# Legalising Marijuana



## Garpal Gumnut (25 October 2009)

Do any asf posters have an opinion on whether marijuana should be legalised. 

A mate who suffers severe arthritis finds it helps him get up and about.

This is from CNN a TV station in the United States given to hyperbole and inaccuracy.


http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/10/21/medical.marijuana.policy/index.html


gg


----------



## Agentm (25 October 2009)

lsd is better


----------



## wayneL (25 October 2009)

Take it away from the crims.

Regulate it.

Standardise it.

Tax it.

Just like alcohol.

Win win.


----------



## Tink (25 October 2009)

I am anti drugs, so you will always get a NO from me on these topics.


----------



## Wysiwyg (25 October 2009)

Tink said:


> I am anti drugs, so you will always get a NO from me on these topics.




I`m with Tink. Seen sporting potential, education aspirations and careers destroyed by the toxic weed.


----------



## Krusty the Klown (25 October 2009)

When you use logic in this matter, logic dictates legalisation.

There is no statistic that Marijuana has caused any deaths, it is not physically addictive (although it can be psychologically addictive like sex and World of Warcraft type games).

Alcohol causes many deaths and is the instigator of violence to other people apart from the user. It is physically addictive.

Tobacco causes death and disease and gives no change of consciousness or "buzz". It is physically addictive.

Marijuana does not induce violence like meth or alcohol. You cannot overdose on it and die.

Marijuana can be introduced in to the body through the stomach and induce a high without causing cancerous lung damage and death by smoking it.

Logic dictates outlaw tobacco and alcohol and legalise Marijuana.

I don't understand the demonisation of the the lesser evil marijuana when you have 2 worse legal drugs that cause so much death, violence and disease.

To quote Mr Spock - "It is illogical".


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (25 October 2009)

wayneL said:


> Take it away from the crims.
> 
> Regulate it.
> 
> ...




Even though I am an anarcho-libertarian, and against more taxes, except for others, I must admit that this would be a good solution.

It would take it away from the crims , as you say wayne.

gg


----------



## jono1887 (25 October 2009)

Hahaha, I'm actually writing an economics essay on this. Some stats I've come across:

- Its carcinogenic... but so are most other things..
- Studies have found risk of schizophrenia increases proportionally to the cannabis consumed before the age of 18 (study was over 30+ years), but we could just legalise it and put in age restrictions.
- It increases chance of dropping out of high school before completion.
- No associated risks with future job propects/income have been found.
- QLD govt. alone spent $3M a year on dealing with cannabis crimes.
- Estimates put the cannabis industry at $15bn annual turnover (imagine the tax potential for the govt!!)


----------



## professor_frink (25 October 2009)

I like my green home grown and tax free thank you very much.


----------



## Lantern (25 October 2009)

When has prohibition ever worked.

Legalise it!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f9to5UnAXVM


----------



## drsmith (25 October 2009)

jono1887 said:


> - Estimates put the cannabis industry at $15bn annual turnover (imagine the tax potential for the govt!!)



1) If it was legal and commercially available how much of this would be a transfer from cigarettes ?

2) Given that it's easy to grow at home how would the government tax it ?
A solution that comes to mind would be to licence it's production so that small scale home production is cost prohibitive but that will only encourage the maintainance of a black market.


----------



## Gone Fishin (25 October 2009)

Once saw a guy dangling from a tree after using too much of the whacky tobacky. Another turkey thought he could fly after having some choof and decided to fly off a bridge onto a motorway. First guy needless to say never got to regret what he did, second one survived but was basically an immobile lump for the rest of his life. so I guess the stuff does not have any adverse effects. Lets legalise it and people can grow as much of the **** as they like without being prosecuted.


----------



## professor_frink (25 October 2009)

Gone Fishin said:


> Once saw a guy dangling from a tree after using too much of the whacky tobacky. *Another turkey thought he could fly after having some choof and decided to fly off a bridge onto a motorway. *First guy needless to say never got to regret what he did, second one survived but was basically an immobile lump for the rest of his life. so I guess the stuff does not have any adverse effects. Lets legalise it and people can grow as much of the **** as they like without being prosecuted.




LOL

Following from Bill Hicks - 



> You never see a positive drug story on the news. They always have the same LSD story. You've all seen it: "Today a young man on acid...thought he could fly...jumped out of a building...what a tragedy!" What a dick. He's an idiot. If he thought he could fly why didn't he take off from the ground first? Check it out? You don't see geese lined up to catch elevators to fly south; they fly from the ****ing ground. He's an idiot. He's dead. Good! We lost a moron. ****ing celebrate. There's one less moron in the world.


----------



## Soft Dough (25 October 2009)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Do any asf posters have an opinion on whether marijuana should be legalised.
> 
> A mate who suffers severe arthritis finds it helps him get up and about.
> 
> ...




From the research I have seen it has a role as an anti-emetic and only a very limited role as an analgesic.

So I do not support it being used as an analgesic, when there are plenty of useful alternatives, for both Osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis.


There is also no argument I can think of to support legalisation of any more psychogenic agents.  Perhaps some of the users disagree, but then again, as someone who used to deal with some of the "users" it definately makes sense to keep it as it is.


----------



## DB008 (25 October 2009)

Simple answer; YES.

I believe that they are doing trials using THC Vaporizers for people with cancer and terminally ill patients for pain relief. 
If my mother or father were sick in hospital (terminal) and asked me to get them some "pot" to make their life easier, l would try my hardest to get some, that's for sure.


----------



## Mr J (25 October 2009)

Tink said:


> I am anti drugs, so you will always get a NO from me on these topics.




Do you feel this way about _all_ drugs, or only for those that are currently illegal? If you give the nod to alcohol, why not marijuana? If you allow some and not others, why take a firm stance on all illegal drugs? I don't think it's logical to do that and then place all illegal drugs in the same group.



professor_frink said:


> I like my green home grown and tax free thank you very much.




Depends how they do it. If they require producers to have licences (and I expect that they would), then your home-grown would still be illegal, and not taxed.



			
				Gone Fishin said:
			
		

> so I guess the stuff does not have any adverse effects




And nobody has ever done anything incredibly stupid while drunk?


----------



## Krusty the Klown (25 October 2009)

Mr J said:


> Do you feel this way about _all_ drugs, or only for those that are currently illegal? If you give the nod to alcohol, why not marijuana? If you allow some and not others, why take a firm stance on all illegal drugs? I don't think it's logical to do that and then place all illegal drugs in the same group.




I concur



> And nobody has ever done anything incredibly stupid while drunk?




Much more so and usually very violent, destructive and involving innocent people.

Any prohibitionists please name one incident where a person stoned on weed has harmed another person other than themselves.



professor_frink said:


> LOL
> 
> Following from Bill Hicks -




I concur wholeheartedly.

When you deliberate this subject with logic and facts already in the public domain and not emotion - logic wins.


----------



## Sugar Dunkaton (25 October 2009)

I don't think that legalizing it is the solution. I for one do not want to have substance that alters peoples perceptions materially legally available, think about people driving high - and other activities where other people are in harms way from some one who is so bent they cant see straight. Im not a drug taker myself, but from everything I understand, weed is just a gateway towards other drugs, so having pot legalized, is just going to improve the numbers of people who cross over to harder drugs - but i am fairly sure that most people will get there anyway.

As for alcohol, I don't think you can blame alcohol for the violence, i think the people are to blame. I drink, and I occasionally drink too much - but i have never been involved in a scuffle. And yes there are some long term down side risks of alcohol abuse, but much like everything - moderation is your friend.


----------



## explod (25 October 2009)

Once a person reaches the age consent, and as long as the action *in no way harms others,*  they ought to be able to do what they want, in toto.

The need for legislation on all matters would not be required, and some people would come to an early end which in the end cost us much less.


----------



## Mr J (25 October 2009)

Sugar Dunkaton said:


> I for one do not want to have substance that alters peoples perceptions materially legally available, think about people driving high - and other activities where other people are in harms way from some one who is so bent they cant see straight.




It would be treated no differently than drink driving. I imagine people who choose not to drink and drive would also choose not to drive while high.


