Cannabis

this is an old thread but I would like to revitalize it! word up to my fellow smokers! There were some very good points on both sides in this thread, so pardon me if I say something thats already been said- ill try to quote it but i cant promise I'll catch everything

the reason I am re-hashing (pun intended) this thread is because I am curious as to what the cannabis situation is in the UK and other countries (Australia and Brazil I see are represented in this thread)... I know I could look it up but 1) the rules/regulations dont always paint a good picture and 2) I'd rather hear it from people

Over here in the states it differs from state to state with the feds popping their heads in every once in a while (Federal vs state sovereignty being a whole different issue). In Nebraska it is decriminalized, basically meaning if you have less than an ounce on your person you get a ticket pretty much like a parking ticket. But if I go home to Iowa, which borders Nebraska for those who don't know (and I don't blame you, I would flunk an England geography test), it isn't decriminalized meaning if any weed is found on me I can be royally fu**ed... usually the first offense is probation but still. Just curious what the rules are where everyone else resides

as for my thoughts on smoking cannabis, and I'll try to keep this short but it probably won't be, I just don't understand whatsoever why it isn't legal in the states. Here are my points, and forgive me if this seems like a bit of a rant because I'm trying to avoid a huge paper I have to write, and also because it probably is Smiley

1) 0 recorded overdoses. Ever. That involves every major hospital in the US since they started recording stuff way back when. While those are great quantifiable records, there have also been zero recorded overdoses worldwide dating as far back as recorded cannabis use (China sometime way back in the day). people do die and have died from using cannabis and doing stupid things (such as driving), and that's why it needs to be regulated and just not let everybody run wild with it, but cannabis has never been the sole reason for a person's death (unlike alcohol, caffeine, pain pills, cocaine, government-created heroine...)

2. The reasons for outlawing cannabis use in the states were racist and based in greed, mostly from lumber/paper and tobacco companies. I can expand if someone wants but I won't get too much into it for now

3. as SuperSkrtel said, this prohibition just creates criminals. The "Gateway drug" theory has been disproved by a number of studies, and many point to the fact that marijuana users have to deal with the criminal underground in order to get their plant. As a result, there is increased exposure to other drugs such as cocaine, etc. Just because it can be smoked doesn't mean they're related, especially since cannabis is found in nature whereas crack and heroine are man-made. Was milk my gateway drug to alcohol?? I also think that legalizing pot, especially in California, would help the drug cartel situation in Mexico immensely. Marijuana is currently one of the cartel's biggest dealings, and may even be their biggest. The situation in Mexico is scary, but by cutting out their MJ clientele it could greatly help out.

4. Economic. The debt of the US is ridiculous. Legalizing, IMO, would help out greatly. You tax it and you make billions. It would create a whole industry full of jobs and merchandise.

5. the "lazy" thing. Yeah, it can make you unmotivated. But the thing is, there are lazy people who don't smoke pot. Lazy people are going to be lazy regardless, and there are plenty of people who use pot and function in society. Some previous posts have said as much, it alters your mindstate just like alcohol so it needs to be used wisely.

Lastly, the criminal system is insane. The costs associated with the war on marijuana is ridiculous when you add up police time and keeping "criminals" incarcerated for minor drug crimes. Eliminating this aspect of the judicial system would not only free up money from not having to keep people in prison and court costs, it would also free up the police to focus on crimes that actually hurt people. You know, rape and murder and stuff. Also, how many people you hear of getting high and going home and beating their wives or children? And alcohol? <- hopefully I dont stir up any bad feelings/memories for anyone on that very serious subject, definitely not my intention

Man that was a long post! sorry everybody!  but hey I like talking about weed Smiley i'm hoping to stir a good convo as this is a subject I am interested in! As for me, wakin and bakin for liverpool games is easily one of my favorite things to do.  cool-smiley-027 chongin spliff there's a reason so many potheads are pacifists (yours truly included) and I think the world can use a little more peace  Smiley one love!

Everything in moderation , i thoroughly enjoy a one paper spliff when i get home from work each day . On the weekends i'll smoke a little more . There is nothing better than smokin a spliff before ya walk into a fillum

I've smoked weed basically every day since the last year of school (2007) except a couple of overseas holidays where I had no choice but to sober up. It's a dangerously hard routine to get out of if all your friends do it and the house you congregate at most has weed cycling through it like oxygen. We've got a few boys from Norwich crashing at my mates this year actually, and they are all stoners so they've fit in quite well and it's been interesting hearing about their lifestyles around it. When they got here and saw we smoke bongs every day they were amazed/disgusted as apparently joints are seen far more over in England. And the price, well, here in Adelaide SA an oz for example you can get for $250 which apparently translates to around $350 converted from pounds.

