Democrats file HR 420 to legalize pot

The study by the NAM which you are basing your statements on, clearly states more research is needed to confirm what is in the study.

"Areas in need of additional research and current barriers to conducting cannabis research are also covered in this comprehensive report."

http://www.nationalacademies.org/hmd/Reports/2017/health-effects-of-cannabis-and-cannabinoids.aspx

None the less, by that studies own admission, it is inclusive there is a link between smoking pot and mental illness, the primary reason being HIPPA.

Then as I mentioned before, the article is published by a rather right leaning organization, as such it must be taken with a grain of salt.

 

Also consider this.

"Legalization has not led to a huge increase in people using the drug casually. About 15 percent of Americans used cannabis at least once in 2017, up from ten percent in 2006, according to a large federal study called the National Survey on Drug Use and Health. (By contrast, about 65 percent of Americans had a drink in the last year.) But the number of Americans who use cannabis heavily is soaring. In 2006, about three million Americans reported using cannabis at least 300 times a year, the standard for daily use."

Three million that's ten percent of the population.

"By 2017, that number had nearly tripled, to eight million, approaching the twelve million Americans who drank alcohol every day. Put another way, one in 15 drinkers consumed alcohol daily; about one in five marijuana users used cannabis that often."

And how did prohibition work out?

 

By the way I am not ignoring a study, just taking it in context of the larger picture.

What matters to me is the risk to benefit ratio, currently this country spends a ton of money on the war on drugs $47 billion and incarcerates 659,000 for pot and 599,282 of them where busted for possession, not dealing, that's a lot of tax dollars considering it costs $31,000 per inmate to keep them in prison.

Remove pot from the DEA schedule list and save $18 billion per year, money that could be spent for much better purposes.

 

Ten percent of the population are HEAVY users. Imagine if ten percent were heavy drinkers....

You realize that 1 in 15 is a smaller percentage than one in five right? Kind of blows a big hole in your post. Thanks for playing.

 

No, you selectively choose to ignore truth in favor of your preferences. You're driving up mental health costs with pot and making it more accessible to the public.

 

Really, heavy users are by definition a person who gets off work and burns one, that's not heavy use.

Learn to see the larger issue.

 

Really, do you have some facts and numbers to back up the specious claim with?

By the way I have nothing to do with making it more accessible to the public.

 

Prevalence of Drinking: According to the 2015 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH), 86.4 percent of people ages 18 or older reported that they drank alcohol at some point in their lifetime; 70.1 percent reported that they drank in the past year; 56.0 percent reported that they drank in the past month.

• Prevalence of Binge Drinking and Heavy Alcohol Use: In 2015, 26.9 percent of people ages 18 or older reported that they engaged in binge drinking in the past month; 7.0 percent reported that they engaged in heavy alcohol use in the past month.2 (See "Definitions" box for definitions of binge drinking and heavy alcohol use.)

Alcohol-Related Deaths:

• An estimated 88,008 people (approximately 62,000 men and 26,000 women die from alcohol-related causes annually, making alcohol the third leading preventable cause of death in the United States. The first is tobacco, and the second is poor diet and physical inactivity.9
• In 2014, alcohol-impaired driving fatalities accounted for 9,967 deaths (31 percent of overall driving fatalities).

How many people in the U.S. have died from smoking pot?

 

Per the CDC.

Binge drinking has serious risks.

Binge drinking is associated with many health problems,8–10 including the following:

• Unintentional injuries such as car crashes, falls, burns, and alcohol poisoning.
• Violence including homicide, suicide, intimate partner violence, and sexual assault.
• Sexually transmitted diseases.
• Unintended pregnancy and poor pregnancy outcomes, including miscarriage and stillbirth.
• Fetal alcohol spectrum disorders.
• Sudden infant death syndrome.
• Chronic diseases such as high blood pressure, stroke, heart disease, and liver disease.
  
• Cancer of the breast, mouth, throat, esophagus, liver, and colon.
• Memory and learning problems.
• Alcohol dependence.

How many people in the U.S. have died from pot poisoning?

 

Wouldn't that indicate a 50% increase in a decade?

Hmmm....

 

I suppose not but generally one wants to make a point that relates to what is being discussed.

 

I believe that is a combination of three factors, social acceptance, legalization and lower wholesale pricing.

 

Speaking of selectively ignoring the truth - you should change your handle to "Hate Liberty" rather than "saveliberty".

The mental health argument is absurd nonsense on many levels.

1) Statistically there are very few people that experience significant mental health issues from Pot.
2) Your argument is a "risk of harm" argument. In a free society individuals have the right to risk a reasonable amount of harm to themselves.

Should we ban things on the basis of increasing heath costs ? This is a horrible justification for law. It is completely anti-liberty and totalitarian.

Should we ban sugar next ? How about Skiing - one could be harmed. Boating ? that is really dangerous - one could drown or get hurt. How about driving a car ? Alcohol ? obviously banned.

You do not even bother to quantify the amount of harm but really there is no need, as it is a fact that other legal things such as Alcohol, Tobacco, driving a care are more harmful.

You also completely miss the fact that legalization with bring far more revenue into the coffers of Gov't than will be spent on treating mental disorders that arise from Pot.

 

Whatever the reason, there has been a massive increase in consumption. It is not replacing alcohol, since booze consumption is still same, so now people are drinking AND smoking pot.

 

I don't know if that is true, that is to say boozers are also now consuming pot, while I am sure some do, I believe they are two different types of people, some folks want to get high, others want to get s-face smashed.

As for an increase I also don't believe there is a massive increase, it's more of a factor with the recent social acceptance of pot more people are admitting to using it.