> Im not a drug taker myself, but from everything I understand, weed is just a gateway towards other drugs, so having pot legalized, is just going to improve the numbers of people who cross over to harder drugs - but i am fairly sure that most people will get there anyway.




A typical argument used, and in my opinion it is baseless. Many who would use it already use it, and most do not take harder drugs. I think that many who would try it but currently don't (due to availability or being illegal) are types that wouldn't touch harder drugs anyway. Marijuana is more often than not just a social drug, like alcohol.




> As for alcohol, I don't think you can blame alcohol for the violence, i think the people are to blame. I drink, and I occasionally drink too much - but i have never been involved in a scuffle. And yes there are some long term down side risks of alcohol abuse, but much like everything - moderation is your friend.




So why the stance against marijuana? I'm also not sure why you talked of marijuana leading to drink driving and harder drugs, when here you say that it is the person that it to blame. You get drunk yourself, so you're obviously okay with alcohol, but why not marijuana? You support one which is no better than the other.


----------



## Cam (25 October 2009)

When people say "in no way harms others" they're always talking about direct, physical harm from engaging in the activity itself.  

I would agree that drinking alcohol, smoking cigarettes, smoking dope, shooting  up heroin and carrying a loaded gun with the safety off "in no way harms others", in a direct physical sense.

Driving drunk or stoned on any drug does harm people.  Carrying the gun, well, to my great regret.... we have decided against that because even respectable people have the odd brain snap.

But there is a cost to society when all these self determining mature adults (putting aside the side issue of our immature culture when it comes to alcohol and drugs) who are causing no direct harm to others start asking for medical treatment for the consequences of their decisions.  Those consequences range from broken limbs to cancer to depression or other mental illness and they're expensive to deal with.

Would I then agree to a total alcohol and cigarette ban?  Sure (I would sadly say goodbye to my Glen Morangie).  When people say that prohibition "doesn't work" they always seem to mean that it doesn't stamp out the problem completely, once and for all.  No solution to a complex social problem works on that definition of "work".  

But if I was a father, I would rather that my kids couldn't legally buy a drug which can touch off depression. The risk of someone "trying it" is way higher when the thing is legal.

If prohibition means that less people can get a substance that offers no benefit whatsoever (other than a holiday from reality) that's fine with me.

The cancer patients and (it seems) people with arthritis get hauled out in support by the "legalise it" group.  I'd legalise dope for the terminal cancer patients.  But you can't take a substance like THC and say that it helps my granddad with his cancer so your 19 year old son who's fit as a fiddle should be allowed to have it.  There's nothing wrong with a general rule that has carve outs to deal with specific situations.  We do that in legislation all the time.

To the "where do you draw the line" crowd, I really don't know.  Things which offer no benefit and which harm either individuals or society are already present in society.  I don't see that fact as an argument for saying "well lets add this non beneficial, harmful substance into the mix as well 'cause we already have alcohol and cigarettes".

I actually (and contrary to the tone of this post) hate our Nanny state.  If our resources were unlimited, I would take a slightly different view of things.  But since they're not, for me, its just a matter of sticking the benefit on one side of the scale and the bane on the other and seeing which way it falls.


----------



## nomore4s (25 October 2009)

wayneL said:


> Take it away from the crims.
> 
> Regulate it.
> 
> ...




I agree. Also how much money would it free up in our legal system.



Wysiwyg said:


> I`m with Tink. Seen sporting potential, education aspirations and careers destroyed by the toxic weed.




Seen that destroyed by alcohol as well, if they are willing to smoke dope or drink alcohol etc etc to excess they aren't that dedicated to their goals and probably wouldn't make it anyway.


----------



## DB008 (25 October 2009)

l'm sure that many of you have seen this, but l'll post the link anyways.

Stoned Firefighter. Very funny.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXo_Cya5x-Y

PS, how do you load Youtube Vids directs into your reply? 

Thanks in advance.


----------



## Sugar Dunkaton (25 October 2009)

There are a lot of people that think because you can never beat the problem, you should just change the law so it is not a problem.

Drink driving is already a problem, and the 5-0 (aka police) have enough trouble trying to keep this under control, now if you legalize Weed, they are going to have to start doing random stoner tests. You are going to have thousands of staff smoking weed at work instead of Ciggies. There is no need to have it legalized. Yes it might help some people, but the majority of people that want it legalized are not the ones that it will help.


----------



## DB008 (25 October 2009)

There is already random drug testing on the road.


----------



## Mr J (25 October 2009)

Ehem, the Netherlands. Not "legalised" in the same way as alcohol or tobacco, but it shows it can exist in the community.


----------



## robots (25 October 2009)

hello,

could someone please post the cheech and chong video

thankyou
Doctor Robots


----------



## theasxgorilla (25 October 2009)

Mr J said:


> Ehem, the Netherlands. Not "legalised" in the same way as alcohol or tobacco, but it shows it can exist in the community.




It shows it can exist in _a community_, specifically the Netherlands.  The next step in any research is to go to the Netherlands, live there, understand the culture and the people and then make an evaluation of how and why pot can exist in _their_ community.


----------



## Smurf1976 (25 October 2009)

explod said:


> Once a person reaches the age consent, and as long as the action *in no way harms others,*  they ought to be able to do what they want, in toto.



Fair enough as long as the "in no way harms others" bit is indeed true. 

I sure don't want to be sharing the roads or working in a hazardous environment with anyone under the influence of mind altering drugs of any type. At least tobacco doesn't have that problem.


----------



## Smurf1976 (25 October 2009)

DB008 said:


> There is already random drug testing on the road.



Indeed there is. But doing some quick maths I've been pulled over for a random breath test about once every 105,000 km since I started driving and that includes some very obvious ones such as the early hours of New Years Day. 

I'd rather not have people stoned given just how low the odds of being caught seem to be. Only once have I ever seen police testing drivers on a major road during commuting times, and that was in an afternoon immediately before Christmas.

If we're going to have even more people out of their minds then we need a much better way of keeping them off the roads. And also keeping them off public transport (think of everyone else...) and away from any situation (eg roadworks, construction sites) where they might wander in and create a danger to others.

What's so wrong with people that they feel a need to get stoned in the first place? Can't people cope with life these days?


----------



## Tink (25 October 2009)

Smurf1976 said:


> What's so wrong with people that they feel a need to get stoned in the first place? Can't people cope with life these days?




Perfect summary - for the people that cant cope in life. 

There are plenty of drugs already on the market for that. Why legalise this crapiola

I dont care what people do as long as they dont hurt people, but as stated, this can hurt other people. 




Mr J said:


> Do you feel this way about _all_ drugs, or only for those that are currently illegal? If you give the nod to alcohol, why not marijuana? If you allow some and not others, why take a firm stance on all illegal drugs? I don't think it's logical to do that and then place all illegal drugs in the same group.




I have already said that I am all for 'alcohol' going down the same road as cigarettes did, warnings and all so 'no nod' from me.


----------



## nomore4s (25 October 2009)

Smurf1976 said:


> What's so wrong with people that they feel a need to get stoned in the first place? Can't people cope with life these days?




What has getting stoned got to do with not being able to cope with life?

Does everyone who drinks alcohol have trouble coping with life?

Some people just enjoy it and use it sensibly. Lumping all dope smokers into one pile is pretty naive imo.


----------



## Fishbulb (25 October 2009)

You can't really regulate human behaviour anyway in this sense, so why bother? Drugs have been around since forever, ditto their use. Making it illegal to try stamping it out or stop its use is like trying to take the wetness out of water.


----------



## nomore4s (25 October 2009)

Tink said:


> Perfect summary - for the people that cant cope in life.
> 
> There are plenty of drugs already on the market for that. Why legalise this crapiola
> 
> I dont care what people do as long as they dont hurt people, but as stated, this can hurt other people.




The reality is usage is already very high, and alot of users are generally law abiding people who contribute to society in many positive ways.

There is always going to be a small element who abuse things and cause trouble for the rest of us. Legalising dope will make no difference to this element of society because they have no respect for society in general.


