Wrong. I am never smoke (not weed, not tobacco), but I did some research on the effect (positive and negative) of weeds almost 20 years ago. . .and even then, the pharmacology of those two substances (weed vs tobacco) clearly showed that weed was far less detrimental to health than tobacco. If we should make one of the two illegal, it should be nicotine, not marijuana. Weed has MANY medicinal properties, and when used without excess (like wine!) it has no negative side effects.
Does that mean you would also be in favor to criminalize use of wine. . . including as a symbolic "blood of God" ingestion during mass?
Given the inanity of the OP and just about everything else that's been posted here, it's quite appropriate. I guess you don't get satire.
The left knows Prohibition doesn't work. Only the right insists on repeating a known, historical mistake, while claiming to have Faith.
The irony here in regards to the right wingers is that they insist upon ownership of American consciousness and don't believe in basic freedom, the sovereignty over ones consciousness and body. Which makes them basically tyrants. Yet they claim to hate tyrants. Incoherent, obviously, and one who loves freedom would never vote for another republican, unless it was a libertarian like rand paul. Yet the right claims the left are the tyrants, the control freaks. The hypocrisy can make an objective mind puke. Beware of these right wingers. They only act like they want freedom, when in fact they demand control, and the worst kind of control. There is great ego gratification and a deep nefarious pleasure in those people who demand to own and have control over the bodies of other human being. Sends a shiver up their legs.
http://ia.media-imdb.com/images/M/M...045410156,284,406_SY317_CR4,0,214,317_AL_.jpg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Azf320JDdqU
LOL.. I am retired, do not drink nor do any drugs. Your truncated brain is blinding you. This isn't a good thing. Why? Because there is no room there for logic, rational thought. Which of course one sees quite a bit of on the right side. You guys just get ego gratification from being able to tell others what to do, and if they do not obey you, you can get them locked up. Such a dangerous mind you guys have.
You lose that bet. I don't smoke weed, but don't see any reason for it to remain illegal. As for a reason to legalize it, I'd suggest the same reason alcohol is legal... not to mention the tax revenue. http://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyph...o-pulls-in-millions-in-marijuana-tax-revenue/
Ahh, so you're one of those What about heroin? Cocaine? Meth? Come on, cannabis is obvious, take a stance.
One of which? The people the OP claimed didn't exist? False equivalency much? How many people have died from cannabis overdoses?
One of those in favor of cannabis legalization and heavy taxation + regulation Yeah one of those - the public health rather than bodily sovereignty crowd. I am not being sarcastic or opposing legalization of cannabis (quite the opposite) - if youcthink cannabis is not a public health issue you're fooling yourself. It's habit forming, if you smoke it it causes many of the same ailments as tobacco, it can encourage unhealthy eating habits in regular users, and it quite seriously lowers motivation. Don't get me wrong, I think its fantastic in spite of those flaws, and smoke it near daily - but if you're making a public health rather than liberty-based argument you might be better off in the "make ALL drugs illegal, including tobacco and alcohol" camp.
Then yes, I'm "one of those". "bodily sovereignty"? How does legalization of cannabis (and taxation, as with any other legal substance) violate bodily sovereignty? Great, then it should be just as legal (and taxed) as tobacco and/or alcohol. If we tried to illegalize everything that was unhealthy, it would be the end of most consumer goods. We've clearly accepted that there are "shades of grey" rather than an absolute good/bad value on the health requirements for consumable products, and the metaphorical 'line in the sand' already accepts items (like tobacco and alcohol) that are no better for you than cannabis. For me, it just makes sense to have a consistant approach for similar products - the tax benefits are just an added benefit.
Do you support legal cultivation for personal use? I mean, I'd still prefer it be unregulated and untaxed, but if I can bypass all that by growing it myself, that's at least close to ideal. I am worried legalization and control measures will result in cannabis becoming a.corporate cash cow much like tobacco.
What I support is it being treated exactly the way similar products are treated - such as tobacco and alcohol.
So yes to cultivation for personal use? I do enjoy brewing a good homebrewed wheat beer. Some separate home brewing and refining of beer and liquor from cannabis cultivation - so I sort of had to ask. [Hr][/hr] What about other drugs? LSD for instance is as non-addictive as water and incredibly non-toxic, any threat would be to the user, and so use is a victimless crime. Do you support legal LSD and psilocybin? Like... Where do you draw the line where the harm becomes so great that prohibition is necessary? Right after cannabis? Opiates? Meth? Bath salts? Krokodil? Or do you support it all being handled like alcohol and tobacco?
Personal use is one thing, commercial levels of production and sale are another - no matter what product you're talking about. I don't believe I've seen enough comparative studies on these other substances to make an informed decision. Not sure why you're so fixated on my opinion, it's not an unusual one.
Its not legal for me to sell my homebrew without a license either. In principle you'd support me being able to grow a few plants in my backyard? I So there is some point at which the harm becomes too great and prohibition becomes necessary? I'm picking your brain, please stay still.
