Why is Marijuana Illegal?

[CaptainF]

Not true. However, smoking marijuana while reading my posts is clearly causing you to read them completely wrong.

Come back when you sober up.

Ahh, finally. The personal references.

For your own knowledge, I never have a joint in my mouth when I'm on CFC. That's just a waste really. If I were to get high I'd like to enjoy it other ways than arguing back and forth with you lot.

Second, I'm sober right now. To apply your same standards, you're a liar.

Yes. You are. You are claiming I said things which I did not, and you are trying to attach nonexistent implications to my words.

You cited the article in reference to your declaration that using marijuana (How does one use marijuana? Pray to it?) causes you to have accidents.

What happens when you use marijuana? Among many other medicinally beneficial things, you get stoned. Sometimes, really stoned.

Your link even focused, as you quoted it, on drivers that drive after using marijuana. In your own words (and I will say this as well) smoking marijuana is easily the most common method of consumption. For one thing, it didn't mention how long after driving, because there is no test as of yet to see if you are stoned or not. Failing a piss test doesn't count.

Also, your article also tested for alcohol. No surprise that lots more of the people had alcohol in their system than marijuana. I wonder how many had both?

So yes, shaky.

 

[nonconformist]

I don't know them, so I can only guess.

It might be because they're......how can I put this delicately......stupid as hell?

Or maybe it's because Marijuana is safer, more pleasurable, non-addictive, and doesn't have the same drawbacks as alcohol or tobacco?

 

[scy12]

Two things:

Marijuana, as we have discussed in this thread, is far less damaging to your health than either alcohol or tobacco.

Second, criminalizing marijuana won't lower it's consumption. More people per capita consume cannabis in the U.S. than in Amsterdam where it is somewhat legal. The U.S. also still produces tons upon tons of weed every year, probably more than any other place on Earth.

More people per capita consume drags in U.S than Amsterdam ? Hard to believe this as Amsterdam is preferred by many for this reason. (And so they would be more open-more likely to have drugs there. Do you have any evidence to back this up ?

 

[BasketCase]

Or maybe it's because Marijuana is safer, more pleasurable, non-addictive, and doesn't have the same drawbacks as alcohol or tobacco?

I know those aren't it.

 

[Sharwood]

Okay, I've already posted all of this before, in the 21st post on this thread, but since apparently no-one but Bezerker read the whole thing, I'll re-post it in snippets. It answers many of the questions people are still arguing about, six pages later. If you want linkage, go back to my previous post.

When marijuana was first banned in the United States:

... The American Medical Association tried to argue for the medical benefits of hemp. Marijuana is actually less dangerous than alcohol, cigarettes, and even most over-the-counter medicines or prescriptions.

As for it's health benefits, and misconceptions about health problems:

According to Francis J. Young, the DEA's administrative judge, "nearly all medicines have toxicm, potentially letal affects, but marijuana is not such a substance...Marijuana, in its natural form, is one of the safest therapeutically active substances known to man. By any measure of rational analysis marijuana can be safely used within a supervised routine of medical care" (DEA Docket No. 86-22, 57). It is illogical then, for marijuana to be illegal in the United States when "alcohol poisoning is a significant cause of death in this country" and "approximately 400,000 premature deaths are attributed to cigarettes annually." Dr. Roger Pertwee, SEcretary of the International Cannabis Research Society states that as a recreational drug, "Marijuana compares favourably to nicotine, alcohol, and even caffeine." Under extreme amounts of alcohol a person will experience an "inability to stand or walk without help, stupor and near unconsciousness, lack of comprehension of what is seen or heard, shock, and breathing and heartbeat may stop." Even though these effects occur only under insane amounts of alcohol consumption, (.2-.5 BAL) the fact is smoking extreme amounts of marijuana will do nothing more than put you to sleep, whereas drinking excessive amounts of alcohol will kill you.

According to Grinspoon, "The only well-confirmed negative effect of marijuana is caused by the smoke, which contains three times more tars and five times more carbon monoxide than tobacco. But even the heaviest marijuana smokers rarely use as much as an average tobacco smoker. And, of course, many prefer to eat it." His book includes personal accounts of how prescribed marijuana alleviated epilepsy, weight loss of aids, nausea of chemotherapy, menstrual pains, and the severe effects of multiple sclerosis.

As for Basketcase's argument that few people smoke cannibis, as it is illegal:

"In a recent survey at a leading teaching hospital, 'over 60 per cent of medical students were found to be marijuana users.' In the same survey, only 30 per cent admitted to smoking cigarettes" (Guardian).

