Originally Posted by Turtlenecks
Even though (if you read the first post, you'd know) smoking marijuana moderately doesn't have any effect on pulmonary functions?
Originally Posted by dizzybomb
How is this an example of natural selection? The only way you would reasonably be able to say that is if weed was killing off people. Tell me how many people have been killed by marijuana?
Originally Posted by Turtlenecks
I heard a quote that put it into perspective..
"Cigarettes kill over 400,000 people a year in this country [USA]. Alcohol kills over 75,000. 150 people die all over the world because coconuts fall on their fucking heads. Marijuana? 0. That's zero ever!" - Joe Rogan
Originally Posted by Ponzo
This is ignorant and you sir have no idea what you are talking about.
Originally Posted by Ele
Corruption is what keeps it illegal. That's all there is to it.
Well well, looks like I have the opportunity to introduce some happy children to the wonder of our golden age; science.
Thanks to science we have put a lot of research in to a lot of topics, and sadly we have pumped money in to the useless topic of cannabis.
Let's take a look at the short term effects of cannabis;
Cannabis is a simulator and a sedative, is mildly psychedelic and has hallucinogenic characteristics, it causes euphoria and anxiety and an alteration of perception. Between 20 and 30 percent of users experience intense anxiety or panic attacks, additionally there are reports of adverse reactions with cannabis causing strokes - the risk of a heart attack on a middle aged person increases fivefold in the first hour after smoking cannabis. It causes increased heart rates, decreased motor control, judgement impairment, decreased ability to concentrate and focus, and reduction in reaction time. In other words, it's similar to alcohol - except it has additional hallucinogenic properties. A single joint takes up to 8 hours to wear off, which is an equivalent time frame to drinking 6 beers. Needless to say if you operate a vehicle under the influence of either alcohol or cannabis, you are a risk to everyone in the vicinity.
Cannabis use can use cognitive deficits for over a week after use - and as much as 28 days. Long term use is known to cause perception deficits and selective memory defects. Long term effects include psychosis, addiction, heart disease, bipolar disorder, depression, mood swings, schizophrenia, intelligence impairment, memory and concentration deficits, respiratory functions, etc.
In addition, Turtlenecks seems to only care about pulmonary functions, but very close to this we know that cannabis in conjunction with butylated hydroxytoluene (a common food additive) increases risk of lung cancer.
In this day and age there is no reason for people to depend on drugs. Like Turtlenecks said, cigarettes and alcohol kill a lot of people, and cannabis does not. However do you think permanent intelligence and motor skill impairment is acceptable?
By the way, that quote is clearly rigged; usually less than 400 people die from alcohol poisoning a year, not 75,000 (and that includes ingestion of non-ethyl alcohol). Rogan is clearly mixing the criteria for selection of which deaths qualify. I expect a large portion of the deaths are merely alcohol related. Since there are no 'breathalyzer' equivalents for cannabis it is really impossible to determine cannabis related deaths from car accidents without blood tests and postmortem testing - which isn't usually done for accidental deaths. Almost all the cigarette deaths are from long-term effects, which are far more well documented and tracked than cannabis. For example cannabis is known to shorten your life span, but it will not be the cause of death - in the same way that HIV may cause the death of someone by the acquirement of AIDS. Don't trust rigged statistics without proper citation and a clear criteria.
To those saying the government is keeping cannabis illegal so they can profit (
), that's obviously not true, legalization and taxation of cannabis would be worth $40-100 billion to the USA gov't. There's no way you think that a handful of fines can match that. However the inverse argument is true; alcohol and cigarettes remain legal because they are profitable. You should not use the legalization of alcohol and cigarettes as justification for legalization of cannabis, as clearly the former should be illegal.tl;dr You shouldn't need the government to tell you what to do, but you just keep doing dumb shit and governments can't let their citizens die/become crippled for fun.
Ok i'm going to keep this short. You brought up that cigarettes and alcohal kill alot of people, but cannabis intellectually damages you.
Well alcohal will damage you as well, not just mentally but phisically too, cigarettes will do mostly damage you phisically. You failed to see that cannabis can help you as well. There's a reason that it is givin out as a medication. Neither alchohal or cigarettes can help you in that way, but they are both legal. Explain the logic behind that.
Well alcohal will damage you as well, not just mentally but phisically too, cigarettes will do mostly damage you phisically. You failed to see that cannabis can help you as well. There's a reason that it is givin out as a medication. Neither alchohal or cigarettes can help you in that way, but they are both legal. Explain the logic behind that.
If only everyone could be as sexy as me
Originally Posted by ImmortalCow
In addition, Turtlenecks seems to only care about pulmonary functions, but very close to this we know that cannabis in conjunction with butylated hydroxytoluene (a common food additive) increases risk of lung cancer.
In this day and age there is no reason for people to depend on drugs. Like Turtlenecks said, cigarettes and alcohol kill a lot of people, and cannabis does not. However do you think permanent intelligence and motor skill impairment is acceptable?