----------



## nunthewiser (25 October 2009)

Has no problems with peoples use of marijuana 

Alcohol is a different matter .......... some people should just not drink ! 

But because it is "legal" it gives a big green light for those that abuse themselves beyond control to continue doing so.


----------



## Gone Fishin (26 October 2009)

nomore4s said:


> What has getting stoned got to do with not being able to cope with life?
> 
> Does everyone who drinks alcohol have trouble coping with life?
> 
> Some people just enjoy it and use it sensibly. Lumping all dope smokers into one pile is pretty naive imo.




So where this thread is leading is...


People get doped to the eyeballs and can drive.

People get pissed and caught and lose their licence.


----------



## nunthewiser (26 October 2009)

Gone Fishin said:


> So where this thread is leading is...
> 
> 
> People get doped to the eyeballs and can drive.
> ...





nope 

drivers up here get swabbed drug tested on a regular basis ..... lol even taxi drivers .....


----------



## wayneL (26 October 2009)

Gone Fishin said:


> So where this thread is leading is...
> 
> 
> People get doped to the eyeballs and can drive.
> ...




Apologies if I've picked up the wrong end of the stick, but there seems to be an assumption that legalising some drugs will cause there to suddenly be drivers under the influence.

News Flash!! They are already out there.

My observation:

I see a car going slower than the speed limit, the driver driving timidly, concentrating intently... probably a bit paranoid about being noticed. I think to myself "that guy is stoned".

I see a car going much faster than the speed limit, 150 dbs of some rapper blaring out the window, driver overconfident and aggressive... probably not really concentrating. I think to myself "that guy is pissed".

Both are more dangerous than.... well reserving my judgement on "normal" drivers.... but I would prefer to share the road with someone stoned than pissed.


----------



## theasxgorilla (26 October 2009)

nunthewiser said:


> nope
> 
> drivers up here get swabbed drug tested on a regular basis ..... lol even taxi drivers .....




Nun, there is currently no evidence to suggest that not capitalising the first letter of a sentence helps save the environment... so please, please, please make an effort.

Thanks.


----------



## Tink (26 October 2009)

wayneL said:


> *Both are more dangerous than*.... well reserving my judgement on "normal" drivers




So why legalise something just as dangerous as alcohol, whether its fast or slow, they are still dangering other peoples lives.

Thats the bottom line.

Poor kids, if the parents arent pissed as parrots, they are as stoned as stunned mullets.

Nah keep it illegal so they have to pay top dollar for it - buggar em and the ones supplying it can cop it just as sweet when they get caught.


----------



## wayneL (26 October 2009)

Tink said:


> So why legalise something just as dangerous as alcohol, whether its fast or slow, they are still dangering other peoples lives.
> 
> Thats the bottom line.
> 
> ...




You missed my point.

The point is that I reckon it is less dangerous than alcohol... and they're already there anyway. 

Harry Chapin was singing about it 30 years ago.

It should be against the law to drive stoned, just like driving pissed, but that is a separate issue to the legality of cannabis generally.

There is no scientific reason to keep it illegal when compared to alcohol.


----------



## moXJO (26 October 2009)

Nooo way... 

I grew up in a suburb where every second house was a pot dealer. Teenage years, all my friends from that area were stoners. At first use it seems fine but most of those friends ended up schizophrenic or committed suicide. In fact suicide rate seems very high. One mate (who was a heavy user) stabbed, then tried to burn down his next door neighbor’s house. He was later diagnosed with schizophrenia and locked in a mental ward for a few months. Then let back out and he tried to kill a cop went back in then let back out a few months later again. I've seen people that seemed really positive end up necking themselves, and a lot of wasted talent. Note: the majority did not drink alcohol either and were purely stoners
 I'm not sure if it was the transition to hydro during the late 80's to early 90's. Back then people didn’t flush the plants with water for 2 weeks, so all those chemicals were still in the buds. Could have also been the high levels of THC associated with skunk or northern lights .

The happy stoner hippy is also a BS myth. The old stoners are more likely to have an extremely short temper, and in my experience get physical when they fly off in a rage. 
Our mental health over here is atrocious, and the cost would blow out if pot were legally availably. A lot of it gets swept under the carpet.
Anyone who thinks pot is not as bad as alcohol is fooling themselves. It causes a lot of problems, both personal and social.
Why add another problem? Pot use has been slowly tapering off for years.  And the current generation views it as the loser’s drug. E is the drug of choice now.

It's already legal to a degree anyway for personal use. If you get caught its (was) a $30 fine for a small amount.


----------



## GumbyLearner (26 October 2009)




----------



## wayneL (26 October 2009)

moXJO said:


> Nooo way...
> 
> I grew up in a suburb where every second house was a pot dealer. Teenage years, all my friends from that area were stoners. At first use it seems fine but most of those friends ended up schizophrenic or committed suicide. In fact suicide rate seems very high. One mate (who was a heavy user) stabbed, then tried to burn down his next door neighbor’s house. He was later diagnosed with schizophrenia and locked in a mental ward for a few months. Then let back out and he tried to kill a cop went back in then let back out a few months later again. I've seen people that seemed really positive end up necking themselves, and a lot of wasted talent. Note: the majority did not drink alcohol either and were purely stoners
> I'm not sure if it was the transition to hydro during the late 80's to early 90's. Back then people didn’t flush the plants with water for 2 weeks, so all those chemicals were still in the buds. Could have also been the high levels of THC associated with skunk or northern lights .
> ...




Mo

I could equally mount a similar case against sugar, or red cordial, or alcohol, or McDonald's hamburgers.

Like anything, overuse is a problem, but moderate use isn't.


----------



## Tink (26 October 2009)

Excellent post moXJO

So much for Australia being the 'lucky country' with these people needing these uppers..sheesh

Very sad actually...


----------



## Fishbulb (26 October 2009)

moXJO said:


> Nooo way...
> 
> I grew up in a suburb where every second house was a pot dealer. Teenage years, all my friends from that area were stoners. At first use it seems fine but most of those friends ended up schizophrenic or committed suicide. In fact suicide rate seems very high. One mate (who was a heavy user) stabbed, then tried to burn down his next door neighbor’s house. He was later diagnosed with schizophrenia and locked in a mental ward for a few months. Then let back out and he tried to kill a cop went back in then let back out a few months later again. I've seen people that seemed really positive end up necking themselves, and a lot of wasted talent. Note: the majority did not drink alcohol either and were purely stoners
> I'm not sure if it was the transition to hydro during the late 80's to early 90's. Back then people didn’t flush the plants with water for 2 weeks, so all those chemicals were still in the buds. Could have also been the high levels of THC associated with skunk or northern lights .
> ...




Hey I don't smoke weed and I haven't smoked anything whatsoever for going on thirty years so I don't have an agenda here. I couldn't care less if it was legalised or not. But what you've written here is overstatement and emotion. 

It's a known "scientific fact" - note the word scientific, that schizophrenia in pot users triggers a susceptibility to the disease, and does not cause it. Also, the undeveloped brain is at risk and not a mature brain. Under eighteens shouldn't be drinking or smoking weed anyway. But they do, and would continue to do so whether legal or not.

Alcohol is by far the more physically damaging substance in any way one would look at it; no question. Get some facts.  

Old stoners flying off the handle? Maybe in Reservoir or Broady


----------



## moXJO (26 October 2009)

wayneL said:


> Mo
> 
> I could equally mount a similar case against sugar, or red cordial, or alcohol, or McDonald's hamburgers.
> 
> Like anything, overuse is a problem, but moderate use isn't.




And I argue all of the above will be overused when Australia gets the munchies from legalized marijuana 

Moderate use and marijuana do not go hand in hand. You need more and more each time to get the high. Why legalize and bring back a problem that is on the way out with this generation. The other thing is that kids in high school are more inclined to use it. So there is still a shortfall in what to do there.
Opening up the minefield of further health and mental associated problems that come with legalizing pot is worse then a few stoners copping a fine.