It's a very interesting article, and actually covers the original point of this thread, namely the question of why marijuana is illegal. It's because hemp is a direct threat to the cotton and paper industries. Nothing more, nothing less. I'd suggest you read it.

 

[BasketCase]

So what if it was banned to protect the cotton and paper industries. I don't care why marijuana is illegal as long as it's illegal.

The brain is the only thing that separates human beings from monkeys. I am violently opposed to anything that messes with the brain. We humans are stupid enough when we're NOT stoned.

 

[MobBoss]

I don't understand this standard of skepticism. I mean, are you saying that someone writing about a position they believe in is automatically a "biased source" simply in virtue of the fact that they are in favor of that position?

So, like, to convince you of something, someone has to be arguing for a stance that they don't actually believe in, and that they have never written about before, and that bears no relation to their position on broader issues?

That type of skepticism is true for a great many things Fifty. I happen to see it all the time if I try to bring up studies that say christian families that attend church regularly are less likely to do X. People point at the person writing the piece and claim bias all the time.

Its like if I claim my wife is the most beautiful woman in the world. I may certainly believe this since since I love her....but most folks would see my viewpoint as biased.

 

[holy king]

So what if it was banned to protect the cotton and paper industries. I don't care why marijuana is illegal as long as it's illegal.

The brain is the only thing that separates human beings from monkeys. I am violently opposed to anything that messes with the brain. We humans are stupid enough when we're NOT stoned.

so you dont like the effects of marijuana... well, why do you wanna prohibit them for people who like them?

 

[Sharwood]

Holy king's right Basketcase. I happen to agree with you that people are stupid enough without using ANY mind-altering substance, but if people want to use them, what right do we have to deny them their choice? As you can see if you read the article in question, marijuana use does not lead directly to criminal activity. Except for buying and smoking marijuana of course.

 

[Fifty]

That type of skepticism is true for a great many things Fifty. I happen to see it all the time if I try to bring up studies that say christian families that attend church regularly are less likely to do X. People point at the person writing the piece and claim bias all the time.

Ok, well I'd say those people are wrong. But that doesn't make it right for you to use your form of uberskepticism. I mean, if you applied the same standards to everything that you are applying to pot here, I doubt very many of your substantive social and political beliefs would be based on unbiased sources. I mean, its not like this guy was like the editor of high times magazine. You are saying he was biased just because he is a libertarian and just because he's written about pot before. I hope you can see what a hoplessly strong standard that is. Just because lefties do it towards you doesn't make it right!

 

[nonconformist]

I know those aren't it.

How do you know? I imagine you have very little, if any experience with the substance. Trust me; it's generally much nicer than alcohol.

 

[BasketCase]

"In a recent survey at a leading teaching hospital, 'over 60 per cent of medical students were found to be marijuana users.' In the same survey, only 30 per cent admitted to smoking cigarettes" (Guardian).

Semi-attached figure, again. 60 per cent of medical students were found to be marijuana users. That doesn't tell us anything.

Here are some figures that DO tell you something:
-- About 30,000 tons of marijuana are produced each year, worldwide.

-- About 5.6 MILLION tons of tobacco are produced each year, worldwide.

These are figures that give you an actual picture. This particular is production, rather than consumption, because I'm having some problems finding usable figures on consumption. But the picture here is that there's a whole lot more tobacco than marijuana out there. As in around a hundred and fifty times more.

As to finding comparitive statistics on usage: Running into problems there.

The DEA estimates that Americans smoke about 5 million pounds (not tons) of marijuana each year. That's a better figure than "60 percent of medical students use weed" because you get an idea of how much.

I haven't yet found a statistic on how many pounds of tobacco are used each year by Americans (it's always statistics on the number of cigarettes). Wait. I just found this: in 1999, the average American consumed 4.2 pounds of tobacco. In a nation of 300 million people, that's around 1.2 BILLION pounds.

If Americans use 5 million pounds of weed a year, and use 1.2 BILLION pounds of tobacco a year, that says what?


Now, the numbers above have some problems. Estimates on the production and usage of MJ are always dicey (people are hesitant to confess how much they produce or use because it's illegal). I haven't yet been able to find estimates on both MJ and tobacco for the same year; and, in order to figure out how much tobacco Americans use every year, I had to take a nine-year old figure and guesstimate from it.

But now you all have a good idea of what you should look for in statistics. Yes, you need numbers--but you also need to know what the numbers mean.

 

[BasketCase]

If I were to get high I'd like to enjoy it other ways than arguing back and forth with you lot.

If you didn't get a buzz from arguing with me, you wouldn't be arguing with me.

Admit it. You like it. Take it, baby. TAKE IT!

