Poll: Weed - Legal or Illegal?

[Maphysto]

Legalize it and tax it. Aside from tax money coming in you'll also save MILLIONS a year on paying for people to be in jail for drug offenses.

And while you'd think this would be standard logic, it's not. The sad fact is, there's literally a corporate incentive to keep shit like this criminalized.

Aside from the direct benefits they gain through privately-owned prisons, there's also the long-term effect of drugs helping to perpetuate cycles of poverty, which provides a nice little pool of wage slaves and keeps those pesky minorities in the gutter.

If we lived in a world that was sane, we'd be trying to address the problems that DRIVE people to drug use rather than going "WHOOPS you smoked the wrong plant, have fun in jail asshole."

 

[AndyFromMonday]

You make it sound like a shit place to live. I think you're telling lies tho.

You also are doing a poor job changing my vote. Don't go into a life of politics.

I never want to get into politics. They're bullshit coated shit with shit gravy.


What you said is that if weed is legal more people will smoke it and therefore we'll have more stoned drivers. At the same time, the Netherlands, a country in which weed use is extremely tolerated, so much so that one might say it's legal, we see a decline in weed use which directly contradicts your claim.

Have you ever actually seen a stoned driver though? I sure as hell haven't, not in my country(there are a shitload of stoners here) or the Netherlands.

I respect your interpretation of your countrymen better than I view my own.

I'm not from the Netherlands if that's your swing.

 

[WolfEdge]

It's not a matter of whether I personally think it's right or wrong. It's a matter of freedom. For me to straight up DEMAND that another person behave as I would wish them to, regardless of their own desires? That's tyranny, no matter how you look at it.

The dangers don't matter, the potential death-rates don't matter, and the supposed side-effects of extended use don't matter. Bottom line: by instigating YOUR views forcibly on someone else, you are effectively controlling them. It's no different from the current video game debacle, and jut as I don't want someone telling me what is and isn't acceptable by law for me to play, neither do I wish to be held responsible for the blocked freedoms of a given individual. To believe otherwise and still frequent this site makes you a hypocrite.

 

[Jaime_Wolf]

I vote keep it illegal. I don't want more 'stoners' driving.

Stoners drive anyways. Prohibition doesn't work.

Were there more drunk drivers when prohibition of alcohol was going on or when it was just illegal to drive drunk?

Your reasoning is fallacious. If you don't want stoned drivers, you make it illegal to drive stoned, not make it illegal to be stoned.

So you're saying legalizing weed wouldn't cause more people to smoke it, and in turn the numbers of those who smoke it and drive wouldn't increase as well?

I'm saying its inconsistent to expect someone who's already broken one law to obey another, similar one. possessing drug & driving impaired.

Good for your statement. I still don't want more stoners driving. Legalizing weed would, more than likely, affect the number of stoned drivers in a way I wouldn't like.

That's my vote, that's my opinion. You aren't doing a good job changing that. Good day.

I actually agree with you. Legalising cannabis would doubtless increase the number of stoned drivers.

On the other hand, I'm not just reasoning based on my own intuitions and comparisons of cannabis to alcohol intoxication. While cannabis leads to reduced working memory performance, degraded tracking ability, and slower reaction times, it doesn't impair motor coordination nor significantly alter judgment. Many studies have shown that (particularly for long-term users) it is considerably less dangerous to drive stoned than to drive while talking on the phone (handless or otherwise), talking to a passenger, or even eating. Some have even shown greater effects for listening to music than driving stoned.

Also, it's a poor argument in the same way that drunk driving was a poor argument for Prohibition. As noted, the majority of people willing to break the law already have and will continue to do so. Those who have thus far avoided cannabis because it was illegal are unlikely to violate the law in a considerably more dangerous fashion once it becomes legal. Thus we're probably talking about a pretty modest increase. Further, a much more effective strategy would be to legalise it and use social taboo to control stoned driving.

Study after study has shown that the main reasons people currently avoid drunk driving are social. It's considered very unseemly and reckless (pretty much never in an attractive "bad boy" way). The problem is that, with cannabis illegal, people don't think this is necessary or don't even think about it since its illegality distances them from it. It would not be at all surprising if cannabis legalisation lead to a greater stigma and, consequently, a lower number of stoned drivers in the slightly longer run.

 

[Jaime_Wolf]

Because legalisaing cannabis (mostly harmless) would make it harder to tell the difference between that and dangerous shit, e.g. skunk or that hydroponic crap. You see, you can go on about how great it is and natural because it grows in the dirt, but while that may have been true in the 60s, it ain't now. There's so much emphasis on THC in today's market that it's becoming less and less safe. So yes, you could tax the safe one. But that just makes it easier to produce and sell the dangerous types, and actually encourages their consumption in a roundabout way.