More so with the boomers, who just a few years ago still considered pot to be something one doesn't talk about, it' one of those things where everybody knows folks who do it but nobody would admit to doing it.

By the way, Pro Line is a wholesale pool supply company any relation to your SN?

 

The thing is god approves of us using alcohol and not pot. Jesus turned water into wine.

Oops I'm wrong he turned it into what we translated into "good wine" which is the unfermented first press of grapes also known as grape juice.

Sorry about that, carry on.

 

In nations that have legalized pot alcohol is by far their biggest problem. Biggest problems with pot are normally equivalent to the j walking epidemic here in America.

Guess no one is beating their wives to death high on blueberry kush.

 

I don't know why people would suddenly admit using pot, if they hid it in the past. It can, and will, still get you fired form the workplace, even in legal States.

Pro Line is the make of my boat.

 

There are only two countries which have legalized it, Uruguay and Canada. I don't think people in Uruguay are into booze.

 

No, He turned it into real wine.

Typically the wedding host served the best wine first, because later people will be too drunk to notice they are drinking bad wine.

"“Everyone brings out the choice wine first and then the cheaper wine after the guests have had too much to drink; but you have saved the best till now.”

He did not turn tares into high quality pot thought.

 

There are more than that but I guess we can avoid splitting hears by saying legal and decriminalized.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_cannabis

Now this didn't use to be a debate at all previously and now when I google it people are split, maybe anheuser busch threw its hat into the ring or something. But that's a debate for the conspiracy thread.

This guy has a good piece on it.

Did Jesus Make Alcoholic Wine?
By Ron Boatwright

The miracle of Jesus turning the water into wine is found in John 2:1-11. Some people try to justify the drinking of alcohol by saying that Jesus made alcoholic wine. But was the wine Jesus created alcoholic? When they ran out of wine at the wedding feast at Cana, Jesus had them fill six water pots to the brim, each of which held about 20 gallons. This would make a total of about 120 gallons. When it was taken to the master of the wedding feast to taste, he was surprised and said, "Every man at the beginning sets out the good wine, and when the guests have well drunk, then the inferior. You have kept the good wine until now" (John 2:10). The good wine in those days was grape juice that had not yet fermented.


The Greek word "OINOS" which is translated wine in the Bible can be either fermented or unfermented wine. We see in Isaiah 65:8, "Thus says the Lord, ‘As the new wine is found in the cluster, and one says do not destroy it’". What is the alcoholic content in the new wine in a cluster of grapes? Zero. There is no alcohol in a cluster of grapes. Also God says in Isaiah 16:10, "No treaders will tread out wine in the presses; I have made their shouting cease." Again we know the alcoholic content of the new wine that is being treaded out in the grape presses is zero. This wine is only fresh grape juice.

Jesus says in Matthew 9:17, "Nor do they put new wine into old wineskins, or else the wineskins break, the wine is spilled, and the wineskins are ruined. But they put new wine into new wineskins, and both are preserved." New wine, which is unfermented wine as we have seen in Isaiah 16:10, 65:8, is not placed into old wine skins because the old wine skins probably have been contaminated with fermentation bacteria which will ferment the new wine. If new wine is placed into old wineskins, then the new wine will become fermented and the fermentation gasses will break the wineskins and the wine will pour out. But Jesus says that you put new wine (fresh grape juice) into new wineskins (which have not been contaminated with fermentation bacteria) "and both are preserved".

Jesus did not create an alcoholic wine. God’s word forbade giving alcoholic wine to someone else. Habakkuk 2:15 says, "Woe to him who gives drink to his neighbor, pressing him to the bottle, even to make him drunk, that you may look on his nakedness." Jesus would have disobeyed God's word as found in Habakkuk and sinned if he had made an alcoholic wine, which was drunk by others. But Hebrews 4:15 says that Jesus "was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin." Jesus never sinned or He could not have died for us. If He sinned He would have had to die for His own sin.

We have seen in the above scriptures that the wine Jesus made was not fermented. It was fresh grape juice, which is also referred to as wine (OINOS). To say that Jesus made 120 gallons of fermented wine is blasphemy. God’s word says "Wine is a mocker, strong drink is a brawler, and whoever is led astray by it is not wise" (Proverbs 20:1).

http://www.netbiblestudy.net/bulletin/new_page_90.htm

 

It was fermented wine with an alcohol in it. Isaiah, and many other verses refer to grape juice, but the wine which was consumed at Jewish weddings was alcohol, which is why the hosts served the good wine first.

Read link

Question: "Did Jesus change the water into wine or grape juice?"
https://www.gotquestions.org/Jesus-water-wine.html
The belief that Jesus created alcoholic wine is definitely more in agreement with the context and the definition/usage of oinos. The primary reasons for interpreting it as grape juice, that alcohol is inherently sinful or that the creation of alcohol would have been encouraging drunkenness, are unbiblical and invalid.


As for legal vs decriminalized pot, there is a big difference.

 

I have physical books that say they drank grape juice for the ceremony then let them get a little drunk but before they got to drunk the brought out the good wine. Can't find anything atm that gives a play by play of types of beverages at ancient Jewish weddings so I'm just going to concede this one because I don't want to read about weddings anymore.

 

Little math problem here. There are 330 million people in the US. 3 million is less that 1%.

 

As I stated, a lower social stigma and a greater social acceptance could be one of the reasons, it wasn't all that long ago being a pot head was considered being equal to a loser, now it has become more of the norm versus an aberration.

As for work answering a survey is not going to cost someone their jobs and again as I already stated in some industries it is nearly impossible to fire someone even they are smoking on the job.

I work in such an industry and personally know that to be a fact.