Edit: Note to self--NEVER INDULGE IN ONLINE S&M AGAIN.

 

[holy king]

Semi-attached figure, again. 60 per cent of medical students were found to be marijuana users. That doesn't tell us anything.

Here are some figures that DO tell you something:
-- About 30,000 tons of marijuana are produced each year, worldwide.

-- About 5.6 MILLION tons of tobacco are produced each year, worldwide.

These are figures that give you an actual picture. This particular is production, rather than consumption, because I'm having some problems finding usable figures on consumption. But the picture here is that there's a whole lot more tobacco than marijuana out there. As in around a hundred and fifty times more.

As to finding comparitive statistics on usage: Running into problems there.

The DEA estimates that Americans smoke about 5 million pounds (not tons) of marijuana each year. That's a better figure than "60 percent of medical students use weed" because you get an idea of how much.

I haven't yet found a statistic on how many pounds of tobacco are used each year by Americans (it's always statistics on the number of cigarettes). Wait. I just found this: in 1999, the average American consumed 4.2 pounds of tobacco. In a nation of 300 million people, that's around 1.2 BILLION pounds.

If Americans use 5 million pounds of weed a year, and use 1.2 BILLION pounds of tobacco a year, that says what?


Now, the numbers above have some problems. Estimates on the production and usage of MJ are always dicey (people are hesitant to confess how much they produce or use because it's illegal). I haven't yet been able to find estimates on both MJ and tobacco for the same year; and, in order to figure out how much tobacco Americans use every year, I had to take a nine-year old figure and guesstimate from it.

But now you all have a good idea of what you should look for in statistics. Yes, you need numbers--but you also need to know what the numbers mean.

absolutely noone can smoke marijuana in the same amount as tobacco. that comparison is not particularly proof for you "knowing what the numbers mean"...

 

[Drewcifer]

What is interesting is that marijuana smoke obviously contains carcinogens yet every study that has gone looking for people who got cancer from it has failed to find them. One possible answer is that there is something else in pot smoke that prevents the carcinogens from actually causing cancer. If that is the case it would be useful to research this phenomenon more deeply.

 

[BasketCase]

Holy king's right Basketcase. I happen to agree with you that people are stupid enough without using ANY mind-altering substance, but if people want to use them, what right do we have to deny them their choice? As you can see if you read the article in question, marijuana use does not lead directly to criminal activity. Except for buying and smoking marijuana of course.

Marijuana use results in a higher risk of a car accident.

Tobacco does not.

When you use weed, you're at a higher risk of hitting ME when you're driving.

Tobacco has different hazards. Such as second-hand smoke. Another hazard is that when that last cigarette finally puts you in the hospital, I end up paying your medical bills.


Now, if you want to go skydiving? You go right ahead and knock yourself out. I'm not gonna stand in your way. In fact, I'll make sure to stay well out of your way so you don't land on me if your chute fails.

 

[holy king]

Now, if you want to go skydiving? You go right ahead and knock yourself out. I'm not gonna stand in your way. In fact, I'll make sure to stay well out of your way so you don't land on me if your chute fails.

so why ban drugs?

 

[BasketCase]

You cited the article in reference to your declaration that using marijuana (How does one use marijuana? Pray to it?) causes you to have accidents.

What happens when you use marijuana? Among many other medicinally beneficial things, you get stoned. Sometimes, really stoned.

YOU said that, Dawg. Not me. You're the one reading stuff into the words.

 

[BasketCase]

so why ban drugs?

Why is that connection between marijuana and car accidents not sinking in???

Skydiving is only dangerous to the skydiver.

Drugs turn the user into a hazard to OTHER PEOPLE.

It's not only alcohol that causes people to turn into death machines when they get behind the wheel of a car. Barbiturates are MUCH more dangerous than alcohol. So are uppers, paradoxically. Anything that alters your perceptions or reaction time is dangerous (and not only to the user) when combined with a car.

And it's not just cars, either. Drugs (and alcohol) also result in a higher incidence of domestic violence. The user becomes violent with the wife or hubby. Love is already difficult enough to come by, and a pain in the ass to keep once you find it.

 

[CaptainF]

What is interesting is that marijuana smoke obviously contains carcinogens yet every study that has gone looking for people who got cancer from it has failed to find them. One possible answer is that there is something else in pot smoke that prevents the carcinogens from actually causing cancer. If that is the case it would be useful to research this phenomenon more deeply.

I cited a study earlier in this thread that indicates that cannabinoids (such as THC among others) have great anti-cancer properties, such as stopping the growth of, and in some cases shrinking malignant tumors.