There was a law that allowed so many plants per backyard a while back. That ended when hydro came in (I think, been a while). All they need to do is decriminalize 5 or so plants (not hydro) per backyard for personal use. How about a growers permit to raise taxes. That way the stoners can keep getting stoned without too many taking it up on the national level. Also combats the illicit drug trade if they don't have to go to the local dealer themselves. I'm sure it will still be abused in some way though.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200504/s1340350.htm



> Australians' drug use in decline
> A national survey of drug use has found most drug usage is declining.
> 
> The strongest falls reported in the National Drug Strategy Household Survey are in the number of people smoking tobacco and marijuana.
> ...


----------



## moXJO (26 October 2009)

Fishbulb said:


> Hey I don't smoke weed and I haven't smoked anything whatsoever for going on thirty years so I don't have an agenda here. I couldn't care less if it was legalised or not. But what you've written here is overstatement and emotion.
> 
> It's a known "scientific fact" - note the word scientific, that schizophrenia in pot users triggers a susceptibility to the disease, and does not cause it. Also, the undeveloped brain is at risk and not a mature brain. Under eighteens shouldn't be drinking or smoking weed anyway. But they do, and would continue to do so whether legal or not.
> 
> ...




Are you friken kidding me: do a bloody google search, there is too many health problems to list.


----------



## wayneL (26 October 2009)

moXJO said:


> Moderate use and marijuana do not go hand in hand. You need more and more each time to get the high.




Same with booze.

Apart from that... nonsense.

BTW, I'm not a user, but used a few times when I was young.

I have friends who still use ( for at least 35 years). No problem that I can see that aren't worse with booze anyway.


----------



## Fishbulb (26 October 2009)

moXJO said:


> Are you friken kidding me: do a bloody google search, there is too many health problems to list.




Google? That's your rebuttal? Are you freakin' kiddin' me? 

I speak from personal and first hand experience, and from information gathered from the pages of - wait for it! ......................... books.


----------



## Wysiwyg (26 October 2009)

moXJO said:


> Nooo way...
> 
> Why add another problem?




Exactly! and thanks for sharing a real life "experience".


----------



## moXJO (26 October 2009)

wayneL said:


> Same with booze.
> 
> Apart from that... nonsense.
> 
> ...




So let’s turn a minor problem (in comparison to alcohol and cigarettes) and turn pot national and on par then?

Your right booze is a lot worse and it’s legal.
 Cigarettes are a lot worse and they are legal.
Now let’s throw pot in the mix on top of that? Even though use was on the decline. Let’s legalize it and turn it into a bigger problem (just like alcohol and cigarettes) by making it socially acceptable and available on a mass scale.
 I do not see the need to legalize it. Australia is not one for using substances in moderation


----------



## wayneL (26 October 2009)

moXJO said:


> So let’s turn a minor problem (in comparison to alcohol and cigarettes) and turn pot national and on par then?
> 
> Your right booze is a lot worse and it’s legal.
> Cigarettes are a lot worse and they are legal.
> ...




It is already socially acceptable and available on a mass scale.


----------



## nunthewiser (26 October 2009)

moXJO said:


> . Australia is not one for using substances in moderation





Speak for yourself , Not for me .


----------



## moXJO (26 October 2009)

wayneL said:


> It is already socially acceptable and available on a mass scale.




How many people do you know that currently abuse alcohol and cigarettes I bet lots and lots? Even though we know it's really bad for us and bad socially. Teenagers abuse it, and then when they step out of school there it is legally to abuse. And because it’s legal its everywhere

Young also abuse the weed through school. But pot users seem to taper out in their late 20's for various reasons. Maybe one of the reasons is that it is a pain in the **** to get, and the stigma of being a 30yo pot smoker. I also  question any benefits of making it legal.
Decriminalize it to a certain degree, so that current users can grow their own and don't have to go to dealers. Heavier fines for hydro. I don't think we need to make any drastic changes though. 
Most dealers sell to the kids (or are kids) so legalizing it is still missing out on the supposed benefits of taking dealers out of the equation.


----------



## wayneL (26 October 2009)

Mo et al

There is a bit of an unbridgeable gap between the two views. I can't see the politicians changing the status quo that much, so the point is probably moot anyway.

But a fair exchange of views to mull over.

Cheers


----------



## Happy (26 October 2009)

moXJO said:


> Nooo way...
> 
> .... At first use it seems fine but most of those friends ended up schizophrenic or committed suicide. In fact *suicide* rate seems very high. One mate (who was a heavy user) stabbed, then tried to burn down his next door neighbor’s house. He was later diagnosed with *schizophrenia *and locked in a mental ward for a few months. Then let back out and he *tried to kill *a cop went back in then let back out a few months later again. I've seen people that seemed really positive end up necking themselves, and a lot of wasted talent. Note: the majority did not drink alcohol either and were purely stoners
> ...
> ...





This is not happy drug, after high there is low and lows get deeper.
Mental people should be locked up, why should I be in danger of some psycho-pot.
If alcoholics could be locked up the better.

Central Australia looks like nice place, lock them up there givem what they want and lets go with preparations for mass immigrations should water move up another foot or two.


----------



## awg (26 October 2009)

I have mixed views on MJ legalisation

One thing I am unequivocal about is that Hemp should be more widely utilised

It has so many uses for fibre, fuel, oil, protein, is a weed suppressant, soil conditioner etc etc.

I think the concerns over its drug use has discouraged this most versatile plants useage and development for other purposes.

(I realise the drug cultivars are not identical to the industrial cultivars.)

There has recently been de-facto legalisation in California, for so-called "medicinal" uses


----------



## Kremmen (26 October 2009)

Socially, economically, logically it should be legal.

It is more useful and far less dangerous than drugs that are legal, alcohol and tobacco. Its prohibition is huge a waste of money and legalising it would generate decent tax revenue. Legalised, it would direct money to the government, instead of to criminals. Crims would get poorer, while everyone else would pay less tax or get better government services. There have been plenty of analyses of these issues, especially the economic aspects.

There has been some worthwhile study of those who have had serious mental problems after using marijuana, which has shown that such people have a deficiency in certain brain chemical control. So, yes, some individuals shouldn't consume marijuana, and this can be medically tested. Just because some people can't cope with something is no reason to prevent the rest of us.

The only people who have any reason to support illegality of pot are those who don't believe in personal freedom. The same kind of people who believe in legislating what we are allowed to do in the bedroom. Unfortunately, that includes most politicians, because they are intrinsically authoritarian and frequently trying to exert control over us (e.g. the plan to censor the internet) instead of enabling individuals to live a happy, fulfilled, life and make their own decisions.


----------



## derty (26 October 2009)

wayneL said:


> I can't see the politicians changing the status quo that much, so the point is probably moot anyway.



Spot on wayne - to legalise dope in this day and age would be political suicide. It's just not going to happen.

Before it would even be considered you would need a very cheap way of testing drivers. There are saliva tests, though these probably no way cheap enough yet for common widespread use. This coupled with the fact that you will test positive for a significant time following the cessation of any physical effects. 

As for the effects on society and the individual, like with any drug, legal or otherwise, the level of use and general effect of daily life is a wide spectrum. 

I was a heavy dope smoker during my mid to late teens and while it was fun it didn't really do me any favours. Motivation was reduced, certainly my ability to perform more complicated mathematical problems was compromised while stoned (which effected my homework) and I generally wasted a lot of time being a stoner. I grew bored of smoking and my use declined. Went to uni and blitzed it and now live a highly productive professional life. I very occasionally and very socially have a toot these days.   

Though many stories are not as bright, quite a few friends remained heavy to moderate users. Most of them are employed full time, none of them really hit their full potential IMHO. One person I know had a psychotic episode and never used again and has not had a relapse since. Others have been treated for depression though the frequency of depression in society makes it hard to link this to dope use. 

At the end of the day I don't think legalising it will provide any benefits to society above the current status. It may provide some revenue for the govt and would remove the requirement to get the drug from dealers and reduce the exposure of users to heavier drugs. Decriminalisation of use is a much better solution.

If you asked any policeman which drug they would prefer removed form society, alcohol or marijuana. You wouldn't find one who would chose dope. 

