CA: Marijuana Legalization

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC539839/?tool=pmcentrez

This one kinda sucks to skim thru so I think I found the page where it starts taking about most the effects http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=6376&page=51

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18515902 or for the full article http://bjp.rcpsych.org/cgi/content/full/192/6/470

http://www.medscape.com/medline/abstract/2787581

How is this for a start?

In short, Marijuana was made illegal because a dept that was like the dea was beginning to be seen as unnecessary, which played a role on its (and a certain person, harry aslinger) funding, so, they created a problem to which they needed funding, they promoted this problem by stating that marijuana "made the degenerate races think they're better". As well as playing off the idea that it made people insane, made people kill people. Heres some Harry quotes for ya

"Marihuana leads to pacifism and communist brainwashing"

"Reefer makes darkies think they're as good as white men."

"There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the US, and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz and swing, result from marijuana usage. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers and any others."

Lol nice catch-22 there.

Your testing can't be real because either it didn't use the MJ or was already biased. There was no 3rd option.

It could be worse ya know? Some asian countries MJ is a death sentence

ooo but you didn't do what i asked, put them into perspective technical talk on the brain makes any idiot igonorant seem scared. Sounds so bad when you talk technical on the brain and its function and what it does to it, sure, what isn't mentioned, is that these effects aren't permanent, that things like sugar, simply missing a meal, and a host of other things, have simliar effects, this is why i asked you to put it into perspective, because people who don't know better, might actually think theres an argument here. Lil do they know your calling a marble a bowling ball, with technical terms.

Sounds like you are being lazy. You want me to read it all and dumb it down and then reword it dumbed for you.

If you really need me to do that you are just proving them right.

If you actually read them it isn't anything on par to what you say. It is in fact long term for alot of it. And serious mental illness is so far beyond low blood sugar

Wasn't meaning to say it like that, but you underestimate the corruption in man and the world. It's nice to have an opposing side so it's not a one way argument, It's just nearly impossible to believe some of the ***.

It's also very hard to believe it when they say testing shows something like decreased motor skills when mine are the same sober as high. When it comes to brain cells all you can do is take their word for it, but I've yet to lose any IQ.

I'm willing to admit it effects different people differently so some can be true, and some is absurd, depending on the person. If it actually did that ***though I wouldn't be offended, If it shrunk my nuts or made me grow hair on my heel I'd still smoke it, so it's not like I'm scared that it has negative effects.

What testing have you done to show you haven't lossed IQ or motor skills?

Have you timed yourself doing varying mental/physical tasks that you haven't just gotten used to doing?

Anyways for alot of it those test it isn't 100%. But heck nothing is. Just trends and increased likelyhoods

For example, one of your articles, claims marijuana causes psychosis, what it doesn't mention, is that other legal drugs do the samething (psychosis is determined by a test, people on legal drugs tested higher on this test, then the ones only on marijuana), nor does the article mention that its not permnant. Minor things, I know. Nor does it mention these people generally already had a genetic disposition to psychological problems, meaning marijuana wasn't the cause, just a temporary magnifying glass sort to speak. Psychosis! Scary!

not sure if it has been mentioned but seeing the whole driving high argument.. they have field tests and saliva swabs to tell if youve smoked recently. and its solid enough to hold in court on a DUI charge.i forget the name of the test they do, something with the way your eyes jerk when you follow their finger. sounds gay but it works. il sometimes find myself baked and doin like 25 in a 40 or something liek that but i dont think i would mow down a field of little leaguers when i get behind the wheel stoned. least it hasnt happened yet!

Asking you to put something in perspective means dumb it down? Hmmm. I don't expect you to care, or believe me, but I hold a wide range of collections of books on the brain, my favorite author/neuroscientist is ramachandran, whos yours?

My problem with marijuana being illegal is internal consistency. I want my laws to be consistent, logical, and rational.

If no one can prove that marijuana is more dangerous than alcohol or tobacco, (which no one argues should be illegal), then I fail to understand why marijuana should be.

I've read almost every study, and even the ones that cite marijuana's negative effects agree: alcohol and tobacco win, hands down. They are more physically addictive, more debilitating, and more damaging long-term.

You didn't read closely enough.

At least two of those articles states other drugs can do that. In fact one of them talked about having to factor some out or that some drugs in particular had a lower rate of that particular psychosis.

Of course they don't mention it's not permnant... because it is.

And again if you read they specifically factored out people with genetic predispostions.

this is some funny reading.....

Driving with sober friends not seeing a difference in my ability to stay focused. Playing various video games, shooters, high and sober with no varying difference in skill or reaction time. I've went to school high and not had it effect my ability to pay attention, no one even knew I was high.

