legalize all drugs - free money and freedom

Marijuana should be illegal because, just like some hardcore drugs (and yes, including alcohol), it leads some people into some dangerous and destructive behaviors. It's not some harmless substance, which is some lie that most pro-marijuana people are trying to propagate. This link below proves how dangerous marijuana is.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-433455/Cannabis-soft-drug-led-sons-hanging.html

 

Because, simply smoking marijuana does not require taking harder drugs; why not blame "peer pressure" for it instead?

 

Smoking marijuana causes emotional problems, such as anxiety, as well as some panic attacks and depression in some people, which led that British kid into committing suicide.

 

Here's some arguements about why marijuana should not be legalized, and it's not about this gateway drug myth.

1-Smoking marijuana permanently lowers somebody's IQ.

http://www.cadca.org/resources/detail/marijuana-iq-study-successfully-defended-scientists

2-It causes short term memory problems.

3-It has even more tar and carcinogens than tobacco smoke has.

4-Smoking marijuana can lead to some emotional problems, such as panic attacks, anxiety, depression, as well as suicidal thoughts.

5-Also, alcohol has caused way too much harm for our society in regards to some traffic fatalities. We should not legalize another harmful substance that will cause even more harm and suffering to this society.

6-Also, unlike drinking alcohol, smoking marijuana is not usually done in moderation by anybody. While some people may drink purely for it's aesthetic purposes during their meals (which is what those Europeans do), nobody smokes a little bit of marijuana for its flavor. Also, alcohol is not usually consumed to the point of intoxication, whereas marijuana is usually consumed to the point of intoxication.

 

Alcohol does as well.

The bolded depends on the type. If pot was legalized, there would likely be a variety of markets that would develop. Some would emphasize having less tar and impurities in much the same way that tobacco developed them. We could even see a significant market for marijuana cigarettes with filters.

Then again, the tar itself is a complete non-issue when vaporizers are used.

Chances are very likely that the vaporizer market will explode if pot is legalized nationally, since it purifies the smoke and gets people much higher than just smoking a joint.

Alcohol has similar effects on some people. Also like alcohol, these effects aren't significant on other individuals.

As we discussed before, I think the War on Drugs itself has been more harmful to society than drunk driving.

Not true. I know several casual pot smokers. Most of the smokers I knew in college would smoke in the same capacity as a social drinker.

 

Not only is that not true, the exact opposite is the case. Of course, all of drug prohibition is based on lies, no reason to expect the truth now.

 

In my case, I use marijuana as an anti-hypocrisy medication and try to resort to the fewest fallacies for my Cause, as a moral and ethic in modern times. If that is the case, then why do those of the opposing view who may not use marijuana, resort to more fallacies for their Cause?

- - - Updated - - -

But, marijuana also has more anti-carcinogenic properties to protect against it than does tobacco for its users.

 

So do simple life, "stressors" regardless of marijuana use; so, unless you factor for that those studies may be faulty.

- - - Updated - - -

This a false analogy since smoking marijuana is more similar to an after dinner cigar than is a drink like alcohol. Should we adjourn to the smoking room and don our smoking jackets?

 

Well, alcohol only lowers somebody's IQ permanently if they abuse the hell out of it and get drunk every single day. If they have somewhere around or one two drinks per day, it won't lower their IQ permanently, and some studies have even showed that moderate drinkers have better mental acuity. Some other studies have shown that contrary to what some people have been stating sometimes, moderate drinking is actually not harmful to somebody's cognitive abilities.

http://www.nhs.uk/news/2012/10October/Pages/Grapes-of-Daft–wine-link-to-brain-damage.aspx

Even if somebody smokes marijuana in moderation, it still will lower their IQ permanently. There's no "safe amount" of marijuana, when it comes to somebody's cognitive abilities being harmed, which is what actually makes alcohol much safer than marijuana to some extents.

Also, what exactly do you mean by this statement?

"Alcohol has similar effects on some people. Also like alcohol, these effects aren't significant on other individuals."?

Well, I'm trying to figure out if marijuana really is safer than alcohol. Somewhere around 15% of alcohol drinkers become alcoholics. Which percentage of people that smoke marijuana become psychologically dependent (ie, addicted), to marijuana? I'm trying to figure out which substance is way more addictive than the other substance.

 

much less risk then drinking alcohol, but yes, there will be addicts if legal or illegal... also just like alcohol

 

Well, some people smoke some cigars for it's flavor, but not really for the desired mind altering effects of the tobacco smoke. Does some people smoke marijuana for its flavor alone?

 

Well, would smoking marijuana cure somebody's lung cancer, or would it just merely worsen it? I'd say the latter answer to that question is the truth. Smoking marijuana protects somebody against cancers? That makes absolutley no sense at all to me. That's simply a bunch of hysterically exaggerated pro-pot propaganda.

 

Why blame an alleged "gateway" drug when the person in question was on LSD at the time of the incident? It must simply a bunch of hysterically exaggerated contra-pot propaganda.

- - - Updated - - -

I guess you haven't been paying attention to our argument; from post 121:

 

How do you separate the nicotine high from the flavor? However, in the case of marijuana, some people smoke it for its palliative effects.

 

Well, let's just forget about this specific comment that I just made before-and let's debate the legalization of medicinal marijuana.

