Poll: Medical Marijuana
- Thread starter Mcupobob
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Marijuana Rules and it is one of the very few things that I disagree with my government on enough to consider moving to Canada for (I love canada, it's like what America keeps trying to convince the world it is)
They expect you to take advantage of the system. The questions ask were "Have you ever gotten a headach" Or "Anixty attack" "acid reflux". Those were the ones I remeber saying yes to, and you only need to answer one of them to get certifed. Its all just a joke.photog212 said:
Some of these legalised Marijuana systems are a joke and need to be more strictly enforced if they are to be used.
I'm against the use of medicinal Marijuana, and would much rather the time and money goes into the development of proper medicines and pain killers that have been more rigorously tested and well designed.
Having legalised recreational drugs available just forces people to try and cheat the system. What's wrong with the pharmacy just proscribing standard pain relief medication?
I'm against the use of medicinal Marijuana, and would much rather the time and money goes into the development of proper medicines and pain killers that have been more rigorously tested and well designed.
Having legalised recreational drugs available just forces people to try and cheat the system. What's wrong with the pharmacy just proscribing standard pain relief medication?
Thats all kinds of messed up isn't? Not to mention I can go to war and kill myself with my nicotin addiction but I can't unwind with the joint? Oh well I bet in the future pot is going to become like the alcohol age limit debate if it gets passed.Scde2 said:
First: of course there's the point that it should just be legalized for recreational use. In truth it's very similar to alcohol in its detrements and mind-altering effects. But of course, you've met people who have a social drink and while a little buzzed, is completely in control(but not safe on machinery). I've never heard of someone getting "a little" stoned. Maybe I don't know enough stoners, but I'd think it's hard to social toke unless you're at home with other stoners. Smoking tobacco gives a shot of nicotine but that chemical really only makes you addicted and releases endorphins. It doesn't get you high. Although arguing for in-home use only beats my argument. Until the stoned asshole decides to leave the house and do stupid shit anyway. And don't tell me stupid things don't sound perfectly logical when high. I know better.
Second: for medical uses it's really THC they want. If this is the case, extract it so the patient doesn't have to get smoke in their lungs to feel the effect, by putting it in a vaporizer. Smokeless cigarettes work the same, delivering nicotene with water vapor instead of tobacco smoke. If getting the individual high enough to be numbed to the pain is the real goal, do it in a way that won't kill them as fast. Also, this way the drug is pure, without contaminants. A lot of weed from Mexico has dried horse dung mixed into it.
Overall, I believe it should be medicinal only, for cases of extreme suffering such as chemo. I've seen how debilitating chemo is, and would never want to go through it. We did this with morphine, an opiate, as well as using a cocaine derivative as a local anesthetic in dentistry.
Second: for medical uses it's really THC they want. If this is the case, extract it so the patient doesn't have to get smoke in their lungs to feel the effect, by putting it in a vaporizer. Smokeless cigarettes work the same, delivering nicotene with water vapor instead of tobacco smoke. If getting the individual high enough to be numbed to the pain is the real goal, do it in a way that won't kill them as fast. Also, this way the drug is pure, without contaminants. A lot of weed from Mexico has dried horse dung mixed into it.
Overall, I believe it should be medicinal only, for cases of extreme suffering such as chemo. I've seen how debilitating chemo is, and would never want to go through it. We did this with morphine, an opiate, as well as using a cocaine derivative as a local anesthetic in dentistry.
Couldn't have said it better, myself. Although, I wouldn't say that partaking in the regular consumption of cannabis necessarily takes away from your objectivity any more than oxygen dependency takes away from your ability to be objective on matters like "should submarines have an air supply". After all, there haven't been any formal, unbiased, conclusive studies on cannabis (to my knowledge, at least, but if you have one you can link me to, I'd piss myself with glee and spam it on all of my "straight edge" pseudo-friends' facebook walls), so using cannabis is really the only way to have an educated opinion on it. Continuing to use it means you analyzed your experiences with it and found that the observable pros outweighed the cons.Furburt said:
Hey, I see your point, but look at it like this; When someone commits murder, 98% of the time the person who commits it will suffer High amounts of stress, anxeity, depression over something that you can never take back. You can't just move on from murder, like you can with drugs. Sure, withdrawl would be hell, but you can recover if you try, unlike murder, which will haunt your every move and reputation, even if murder becomes legal. I mean seriously, if you were hiring for a new clerk at your job, per se, and you interview a guy who seems really nice. When you read his report, you discover that in an act of blind rage he killed a co-worker for, lets say, giving him too much work/criticism, whatever. Grant it, the murder was legal, but that really doesn't make it any better, does it? I mean, you could be his next victim of rage, for he really doesn't know that killing someone is bad, now does he? While I'm not sure that that's what you had in mind, I thought I'd give you my perspective on your opinion. Marijuana is in a completely different catagory in its self. Now, if you had said something about all the other drugs, I would definately agree with you in that it wouldn't change a thing. Hardcore drugs (cocaine, for example) damage more brains and lives than marijuana would ever hope to achieve. The only seroius damage Marijuana causes (as fas as I know) is a retardation in the choice-making part of your mind, and maybe a little hacker's lung. On a final note, you'd be surprised at how many people I know that smoke weed just to be a rebel. (I live in America myself.) Another good reason for the legalization is that the drug cartels and others involved will take a huge blow to their power if Marijuana (their biggest selling item) is selled legally. Nonetheless, this was a good topic, and I'm glad I could share my opinion. Please, don't flame me, just my opinion, And no, I'm not flaming you either.Dango said:
EDIT: Oh, and that 2% who wouldn't feel anything after killing someone either would hide it deep in their subconcious or keep killing for various reasons (ie; mental problems, murderous tendencies, etc.)
I don't know enough about the system or how likely it would be to be able to replace with some other way of getting weed legally, to be able to answer the poll. But it does seem silly that recreational tokers are taking advantage of a system intended for the legitimately ill. And it doesn't seem right that it's not taxed.
So yes, make it legal, if you can.
OP makes a good point about industrial growers possibly using pesticides and stuff; I hadn't really thought about that before. Like they surely do with tobacco. And additives in beer. Needs more thought...
So yes, make it legal, if you can.
OP makes a good point about industrial growers possibly using pesticides and stuff; I hadn't really thought about that before. Like they surely do with tobacco. And additives in beer. Needs more thought...
That was an excellent read. I'm not surprised I hadn't heard about that study before, since every form of news media over here in America is regulated by the government, and aren't allowed to talk about things that our government disagrees with (such as "hey fuckheads, we've got scientific evidence that contradicts all the lies you've spoon-fed us since childbirth to justify the prohibition") in the name of "public decency". It's an Orwellian suppression of information that nobody seems to be catching on to because we all assume that the first amendment (freedom of the press) overrides such regulatory government offices like the FCC.Furburt said:
But yeah, judging by what you've told me, we (America) are doing the same thing the UK did, in a sense. The UK was convinced that the findings of the study would support their stance on cannabis, and when it contradicted them, they silenced it. American politicians probably already know about the way the UK handled it, so they're just flat-out telling people that nobody is allowed to study it, period.
Ah, well. We'll get it right eventually. We just have to wait for the current generations-in-power to die off so that the propaganda they were fed as children is no longer disseminated to us or our offspring in the form of legislation and continuing the campaigns against truth.
And why do certain areas seem to think that an unregulated amount of Endocanabanoids from dried leaves is the best way to administer them? Many modern medicines are derived from natural substances and it is the job of the pharmaceutical agencies to extract and regulate these active ingredients providing a clean and standardised dosage for medical use.Furburt said: