Should Tobacco Products Be Finally Banned?

[Jenya]

Now that Peter Jennings (R.I.P :( ) has passed away from a product that is known to kill us both directly and indirectly, should all tobacco product be finally banned for good?

What do you think?

[Brian]

Banning tobacco products would do nothing. It would only cause people to make new ones and sell them underground. It happened during the prohibition era in the 1920s, when alchoholic beverages were banned.

[Bobby F.]

Banning tobacco products would do nothing. It would only cause people to make new ones and sell them underground. It happened during the prohibition era in the 1920s, when alchoholic beverages were banned.

Very true. That is what is going on with drugs. Make it illegal to buy and you get all of the bad crimes to go with it.

[Munsters#1]

Banning tobacco would be pointless, drugs are banned, yet look at all the junkies in the US, alcohol was once banned, yet people constantly kept getting liquor.

[barwars]

I don't smoke, anything legal or illegal. But I believe marijuana should be legalized over cigarettes. Cigarettes are completely pointless.

[DarkLordDotan]

I'll never understand why you people want to ban everything, over 2,000 people die each year in swimming pools, I guess we should ban those too?

Banning will not do anything, it will only start yet another black market, only this time a black market even larger than that of illegal drugs.

And more important than that, it's an issue of personal freedom and responsibility. You have the choice to smoke if you want, if you do you will put your life at risk... So what? It is your life, you may choose what risks you will or will not take, and you have no right to force someone else to take risks, or not take risks.

And why is it that because Peter Jennings died you want to ban them? Peter Jennings made his own choice on what risks he would take, he chose poorly, but it is his right to do so.




41,945 People Die Each Year In Car Accidents, Ban Cars!

:rolleyes:

[Pus$y Galore]

Yup - cannot ban them. Look what happened just when they raised the taxes on them - illegal activity overnight with buying from the Indian Reserves and cross-border. Can't be done now.

Hopefully just the restrictions alone will naturally make it drop off (either by death, or people choosing not to smoke or to quit) in a generation or two.

Not only that, look at the revenue it brings in for the government. Taxes would be raised across the board. Non-smokers will be real happy about that (NOT).

[Kay Scarpetta]

It's not going to do anything at all. Most people are smart enough to not start in the first place, and for the people who do smoke, hopefully they'll realize that they're taking months off their life with every cigarette they smoke.

There's so many products out to help you quit, like all the Nicorette products, and prescription meds like Wellbutrin. I used the Nicorette chewing gum and it helped me quit in an instant. I feel so much healthier now.

[DarkLordDotan]

Hopefully just the restrictions alone will naturally make it drop off (either by death, or people choosing not to smoke or to quit) in a generation or two.

Think of it as evolution in action.

[Hollow]

it's one's personal choice whether they want to smoke, not the government's. but if it's banned, fine with me.

[Pus$y Galore]

Think of it as evolution in action.


An excellent description!

[Fleet]

I don't smoke, anything legal or illegal. But I believe marijuana should be legalized over cigarettes. Cigarettes are completely pointless.
The substances in marijuana are even more carcinogenic (cancer-causing) than those in cigarettes.
So legalizing marijuana (a mind-altering drug, btw) would not be a help!

[Munsters#1]

The substances in marijuana are even more carcinogenic (cancer-causing) than those in cigarettes.
So legalizing marijuana (a mind-altering drug, btw) would not be a help!

If people really want it, they're still going to get it.

[Fleet]

If people really want it, they're still going to get it.
I know. I can live without either.

[Brad]

I'm all for banning tobacco products in all public buildings and parks, but not for banning them outright.

[Hollow]

I'll never understand why you people want to ban everything, over 2,000 people die each year in swimming pools, I guess we should ban those too?

Banning will not do anything, it will only start yet another black market, only this time a black market even larger than that of illegal drugs.

And more important than that, it's an issue of personal freedom and responsibility. You have the choice to smoke if you want, if you do you will put your life at risk... So what? It is your life, you may choose what risks you will or will not take, and you have no right to force someone else to take risks, or not take risks.

And why is it that because Peter Jennings died you want to ban them? Peter Jennings made his own choice on what risks he would take, he chose poorly, but it is his right to do so.




41,945 People Die Each Year In Car Accidents, Ban Cars!

:rolleyes:
well those kinds of deaths are caused by accidents, sucking **** into your lungs is intentional. if just merely being in a pool and driving normally were dangerous i'm sure it would be more of an issue.

still, smoking is disgusting and i wouldn't care if it were banned.

[RaceFastSafeCar]

It's not going to do anything at all. Most people are smart enough to not start in the first place, and for the people who do smoke, hopefully they'll realize that they're taking months off their life with every cigarette they smoke.
Wait a minute... let's do the math here... Average life expectancy of a white male, around 75 - 80 years... And according to your claim, each cigarette I smoke takes "months" off of my life, which I'll just assume is a small number, like 2... I've smoked for almost two years now (I'll just round the number up to two)... About 15 cigarettes per day... 730 days of smoking + 15 cigarettes per day = 10950 cigarettes. 10950 multiplied by two (months) = 21900 months... 21900 divided by 12... I'm 19 now... My god! I should have died 1825 years ago! :rolleyes:

[MissZero]

no..people know they're killing themselves when they smoke and therefore its there own fault. Besides nothing will change if they are banned people will still finnd a way to get it

[Fleet]

Wait a minute... let's do the math here... Average life expectancy of a white male, around 75 - 80 years... And according to your claim, each cigarette I smoke takes "months" off of my life, which I'll just assume is a small number, like 2... I've smoked for almost two years now (I'll just round the number up to two)... About 15 cigarettes per day... 730 days of smoking + 15 cigarettes per day = 10950 cigarettes. 10950 multiplied by two (months) = 21900 months... 21900 divided by 12... I'm 19 now... My god! I should have died 1825 years ago! :rolleyes:
I once read somewhere that every cigarette smoked costs from 2 to 3 minutes of a person's life.
I think each cigarette costing "months" is an exaggeration.

[Kay Scarpetta]

Wait a minute... let's do the math here... Average life expectancy of a white male, around 75 - 80 years... And according to your claim, each cigarette I smoke takes "months" off of my life, which I'll just assume is a small number, like 2... I've smoked for almost two years now (I'll just round the number up to two)... About 15 cigarettes per day... 730 days of smoking + 15 cigarettes per day = 10950 cigarettes. 10950 multiplied by two (months) = 21900 months... 21900 divided by 12... I'm 19 now... My god! I should have died 1825 years ago! :rolleyes:

Fine, so I was exaggerating obviously, but you still get my point. I smoked for four and a half years, half a pack-a pack a day. My pulmonologist ordered scans of my lungs and said they are already mildly damaged. My father has borderline emphazema from smoking since he was my age.

If you'd like to die from inhaling **** into your lungs, fine with me. Just don't ever bitch if you come down with lung cancer or need a hole cut in your throat.

[Pus$y Galore]

The substances in marijuana are even more carcinogenic (cancer-causing) than those in cigarettes.
So legalizing marijuana (a mind-altering drug, btw) would not be a help!


Is there proof of that? Not that I'm disputing, but when you hear of the additives in cigarettes, I find it hard to believe that marijuana just dried has more poisons in it - cigarettes have:

What's in a Cigarette? - Here are some of the 4000 Chemicals

Acetone ------------------
Acetic Acid ---------------
Ammonia ----------------------------------
Arsenic ------------------------------------
Benzene -----------------------------------
Carbon Monoxide ----------------------
Carbon Tetrachloride ------------------
DDT -----------------------------------------
Formaldehyde ---------------------------
Hydrogen Cyanide ---------------------
Hydrogen Sulphide --------------------
Lead ----------------------------------------
Methanol ----------------------------------
Nicotine ------------------------------------
Polonium-210 ----------------------------
Radon --------------------------------------
Sulphuric Acid --------------------------
Tars -----------------------------------------
Caesium -----------------------------------
Ethanol ------------------------------------


Common Uses (in order) of the above Poisons:

nail varnish remover
vinegar
cleaning agent
ant poison in the USA
petrol fumes
exhaust fumes
dry cleaning fluid
insecticide
embalming fluid
industrial pollutant
stink bombs
batteries, petrol fumes
rocket fuel
insecticide
radioactive fallout
radioactive gas
power station emissions
road surface tar
heavy metal
anti-freeze

[barwars]

The substances in marijuana are even more carcinogenic (cancer-causing) than those in cigarettes.
So legalizing marijuana (a mind-altering drug, btw) would not be a help!