By the way, that quote is clearly rigged; usually less than 400 people die from alcohol poisoning a year, not 75,000 (and that includes ingestion of non-ethyl alcohol). Rogan is clearly mixing the criteria for selection of which deaths qualify. I expect a large portion of the deaths are merely alcohol related. Since there are no 'breathalyzer' equivalents for cannabis it is really impossible to determine cannabis related deaths from car accidents without blood tests and postmortem testing - which isn't usually done for accidental deaths. Almost all the cigarette deaths are from long-term effects, which are far more well documented and tracked than cannabis. For example cannabis is known to shorten your life span, but it will not be the cause of death - in the same way that HIV may cause the death of someone by the acquirement of AIDS. Don't trust rigged statistics without proper citation and a clear criteria.
If you actually knew what BHA and BHT were you wouldn't use that argument. They're basically funballs of cancer and hyperactivity. Saying that you shouldn't smoke with BHA is basically like saying you shouldn't smoke with anthrax. The cannabis isn't the dangerous part.
As for the Rogan quote, you obviouslly weren't meant to take it literally. The point of it was to show the ridiculousness and hypocrisy of illegal marijuana.
Also, a question just for you - Why do you feel the need to be purposely egotistical when you get involved in discussions? You should smoke some dope man, unwind those strings a little.
Originally Posted by ImmortalCow
You should not use the legalization of alcohol and cigarettes as justification for legalization of cannabis, as clearly the former should be illegal.
Why the hell not? They should, but they aren't, so we'll just let it slide? You can't honestly think that's right, can you? As an aside, I'm quite libertarian about this, I believe that they all should be legal - marijuana, cigarettes and alcohol.
So what proper justification do you have for why you're against marijuana being legalised, while cigarettes and alcohol run amok? Obviously the governments left the shit to fester, haven't they?
edit:
Originally Posted by ImmortalCow
Thanks to science we have put a lot of research in to a lot of topics, and sadly we have pumped money in to the useless topic of cannabis.
Also, can you explain to me what this stupidly vague piece of sophistry actually means?
Last edited by Turtlenecks; Jan 16, 2013 at 11:45 AM.
I know I already said it, but I honestly don't get how cigarettes and alcohal are nothing but harmful to the body but are legal, while marijuana is illegal but can actually be medically helpful. Where is the logic behind ths *looks around for some logic*
If only everyone could be as sexy as me
Originally Posted by dizzybomb
Ok i'm going to keep this short. You brought up that cigarettes and alcohal kill alot of people, but cannabis intellectually damages you.
Well alcohal will damage you as well, not just mentally but phisically too, cigarettes will do mostly damage you phisically. You failed to see that cannabis can help you as well. There's a reason that it is givin out as a medication. Neither alchohal or cigarettes can help you in that way, but they are both legal. Explain the logic behind that.
Even if cannabis is illegal for recreational use it can still be used medicinally - IF that was actually warranted. We actually have a wide array of medicine available to treat nausea and pain, thanks to science. Most people who ask for medicinal marijuana are probably not even sick...
Originally Posted by Turtlenecks
If you actually knew what BHA and BHT were you wouldn't use that argument. They're basically funballs of cancer and hyperactivity. Saying that you shouldn't smoke with BHA is basically like saying you shouldn't smoke with anthrax. The cannabis isn't the dangerous part.
Cannabis increases the effects of BHT, as previously explained.
Originally Posted by Turtlenecks
As for the Rogan quote, you obviouslly weren't meant to take it literally. The point of it was to show the ridiculousness and hypocrisy of illegal marijuana.
Well not only does Rogan fail to understand basic statistics, but there is nothing hypocritical about the illegality of marijuana. As I previously explained, the fault lies with the legality of alcohol and cigarettes.
Originally Posted by Turtlenecks
Also, a question just for you - Why do you feel the need to be purposely egotistical when you get involved in discussions? You should smoke some dope man, unwind those strings a little.
Why the hell not? They should, but they aren't, so we'll just let it slide? You can't honestly think that's right, can you? As an aside, I'm quite libertarian about this, I believe that they all should be legal - marijuana, cigarettes and alcohol.
So what proper justification do you have for why you're against marijuana being legalised, while cigarettes and alcohol run amok? Obviously the governments left the shit to fester, haven't they?
Because people like you cost the gov't systems billions of dollars. You are literally using my money to fund your drug habits. There is no way I can be ok with this.
If people are idiots, that's their business. But when it starts costing me money, why shouldn't I be upset?
Besides that, as I already stated, I am against cigarettes and alcohol being legal. People have shown they are irresponsible, so why should they be allowed to do things that have a negative effect on all of society?
Originally Posted by Turtlenecks
Also, can you explain to me what this stupidly vague piece of sophistry actually means?
Because what kind of idiot things "it's a great idea to burn something and inhale the fumes". It's clearly going to be bad for you, that's not even counting the obviously brain-addling effects that the drug, which are apparent to anyone who has used or witnessed someone using.
Every dollar pumped in to researching negative effects of cannabis is a dollar wasted. Pot heads don't care about facts, they just say "hurr durr smoke some dope man, unwind those strings a little".
Originally Posted by dizzybomb
I know I already said it, but I honestly don't get how cigarettes and alcohal are nothing but harmful to the body but are legal, while marijuana is illegal but can actually be medically helpful. Where is the logic behind ths *looks around for some logic*
I already explained it to you, did you not understand my explanation?
