Why is Marijuana Illegal?

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.

well yes, it is illegal to drive under the influence of alcohol because of that. and it would be still illegal to drive under the influence of cannabis because of that...
 
Yeah, well, I think rape should be a capital crime.

Not gonna happen in America any time soon. Nobody said the world was perfect.
 
Don't know if its been said, but marijuana is illegal because of William Randolph Hurst.
 
marijuana is illegal
 
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.

Then your ideology is more closely related to fascism than capitalism. ;) And industrial hemp aint marijuana, so to speak.

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.

Oops, my mistake, communism...

Seriously, you wanna send people to jail for not thinking "correctly". Thats where they get re-educated? What doesn't mess with the brain? Jesus Christ, who made you God over our minds? I really do resent the arrogance, BC. If you didn't have the government doin your dirty work would you be running around yourself trying to cage pot smokers? No, you'd get yerself killed and you'd deserve it...
 
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.

But he is close fifty. He is a libertarian and one of their political platforms is legalization of drugs.

You are saying he was biased just because he is a libertarian and just because he's written about pot before.

I think thats a pretty safe assumption, yes.

I hope you can see what a hoplessly strong standard that is. Just because lefties do it towards you doesn't make it right!

Again, if he were some independant researcher, not a libertarian, who hadnt written a lot of paper on the legalization of drugs, I would be more apt to consider his body of work. But simply because he is an academic doesnt mean he cant also have an agenda..and a biased one at that.

Remember, Ward Churchill is an academic also. ;)
 
I feel obliged to point out that as the article mentioned, he used government statistics in his work.

If the national government is reporting the numbers, well...
 
But he is close fifty. He is a libertarian and one of their political platforms is legalization of drugs.



I think thats a pretty safe assumption, yes.



Again, if he were some independant researcher, not a libertarian, who hadnt written a lot of paper on the legalization of drugs, I would be more apt to consider his body of work. But simply because he is an academic doesnt mean he cant also have an agenda..and a biased one at that.

Remember, Ward Churchill is an academic also. ;)

So you don't trust any info on religion that comes from religious organizations? You don't trust anything any military leader says about military matters? That seems to contradict a lot of the evidence you bring to the table in a lot of threads...
 
well yes, it is illegal to drive under the influence of alcohol because of that. and it would be still illegal to drive under the influence of cannabis because of that...

It's legal to drive under the influence of cannibus in some US states. The supreme court (of Idaho or US, I'm not sure) ruled that someone with a prescription for weed and driving while smoking was not "driving under the influence". This is not as much because weed has limited affects once some acclamation of long term use occurs, but because we cannot set a standard of what qualifies as "drunk" like .08 for alcohol. You'd have to give people on the spot blood tests, and before that we would have to determine the THC content in blood that qualifies as "impaired". Some would argue that no amount of consumption, by a regluar user, qualifies as "impairment".

I think one state is Idaho, IIRC.
 
I should bring up this youtube video where a British TV station experiments with stoned driving:

Link
 
So you don't trust any info on religion that comes from religious organizations?

I think such information does contain bias often of course. I also think the opposite is true, that there is a lot of bias from anti-religious sources as well.

I dont automatically trust such information on religion from religious sources. I still view the Westboro Baptist Chuch with a modicum of skepticism.

:rolleyes:

You don't trust anything any military leader says about military matters?

Many dont. Does the term 'General Be-tray Us' ring a bell?

And I have been in the military long enough to recognize a crap sandwich coming down from on high when I see one. There are some things I trust, which I can simply verify by virtue of my long career...and there is some I would trust at all.

That seems to contradict a lot of the evidence you bring to the table in a lot of threads...

Not contradictory at all. Bias, like bigotry exists....and probably always will. The truth is somewhere in the middle.
 
I should bring up this youtube video where a British TV station experiments with stoned driving:

Link

I agree. I'm no hippie, but cannibus is totally demonized. I'm glad this video exists.

Thanks.
 
I agree. I'm no hippie, but cannibus is totally demonized. I'm glad this video exists.

Thanks.

It's the truth!:)

People tend to think that weed affects your mind like alcohol does, but the reality is quite the opposite. I've been around many stoners (;)) when they were (as they put it) "high" and they really weren't much different from sober people. They could hold a conversation perfectly fine, play video games and kick all our asses, even ride skateboard competently. No surprise that they'd be able to drive as well.

I would say that if you're at the extreme upper threshold of high-ness though, you probably will start to notice little...mistakes. Like for example...wait, what was I talking about?;)

*da dum ch*

EDIT: Not to mention that unlike alcohol, marijuana doesn't have any hangover effects at all.
 
It's the truth!:)

People tend to think that weed affects your mind like alcohol does, but the reality is quite the opposite. I've been around many stoners (;)) when they were (as they put it) "high" and they really weren't much different from sober people. They could hold a conversation perfectly fine, play video games and kick all our asses, even ride skateboard competently. No surprise that they'd be able to drive as well.

I would say that if you're at the extreme upper threshold of high-ness though, you probably will start to notice little...mistakes.;)

Ahh, the upper-threshold of highness... :cool:

Who would drive? It's no fun to waste an upper-threshold on driving.
 
I should bring up this youtube video where a British TV station experiments with stoned driving:

Link

So, smoking 1 joint does not affect your driving skills.

I'm 100% sure that:
- drinking 1 beer will not affect your driving skills
- smoking 1 cigarette will not affect your driving skills.

What is your point? That you don't go unconscious after using cannabis? Well I can't talk for everybody but I knew that without this video, thanks!
 
So, smoking 1 joint does not affect your driving skills.

I'm 100% sure that:
- drinking 1 beer will not affect your driving skills
- smoking 1 cigarettes will not affect your driving skills.

What is your point? That you don't go unconscious after using cannabis? Well I can't talk for everybody but I knew that without this video, thanks!

Dude.

1 joint gets you high.
2 joints gets you high.
3 joints gets you high.

The guy smoked a standard "spliff". He was high. No doubt. You don't get higher by smoking more. There's a limit to the effect - you can smoke as much as you want and the effects don't change.

ps. 1 beer affects your driving. You will have a blood-alcohol content greater than .08 for 1 hour.

Are you seriously comparing alcohol and THC to nicotine in regard to affects?
 
Then your ideology is more closely related to fascism than capitalism. ;)
Oops, my mistake, communism...
Heheheh. I confuse a lot of people this way. My opinions are a random mish-mash of left and right. More right than left, but how about if we just LEFT it at that........are you all RIGHT with this?

Seriously, you wanna send people to jail for not thinking "correctly".
No. I wanna send people to jail for selling stuff that destroys the one thing that makes humans humans. Actually, I want the police to do it because I'm not a police officer and therefore I shouldn't be running around clobbering people on the head with a baton.
 
No. I wanna send people to jail for selling stuff that destroys the one thing that makes humans humans. Actually, I want the police to do it because I'm not a police officer and therefore I shouldn't be running around clobbering people on the head with a baton.

When you have this kind of a stance on alcohol, nicotine, caffeine, and the rest of legal drugs (including prescriptions), I'll respect your supposed position on this.

Till then, I think you are just being stubborn for fun.
 
Back
Top Bottom