My rolling skills have increased in the few months they've been here, I'm about to have this joint to try and wake up.

The high you get from drugs is incredible, it's educational, a room of people on acid can be the most entertaining time of your life. I think weed is a gateway drug because the high you experience, with drugs like acid and shrooms too, they're all similar; you can feel it if you've done these drugs enough, it's why you smoke weed while on acid. BUT I think the most important thing with recreational drugs is that you have to be the kind of human that knows what he or she wants out of their experience without going overboard to get the most out of it. I mean musicians that get so high they make outstanding records will probably keep getting higher and taint their reputation. That's the hard part, knowing when to stop, something a stoner isn't programmed to do!

My rolling skills have increased in the few months they've been here, I'm about to have this joint to try and wake up.

haha I am with you on that, I started with blunts so I can roll those but my joint-rolling skills, while improving, are still pretty terrible. not sure why they were so disgusted with the bongs tho, bong rips are quality!

but yes, moderation and self-control are important. no clue why it isn't legal tho, as alcohol and painkillers, and even caffeine! are all abused on a daily basis. They say the withdrawals from caffeine are far more severe than that from quitting the herb

Every single friend i have made here in Eugene does it. Every one of them are wonderful, great people. No problems at all.

JD's post up above from a couple years back sums it up perfectly. The stuff is no worse than anything else, in fact its probably better than half the sh*t we are fed these days.

Do you find its still such a closed minded thing back in Adelaide, Del Boca? I always found in general most were much more closed minded - where here where im living in the US, i walked past someone having a toke right on the sidewalk at lunchtime, offered me some as well. Obviously illegal still, but its much more accepted by the general population.

As the man said moderation is the key not just with blow the same deal applies with everything -  booze,ciggies,coke.smack whatever over indulgence in any of these substances will do you in. With the emergence of the ultra strong synthetic super skunk variety of blow the word moderation is undermined to the extent that you cannot moderate this type of blow and the ironic thing is skunk is entirely man made as are the lethal substances mentioned earlier.
Man has mutated nature and transformed relatively harmless distractions into lethal forms of entertainment as is his masochistic want, on a personal level I smoked various types of weed all my life in varying strengths and decided to stop when the skunk took over being as it was ever more accessible and easy to aquire, gone were the days of a relaxed drink and ultra chilled sessions the days of off your head with one spliff beckoned, the gangster influence as organised crime took over, this was was also an affecting factor.

yeah stuey, IMO one of the strongest points of the anti-legalization thought process is the fact that it is so tough, perhaps impossible, to regulate the potency. If it were to be legalized there could possibly be a new underground market opened up with strains/varieties that wouldn't be sold in stores. I think that goes hand in hand with the gangster influence tho, with legalization you could stem those two things: sure if you wanted to go underground the risk would be there, but in the stores there would be regulated brand-names such as "OG Kush" that would be akin to a Pepsi or a Coca-Cola in the soda industry and that are cultivated with the same potency time and time again.

Impossible to legalise due to the fact you cannot control the strength ( as has been said ) plus it would be impossible to tax as you could grow it in your greenhouse.

Long term psychotic effects are just being realised at the moment as well, plus although as has been said you rarely see an angry person smoking weed, I have been to many a tragedy (deaths, accidents) when it could be argued cannabis was to blame.

Traditional forms of cannabis have been used for thousands of years with no record of psychological damage, there is a suggestion that the super strong varieties of skunk do have the capability of affecting relatively young users and there is ongoing research. As stated previously however the skunk form is synthetic and the natural herb is not the culprit.
 
 P.S. The only fatalities recorded with cannabis are people whose skill levels have been impaired consequently their ability to control possible fatal machinery for instance motors,airoplanes,any lunar vehicles has been clouded leading to accidents.

Traditional forms of cannabis have been used for thousands of years with no record of psychological damage, there is a suggestion that the super strong varieties of skunk do have the capability of affecting relatively young users and there is ongoing research. As stated previously however the skunk form is synthetic and the natural herb is not the culprit.

 
 P.S. The only fatalities recorded with cannabis are people whose skill levels have been impaired consequently their ability to control possible fatal machinery for instance motors,airoplanes,any lunar vehicles has been clouded leading to accidents.