God made marijuana, man made cigarettes. Who do you trust?

[Pus$y Galore]

God made marijuana, man made cigarettes. Who do you trust?

And don't forget the Cubans with those cigars! Go with God I tell ya!! :happyface

[ABlairican Pie]

It's not going to do anything at all. Most people are smart enough to not start in the first place, and for the people who do smoke, hopefully they'll realize that they're taking months off their life with every cigarette they smoke.
Technically, they say it takes five minutes off your life for each cigarette you smoke.

[ABlairican Pie]

Fine, so I was exaggerating obviously, but you still get my point. I smoked for four and a half years, half a pack-a pack a day. My pulmonologist ordered scans of my lungs and said they are already mildly damaged. My father has borderline emphazema from smoking since he was my age.

If you'd like to die from inhaling **** into your lungs, fine with me. Just don't ever bitch if you come down with lung cancer or need a hole cut in your throat.That's very sad, to have slight lung damage at an early age. :(

I smoked off and on, summer 1983-March 1984, summer-November 1985, then
1993-spring 1996 before I joined a fitness center. I was just like Clinton in that I never inhaled. :lol: But it still wasn't good for me. It just got to the point where it tasted disgusting and that I was "burned out" (no pun intended). puke:

[ABlairican Pie]

Caesium -----------------------------------

heavy metal
ALLRIIIIIIIIIIGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! HEAVY METAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :rock: :rock: :rock: :guitar: :guitar: :guitar:

I've just found the name of my new band!!!!






:joke:

Actually, I know that caesium is a radioactive metal used in weapons.

[Pus$y Galore]

ALLRIIIIIIIIIIGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! HEAVY METAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :rock: :rock: :rock: :guitar: :guitar: :guitar:

I've just found the name of my new band!!!!






:joke:

Actually, I know that caesium is a radioactive metal used in weapons.


:lol:

I guess they throw that stuff in so everybody can tell who the smokers are - you end up glowing in the dark! ;) :crazy:

[GoldenFamilyTies]

I'm all for banning tobacco products in all public buildings and parks, but not for banning them outright.

Agreed.

[Fleet]

God made marijuana, man made cigarettes. Who do you trust?
God also made the oleander bush and poisonous snakes.

I don't think God intended people to get stoned on marijuana!

[Munsters#1]

God also made the oleander bush and poisonous snakes.

I don't think God intended people to get stoned on marijuana!

Than he shouldn't have made any. He knows we just abuse stuff.

[Fleet]

Is there proof of that? Not that I'm disputing, but when you hear of the additives in cigarettes, I find it hard to believe that marijuana just dried has more poisons in it - cigarettes have:


I have posted here before at length about the ingredients of marijuana, how it remains in the fatty area of the brain stem for years and how many lives have been lost due to people under the influence of marijuna.

I think everyone would be better off without both cigarettes and marijuana.

[Pus$y Galore]

God also made the oleander bush and poisonous snakes.

I don't think God intended people to get stoned on marijuana!

What about for medicinal purposes though (similar to other natural pain relievers and cures - the high is then just a side effect). It's helped glaucoma patients, and people with chronic pain under ones undergoing chemo. With chemo, for some reason, the usual anti-nauseant drugs such as Gravol don't touch it, but for many marijuana does.

[Pus$y Galore]

I have posted here before at length about the ingredients of marijuana, how it remains in the fatty area of the brain stem for years and how many lives have been lost due to people under the influence of marijuna.

I think everyone would be better off without both cigarettes and marijuana.

Oh - I hadn't seen those posts.

Who has died under its influence? Are the numbers even near the deaths that alcohol causes?

[Dr. Thong]

I'm a lifelong non-smoker - never even tried it - but banning cigarettes will not stop people from smoking. If you ban cigarettes, then why not red meat?? Or foods with certain cholesterol causing substances??

I'm not trying to make a mockery of the issue, but rather put across a point that if we let the government start dictating personal behaviors, we're crossing a very dangerous line.

I do think it's ironic that marijuana is still illegal, yet the most dangerous drug of all is not only legal, but it's still socially acceptable: Alcohol. I'm not saying everyone who drinks gets behind the wheel of a car - many people drink responsibly - but between drunk drivers and abusers who drink themselves into clinics, hospitals or even death, alcohol is the most dangerous drug of all if you think about it. Yet, you can buy it practically anywhere if you're of legal age.

I would like to see the numbers of smokers drop to the point where tobacco demand suffers and eventually, a tobacco manufacturer (or two or three) is forced out of business. However, I don't blame tobacco companies for smoking-related deaths - people choose to smoke despite the risks. It's been known for over 40 years that smoking is related to cancer and other health risks and yet, I see plenty of people lighting up on a daily basis.

Unfortunately, it's a complex issue and simply banning cigarettes isn't the answer. If we could educate kids about the dangers and really make it stick (i.e., when they become teenagers and think they know everything) - then we might have a shot at eradicating cigarettes. It's a nice thought, at any rate...

[Pus$y Galore]

I'm a lifelong non-smoker - never even tried it - but banning cigarettes will not stop people from smoking. If you ban cigarettes, then why not red meat?? Or foods with certain cholesterol causing substances??

I'm not trying to make a mockery of the issue, but rather put across a point that if we let the government start dictating personal behaviors, we're crossing a very dangerous line.

I do think it's ironic that marijuana is still illegal, yet the most dangerous drug of all is not only legal, but it's still socially acceptable: Alcohol. I'm not saying everyone who drinks gets behind the wheel of a car - many people drink responsibly - but between drunk drivers and abusers who drink themselves into clinics, hospitals or even death, alcohol is the most dangerous drug of all if you think about it. Yet, you can buy it practically anywhere if you're of legal age.

I would like to see the numbers of smokers drop to the point where tobacco demand suffers and eventually, a tobacco manufacturer (or two or three) is forced out of business. However, I don't blame tobacco companies for smoking-related deaths - people choose to smoke despite the risks. It's been known for over 40 years that smoking is related to cancer and other health risks and yet, I see plenty of people lighting up on a daily basis.

Unfortunately, it's a complex issue and simply banning cigarettes isn't the answer. If we could educate kids about the dangers and really make it stick (i.e., when they become teenagers and think they know everything) - then we might have a shot at eradicating cigarettes. It's a nice thought, at any rate...

:clap (and I'm standing - alcohol killed my father and destroyed our family)

[Fleet]

Oh - I hadn't seen those posts.

Who has died under its influence? Are the numbers even near the deaths that alcohol causes?
People who get stoned and try to drive and end up killing themselves are the ones who die.
BTW, I remember a story on the TV news a few months ago in which a mother's son was in the hospital for mental problems. The diagnosis was irreverible mental illness due to marijuana use.

I don't think the numbers are more than alcohol because alcohol is legal and much more availble. The point is, why add another vice?

[Fleet]

I do think it's ironic that marijuana is still illegal, yet the most dangerous drug of all is not only legal, but it's still socially acceptable: Alcohol. I'm not saying everyone who drinks gets behind the wheel of a car - many people drink responsibly - but between drunk drivers and abusers who drink themselves into clinics, hospitals or even death, alcohol is the most dangerous drug of all if you think about it. Yet, you can buy it practically anywhere if you're of legal age.