And finally, here is a little clip to reinforce the fears of those that seem to think that there is a dope crazed psycho lurking behind every corner..


----------



## moXJO (26 October 2009)

Kremmen said:


> The only people who have any reason to support illegality of pot are those who don't believe in personal freedom. The same kind of people who believe in legislating what we are allowed to do in the bedroom. Unfortunately, that includes most politicians, because they are intrinsically authoritarian and frequently trying to exert control over us (e.g. the plan to censor the internet) instead of enabling individuals to live a happy, fulfilled, life and make their own decisions.




Hey moonbeam
 you been on the high thc stuff? I've got an article for you



> Such research is in the very early stages, but it does back up clinical evidence that marijuana can cause *paranoia* and schizophrenic-like symptoms in some people..




http://mentalhealth.about.com/od/chemicaldependency/a/thcyale604.htm

PS: the toaster is bugging your thoughts





PPS: I'm just taking the piss


----------



## Wysiwyg (26 October 2009)

Kremmen said:


> Socially, economically, logically it should be legal.




You want to make this mind altering drug easily available to the young, impressionable and highly susceptible minds of our society but have no idea, repeat no idea, of the harm it can do to a persons` brain. 



> It is more useful and far less dangerous than drugs that are legal, alcohol and tobacco. Its prohibition is huge a waste of money and *legalising it* *would generate decent tax revenue*. *Legalised, it would direct* *money to the government, instead of to criminals*. Crims would get poorer, while everyone else would pay less tax or get better government services.




The highlighted says it all. You couldn`t give a stuff about the innocent young lives that are wrecked by trying and becoming addicted / habitual users. 

Minority thinker thankfully.


----------



## nomore4s (26 October 2009)

> You want to make this mind altering drug easily available to the young, impressionable and highly susceptible minds of our society but have no idea, repeat no idea, of the harm it can do to a persons` brain.




Am I missing something here? But isn't it already freely available to the young?

I'm pretty sure nearly any high school student would know how to get hold of some.


----------



## nunthewiser (26 October 2009)

nomore4s said:


> Am I missing something here? But isn't it already freely available to the young?
> 
> I'm pretty sure nearly any high school student would know how to get hold of some.




In fact one could almost claim that it is easier for the high school student to get a bag of dope than it would be to get someone to go to the bottleshop for them.


----------



## pointr (26 October 2009)

Read an excellent article many years ago in the Australian Medical journal by a Canadian doctor who had done much research. More carcinogenic than tobacco, associated with mental issues ie 'amotivational syndrome', schizophrenia, physical brain changes-ventricle size increased with chronic users ie because the brain tissue had shrunk, associated with feminizing characterisitcs in men-decreased red blood count and testicle size. We need to tighten up on our current 'legal' drug use not add to the problem


----------



## Wysiwyg (26 October 2009)

nomore4s said:


> Am I missing something here? But isn't it already freely available to the young?
> 
> I'm pretty sure nearly any high school student would know how to get hold of some.



That is a broad assertion and I don`t know all the high school students to prove it wrong. Certainly when I was at school it was unheard of but that was in the 80`s.


----------



## nunthewiser (26 October 2009)

Wysiwyg said:


> That is a broad assertion and I don`t know all the high school students to prove it wrong. Certainly when I was at school it was unheard of but that was in the 80`s.





I was in school in the early 80,s also , Dope was easier to get than alcohol.

It was a public school.


----------



## derty (26 October 2009)

nunthewiser said:


> I was in school in the early 80,s also , Dope was easier to get than alcohol.
> 
> It was a public school.



I'll second that.

Out of curiosity, Wysiwyg, moXJO, Tink and Happy. Have you ever smoked dope or spent any time within the drug culture?


----------



## Junior (26 October 2009)

I went to private school in the 90s and weed was def very easy to get ahold of.  Easier than alcohol.


----------



## Gone Fishin (26 October 2009)

Yes I went to school in the 80's some interprising students use to grow the stuff in the surrounding bush lol


----------



## Wysiwyg (26 October 2009)

derty said:


> I'll second that.
> 
> Out of curiosity, Wysiwyg, moXJO, Tink and Happy. Have you ever smoked dope or spent any time within the drug culture?



I knew people that did and they were lazy, no-hoper-doper dole bludgers with an addiction to cigarettes too. I remember they were a placid bunch with low to negligible consciousness and a healthy appetite when drugged.


----------



## awg (26 October 2009)

Wysiwyg said:


> Certainly when I was at school it was unheard of but that was in the 80`s.




Did you leave in Primary School?


When i was young, I thought it should be legalised.

However, I have personally witnessed a guy in his 30s( now deceased) develop Schizophrenia, seemingly as a result of heavy Pot use.

He had no indication of mental illness prior to commencing heavy use, following a relationship breakdown.

Seen a few other bad things too.

Causes Emphysimia, Bronchitis and Lung Cancer.

Also cause severe anorexia of the wallet

Read an interesting book once, about why humans have gone to such lengths to discover various hallucinogenic substances, despite the fact they are obscure, foul tasting, and even dangerous.

The conclusion was that people fundamentally want to experience "altered states of conciousness"

Having said that, I am also oppossed to an over-zealous legal response

Just call me a fence sitter


----------



## nunthewiser (26 October 2009)

Has removed last post as being an illegal substance marijuana is not something i am comfortable stating experiences in regards to it.

However from what i heard down the pub once was that dope smoking is not confined to the no-hopers and lazy ... quite a few "profesionals" and other higher career types have been known to partake in the odd toke from time to time.


----------



## DB008 (26 October 2009)

One of my mates uses this. No smoke, so there goes the lung cancer argument. Vaporizer, way to go if your going to do it, IMO. I don't smoke of do drugs btw.


https://www.thevolcanovaporizer.com/

http://www.storzbickel.com/vaporizer/volcano-vaporization-system.html


----------



## theasxgorilla (26 October 2009)

moXJO said:


> Nooo way...
> 
> I grew up in a suburb where every second house was a pot dealer. Teenage years, all my friends from that area were stoners. At first use it seems fine but most of those friends ended up schizophrenic or committed suicide. In fact suicide rate seems very high. One mate (who was a heavy user) stabbed, then tried to burn down his next door neighbor’s house. He was later diagnosed with schizophrenia and locked in a mental ward for a few months. Then let back out and he tried to kill a cop went back in then let back out a few months later again. I've seen people that seemed really positive end up necking themselves, and a lot of wasted talent. Note: the majority did not drink alcohol either and were purely stoners
> I'm not sure if it was the transition to hydro during the late 80's to early 90's. Back then people didn’t flush the plants with water for 2 weeks, so all those chemicals were still in the buds. Could have also been the high levels of THC associated with skunk or northern lights .
> ...




I also grew up out in the outer eastern suburbs of Melbourne, where I can state that my experience was the demand frequently outstripped supply.

I agree with everything you've written.  I can think of four school friends right this second who became victims of marijuana induced psychosis.  I also believe what you believe about the kind of weed that causes this problem.

When people talk about moderate, it refers to so many different things.  Moderate in frequency of use, moderate in the amount you smoke when you do smoke, and moderate in the strength of the dope you smoke.  The same discussion can be had about anything, as Wayne has mentioned... McDonalds, alcohol, candy.

I believe the psychiatric ward at Maroondah Hospital in Ringwood was created to cope with the rise in drug induced psychosis out where I grew up.  This was mostly due to speed and weed. I know too many people who went there.

I also believe that the amount of drug consumption increased in this area in response to the increase in the number of factories and factory workers out there. I think the people working in these jobs were often understimulated, underchallenged, with few future prospects.  And the jobs themselves were so monkey-see-monkey-do with little variation that once they'd learned what to do they could cut their mental capacities in half and still perform adequately.

People talk about "coping" like you are weak if you take drugs, but I wouldn't overlook boredom as a backdrop to a lot of this. I know a lot of us probably have some fond memories of growing up in suburbia when it was the middle-Australian utopia, but some of us also couldn't escape it fast enough.