Medicinal marijuana is given to some AIDS parents, which damages their immune system.

Medical marijuana is given to some people that have anxiety as well as depression, and marijuana has only been proven to sometimes even cause as well as worsen those specific conditions.

So, that's why medicinal marijuana should not be legalized. It's just some scam, but its not really some medicine. All this drug does is to simply worsen somebody's medical conditions, but not to really help them get any better at all.

 

Marijuana may be contra-indicated for some persons, but that does not mean it is bad as an herbal medicine. Should we also criminalize commercial drugs that have adverse side effects for some people even if other people may benefit from them?

 

ROFLMAO

This is perhaps the best reason for using and legalizing marijuana that I've ever read.

 

If addiction is the factor that you're most interested in, this study might clear things up a bit.

http://www.beckleyfoundation.org/bib/doc/bf/2007_David_211305_1.pdf

 

Regardless of addiction or cognitive damages, this article that I found on this websites actually has a pretty good arguement against legalizing marijuana. Tell me what your opinion, or rebuttals, is to this articles that I had found. I copied, pasted, as well as highlighted, the parts of this article that helps to supports my arguments.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs...tion-of-cannabis-could-spur-new-health-crises

If marijuana is no worse than alcohol, why ban it? Good question—except it begs another: Do we really need another problem like alcohol abuse on our hands? Do we want to add to the DUIs and DWIs that are alcohol-fueled with those caused by use of marijuana? If pot were legal, would more people use it more frequently, creating a problem of a size we had not anticipated and could not control?

There's a stronger financial argument for legalizing marijuana. It is an utter waste of money and resources to arrest and prosecute people for marijuana possession, and cash-strapped states have better use for money, courts, and prison space. Legalizing pot could actually help reduce the criminal element, since no one would have to interact with the criminal community to get it. The substance could not only be sold in a controlled and licensed manner, but it could be taxed—bringing in substantial amounts of money to states.

[See a collection of political cartoons on healthcare.]

But the same argument could be made about tobacco, which is as dangerous as many drugs and legal in part because it would be politically impossible to destroy the tobacco industry. True, cigarette smokers do not get stupid and crash cars into trees, but they still kill themselves and others by ingesting and exhaling toxic smoke. And while cigarette taxes indeed bring cash to local governments, we all end up paying dearly for the added healthcare costs of caring for smokers with emphysema, lung cancer, and other ailments.

It may not be fair to subject marijuana to a higher legal standard than alcohol or tobacco. But it may be a way to prevent a third series of healthcare crises.

 

all the criminals that support themselves selling drugs would no longer be able to support that lifestyle, they would actually have to get jobs and would no longer be idealized by their younger peers because they got such nice things

people wanting drugs or alcohol would no longer need to interact with criminals to have a good time

the drug war just creates an environment for criminals, same as alcohol prohibition did years ago

.

 

The healthcare crisis is present due to an unwieldy healthcare system in America, not so much due to unhealthy habits.

For example, the percentage of smokers and the obesity percentage are about the same in the UK, yet the UK spends only a fraction of what we do per person on healthcare.

Limiting healthcare costs is best done by implementing an NHS.

How the UK handles healthcare costs due to tobacco is by simply taxing it heavily and using the funds to pay for the later costs. It's about the only truly cost-effective way of dealing with this.

Beyond that, peer pressure works better than the law when it comes to discouraging the use of both legal and illegal drugs.

 

Well, smoking marijuana is way more harmful to somebody's lungs than smoking tobacco cigarettes is.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1603611/posts

"SMOKING three cannabis joints will cause you to inhale the same amount of toxic chemicals as a whole packet of cigarettes, according to research published in France today.

Cannabis smoke contains seven times more tar and carbon monoxide, the French National Consumers' Institute concluded in research published in the April edition of its monthly magazine.

The institute tested regular Marlboro cigarettes alongside 280 specially rolled joints of cannabis leaves and resin in an artificial smoking machine.

The tests examined the content of the smoke for tar and carbon monoxide, as well as for the toxic chemicals nicotine, benzene and toluene.

"Cannabis smoke contains seven times more tar and carbon monoxide than tobacco smoke," the institute's magazine says.

Someone smoking a joint of cannabis resin rolled with tobacco will inhale twice the amount of benzene and three times as much toluene as if they were smoking a regular cigarette, the study says.

Smokers of pure cannabis leaves will also inhale more of these chemicals than from a normal cigarette, though the amount varies depending on the quantities.

"Smoking three joints every day – which is becoming frequent – makes you run the same risks of cancer or cardio-vascular diseases as smoking a packet of cigarettes," the magazine says."

 

true, but with education one could learn they don't have to smoke marijuana, brownies are a good alternative

heck, smoking green tea would be bad for your, but consuming is not

.

 

I believe those studies don't necessarily take marijuana's, "protective" properties against cancer into sufficient consideration.

 

Just because some marijuana may not necessarily be smoked, that still doesn't mean that it doesn't cause some cancers even then. I mean, chewing tobacco isn't smoked, but that still can causes some cancers. Even if non smokeable forms of tobacco can still causes some cancers, isn't that same statement still true about marijuana? Just because it's not smoked, that still doesn't mean that it's not carcinogenic.