Which adds to the argument, how could you set a drink drive limit for Cannabis? How do you police things like working with machinery? You can't.

If you die or kill someone else due to driving whilst stoned you have to blame the person and the drug. It not being legalised goes way beyond the immediate health effects IMO.

Impossible to legalise due to the fact you cannot control the strength ( as has been said ) plus it would be impossible to tax as you could grow it in your greenhouse.

Long term psychotic effects are just being realised at the moment as well, plus although as has been said you rarely see an angry person smoking weed, I have been to many a tragedy (deaths, accidents) when it could be argued cannabis was to blame.

people can brew moonshine in their basements, doesn't mean everybody does it. you wouldn't be able to grow the quality that is being sold in stores (unless you are a great botanist of course), and it would be tough to compete with being able to buy a perfect machine-rolled joint from your local convenience store. As for the tragedies, the same can be said for alcohol. Even more so to be quite honest, and that is a legal substance.

Traditional forms of cannabis have been used for thousands of years with no record of psychological damage, there is a suggestion that the super strong varieties of skunk do have the capability of affecting relatively young users and there is ongoing research. As stated previously however the skunk form is synthetic and the natural herb is not the culprit.

That synthetic stuff is under scrutiny currently over here, with a government crackdown starting up. and another interesting part of that is that pharmaceutical companies have been trying to imitate cannabis for years synthetically. drugs like Marinol try to duplicate the effects of marijuana through use of THC, but they can't seem to properly duplicate the results. Which is funny, considering cannabis is currently classified (unintentional alliteration there haha) as a schedule I drug- meaning it has "no medicinal value". then why are pharmaceutical companies trying to duplicate it? because they are trying to make money off it. I know someone who was prescribed Marinol, they said it didn't work anywhere near as well as pot and it cost a fortune

Which adds to the argument, how could you set a drink drive limit for Cannabis? How do you police things like working with machinery? You can't.

If you die or kill someone else due to driving whilst stoned you have to blame the person and the drug. It not being legalised goes way beyond the immediate health effects IMO.

There is equipment that can detect pot in the same way a breathalyser detects alcohol and there are appropriate penalties and rightfully so it is the same crime.
To reiterate there are no proven detrimental health effects in the strict sense of the word associated with traditional cannabis, the skunk variety is still being investigated but there is every possibility that some legislation will be called for.

The equipment you say can detect the presence of cannabis but they cannot give a level like alcohol. Plus unlike alcohol cannabis can be detected for up to two months if you are a regular user. No doubt with lots of money thrown into it they may be able to find someway but would be very costly.

Wonder how many people if they didn't smoke cannabis would smoke! I mean not only have you got the possible health problems from cannabis but you have tobacco as well.

Wonder how many people if they didn't smoke cannabis would smoke! I mean not only have you got the possible health problems from cannabis but you have tobacco as well.

I have to admit I don't quite understand what you're trying to say in the bold, probably because its a bit late haha. But as far as the health problems go- the only health problems associated with cannabis are because during the act of smoking something (not just cannabis) you inhale carcinogens and other stuff (because think about it... you are lighting something on fire and bringing it into your body). However a bong greatly reduces these carcinogens, and a vaporizer effectively eliminates them. If you smoke the resin or tar then yeah thats gonna mess you up, or as stuey mentioned that synthetic crap, but thats a different decision. Smoking cigs is much more volatile to your body, as cannabis is one plant but cigs have all that other crap (formaldahyde, etc.) and tobacco itself is more dangerous than cannabis.

The equipment you say can detect the presence of cannabis but they cannot give a level like alcohol. Plus unlike alcohol cannabis can be detected for up to two months if you are a regular user. No doubt with lots of money thrown into it they may be able to find someway but would be very costly.

Wonder how many people if they didn't smoke cannabis would smoke! I mean not only have you got the possible health problems from cannabis but you have tobacco as well.

Any immediate trace of cannabis while in charge of a motor vehicle for instance should be a criminal offence, the fact that it can be traced after two months is entirely inconsequential, to suppose that cannabis can have a discernable effect on one's actions weeks after such a period is laughable. If that were so after 30+years of smoking pot and having not smoked it for some 4 years by that reasoning I should still be showing some wacky backy tendencies!
In reality in spite of whatever physical evidence the actual psychological effects of cannabis regarding concentratation and the ability to perform complex intellectual tasks seems to indicate that there is little in the way of of any deterioration in this area.
To make a simple comparison if somebody went to the pub on a Sunday afternoon and had the usual 4 or 5 pints before dinner by the same reasoning they should still be slightly pissed two months later!!! Bollocks springs to mind.