Alcohol, in moderation, does not alter the mind; marijuana is a mind-altering drug.

More info on marijuana:
http://www.well.com/user/woa/fspot.htm

"Every time we pick up a youngster who's dropping acid, 9 times out of 10 he's holding marijuana. I judge weed by the company it keeps."
- Sgt. Joe Friday, Dragnet

[Pus$y Galore]

Alcohol, in moderation, does not alter the mind; marijuana is a mind-altering drug.

More info on marijuana:
http://www.well.com/user/woa/fspot.htm

"Every time we pick up a youngster who's dropping acid, 9 times out of 10 he's holding marijuana. I judge weed by the company it keeps."
- Sgt. Joe Friday, Dragnet

Actually under the same conditions (moderate use), marijuana does less damage to the brain than alcohol. Even in moderation, alcohol kills brain cells that do not come back. Not to mention the amount of drunk driving, cirrosis of the liver, and domestic violence that it causes. I've yet to hear of anyone smoked up beat the life out of their spouse. It happens all the time under alcohol. The effects of grass are more mood mellowing, so people don't usually get nearly as violent under its influence if at all. The main drawback of marijuana is the resins from it that go into the lungs, like cigarettes. That's why the medical community uses a pill form of THC. I've yet to hear modern medicine use alcohol in treatments. And while marijuana may cause a mental addiction to it, it is not the physical addictive drug that alcohol and stronger drugs such as cocaine, meth and heroin are.

[RaceFastSafeCar]

If you'd like to die from inhaling **** into your lungs, fine with me. Just don't ever bitch if you come down with lung cancer or need a hole cut in your throat.
Deal. But, only one person in my families history has ever died from lung cancer... and he didn't smoke, nor was he ever around people that smoked.

[Dr. Thong]

Alcohol, in moderation, does not alter the mind; marijuana is a mind-altering drug.


True, but alcohol surpresses inhibitions, which leads people who drink too much to do and say things they normal wouldn't in a sober state. And while many people drink moderately, others do not. And some of those who do not think they can drive.

And the tolerance for alcohol differs from person to person: One person may get tipsy after just one or two drinks, whereas others can drink a bit more before feeling drunk.

[Fleet]

True, but alcohol surpresses inhibitions, which leads people who drink too much to do and say things they normal wouldn't in a sober state. And while many people drink moderately, others do not. And some of those who do not think they can drive.

And the tolerance for alcohol differs from person to person: One person may get tipsy after just one or two drinks, whereas others can drink a bit more before feeling drunk.
As I said... why make yet another vice legal?

[Pus$y Galore]

As I said... why make yet another vice legal?


So that 15 yr olds aren't out selling it illegally on the street. If it were legal, no need for the underground drug trade and even though teens might still be able to get their hands on it, there wouldn't be the need to solicit it.

[theshark8777]

So that 15 yr olds aren't out selling it illegally on the street. If it were legal, no need for the underground drug trade and even though teens might still be able to get their hands on it, there wouldn't be the need to solicit it.

Plus think of the all the tax revenue the states would get.

[Fleet]

So that 15 yr olds aren't out selling it illegally on the street. If it were legal, no need for the underground drug trade and even though teens might still be able to get their hands on it, there wouldn't be the need to solicit it.
Yeah, that's all we need... even more potheads out in the street! :rolleyes:

It's not like your talking about legalizing something that's harmless.

There have been many studies done on marijuna. In one, it took until the 40th person who said he used cocaine without first using marijuna.
The first 39 said they started with marijuna and moved on to even more dangerous drugs.

As Dr. Thong said, many people cannot drink alcohol in moderation. Why introduce (legally) yet another problem on society?

[theshark8777]

Yeah, that's all we need... even more potheads out in the street! :rolleyes:

It's not like your talking about legalizing something that's harmless.

There have been many studies done on marijuna. In one, it took until the 40th person who said he used cocaine without first using marijuna.
The first 39 said they started with marijuna and moved on to even more dangerous drugs.

As Dr. Thong said, many people cannot drink alcohol in moderation. Why introduce (legally) yet another problem on society?

I know alot of people who have smoked pot without ever doing any other drug.

[Pus$y Galore]

Yeah, that's all we need... even more potheads out in the street! :rolleyes:

It's not like your talking about legalizing something that's harmless.

There have been many studies done on marijuna. In one, it took until the 40th person who said he used cocaine without first using marijuna.
The first 39 said they started with marijuna and moved on to even more dangerous drugs.

As Dr. Thong said, many people cannot drink alcohol in moderation. Why introduce (legally) yet another problem on society?


And ask those same people if they ever tried a drink or a beer before trying marijuana - 100%. So why not take that away.
By legalizing it (or decriminalizing actually), you're not going to have anymore "potheads" on the streets than there are now. Those who are going to use, are going to use whether its legal or not, so you would actually be making it so that teens and others can profit off of it. Again, great tax revenue - price it like cigarettes are now - through the roof - that way you're keeping it further away from kids and ones who aready can ill-afford it.

Honestly Fleet, I'm not endorsing everyone sitting around like we see in movies in the 60s - just regulate it so that it can be controlled and restricted more.

[Fleet]

I know alot of people who have smoked pot without ever doing any other drug.
And there are many, many other people who have smoked pot and started using other drugs. Do some research.

Interesting that some people are trying to defend an illicit, illegal, mind-altering, carcinogenic drug. Just say NO!

[Fleet]

And ask those same people if they ever tried a drink or a beer before trying marijuana - 100%. So why not take that away.
By legalizing it (or decriminalizing actually), you're not going to have anymore "potheads" on the streets than there are now. Those who are going to use, are going to use whether its legal or not, so you would actually be making it so that teens and others can profit off of it. Again, great tax revenue - price it like cigarettes are now - through the roof - that way you're keeping it further away from kids and ones who aready can ill-afford it.

Honestly Fleet, I'm not endorsing everyone sitting around like we see in movies in the 60s - just regulate it so that it can be controlled and restricted more.
Again, I find it interesting that some people are tying to defend an illicit, illegal, mind-altering, carcinogenic drug.
As Mr. Spock would say, "That is illogical."

Do you have statistics supporting your claim that 100% of marijuana users tried a drink or a beer?

[Brad]

Yeah, that's all we need... even more potheads out in the street! :rolleyes:

Seriously, if I had to choose having between potheads and drunks out and about, I'd take the Dorito-lovers any day of the week. Drunk people are potentially abusive; someone who is high on pot is not.

It's not like your talking about legalizing something that's harmless.

There are lot of things that are currently perfectly legal that are very harmful. Cigarettes, booze, plenty of junk food and sodas, car emission, factory pollution; etc.

If a responsible adult wants to light a j in the privacy of their own home to have an enjoyable, relaxing Friday night, what's the harm? If somebody wants to take advantage of the medicinal/pain-relieving properties of marijuana in the privacy of their own home, what's the harm?

It's certainly a lot less harmful than alcohol, which, as I said, is perfectly legal and is being served up in a bar near you.

There have been many studies done on marijuna. In one, it took until the 40th person who said he used cocaine without first using marijuna.

Okay. But on the same token, there are countless people who smoke/smoked marijuana who never used cocaine or any other hard drugs. Seriously, cocaine and marijuana is really apple and oranges.

As Dr. Thong said, many people cannot drink alcohol in moderation. Why introduce (legally) yet another problem on society?

Well, the "problem" is going to be here whether it's legal or not, Fleet. Call me a bleeding-heart, but I don't think anyone should go to jail just because they're smoking something that grows freely upon the planet.

And there are many, many other people who have smoked pot and started using other drugs. Do some research.

There are many, many more people who have smoked pot and not started using other drugs, studies be damned.