No IQ tests, as they are ***and unreliable, it's something that has to be done in a study really. Did some memory tests, took a few chapters from a history book, memorized what I could, got quizzed on it. Got high, tried it again. Knew the same amount of ***.

Didn't test long term memory though just short term, as my long term is already ***long before I ever started smoking.

You can call these tests unprofessional if you want, but I did them. Once again, it's different for different people, which makes any legitimate studies essentially *** even without biased.

But do you think drug dealers will pay taxes and people will buy weed instead of grow it? That's why it's not legal, it can't be taxed, and people won't pay for growing licenses and ***either. So you can be civil here and agree most if not all studies have cigarette/tobacco companies biased funding in it.

I'll agree with most that. Other than I think tobacco and alcohol should be considered at the very least more regulated (though high taxes on tobacco could be argued as that even if that isn't the reason)

Its pemnant! Lol! You have a long way to go my friend. Learn about the brain. Half the population has smoked pot and some at a young age, were are all the people with psychosis from pot hiding in the world?, They all don't have psychosis. Put into play common sense for a second. They tested 15-16 year olds, wtf is that? They're brain isn't even fully developed. These aren't even the people who'd be smoking it if it was legal-legally, so why are you even posting it here? You think its random that they tested kids?

Just because it's different for different people doesn't make it BS.

Almost everything is different for different people. That's the entire point of studies. If you could just go hey my friend was fine then everyone should be we wouldn't need to do much of any testing.

Hmmm I think weed growers will be more likely to pay taxes when it is legal than now ;).

Though it has nothing to do with being civil yes everything is biased. But it is plain wacko conspiracy to assume every or even almost every study group by highly respected groups around the world has been bought off by "big tobacco"

You have heard of the different recalled medical drugs with law suits? And all the cold medicine with 200 side effects including diarrhea, chest pain ect.? Do you know why they are legal and on the market even though they are dangerous and pot isn't, at least not as much? because they are easily taxable, you can't make that ***in your house lol.

Whether they will pay taxes or not is just speculation, I assumed you would have agreed though, doesn't matter.

When you consider how easily corruptible man is, combined with the sheer amount of money tobacco industries make, it would be crazier to think they DIDN'T pay people off to boost their sells and crush their competition.(weed)

You got a long way to go on reading my friend. While not "permanent" I'd "In a previous longitudinal study of Swedish conscripts we have shown strong association between level of cannabis consumption at conscription and development of schizophrenia during 15 years of follow-up." Goes to rather long term


The increased risk was at most under 10%. So you wont see a country overrun by physchotics. However you do see increasing trends in mental illness. Obviously not just from MJ or even drugs in general but still.

And some of it was done in countries it is legal in. And only 1 test did target 15-16.

Historical evidence from when alcohol was illegal, then made legal again, shows that people will in fact go legit and pay taxes once you decriminalize it. Legal alcohol is cheaper than illegal alcohol, so it puts the illegal suppliers and gangs out of business. Alcohol is just as easy to make in your back yard as pot, yet there's no great epidemic of illegal alcohol on the market.

Everything has side effects for some people. I once was on something that listed both heart stopping and death seperately and strongly advised not taking with cocaine lol.

Turns out I probably shouldn't have been prescribed it as the real common risks pretty much always outweighted the benefits.

Which is the real reason behind the difference. Difference between recreation and medical use. Pretty sure medical marijuana is still legal and yes you can go to jail for abusing cough syrup. Hell I knew a guy who got in trouble just for buying 3 bottles at once.

I'd say alot of people would pay unless it is flipping rediculous. Pay a little money to make your growing operation so much easier and legal. Why not?

Not saying some people aren't corrupted and sure some studies might have a bias. Doesn't mean ALL of them are. Nor does it mean they print completely false garbage. That goes far beyond just biased and is people risking there careers, names and livelyhoods

I'm not really that smart. You guys give me way too much credit. I think the red bar makes me come across wiser than I otherwise might sound.

But by agreeing some can be, you admit you don't know if all or any of them are or aren't. So none could be, but so could all of them. Making them hard to believe. And most likely lies. Think about it, but light one up first.

Edit: @Jaerik Give me a red bar and let's test it out.

You could change it to pink for awhile to test it.

Or give Korpg a red bar. That would be the ultimate test lol

Orz, I mean. I don't really have an opinion either way because having never tried marijuana, I don't know how it affects people. Unfortunately, since my schooling was very biased (sex is bad! drugs are bad! alcohol is bad! atheists are bad! rock'n'roll is bad! gogo Jesus! <-- was pretty much the extent of education as far as my folks were concerned) I also don't have any good idea of what marijuana is, exactly. (what, crushed kitten skulls? Leaves? Penguin feet? Who knows? Who cares?) So sorry for not contributing much, but I saw the kitty and it reminded me of you guys. :-(