Any immediate trace of cannabis while in charge of a motor vehicle for instance should be a criminal offence, the fact that it can be traced after two months is entirely inconsequential, to suppose that cannabis can have a discernable effect on one's actions weeks after such a period is laughable.

I think what he meant is that as of right now, at least to my knowledge, there isn't a way to determine whether the trace of cannabis is a month (ive never heard of it lasting 2 months myself, just 30 days) or an hour old. The blood/urine tests they use can detect the traces but cant place a definitive "when". While there are certainly other signs that officers of the law can use- smell, presence of MJ, dude being obviously stoned - to determine if they are under the influence, those things wouldn't be capable of proving the person was intoxicated (in court anyways). I am pretty confident, however, that they could develop such technology as a weed equivalent for a breathalyzer

From what I understand cannabis use can be detected in a similar way as a breathalyser and further tests can trace it over longer periods.

Yeah, here in Holland the police already use those breathalysers for cannabis testing at road checks etc.

I've shared my mind on this subject in the alcoholism thread we had not too long ago, which kind of evolved into a drugs/addiction discussion.

Think everyone knows I'm all for legalising, won't surprise anyone seeing as I live in Amsterdam. Just have to make a comment however on the psychological effects of cannabis. It has recently been proven that about 25% of all people carry a certain gene which combined with the use of cannabis gives them a much higher chance of becoming schizophrenic than when they wouldn't use it.

From what I understand cannabis use can be detected in a similar way as a breathalyser and further tests can trace it over longer periods.

Yeah, here in Holland the police already use those breathalysers for cannabis testing at road checks etc.

Nice! I was under the impression that wasn't currently do-able.

Think everyone knows I'm all for legalising, won't surprise anyone seeing as I live in Amsterdam. Just have to make a comment however on the psychological effects of cannabis. It has recently been proven that about 25% of all people carry a certain gene which combined with the use of cannabis gives them a much higher chance of becoming schizophrenic than when they wouldn't use it.

I was under the impression that the studies say it increases the likelihood of people who have a family history/or are already susceptible to the disease, never heard the 25% figure myself... an interesting and troubling stat if true. Also read somewhere that this increased likelihood happens mostly if people begin smoking heavily before the age of 25.... whoops 

It's a recent studies done by a Dutch university. I only know of it because a researcher was talking about it on tv last week.

I am wrong about the breathalyser for cannabis though. In my 9 years that I've had my license I've actually never been tested for alcohol or cannabis myself. But mates have been tested for alcohol and cannabis, and I kind of assumed it was done the same way. I shouldn't have because it's in fact tested through saliva, but it is an instant test.

I live in California, where there was a ballot measure in the last election to legalize cannabis. This was essentially marketed as a way to earn tax revenue on a billion dollar industry. It was shot down pretty heavily.

I for one have only smoked a few times in my life, and won't do it again. Nothing bad, just not a big drug/drinker type guy. I have no problem with it being legalized. I think legalization would reduce crime rates, and would reallocate law enforcement resources to more meaningful searches (i.e. Cocaine, which is a big problem where I am, right on the US-Mexico border). Also, the United States could stand to make a little extra money regulating an industry that is doing just fine without it.

The only problem, as a few people have already mentioned here, is classification and determination of quality. This would be one hell of an undertaking, and the FDA is a bi*ch over here. I'll always vote to legalize, though. It's really no worse than alcohol, and is a waste of narcotics officers' time.

I live in California, where there was a ballot measure in the last election to legalize cannabis. This was essentially marketed as a way to earn tax revenue on a billion dollar industry. It was shot down pretty heavily.

I'm not sure 54-46 is really "heavily", especially after a similar vote in the 60s or 70s was something like 63-27. On a related side note, I saw the county-by-county voting stats and San Fran was something like about 60% yes

I think legalization would reduce crime rates, and would reallocate law enforcement resources to more meaningful searches (i.e. Cocaine, which is a big problem where I am, right on the US-Mexico border). Also, the United States could stand to make a little extra money regulating an industry that is doing just fine without it.

The only problem, as a few people have already mentioned here, is classification and determination of quality. This would be one hell of an undertaking, and the FDA is a bi*ch over here. I'll always vote to legalize, though. It's really no worse than alcohol, and is a waste of narcotics officers' time.

+ + +

I'd post a constructive argument for the benefits I have found from using Cannabis, but I can't seem to concentrate long enough to do so.