The key issue raised by the OP is that of making a criminal out of someone who practices responsible, medical use.  I'm not sure Australian society could cope with legalised weed.  But the medical use case might require an exception to that rule.  

I for one hate being made a criminal when I partake of something I consider to be completely innocent... which it is in Holland where I live   But I don't have a medical reason anyhow...  I just enjoy the mind-altered state while I go on a Youtube run with some friends.


----------



## theasxgorilla (26 October 2009)

nunthewiser said:


> Has removed last post as being an illegal substance marijuana is not something *i* am comfortable stating experiences in regards to it.
> 
> However from what *i* heard down the pub once was that dope smoking is not confined to the no-hopers and lazy ... quite a few "profesionals" and other higher career types have been known to partake in the odd toke from time to time.




Hello again Nun,

Today's lesson, _I_ shall be capitalised when used in the form of the perpendicular pronoun.

Carry on.

ASX.G


----------



## nunthewiser (26 October 2009)

theasxgorilla said:


> Hello again Nun,
> 
> Today's lesson, _I_ shall be capitalised when used in the form of the perpendicular pronoun.
> 
> ...




Does "jamsandinyaclacker" need a fullstop or a capital J ?

I am trying.

Punctuation and capital letter use maybe a natural thing for you , but for me it is not . I have to work at it.

My spelling and english use in the written context has improved 10 fold since first appearing here at ASF.

I am trying.


----------



## outback (26 October 2009)

theasxgorilla said:


> Hello again Nun,
> 
> Today's lesson, _I_ shall be capitalised when used in the form of the perpendicular pronoun.
> 
> ...




I thought they did away with executions years ago.


----------



## prawn_86 (26 October 2009)

nunthewiser said:


> My spelling and english use in the written context has improved 10 fold since first appearing here at ASF.




Totally agree 

On the dope topic, i dont have much to add, aside from what has already been said. The one thing that concerns me about weed though, is its not possibly to regulate the amount of THC that a user gets, from each 'dose'. That is to say, some plants will be higher (or lower) ever parts of plants will be different. Unlike a pill where you can Xmg of active substance, that is near impossible to measure when it comes to weed.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (26 October 2009)

Perhaps this poor little macaque could find a home in basket weaving territory, Balmain , or some other part of Sydney.

He may end up being a "Senior NSW Politician"



> Dope Smoking Monkey Needs New Home
> 
> A dope-smoking monkey that was once at the centre of a drugs raid is in need of a new home.
> 
> The rare Rhesus Macaque primate, whose pet name is Nobby, was caught up a police swoop.




gg


----------



## Julia (26 October 2009)

nunthewiser said:


> However from what i heard down the pub once was that dope smoking is not confined to the no-hopers and lazy ... quite a few "profesionals" and other higher career types have been known to partake in the odd toke from time to time.



It would be quite wrong to assume that because 'professionals' use drugs that makes it OK and/or said professionals are immune from developing problems from such drug use.



nunthewiser said:


> Punctuation and capital letter use maybe a natural thing for you , but for me it is not . I have to work at it.
> 
> My spelling and english use in the written context has improved 10 fold since first appearing here at ASF.
> 
> I am trying.



Nun, you can write excellent English with perfect punctuation and grammar when you feel like it.  viz your recent posts describing your taxi experiences.


----------



## Tink (27 October 2009)

derty said:


> Out of curiosity, Wysiwyg, moXJO, Tink and Happy. Have you ever smoked dope or spent any time within the drug culture?




No, never been interested in drugs.

Of course I have met people that do or have - we all have stories to tell about people involved with it all, mostly bad.

One lady I knew that was so bubbly and full of life, completely changed after getting involved with marijuana, to a recluse. So much for an upper 



theasxgorilla said:


> I believe the psychiatric ward at Maroondah Hospital in Ringwood was created to cope with the rise in drug induced psychosis out where I grew up.  This was mostly due to speed and weed. I know too many people who went there.




Interesting you should mention that hospital. Not sure how long since you left Melbourne, but I got told that the Psychiatric Ward has tripled in size to cater for the growing demand.

I agree that I dont think Australia's culture would cope with legalising drugs.


----------



## Krusty the Klown (28 October 2009)

prawn_86 said:


> The one thing that concerns me about weed though, is its not possibly to regulate the amount of THC that a user gets, from each 'dose'. That is to say, some plants will be higher (or lower) ever parts of plants will be different. Unlike a pill where you can Xmg of active substance, that is near impossible to measure when it comes to weed.




In fact, Prawn, it is possible to do exactly just that. Its done with tobacco. It's also done with the medical marijuana (smokable) in California.

FACT: Its also done right here in Australia. Not many people know it, but the evil weed marijuana is available on prescription here in Australia, along with cocaine. 

The form of marijuana here is in the form of a liquid that is sprayed under the tongue in a measured dose.

Cocaine is used as a topical anaesthetic by doctors and dentists.

Both are available from your local pharmacist.


----------



## overit (28 October 2009)

Plenty of free online documentries on this subject. Good place to start is Documentary List.

Good doco to start - The Union: The Business Behind Getting High.

Its also quite a useful plant. Magic Weed - History Of Marijuana


----------



## Gamblor (28 October 2009)

Wysiwyg said:


> I`m with Tink. Seen sporting potential, education aspirations and careers destroyed by the toxic weed.




I've seen the same happen with alcohol


----------



## Gamblor (28 October 2009)

wayneL said:


> There is no scientific reason to keep it illegal when compared to alcohol.




There seems to be a small portion of the community that develop some form of psychosis or full blown schizophrenia after smoking marijuana. It appears to be a genetic link so it's hard to say they wouldn't go on to develop these problems anyway.

Obviously there are big question marks over this and it needs to be researched further. 

I still want to see it legalised - alcohol causes many more social problems and makes the illegality of dope seem silly.


----------



## Julia (28 October 2009)

Gamblor said:


> I still want to see it legalised



Hope you don't hold your breath waiting for it to happen.
It would be political suicide.


----------



## Krusty the Klown (28 October 2009)

Julia said:


> Hope you don't hold your breath waiting for it to happen.
> It would be political suicide.




Yes, that's the hypocrisy of the whole subject, allow the greater of two evils, weed and alcohol, to be legal.

Ignore the logic and facts and vote with emotion.

It's emotions that win elections not facts, time and time again.


----------



## Wysiwyg (28 October 2009)

Julia said:


> Hope you don't hold your breath waiting for it to happen.
> It would be political suicide.



Julia, if a human being has the birth right to do whatever they wish to themselves then why can`t they take dope? There must be a reason why society has agreed that this particular plant must not be taken freely by whoever wishes so. We have touched on the side effects such as psychological damage and lung disease but what is the one real reason? I can`t think of one apart from the harm it would cause youths trying and habituating. Socially disruptive maybe.


----------



## Gamblor (28 October 2009)

Julia said:


> Hope you don't hold your breath waiting for it to happen.
> It would be political suicide.




It won't happen for ages, 20 years or more - A generation of voters need to kick the bucket first. 

Personally it doesn't bother me much - never liked it and it's not like it's hard to get if I ever needed it for a medical reason. It's more the hypocrisy of those who denounce marijuana then go home and knock off a bottle of red that gets on my nerves.


----------



## Julia (28 October 2009)

Wysiwyg said:


> Julia, if a human being has the birth right to do whatever they wish to themselves then why can`t they take dope? There must be a reason why society has agreed that this particular plant must not be taken freely by whoever wishes so. We have touched on the side effects such as psychological damage and lung disease but what is the one real reason? I can`t think of one apart from the harm it would cause youths trying and habituating. Socially disruptive maybe.



I wasn't expressing my opinion about the desirability of the drug or otherwise.
Have only tried it once and was totally unimpressed.

All I was saying is that the political reality is that far more of the electorate would be against ever legalising marijuana than would be for it.  Therefore, it simply won't happen.

Just consider voluntary euthanasia as a comparison.  Over 80% of the population want this to be legislated, but both colours of government refuse to even seriously discuss it because the 'anti' lobby is so vocal and powerful.

I don't know what the figures would be, but I'd very much doubt even 50% of the population would be in favour of adding another psychoactive drug to the already considerable mess made by alcohol and nicotine.