Interesting that some people are trying to defend an illicit, illegal, mind-altering, carcinogenic drug. Just say NO!

I'm not defending it. I'm just saying it's hypocritical that someone can legally buy cigarettes and booze, both of which are worse for you than pot, yet pot is currently illegal.

[James"Thunder"Early]

It should be legalized, as long as it's regulated. I don't necessarily agree with it's use, but it's not for the government to decide if people should do this or not, it's a personal issue and should be left alone.

[James"Thunder"Early]

Seriously, if I had to choose having between potheads and drunks out and about, I'd take the Dorito-lovers any day of the week. Drunk people are potentially abusive; someone who is high on pot is not.



There are lot of things that are currently perfectly legal that are very harmful. Cigarettes, booze, plenty of junk food and sodas, car emission, factory pollution; etc.

If a responsible adult wants to light a j in the privacy of their own home to have an enjoyable, relaxing Friday night, what's the harm? If somebody wants to take advantage of the medicinal/pain-relieving properties of marijuana in the privacy of their own home, what's the harm?

It's certainly a lot less harmful than alcohol, which, as I said, is perfectly legal and is being served up in a bar near you.



Okay. But on the same token, there are countless people who smoke/smoked marijuana who never used cocaine or any other hard drugs. Seriously, cocaine and marijuana is really apple and oranges.



Well, the "problem" is going to be here whether it's legal or not, Fleet. Call me a bleeding-heart, but I don't think anyone should go to jail just because they're smoking something that grows freely upon the planet.



There are many, many more people who have smoked pot and not started using other drugs, studies be damned.



I'm not defending it. I'm just saying it's hypocritical that someone can legally buy cigarettes and booze, both of which are worse for you than pot, yet pot is currently illegal.I agree, prohibition was struck down and alcoholic beverages are much more a danger to the user and other people (drunk driving).

[Fleet]

Seriously, if I had to choose having between potheads and drunks out and about, I'd take the Dorito-lovers any day of the week. Drunk people are potentially abusive; someone who is high on pot is not.


There are lot of things that are currently perfectly legal that are very harmful. Cigarettes, booze, plenty of junk food and sodas, car emission, factory pollution; etc.

If a responsible adult wants to light a j in the privacy of their own home to have an enjoyable, relaxing Friday night, what's the harm? If somebody wants to take advantage of the medicinal/pain-relieving properties of marijuana in the privacy of their own home, what's the harm?

It's certainly a lot less harmful than alcohol, which, as I said, is perfectly legal and is being served up in a bar near you.


Well, the "problem" is going to be here whether it's legal or not, Fleet.
- I would choose neither!
- A problem will not go away by making it legal.
- What if the "responsible" adult lights up, gets high, and doesn't realize his or her 5-year-old child has left the room and wandered into the street and is hit by a car? Kind of a high price to pay for their "right to privacy." :(

Alcohol doesn't stay in the system like marijuana does. Alcohol does not contain any carcinogens.

[Brad]

What if the "responsible" adult lights up, gets high, and doesn't realize his or her 5-year-old child has left the room and wandered into the street and is hit by a car? Kind of a high price to pay for their "right to privacy."

Whoa, whoa, whoa - when did a five-year-old child come into the equation? I'm not talking about Ward Cleaver lighting up a doobie. If someone who is watching over a five-year-old child decides to smoke one up, I wouldn't call that person responsible.

When I say "responsible adult," I'm talking about a single person who, for whatever reason, has had a stressful day at work and just wants to unwind in the comfort of his/her own home (for example). That person isn't bothering anyone; they just want to relax. Nothing wrong with that in my book. Marijuana makes you calm, relaxed, and sometimes goofy. Nothing like the crazies you may have seen in Reefer Madness.

Alcohol, on the other hand, can potentially make you obnoxious, violent, lethal. Yet it's legal.

I know this because I've had firsthand experience with both. My experience is that I have drank my fair share of alcohol and smoked my fair share of weed. I didn't get my information from biased studies or propaganda pieces.

Alcohol doesn't stay in the system like marijuana does. Alcohol does not contain any carcinogens.

Well, marijuana doesn't mess up your liver like alcohol does. My paternal grandmother drank herself to death and died of liver failure at age 47.

By the way, my doctor told me to abstain from alcohol, because if it were mixed with the medication I'm on, it could potentially kill me. On the other hand, many people with my disease who take the medication I take also smoke marijuana to soothe the nausea that the medication causes. I'm seriously entertaining the idea of joining their ranks, because it gets so unbearable.

What are the medicinal advantages of alcohol?

[Fleet]

When I say "responsible adult," I'm talking about a single person who, for whatever reason, has had a stressful day at work and just wants to unwind in the comfort of his/her own home (for example).

Well, marijuana doesn't mess up your liver like alcohol does. My paternal grandmother drank herself to death and died of liver failure at age 47.

Real responsible adults steer clear of weed in the first place. When they want to unwind, they excercise, talk with friends, watch a favorite TV show, enjoy a snack, etc. instead of turning to drugs.
I've had many stressful days at work (12-hour days, 70-hour weeks, deadlines to meet, trying to do two different projects at work at the same time) and the last thing I would do to unwind would be to use marijuana.

Yeah, marijuana doesn't mess up your liver, just your lungs! And possibly the brain stem.

[Pus$y Galore]

- Alcohol doesn't stay in the system like marijuana does. Alcohol does not contain any carcinogens.

No, it just permanently kills brain cells and it IS a carcinogen - I have a skin condition called Lichen Planus, and the inside of my cheeks and gums are affected. I have been told that drinking alcohol with it, will increase the risk of getting oral cancer. There are also many other health conditions where you are asked to stay away from alcohol because of the cancer risks - such as Crohn's Disease.

[Fleet]

No, it just permanently kills brain cells and it IS a carcinogen - I have a skin condition called Lichen Planus, and the inside of my cheeks and gums are affected. I have been told that drinking alcohol with it, will increase the risk of getting oral cancer. There are also many other health conditions where you are asked to stay away from alcohol because of the cancer risks - such as Crohn's Disease.
A relatively slim chance with moderate drinking.
Both for brain cell damage and cancer.

[barwars]

A relatively slim chance with moderate drinking.
Both for brain cell damage and cancer.

The same can be said for marijuana. Relatively slim chance. 99% of people that smoke marijuana don't do it on a daily basis. Much like drinking, it's a way to relax and have fun with some friends, mostly at parties.

Calling everyone that smokes a pothead is no different than calling everyone who drinks alcoholic.

[theshark8777]

Calling everyone that smokes a pothead is no different than calling everyone who drinks alcoholic.

I have to agree with that.

And your point about the 5 year old. I think a drunk could just as easily ignore the child and she runs out in the road, that theory is flawed.

I think Brad has had the best responce so far.

[Pus$y Galore]

A relatively slim chance with moderate drinking.
Both for brain cell damage and cancer.


I've yet to see studies that actually show permanent brain CELL damage from marijuana - it is "thought", but I've been googling and cannot come up with a study that says they have definitive proof like they do with alcohol. There's also definite proof for "hard" drugs such as meth - it actually turns the brain into swiss cheese. From what I read last night, the worst that pot can do is affect long and short term memory (once again, no where can I see that this is permanent) and this is in heavy users - the same with making people "lazy" - again, in longterm, daily use - well doing that with anything can mess you up.

Just taking aspirins or Tylenol daily can mess you up badly too by eating holes in the stomach lining or intestine.

Its a case of "everything in moderation".

[Pus$y Galore]

I have to agree with that.

And your point about the 5 year old. I think a drunk could just as easily ignore the child and she runs out in the road, that theory is flawed.

I think Brad has had the best responce so far.