Actually this is completely untrue. "Skunk" and "hydroponic crap" are just better-grown, better-bred varieties. There's really no indication that modern cannabis is any more harmful than cannabis from the 60s (or contemporary lower-quality cannabis). Hydroponic growth also typically requires fewer pesticides, which can be extremely dangerous.

The overwhelming majority of the studies showing large differences between the THC content of cannabis from the 60s and today have been discredited by most major research organisations. Most of the measurements from the 60s were of confiscated bricks of extremely low-quality (by 60s standards) cannabis taken from police lockers they had been sitting in for months if not years. The THC content has certainly gone up, but not anywhere near the level that gets thrown around so often. Hydroponic growth is also not some fancy new invention that didn't exist in the 60s: it's pretty easy to set up, easier to conceal, and grows much higher-quality, lower-variability product.

 

[lSHaDoW-FoXl]

Our politicians do far worse drugs then weed all the time. And you know what? If our politicians just chilled and smoked a joint instead of being such selfish pompous assholes maybe we'd be living in a better world. It's not like progress would be any slower because we pretty much gave that up when we became a democracy. Instead, we'll just live in a world where politicians can't sign any bad laws nor good ones.

And since politicians never actually do sign good policies I suppose this further supports my idea. And besides all that I think a drunken alcoholic with a car or a gun is a far greater public menace to us. Hell, just a month ago I remember watching the news and hearing a drunken driver crashing into a house and starting a fire.

But perhaps it's not drugs or alcohol that's the problem, maybe it's just the few morons who do stupid shit. Afterall, if they weren't doing stupid shit because of weed they'd probably do stupid shit over something else.

 

[thePyro_13]

Either outlaw booze or legalize and regular weed.

Can't make booze illegal any-more than you can cigarettes. The economy would suffer too much in a short time span and people who use them regularly would flip out. That isn't a good enough reason to legalise weed. We don't need a 3rd harmful drug that has become so common that it's hard to remove from our society.

 

[Wintermoot]

As long as you can still fire people on the spot for coming to work stoned and they are not allowed to drive while stoned then I do not care.
Sure it has long term side effects and totally destroys your memory but eh, thats your problem.

aren't that the same effect,s as booze?
OT
legalize it! it,s mostly harmless and we already legalized worse stuff (like tobacco and alcohol)
so why not this?

 

[Meestor Pickle]

I dont really care, it doesnt affect me and it gets rid of some idiots

 

[Dana22]

Every drug should be legal, in my opinion.

 

[Baneat]

Keep that shit illegal. Peoiple are stupid and mentally fogged up enough already, why hand them another way to go the way of the retard? Keep them hungry, desperate, poor and on the run.

If you think you know better than someone else, and think that gives you the right to control personal aspects of their life, it's important to note we call that fascism.

 

[the-squid]

First of all I have to say I am Dutch, so my opinion may not be entirely neutral on this topic, But I really REALLY do not understand the whole fear of weed thing, I have read almost the whole tread ( until page 4 ) and I am shocked about all the faults and myths in most of the posts, So I am gonna name a cupple of facts and myths on the subject :

Marijuana causes brain damage = LIE !!

None of the medical tests currently used to detect brain damage in humans have found harm from marijuana, even from long term high-dose use.

An early study reported brain damage in monkeys after six months exposure to high concentrations of marijuana smoke. These tests aren?t to be taken serious, because these monkeys were tested with outdated technology thus making the result inaccurate.

In a recent, more carefully conducted study, researchers found no evidence of brain abnormality in monkeys that were forced to inhale four to five marijuana cigarettes every day for a year. This clearly proves that marijuana leaves NO brain damage.

The claim that marijuana kills brain cells is based on a report dating back 25 years and has never been supported by any scientific study.

Legalizing marijuana would cause carnage on the highways = lolwhut ?


Dont drink and drive
Dont smoke and drive ... Duh

Marijuana is highly addictive = FALSE


Tobacco has a 90% addiction rate and marijuana is less addictive then caffeine. You heard that right, you get hooked on coffee faster then you get hooked on marijuana!

Also, tobacco (nicotine) and alcohol can be as addicting as heroin or cocaine, but marijuana is one of the least habit forming drug there is!

Some people who heavily and frequently smoke marijuana can stop without difficulty.
Marijuana does not cause physical dependence. If people experience withdrawal symptoms at all, they are very mild.

Surveys show that the large majority of people who have had experience with marijuana do not become regular users.

even people who continue using marijuana for several years or more are not necessarily "addicted" to it.

Many regular users (including many daily users) smoke marijuana in a way that does not interfere with daily life activities, and may in some cases even boost there performance.

Marijuana causes crime and aggression = WHAHAHAHA

Ever gone to a coffie shop( = weed bar) in Amsterdam ? Well everyone who did knows there is 0 % aggression from stoner's, worst case scenario is you losing to some dude after a game of chess or monopoly

thats about it and sorry for some grammar mistakes or spelling errors I am dyslectic as F$^%