is the worst drug out there, but it has been proven to cause depression, and really **** up your brain if you're unlucky. The fact that junkies like yourself keeps 'denying' all the scientific studies that have been made that are against the use of marijuana is not going to change anything. If you want to label it "all lies", then DEBUNK it. Preferably by using scientific measures, and not the old "It's all a Government conspiracy" clich?.

"Marijuana has not killed one person or been a Modem for crime."

Other than the fact that Marijuana is a crime in itself which results in thousands of arrests made each year... Does it lead to other crimes? According to the ONDCP, at least sixty percent of the Mexican drug cartel money comes from selling marijuana in the U.S. They protect this 'revenue' by brutally torturing, murdering and dismembering thousands of innocent people. You could argue that this can be resolved by legalizing & taxing marijuana, but the fact is that if the tax is too high or the limits too strong (which it will be) people will still just seek out the black market.

You could also argue that if we would to legalize the use of marijuana, it would also reduce the overall crime-rate that is related to marijuana. In that sense, you're correct because most arrests are mainly for possession. That said, you could use this excuse for ANY drug. The remaining fact is that's neither good for you physically or psychologically.

Marijuana can also be linked to child crime and harder drugs (The gateway theory), which I personally can agree with.

-> https://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article648195.ece
---
I mean, let's turn the question around and ask us this: Why should we legalize the use of yet another drug? There's absolutely no point in doing so. Having more junkies out in the streets is not exactly a positive thing. What makes you unable to live your life to the fullest without having the need to inhale smoke? I'm sure the amendment does not include doing things that are ILLEGAL in the first place; attempting suicide is against the law, etc..

Conclusion; No, Marijuana should not be legalized. We already enough issues with alcoholics. Legalizing more drugs would only damage our civilization even further.

And before you say it, no, I'm not a secret operative working for the US Government.
 
Last edited:
I used to smoke them tweeds and I turned out to be a pretty cool young man.

stoner-791927.jpg


I'm sure the guy above says exactly the same thing.. Know what I mean?
 
Top