Actually that 5 yr old scenario would probably have way higher chances of happening in the home of a heavy drinker than a pot smoker. For starters, anyone I know who have children and occasionally smoke pot NEVER do it around their kids - EVER, yet as we know, people drink around children all the time. And people don't "pass out" like they do with alchohol. And anyone who is doing either to excess with small children is just a bad parent period imo. You can't blame the substance for the action of morons. You're either a responsible adult or not.

[Pus$y Galore]

Interesting study results:


Study suggest that decriminalization of marijuana does not lead to increased drug use

Medical Study News

Published: Monday, 3-May-2004


In the first rigorous study comparing marijuana use in the Netherlands and the United States, researchers have found no evidence that decriminalization of marijuana leads to increased drug use. The results suggest that drug policies may have less impact on marijuana use than is currently thought.

The findings appear in the May issue of the American Journal of Public Health. Craig Reinarman, professor of sociology at the University of California, Santa Cruz, coauthored the article, "The Limited Relevance of Drug Policy: Cannabis in Amsterdam and in San Francisco," with Peter D. A. Cohen, director of the Centre for Drug Research (CEDRO) at the University of Amsterdam in the Netherlands, and Hendrien L. Kaal, now an instructor at the University of Leiden in the Netherlands.

The study compared the cannabis (marijuana and hashish) habits of users in Amsterdam and San Francisco to test the premise that punishment for cannabis use deters use and thereby benefits public health.

"We compared representative samples of experienced marijuana users to see whether the lawful availability of marijuana did, in fact, lead to the problems critics of the Dutch system have claimed," said Reinarman. "We found no evidence that it does. In fact, we found consistently strong similarities in patterns of marijuana use, despite vastly different national drug policies."

Highlights of the study include:

? The mean age at onset of use was 16.95 years in Amsterdam and 16.43 years in San Francisco

? The mean age at which respondents began using marijuana more than once per month was 19.11 years in Amsterdam and 18.81 years in San Francisco.

? In both cities, users began their periods of maximum use about 2 years after they began regular use: 21.46 years in Amsterdam and 21.98 years in San Francisco.

? About 75 percent in both cities had used cannabis less than once per week or not at all in the year before the interview.

? Majorities of experienced users in both cities never used marijuana daily or in large amounts even during their periods of peak use, and use declined after those peak periods.

The Netherlands effectively decriminalized marijuana use in 1976, and it is available for purchase in small quantities by adults in licensed coffee shops; in the United States, marijuana use carries stiff criminal penalties, and more than 720,000 people were arrested for marijuana offenses in 2001.

The study was funded by the U.S. National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) and the Dutch Ministry of Health.

In identical questionnaires administered in Amsterdam and San Francisco (cities chosen for their similarities as politically liberal northern port cities with universities and populations of roughly 700,000 people), nearly 500 respondents who had used marijuana at least 25 times were asked detailed questions about their marijuana use. The questionnaire explored such issues as age at first use, regular and maximum use, frequency and quantity of use over time, intensity and duration of intoxication, career use patterns, and use of other illicit drugs.

"In the United States, marijuana policy is based on the assertion that strict penalties are the best way to inhibit use," said Reinarman.

The study's findings cast doubt on that scenario, he said. Despite widespread lawful availability of cannabis in Amsterdam, there were no differences between the two cities in age at onset of use, age at first regular use, or age at the start of maximum use.

The study found no evidence that lawfully regulated cannabis provides a "gateway" to other illicit drug use. In fact, marijuana users in San Francisco were far more likely to have used other illicit drugs--cocaine, crack, amphetamines, ecstasy, and opiates--than users in Amsterdam, said Reinarman.

"The results of this study shift the burden of proof now to those who would arrest hundreds of thousands of Americans each year on the grounds that it deters use," said Reinarman.


This release is available on the web at: http://press.ucsc.edu

[Mikado]

In my heart, id love to see them banned, but, in practical terms, that would just give the underworld another cash product to smuggle, however, the best solution is to continue banning it in public places...its so nice to sit in a restaurant and not have someone smoking and ruining my meal! As an asthma sufferer, i can tell you, second hand smoke is VERY harmful...on the other hand, if all the smokers in the world would be happy with some smokeless tobacco flavored nicotine gum or something, i'd say "Go ahead, knock yourselves out, its YOUR choice for a cancer"...but, as long as tobacco products affect me ( and my lungs ) , ill speak out against them!!!

[Fleet]

The same can be said for marijuana. Relatively slim chance. 99% of people that smoke marijuana don't do it on a daily basis. Much like drinking, it's a way to relax and have fun with some friends, mostly at parties.

Calling everyone that smokes a pothead is no different than calling everyone who drinks alcoholic.
Better to avoid marijuana in the first place.
One marijuana cigarette alters the mind temporarily.
One drink does not- it takes several.

I feel sad for people who think they need a mind-altering, illegal and carcinogenic drug in order to have "fun" and to relax.
As I said, the better way is to have fun which doesn't harm the body, like biking or swimming, putting on a favorite cd or record, reading, etc.

"Marijuana is not a benign drug; its use impairs learning and judgment and may lead to the development of mental health problems."
- American Medical Association
(This backs up what I wrote about the woman who had to bring her son to the hospital due to his erratic behavior. The diagnosis was irreversible mental illness due to marijuana use.)

"Smoking marijuana can injure or destroy lung tissue. Marijuana smoke contains 50-70% more of some cancer-causing chemicals than does tobacco smoke."
- American Lung Association

"Recent research has indicated that for some people there is a correlation between frequent marijuana use and aggressive or violent behavior. This should be a concern to parents, community leaders and all Americans."
- The National Crime Prevention

[Fleet]

http://www.theantidrug.com/drug_info/drug-info-marijuana.asp

Let's make Sitcoms Online a drug-free website!

[Pus$y Galore]

Better to avoid marijuana in the first place.
One marijuana cigarette alters the mind temporarily.
One drink does not- it takes several.



Actually, I can take as little as two sips of a drink (usually wine or Bailey's) and will feel it. Especially during the day. My boss once took me to lunch and insisted I have a glass of white wine with. Even though I ate along with it, I was absolutely looped when we got back to the office.

Both drugs affect different people in different ways.

I think its sad that people feel the need to rely on either for relaxation or to "escape", but that's the way of the world I guess.

[barwars]

That is the classic line. Relaxing doesn't have to involve a alcoholic beverage.

So true. But on the same line.... people who do chose to drink and/or smoke are no better than those who do not.

[Fleet]

That is the classic line. Relaxing doesn't have to involve a alcoholic beverage.
True.
I've never had a drink in my life (or smoked anything), yet co-workers and friends comment on how easygoing I am. No quick temper or getting overexcited about little things. Maybe the soccer and volleyball games we sometimes play during the day help relax everyone! And playing those games is a lot better than taking drugs or drinking. I don't think either of those improves the cardiovascular system!
To relax I would recommend vitamin B-1 over marijuana or drinking anyday.
That's what I give to my mom. When she gets nervous or agitated, I give her some vitamin B-1.

[Dutabi84]

From the link Fleet posted...

"Long-term regular users of marijuana may become psychologically dependent. They may have a hard time limiting their use, they may need more of the drug to get the same effect, and they may develop problems with their jobs and personal relationships. The drug can become the most important aspect of their lives."

This was just one paragraph of many full of the word "may" or "can". Doesn't sound like they're too sure about it? Hell, people become dependant on a lot of different foods that are bad for you. Should we ban them, too?

I have several friends that smoke weed. I'd say maybe 1 out of 10 of them have tried hard drugs. It's not like weed leads to hard drugs, like that bogus study would have you say. The individual leads himself to hard drugs. While it may be true that a majority of users of hard drugs smoke/smoked weed, it is ALSO very true that many pot smokers haven't, and don't intend on using hard drugs.

Besides, wouldn't it be good for the economy anyways? Rather than having tax dollars spent on puting these oh-so-pesky "potheads" in jail, how about legalizing it and taxing it heavily?