----------



## noirua (29 October 2009)

Should Marijuana be legalised for use by certain people, such as those suffering from multiple sclerosis and cancer?  Video - http://bookman.gala.com/blog/2008/4/medical_marijuana_alternative_a_cure_for_a_multitude_of_illness

http://www.drug-rehab.com/medical-marijuana.html

**Apologies, struggling on these links. Will correct later.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (29 October 2009)

OK.

We have had comments from Stoners, Moaners and Groaners.

Its all going roundabout.

Weed is agrowing, as we speak. 

The country wakes up, grabs their wheeties and bong, to enter the world of industry, agriculture, business, education, health and politics.

It is time for a vote.

I'm unsure how to organise a vote on an existing thread.

Any mods to help.

"Should marijuana be legalised?"

 Yes

 No


gg


----------



## Jackman (29 October 2009)

As it’s been a decade or two since I have par-taken in the communal bong.

Should it be legalised! On my personal experience yes, as I had no serious side affects or long term health issues besides only having the retention span of a flea.

Jack


----------



## erasmus (29 October 2009)

Would love to answer this ,but i have forgotten what the question was.
oh yeah,legalising marijuana,what can i say?
umm ?
Hell ,i am feeling pretty foggy this morning, need some motivation,...........
cough cough, that's better,now, where were we?
What was the question again?
Oh yeah ,legalize marijuana.
Damn right we should!
We should not have to put up with the backward hypocritical stance our government takes,too this most important of issues and as soon as i get motivated again i am going to let you all know what i really think about......
What was the question again?
Wish my lungs and throat didn't feel like sandpaper and the wheezing would go away,bloody pollution from city living.
Anyway, everybody have a great day,i'm starting to feel a bit run down this morning, i'm going back to bed.


----------



## nomore4s (29 October 2009)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Any mods to help.
> 
> "Should marijuana be legalised?"
> 
> ...




Poll added


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (29 October 2009)

So far it is 10 for and 7 against.

So thats it.

ASF members feel it should be legalised.

a resounding majority.

gg


----------



## Macquack (29 October 2009)

explod said:


> Once a person reaches the age consent, and as long as the action *in no way harms others,*  they ought to be able to do what they want, in toto.




I agree with explod.

Cut some slack to the poor pot smokers and legalise the stuff.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (29 October 2009)

Macquack said:


> I agree with explod.
> 
> Cut some slack to the poor pot smokers and legalise the stuff.




Its 13 for and 8 against.

This is exciting.

Lets see how it pans out.

gg


----------



## nunthewiser (29 October 2009)

Before i vote, one question needs to be answered.

Will it cost more or less through legalisation and will will one be able to score evil high content THC weeds . ?


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (29 October 2009)

nunthewiser said:


> Before i vote, one question needs to be answered.
> 
> Will it cost more or less through legalisation and will will one be able to score evil high content THC weeds . ?




Mate just bloody well vote. We can argue about the rest later. Or if you don't want to vote, give someone else yours to vote.

Otherwise Joe will send you an infraction for not voting.

gg


----------



## overit (29 October 2009)

Hello whats going on here? Someone forgot to follow the script.



> *Alcohol and tobacco more harmful than ecstasy and cannabis, says chief Government adviser*
> 
> Published: 7:00AM GMT 29 Oct 2009
> 
> ...


----------



## Wysiwyg (29 October 2009)

overit said:


> Hello whats going on here? Someone forgot to follow the script.



That Professor is a Nutt.


----------



## wayneL (29 October 2009)

Wysiwyg said:


> That Professor is a Nutt.




They ran a program on TV that outlined that research. It was very compelling. Not nutty at all.

The professor is right. The whole debate is emotive and politicized and logic has gone out the window.


----------



## nunthewiser (30 October 2009)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Mate just bloody well vote. We can argue about the rest later. Or if you don't want to vote, give someone else yours to vote.
> 
> Otherwise Joe will send you an infraction for not voting.
> 
> gg





I,m afraid i cannot vote until i know all the facts! So much pressure! What happens if i vote and i make the difference between legalisation and non legalisation? .... I would be devastated to learn I alone had altered the course of history without knowing the full story........

I,m sure Joe would agree on my stance and actually remove all my infractions i have because i have proven myself to be a most responsible adult in this matter. 

yours sincerely. 

A Dazed and confused Nun.


----------



## BradK (30 October 2009)

WARNING: This is a purely, non-scientific subjective post from painful experience that will p!ss off the nutty wacky tabacky apologists. 

Brother is a long term user. I do not necessarily believe it leads to harder stuff, but I have seen his personality and mood turn on a dime, and also over long term. I also have some old school friends who are long time users. Same story. 

I know its anecdotal, but long term daily or weekly use (Im talking over 10 years here) is utterly destructive. And the ONLY PEOPLE WHO DISAGREE WITH THAT ARE THE USERS!!! And they dont count - because they are ADDICTS. 

Like any addicts, they wrought destruction on the family - I have seen my mother dumbfounded at my brothers actions, demands for money, etc. with little knowledge that he is a user. It might not be physically addictive as someone says above, but I think it severly diminishes mental health and wellbeing. 

Noone will ever convince me that it should be legalised. Jail growers and pushers with LOOOOONNNGGGG sentences. 

Can't believe so many ASFers have voted yes! Unbelievable. 

Brad


----------



## BradK (30 October 2009)

Wysiwyg said:


> I`m with Tink. Seen sporting potential, education aspirations and careers destroyed by the toxic weed.




Spot on - the draining of motivation, aspirations and careers is proof of the pudding.


----------



## BradK (30 October 2009)

nomore4s said:


> Am I missing something here? But isn't it already freely available to the young?
> 
> I'm pretty sure nearly any high school student would know how to get hold of some.




But the overwhelming majority would not access it. Just because they might know how to get it, I think the criminality of it all is the key deterrent.


----------



## BradK (30 October 2009)

moXJO said:


> Nooo way...
> 
> I grew up in a suburb where every second house was a pot dealer. Teenage years, all my friends from that area were stoners. *At first use it seems fine but most of those friends ended up schizophrenic or committed suicide. *In fact suicide rate seems very high. One mate (who was a heavy user) stabbed, then tried to burn down his next door neighbor’s house. He was later diagnosed with *schizophrenia *and locked in a mental ward for a few months. Then let back out and he tried to kill a cop went back in then let back out a few months later again. I've seen people that seemed really positive end up necking themselves, and a lot of wasted talent. Note: the majority did not drink alcohol either and were purely stoners
> I'm not sure if it was the transition to hydro during the late 80's to early 90's. Back then people didn’t flush the plants with water for 2 weeks, so all those chemicals were still in the buds. Could have also been the high levels of THC associated with skunk or northern lights .
> ...




Absolutely agree with everything you have said here. We didn't grow up in the same area did we?

For those who criticise the debate as having logic gone out the window - ever tried to consistently reason with a user? Talk of logic is hypocritical in this instance.


----------



## nunthewiser (30 October 2009)

BradK said:


> WARNING: This is a purely, non-scientific subjective post from painful experience that will p!ss off the nutty wacky tabacky apologists.
> 
> Brother is a long term user. I do not necessarily believe it leads to harder stuff, but I have seen his personality and mood turn on a dime, and also over long term. I also have some old school friends who are long time users. Same story.
> 
> ...





Sorry to break it to ya but ya brother sounds farked up regardless the poison, it may be mull but if it wasnt mull it would be something else. Your brothers demons are his and they will come out on legal highs also.

no offense intended but your story could relate to any form of poison taken from those looking to escape.


----------



## moXJO (30 October 2009)

Jackman said:


> As it’s been a decade or two since I have par-taken in the communal bong.
> 
> Should it be legalised! On my personal experience yes, as I had no serious side affects or long term health issues besides only having the retention span of a flea.
> 
> Jack




I'm interested in why people gave it up. What prompted people to stop smoking GG's miracle plant?

On the other side.... Why do people still smoke it (or their friends still smoke it), and are they long term users (over ten years)?


