Should Marijuana be legal? Vote the poll!

[Rin]

I vote neither.

It should absolutely be illegal as a recreational drug; the danger of spontaneous psychosis should be enough to justify a ban. When smoked, it is also just as dangerous as cigarettes, which should by the way also be illegal. There are other, far less dangerous forms of tobacco (including pipe tobacco and cigars, but some oral types are definitely the safest), and “forcing” tobacco users to use them instead of cigarettes would save thousands of lives a year.

However, cannabis has excellent medicinal value in many cases. The fact that “we” (depending on location) still refuse those with terminal cancer, MS and so on cannabis for medicinal purposes, while pumping them full of opioids or other strong drugs which have far worse side effects, because “cannabis is bad”, stinks of ideology.

So there should be an option like “No for recreational use, yes for medicinal use”.

 

[migueltojose]

I vote neither.

It should absolutely be illegal as a recreational drug; the danger of spontaneous psychosis should be enough to justify a ban. When smoked, it is also just as dangerous as cigarettes, which should by the way also be illegal. There are other, far less dangerous forms of tobacco (including pipe tobacco and cigars, but some oral types are definitely the safest), and “forcing” tobacco users to use them instead of cigarettes would save thousands of lives a year.

However, cannabis has excellent medicinal value in many cases. The fact that “we” (depending on location) still refuse those with terminal cancer, MS and so on cannabis for medicinal purposes, while pumping them full of opioids or other strong drugs which have far worse side effects, because “cannabis is bad”, stinks of ideology.

So there should be an option like “No for recreational use, yes for medicinal use”.

Regardless of your opinion, which I might agree with to a large extent… people need the right to choose… they need to choose to behave…

We have too many laws because… we have excessive bad behavior…

We need to behave… and earn the right to freedom… we have to be responsible… Then many of these behavioral laws are unnecessary… we need to re-reach “critical mass”… conformity is not a bad word… it is necessary… to an extent…

 

[Viki63]

I agree that people should have the right to choose. But if it could be restricted to adults, it would be a different story.
I live in Washington, where mj is legal now, I smell it on the street corners, on the sidewalks, in the stores.

The trouble is young people think it’s cool and start using it during the time of their lives when it’s most dangerous for brain development.
Making it legal is perhaps the most stupid thing Washington has done, and this state has done some majorly stupid things.
When it’s legal for adults, teenagers will get hold of it. Plenty of dumb adults are willing to buy it for kids.
We are dumbing the next generation into ruin.

 

[Rin]

Regardless of your opinion, which I might agree with to a large extent… people need the right to choose… they need to choose to behave…

We have too many laws because… we have excessive bad behavior…

We need to behave… and earn the right to freedom… we have to be responsible… Then many of these behavioral laws are unnecessary… we need to re-reach “critical mass”… conformity is not a bad word… it is necessary… to an extent…

I would agree with you, were it not for the fact that cigarette smoking costs society heaploads of money in lost taxes, medical expenses, and so on every year. Add the fact that smoking often isn’t a choice (it is often a form of self-medication, though it may mask the condition since nicotine works mildly anti-depressive), and even when it begins as a choice, it often doesn’t remain a choice, depending on how susceptible the person is to nicotine addiction.

If Marijuana was legalized as a recreational drug, it would have the exact same effects as cigarettes on society, though since people would smoke more rarely, it would cause fewer cases of lung cancer. However, it would have the added danger of psychosis, which would also be a huge societal expense.

One could of course say that smokers should be allowed to smoke, but pay the medical bills themselves. However, since the vast majority of smokers are low-income or disabled, such a policy would be gravely immoral, and basically a death sentence - especially since the choice to smoke may not even have been truly free.

To conclude, I would have agreed with you a few years ago. But I will no longer stick to a principle of letting people choose, when that principle kills thousands of people a year. Especially not when there are plenty of far less dangerous tobacco products; while still not risk free, some of them can be compared to coffee in risk level. Tobacco isn’t really that bad in its pure form. Cigarettes are however essentially poisoned sticks of something that may at one point have been tobacco - if anyone sold foods with the additives found in tobacco, they would probably be imprisoned. It’s time to enforce similar regulations on tobacco production.

 

[migueltojose]

The trouble is young people think it’s cool and start using it during the time of their lives when it’s most dangerous for brain development.

We are dumbing the next generation into ruin.-

Well… that’s what our parents thought… and that’s what their parents thought… and that’s what their parent’s thought… and they could all be right…

But it’s also like the Darwin Awards… those who can’t handle “freedom” will be weeded out. They won’t be attractive for mating and they will not reproduce and their genes will be removed from the gene pool. And those who can handle their shtuff will survive and thrive.

We have gotten soft by subsidizing the weak and morally corrupt.

Educate, Evangelize, Enlighten… that’s what we must do…

“Some of the seed falls on rocks.”

Repent and be saved. Or, not…

 

[on_the_hill]

At first, I thought, ‘no.’

A few years into the debate, I thought, ‘yes.’

Now I’m thinking, ‘no.’

I’m hearing that the THC levels are far above what had been “your parents’ pot,” and that it’s not nearly the harmless high people say it is.

 

[migueltojose]

At first, I thought, ‘no.’

A few years into the debate, I thought, ‘yes.’

Now I’m thinking, ‘no.’

I’m hearing that the THC levels are far above what had been “your parents’ pot,” and that it’s not nearly the harmless high people say it is.

People need to be responsible and make the right choices. Freedom is paramount. How can we learn to be responsible and make the right choices when choice is removed. We are babying ourselves. It’s sad. Be free and choose well. Or surrender freedom and lose the ability to discern.

 

[Tom_Baum]

Some believe that God gave us free will.

If God gave us free will, should we use our free will to take away other people’s free will?

 

[on_the_hill]

People need to be responsible and make the right choices. Freedom is paramount. How can we learn to be responsible and make the right choices when choice is removed. We are babying ourselves. It’s sad. Be free and choose well. Or surrender freedom and lose the ability to discern.

I don’t disagree, but at the same time, there are behaviors that lead to bad consequences. The problem with intoxicants is that they deny or prevent a user from choosing well. People get drunk and stupid.

 

[on_the_hill]

Some believe that God gave us free will.

If God gave us free will, should we use our free will to take away other people’s free will?

Right, but we still have laws. A system based on the idea of protecting everyone’s free will wouldn’t last long.

 

[Tom_Baum]

Right, but we still have laws. A system based on the idea of protecting everyone’s free will wouldn’t last long.

As far as, “but we still have laws”, this is quite the understatement.

And I suppose a system based on freedom will not last long either since many seem to think they know what is best for others.

 

[adawgj]

I say yes, however there should be just say no programs to counter attack it.

 

[John_Lazarus]

Well… that’s what our parents thought… and that’s what their parents thought… and that’s what their parent’s thought… and they could all be right…

But it’s also like the Darwin Awards… those who can’t handle “freedom” will be weeded out. They won’t be attractive for mating and they will not reproduce and their genes will be removed from the gene pool. And those who can handle their shtuff will survive and thrive.

We have gotten soft by subsidizing the weak and morally corrupt.

Educate, Evangelize, Enlighten… that’s what we must do…

“Some of the seed falls on rocks.”

Repent and be saved. Or, not…

Duuuude…you’re harshing my mellow…