Oh yeah, and the more you drink, the more mind altered you get. The more weed you smoke, the more altered your mind gets. There's a direct relation to how much you drink/smoke to how impared you get.

[barwars]

Besides, wouldn't it be good for the economy anyways? Rather than having tax dollars spent on puting these oh-so-pesky "potheads" in jail, how about legalizing it and taxing it heavily?

Good point. People would get themselves into less trouble if weed were legal.

Much like prositution, it'd be safer for everyone involved if legalized and regulated.

[barwars]

Also, some people just "drink" because they want a drink, period. For some people it's simply the taste.

My grandfather is 86, he's by no means an alcoholic, but he drinks beer daily. And he's in much better shape than my other grandfather who's only 79, who hasn't had a drink in decades.

[Fleet]

From the link Fleet posted...

"Long-term regular users of marijuana may become psychologically dependent. They may have a hard time limiting their use, they may need more of the drug to get the same effect, and they may develop problems with their jobs and personal relationships. The drug can become the most important aspect of their lives."

This was just one paragraph of many full of the word "may" or "can". Doesn't sound like they're too sure about it? Hell, people become dependant on a lot of different foods that are bad for you. Should we ban them, too?

I have several friends that smoke weed. I'd say maybe 1 out of 10 of them have tried hard drugs. It's not like weed leads to hard drugs, like that bogus study would have you say. The individual leads himself to hard drugs. While it may be true that a majority of users of hard drugs smoke/smoked weed, it is ALSO very true that many pot smokers haven't, and don't intend on using hard drugs.

Besides, wouldn't it be good for the economy anyways? Rather than having tax dollars spent on puting these oh-so-pesky "potheads" in jail, how about legalizing it and taxing it heavily?

Oh yeah, and the more you drink, the more mind altered you get. The more weed you smoke, the more altered your mind gets. There's a direct relation to how much you drink/smoke to how impared you get.
If you want to try and defend the illegal, mind-altering, carcinogenic drug known as "Marijuana," go ahead. I will continue to hope that kids will have the common sense to stay far away from it (as I did).

As I said, there is the case of the mother whose son was diagnosed with irreversible mental illness (caused by brain damage) due to marijuana use.

There is also the fact that, according to the American Lung Association, marijuana smoke contains 50-70% more of some cancer-causing chemicals than does tobacco smoke.

My way of thinking is it's much better to avoid marijuana.

[Fleet]

This was just one paragraph of many full of the word "may" or "can". Doesn't sound like they're too sure about it? Hell, people become dependant on a lot of different foods that are bad for you. Should we ban them, too.

Besides, wouldn't it be good for the economy anyways? Rather than having tax dollars spent on puting these oh-so-pesky "potheads" in jail, how about legalizing it and taxing it heavily?


Two wrongs don't make a right. Becoming dependant on different foods does not make marijuana use any more credible.

It would be better if people just stayed away from that junk in the first place.

[Dutabi84]

There is also the fact that, according to the American Lung Association, marijuana smoke contains 50-70% more of some cancer-causing chemicals than does tobacco smoke.


Well, let's compare this to cigarettes..I don't know how much your typical smokers smoke in a day, but let's say 1 pack a day. Let's also say that your typical marijuana smoker smokes the equivalent of 1 joint per day.

If my math is correct, the cigarette smoker will be getting about 7x as much of these chemicles per day.

There's gotta be thousands of different ways to get cancer, anyways. If it's not one thing, there's always gonna be another.

[theshark8777]

Well, let's compare this to cigarettes..I don't know how much your typical smokers smoke in a day, but let's say 1 pack a day. Let's also say that your typical marijuana smoker smokes the equivalent of 1 joint per day.

If my math is correct, the cigarette smoker will be getting about 7x as much of these chemicles per day.

There's gotta be thousands of different ways to get cancer, anyways. If it's not one thing, there's always gonna be another.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20050218/images/snl5.jpg
It's always something, if it ain't one thing it's another.

[Pus$y Galore]

http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20050218/images/snl5.jpg
It's always something, if it ain't one thing it's another.


You scare me!! :lol: We think too much alike sometimes. ;)

I was just reading Dutabi84's reply and thinking, ya - or after 20 years of smoking, you're finally able to quit and two weeks later get hit by a bus (its happened) - and then thought - If it aint' one thing, its another - its always something!!! :lol:

[Pus$y Galore]

True.
I've never had a drink in my life (or smoked anything), yet co-workers and friends comment on how easygoing I am. No quick temper or getting overexcited about little things. Maybe the soccer and volleyball games we sometimes play during the day help relax everyone! And playing those games is a lot better than taking drugs or drinking. I don't think either of those improves the cardiovascular system!
To relax I would recommend vitamin B-1 over marijuana or drinking anyday.
That's what I give to my mom. When she gets nervous or agitated, I give her some vitamin B-1.


That's great - it really is, but some people come from families where they're exposed to things as children or have certain disfunctional issues that are supressed by their parents and when they get a little older, feel the need to find an escape. I'm not saying it's right, but really, until you've walked in their shoes, you cannot judge someone.
I know many people who smoke grass and they're perfectly functioning members of society. Some are presidents and vice presidents of companies. It's like ANYTHING else - you must know how to handle it responsibly - like driving a car - some people aren't responsible and get tickets or into accidents all the time. Others will go a lifetime without any incidents.

[Pus$y Galore]

Two wrongs don't make a right. Becoming dependant on different foods does not make marijuana use any more credible.

It would be better if people just stayed away from that junk in the first place.

So I take it you could give up chocolate entirely for the rest of your life quite easily then. It doesn't make you feel better when you eat it? It does have chemicals in it that are supposed to have that affect, one of the reason women go nuts for it while menstrating.

[Jenya]

Plus think of the all the tax revenue the states would get.


What makes you think people would buy it licensed from the state, as apposed to from the street that would be unlicensed? ;)

[Fleet]

That's great - it really is, but some people come from families where they're exposed to things as children or have certain disfunctional issues that are supressed by their parents and when they get a little older, feel the need to find an escape. I'm not saying it's right, but really, until you've walked in their shoes, you cannot judge someone.
I know many people who smoke grass and they're perfectly functioning members of society. Some are presidents and vice presidents of companies. It's like ANYTHING else - you must know how to handle it responsibly - like driving a car - some people aren't responsible and get tickets or into accidents all the time. Others will go a lifetime without any incidents.
But I think the use of it (marijuana) should be discouraged, not encouraged.

[Fleet]

So I take it you could give up chocolate entirely for the rest of your life quite easily then. It doesn't make you feel better when you eat it? It does have chemicals in it that are supposed to have that affect, one of the reason women go nuts for it while menstrating.
If I became allergic to chocolate or something similar, I would give it up.
I don't eat chocolate that much- when I mention it here, I just exaggerate it for fun.
I don't know if it makes me feel any better eating chocolate. I don't see any difference before and after.

Chocolate does have a substance in it (similar to red wine) which may benefit the heart. Dark chocolate especially.

[Hollow]

God also made the oleander bush and poisonous snakes.

I don't think God intended people to get stoned on marijuana!
aren't certain animals dangerous because adam and eve ate the forbidden fruit according to bible theory? :grr:

[Fleet]

Well, let's compare this to cigarettes..I don't know how much your typical smokers smoke in a day, but let's say 1 pack a day. Let's also say that your typical marijuana smoker smokes the equivalent of 1 joint per day.

If my math is correct, the cigarette smoker will be getting about 7x as much of these chemicles per day.

There's gotta be thousands of different ways to get cancer, anyways. If it's not one thing, there's always gonna be another.
A good reason to avoid both!
Cigarettes, though, are not a mind-altering drug. Marijuana is.

[Fleet]

aren't certain animals dangerous because adam and eve ate the forbidden fruit according to bible theory? :grr:
Yes, but that's going into a completely different subject.

[James"Thunder"Early]

But I think the use of it (marijuana) should be discouraged, not encouraged.No one here is encouraging it, the point is if someone want to use it, the law shouldn't stop them.

[Fleet]

No one here is encouraging it, the point is if someone want to use it, the law shouldn't stop them.
I would say suggesting that it be legalized is encouraging its use.

Just because some people don't agree with the law doesn't mean it should be changed.

[James"Thunder"Early]

I would say suggesting that it be legalized is encouraging its use.

Just because some people don't agree with the law doesn't mean it should be changed.You're twisting the argument. No one is encouraging it, but people should be allowed to make the choice without government interference. There is a difference.

[Fleet]

You're twisting the argument. No one is encouraging it, but people should be allowed to make the choice without government interference. There is a difference.
Not with a mind-altering drug.
If no one here is encouraging it, how come nobody (except me) has said, "It's better that people stay away from it?"

[James"Thunder"Early]

Not with a mind-altering drug.
If no one here is encouraging it, how come nobody (except me) has said, "It's better that people stay away from it?"There is a difference between encouraging it's use and supporting the legality of it. I can't use my own personal beliefs in a debate like this, because that's not valid to the argument.

[Brad]

Not with a mind-altering drug.
If no one here is encouraging it, how come nobody (except me) has said, "It's better that people stay away from it?"

I'll tell you why - because it's nobody's business what someone is doing in the comfort of their own home, as long as it isn't hurting anyone else.

[theshark8777]

I'll tell you why - because it's nobody's business what someone is doing in the comfort of their own home, as long as it isn't hurting anyone else.

Can't argue with that.

[Fleet]

I'll tell you why - because it's nobody's business what someone is doing in the comfort of their own home, as long as it isn't hurting anyone else.
A pot-free home is the preferred way of living. Morally and legally.

Unfortunately, there have been many cases of people doing "their own business" who have been arrested because they were too high to watch and take care of their own children. The charge being child endangerment.

Again, you guys can (try to) defend pot all you want. I never will. It is something which is completely unecessary in my life.

[theshark8777]

A pot-free home is the preferred way of living. Morally and legally.

Unfortunately, there have been many cases of people doing "their own business" who have been arrested because they were too high to watch and take care of their own children. The charge being child endangerment.

Again, you guys can (try to) defend pot all you want. I never will. It is something which is completely unecessary in my life.
'

First no one said you had to do it, second if the person is childless your arguement is moot.

[James"Thunder"Early]

A pot-free home is the preferred way of living. Morally and legally.

Unfortunately, there have been many cases of people doing "their own business" who have been arrested because they were too high to watch and take care of their own children. The charge being child endangerment.

Again, you guys can (try to) defend pot all you want. I never will. It is something which is completely unecessary in my life.This is not about the moral rights and wrongs of the issue, it's about the legality. If you we're a legislator or a judge you're argument would be bogus.

[Fleet]

'
First no one said you had to do it,
And people would be better off if they didn't do it.

And, btw, I admire Chuck Norris greatly for his "Kick Drugs out of America" program.

[Pus$y Galore]

A pot-free home is the preferred way of living. Morally and legally.

Unfortunately, there have been many cases of people doing "their own business" who have been arrested because they were too high to watch and take care of their own children. The charge being child endangerment.

Again, you guys can (try to) defend pot all you want. I never will. It is something which is completely unecessary in my life.

Not trying to be a smartass, but do you have documented evidence to support the claim of "many" cases - and ones where it was found that it was solely marijuana that was being used (i.e, no alcohol or other drug - street or prescription) and something happened to the child. I would be interested in it.

And then how do you account for the daily cases of people endangering their children or not being attentive (kids drowing in pools, locked in overheated cars, etc.) where absolute no substance was involved? Because they're not "abusers" or "users" should they not be allowed to have children just because they're stupid idiots and irresponsible?

[Pus$y Galore]

But I think the use of it (marijuana) should be discouraged, not encouraged.


I fully agree - but those studies done in Holland (there were more that I found in the google, but it would be moot to post more), strongly show that not only does legalizing/decriminalizing it encourage use, use tends to drop off faster than it does when its considered illegal. I think to some, that's part of it's appeal - "the risk" of doing it.

[Pus$y Galore]

If I became allergic to chocolate or something similar, I would give it up.
I don't eat chocolate that much- when I mention it here, I just exaggerate it for fun.
I don't know if it makes me feel any better eating chocolate. I don't see any difference before and after.

Chocolate does have a substance in it (similar to red wine) which may benefit the heart. Dark chocolate especially.

Yeah, I know it does (the dark chocolate only though actually), but as I mentioned, marijuana also has several medicinal benefits - again, everything in moderation.
Chocolate does have it's drawbacks also (weight gain, tooth decay) and some do claim to get "hooked" on the stuff.

Not to mention the mess that stuff makes when it melts on the couch!!! My messy husband and his Eskimo Bars!! :cuss: ;)

[DarkLordDotan]

I'll tell you why - because it's nobody's business what someone is doing in the comfort of their own home, as long as it isn't hurting anyone else.

Now this intrigues me.

Do you apply this logic to all issues, or only this one?

Would you equally apply it to the issue of personal firearms ownership?

Or is this selective logic?

[Brad]

Would you equally apply it to the issue of personal firearms ownership?

Or is this selective logic?

Well, firearms are potentially lethal. But yes, I do support responsible adults owning personal firearms.

I actually used to be totally against guns, but I changed my tune last winter when I went to a firing range with my dad and shot a gun for the first time in my life. I had a blast (pun dreadfully intended). I would never own one myself, nor would I ever shoot at a living thing, but I don't want to infringe on someone else's right to do so.

But honestly, is a five-day waiting period really that bad?

[Fleet]

Yeah, I know it does (the dark chocolate only though actually), but as I mentioned, marijuana also has several medicinal benefits - again, everything in moderation.
Chocolate does have it's drawbacks also (weight gain, tooth decay) and some do claim to get "hooked" on the stuff.

Not to mention the mess that stuff makes when it melts on the couch!!! My messy husband and his Eskimo Bars!! :cuss: ;)
Marijuana is not needed- there are herbs and prescription drugs which can treat whatever marijuana can "treat."

Some sources say that chocolate really isn't a big culprit with tooth decay. Because it doesn't stick on the teeth. Something like granola bars or raisins sticks to the teeth much more than chocolate.

Eskimo bars? Do you have any extra ones you don't want? ;)

[Fleet]

Not trying to be a smartass, but do you have documented evidence to support the claim of "many" cases - and ones where it was found that it was solely marijuana that was being used (i.e, no alcohol or other drug - street or prescription) and something happened to the child. I would be interested in it.

And then how do you account for the daily cases of people endangering their children or not being attentive (kids drowing in pools, locked in overheated cars, etc.) where absolute no substance was involved? Because they're not "abusers" or "users" should they not be allowed to have children just because they're stupid idiots and irresponsible?
I'm sure some research can bring up evidence of only marijuana being involved. You can defend marijuana all you want- I won't. It's bad for society.
Again, why encourage yet another vice?

[James"Thunder"Early]

I'm sure some research can bring up evidence of only marijuana being involved. You can defend marijuana all you want- I won't. It's bad for society.
Again, why encourage yet another vice?What business of yours if someone choose to use it? That is the whole point of this debate, not rather or not using it is bad.

[Fleet]

What business of yours if someone choose to use it? That is the whole point of this debate, not rather or not using it is bad.
No, this topic is "Should Tobacco Products be Finally banned."
As long as marijuana is illegal, it should be everybody's business. If I saw a neighbor growing it in his yard, I would certainly notify the police.

[barwars]

No, this topic is "Should Tobacco Products be Finally banned."
As long as marijuana is illegal, it should be everybody's business. If I saw a neighbor growing it in his yard, I would certainly notify the police.

In the words of Carla Tortelli.... snitchface.

Anyways, if my neighbor were growing it, I figure it's not my business, but I'd still tell them to either get rid of it or move it. I don't want to have to care if the police ever drop by.

[James"Thunder"Early]

No, this topic is "Should Tobacco Products be Finally banned."
As long as marijuana is illegal, it should be everybody's business. If I saw a neighbor growing it in his yard, I would certainly notify the police.I know what the topic is, I was refering to the majiruana debate. It not your business if someone uses, because they are not harming you. You can't stick your nose in other people business.

[Fleet]

I know what the topic is, I was refering to the majiruana debate. It not your business if someone uses, because they are not harming you. You can't stick your nose in other people business.
It's still illegal. If they were shooting fireworks in their backyard, that's illegal, too. You can't say "It's their own business." Especially if a firework ignites a neighbor's roof.
And if a neighbor smokes some marijuana and then goes out for a drive, he is legally intoxicated, so he may be a threat to other people.

[Fleet]

In the words of Carla Tortelli.... snitchface.

Anyways, if my neighbor were growing it, I figure it's not my business, but I'd still tell them to either get rid of it or move it. I don't want to have to care if the police ever drop by.
I would still call the cops. Who knows, it may be for the other person's good. It may prevent a mistake he would have made later on.

[Fleet]

And if a neighbor smokes some marijuana and then goes out for a drive, he is legally intoxicated, so he may be a threat to other people.
Like this:
http://alcoholism.about.com/b/a/039646.htm

[DarkLordDotan]

It's still illegal. If they were shooting fireworks in their backyard, that's illegal, too.

Actually, in this part of the country shooting fireworks in your backyard is legal.

As it should be.

[Mikado]

hmmm how did a tobacco thread turn into a pro-anti pot thread? :p you guyssssssss!!! ;)

[Mikado]

Actually, in this part of the country shooting fireworks in your backyard is legal.

As it should be.
Here the big ones are legal, but, strangely the small ones are not*....the teens still get them though. * I remember they were banned after a year when a few kids lost some fingers, about 25-30 years ago.

[Fleet]

Actually, in this part of the country shooting fireworks in your backyard is legal.

As it should be.
It is illegal in the city of L.A. Probably because the authorities or concerned about the dry hills and mountains in the area.

If there is lots of room, there should be no problem. Although it could be dangerous if someone doesn't know how to light fireworks properly.

[Dutabi84]

http://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/attachment.php?s=&postid=2170703

[Pus$y Galore]

Marijuana is not needed- there are herbs and prescription drugs which can treat whatever marijuana can "treat."

Some sources say that chocolate really isn't a big culprit with tooth decay. Because it doesn't stick on the teeth. Something like granola bars or raisins sticks to the teeth much more than chocolate.

Eskimo bars? Do you have any extra ones you don't want? ;)

Actually there isn't currently anything else that treats the nausea of chemotherapy. That's why they have turned to pot. No other herb or presciption drug is as effective (in certain patients - some patients don't get it as badly). I'm not sure for glaucoma, but if there were alternatives, I don't think the medical community would be pushing the marijuana the same. Its them that started to put pressure (on our gov't at least) for the legalization and it now is here for medical purposes. You can take it either in the herb form (either smoked, or brewed in tea) or in a pill form. You just need a prescription. The amounts required don't really get people "high" either.

As for the chocolate thing - you're right on the tooth decay - I was just razzing ya since we're coming down the home stretch on the topic methinks! ;)

No Eski bars at the moment but the fridge is filled with popsicles...including chocolate. Afterall, ya really need them after blowin' a dubie!! ;) :lol:

j/k

[Pus$y Galore]

http://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/attachment.php?s=&postid=2170703



HA HA HAHA HAHAHAAHAA!!

[Fleet]

Actually there isn't currently anything else that treats the nausea of chemotherapy. That's why they have turned to pot. No other herb or presciption drug is as effective (in certain patients - some patients don't get it as badly). I'm not sure for glaucoma, but if there were alternatives, I don't think the medical community would be pushing the marijuana the same. Its them that started to put pressure (on our gov't at least) for the legalization and it now is here for medical purposes. You can take it either in the herb form (either smoked, or brewed in tea) or in a pill form. You just need a prescription. The amounts required don't really get people "high" either.

Those who want marijuana legalized try to use that reasoning... that marijuana can treat some things which no drug or herb can. Studies have shown that to be untrue.
The herb ginger is an excellent remedy for nausea and there are no side effects like mind-altering and it's not carcinogenic like marijuana is.

As for glaucoma, there are many herbs which can treat it:
- Billbery contains flavonoids and nutritents needed to protect the eye from further damage.
- Chickweed and eyeweed are good for all eye disorders.
- A combination of ginkgo biloba extract and zinc sulfate may slow progressive vision loss.
- Jaborandi is a rainforest herb that contains pilocarpine, used for over 120 years to relieve intraocular pressure in glaucoma.
- Rose hips supply valuable flavonoids and vitamin C.

[DarkLordDotan]

It is illegal in the city of L.A. Probably because the authorities or concerned about the dry hills and mountains in the area.

If there is lots of room, there should be no problem. Although it could be dangerous if someone doesn't know how to light fireworks properly.

Well that's their problem, isn't it?

I'm starting to make this my motto: Think of it as evolution in action.

[theshark8777]

Well that's their problem, isn't it?

I'm starting to make this my motto: Think of it as evolution in action.


In Ohio it is legal to buy fireworks, but illegal to set them off. :rolleyes:
That makes sense.

[Pus$y Galore]

In Ohio it is legal to buy fireworks, but illegal to set them off. :rolleyes:
That makes sense.


Now there's Capitalism in Action!! :crazy:

[Fleet]

Now there's Capitalism in Action!! :crazy:
That's not really Capitalism; it's just an obscure law.
But, Capitalism is what made the economy in the U.S. the biggest in the world.

[theshark8777]

That's not really Capitalism; it's just an obscure law.
But, Capitalism is what made the economy in the U.S. the biggest in the world.


Well I actually believe its like that in Pennsylvania also. You have to sign a for saying you are taking them out of state.

[Fleet]

Well I actually believe its like that in Pennsylvania also. You have to sign a for saying you are taking them out of state.
That's interesting. How would they know if you took them out of state whether you sign or not?

[theshark8777]

That's interesting. How would they know if you took them out of state whether you sign or not?

I would imagine that just gets the fireworks place off the hook. I remember one time my mom bought some and filled out her adress and they told her she had to take them out of state, so she filled out another one and wrote PA on it.

[barwars]

Well I actually believe its like that in Pennsylvania also. You have to sign a for saying you are taking them out of state.

I think in NY (I'm not positive), it's illegal to buy them in state, but they can be set off legally. Because I know people have to make trips to PA to buy fireworks, but I've never seen anybody get into any trouble with the police over them. Maybe theres just some sort of waver for the 4th of July weekend. I've actually seen cops drive by as we set off fireworks in the back of the school.

[theshark8777]

I think in NY (I'm not positive), it's illegal to buy them in state, but they can be set off legally. Because I know people have to make trips to PA to buy fireworks, but I've never seen anybody get into any trouble with the police over them. Maybe theres just some sort of waver for the 4th of July weekend. I've actually seen cops drive by as we set off fireworks in the back of the school.

Well I know here, not that I live in the biggest city by far, but on July 4th they don't really try to stop you. A family friend used to always have a little pre-fireworks show before the city's fireworks. One year they did make him stop, but I think that was the fire dept, more than the police. The next year though, everything was back to normal, I can't remember maybe it was just a dryer year than normal.

[Pus$y Galore]

We just heard someone shooting off fireworks tonight! Don't know what they'd be celebrating today other than a wedding maybe and they got a special permit.