----------



## nunthewiser (30 October 2009)

moXJO said:


> I'm interested in why people gave it up. What prompted people to stop smoking GG's miracle plant?
> 
> On the other side.... Why do people still smoke it (or their friends still smoke it), and are they long term users (over ten years)?





Very personally know a godly fella been toking for 26 years now , he is fine , but what takes the cake is the angels father that tokes on occasion that has been doing it for 50 years .............  

Hey but there no psycologists , just riff raff that know who they are .


----------



## wayneL (30 October 2009)

moXJO said:


> I'm interested in why people gave it up. What prompted people to stop smoking GG's miracle plant?




A few reasons for me.

1/ I'm a non-smoker, I don't enjoy inhaling smoke.

2/ I only like getting pissed/high in social situations and no-one does so with dope in my group of friends.

3/ When I drink, I know exactly how pissed I'm going to get. With weed, it's variable. I like to keep control of myself.

4/ Mrs doesn't smoke it. (but has no challenge with it)

In the right situation, I'd have no problems taking it though (unlikely though).


----------



## moXJO (30 October 2009)

nunthewiser said:


> Very personally know a godly fella been toking for 26 years now , he is fine , but what takes the cake is the angels father that tokes on occasion that has been doing it for 50 years .............
> 
> Hey but there no psycologists , just riff raff that know who they are .



My friend’s brother has been pulling cones for roughly the same length of time. He developed a pretty short wick though, and I have seen some pretty fiery moods and bouts of depression (not attributing it all to pot). In fact he had to move out of the city and into a rural area which has done him wonders. He seemed to have fallen through the cracks and lost his way somewhere. All his drive dried up. So much potential lost, he was a brilliant artist, good at motocross, martial arts, and fantastic at maths. Now if he is not able to smoke pot at least one session a day, his temper starts to boil.
But he is always quick to help anyone and always tries to do the right thing. This is just one story of a person I personally know with the mildest effect from use.
Pot smokers are not bad people. Some very good friends (and good people) from my past were pot smokers. But a habit is a habit and often hard to shake.


----------



## moXJO (30 October 2009)

wayneL said:


> A few reasons for me.
> 
> 1/ I'm a non-smoker, I don't enjoy inhaling smoke.




I'm sure nun's friends could bake you a cookie

I remember a friend once baked a cake/slice, with two ounces of hydros finest just to make sure. He consumed a piece and brain was quickly numbed over the next 40 mins. He put it in a cake tin and went to sleep. 

His parents had a cup of tea before they went shopping and found the cake. Both ate a fairly large slice before driving off. They made it a fair way down the street before the father turned to mother and asked "where am I, and where are we going". Confusion rained.
Both had to be driven home and slept for a very long time


----------



## Krusty the Klown (30 October 2009)

Interestingly we've heard about some users who seem to have sank in to depression while using marijuana. That does not mean that pot caused it. Maybe the depression was the reason that they used the pot in the first place.

Considering that depression is labelled "the common cold of the psyche" by doctors because it is so common, it may be that the prohibitionists are putting the cart before the horse.

We never hear about the ongoing users who go on to lead perfectly normal lives do we? Why not? Because they do not stand out from the crowd and have no reason to be singled out.

There are quite a few recreational heroin and cocaine users out there that lead normal lives also.

The media only reports on the dramatic cases. What is so dramatic about a casual user that leads a normal life?

Teenagers and young people get drunk alot, but as they grow older that behaviour wanes.

An example of this? Myself. My friends and I used to smoke pot quite heavily as teenagers and in our early twenties, but rarely these days. Same as with grog.

Despite this I still managed to gain a wall full of qualifications and hold down a full time job, buy a house etc....


----------



## Chris45 (30 October 2009)

My father smoked a packet of cigarettes a day all of his adult life and enjoyed a healthy active life until he died of dementia at 99 so, using him as an example, you’d have to say that cigarettes are harmless. But is the community, *as a whole,* now better off with all of the restrictions on smoking? Most definitely YES!!! Smokers used to be a selfish and inconsiderate lot and I hated having to breathe their foul smoke all the time. I am really pleased that the pressure on them to quit their filthy habit is continually increasing.

As with heroin, some people can use marijuana and still lead normal healthy lives but that doesn’t mean that the community would benefit from its legalization. I know one person whose life has been adversely affected by marijuana and am therefore sympathetic to the anti-marijuana arguments in this thread.

Most of us live in communities so we should be thinking about what's best for the community, not what's best for "me".


----------



## Krusty the Klown (30 October 2009)

Chris45 said:


> Most of us live in communities so we should be thinking about what's best for the community, not what's best for "me".




I totally agree. To quote Mr Spock "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few".

So here is my proposal. Ban alcohol and replace it with pot.

I GUARANTEE there will be less domestic violence, less violence at sporting venues, less youth violence, less gang rape, less violence at mass gatherings... in fact less violence in general.

You've never heard of a pot smoker going on a rampage have you? It's always a drunken rampage.....

If this proposal saves one life or one woman from getting bashed or raped then it is worth it and the community wins.


----------



## moXJO (30 October 2009)

Krusty the Klown said:


> So here is my proposal. Ban alcohol and replace it with pot.
> 
> .




But how then will ugly people get laid


----------



## Krusty the Klown (30 October 2009)

moXJO said:


> But how then will ugly people get laid




I find a paperbag works well!!!!


----------



## manuelg (30 October 2009)

Wysiwyg said:


> There must be a reason why society has agreed that this particular plant must not be taken freely by whoever wishes so. We have touched on the side effects such as psychological damage and lung disease but what is *the one real reason?* I can`t think of one apart from the harm it would cause youths trying and habituating. Socially disruptive maybe.




If you do some research into the issue there are many reasons why it is illeagal but few of them are scientific (or logical).  The original reasonings were influenced by the American Burea of Narcotics in the 20's/30's and are almost entirely political (with later reasoning that took on a decidedly racist tone). 

An interesting quote from a 1934 New york newspaper - “Marihuana influences Negroes to look at white people in the eye, step on white men’s shadows and look at a white woman twice.”

And a quote by Harry Anslinger, the head of the Burea of Narcotics at the time - “…the primary reason to outlaw marijuana is its effect on the degenerate races.” 

The history of american drug illegalisation is interesting and incredibly illogical.  If it weren't for the popularity of alcohol at the time, it could easily be as maligned as marijana now.


----------



## awg (30 October 2009)

Something I didnt see mentioned, may have been, but what I have noticed is very prevalent and harmful, is the frequent mixing of cannabis with tobacco.

This often causes the person to be a complete and hopeless addict, if they are a regular user.

The persons who I know of, that are not "addicted", dont mix the two together, to the best of my knowledge.

I have been advised by several persons that work in the mental health industry, that tobacco usage amongs schizophrenics approaches 100%.

and that smoking anything is correlated with increased incidence of mental illness.

I suspect that the bad-tempered users/addicts mentioned are mixers..."chuff smokers", who need their hit of nicotine.

The few true stoners I have known, never seen them act angry, mellow hippy types


----------



## derty (30 October 2009)

awg said:


> I suspect that the bad-tempered users/addicts mentioned are mixers..."chuff smokers", who need their hit of nicotine.



I agree, I had some mates who, while were not cigarette smokers, would spin their dope with tobacco. When they couldn't get any pot they would become extremely irritable.  Others, who did smoke cigarettes, would not become irritable when they did not have any pot. We quickly realised that they were addicted to nicotine. 

With the potency and cost of pot these days I doubt if there are many who don't mix their dope with tobacco.


----------



## Chris45 (30 October 2009)

Krusty the Klown said:


> So here is my proposal. Ban alcohol and replace it with pot.
> 
> I GUARANTEE there will be less domestic violence, less violence at sporting venues, less youth violence, less gang rape, less violence at mass gatherings... in fact less violence in general.
> 
> ...



Good point Krusty! (Except for the bit about replacing it with pot.) So ....., who's going to start a poll about banning alcohol? 

Your solution for the ugly people is an old and proven method.


----------



## Wysiwyg (30 October 2009)

Chris45 said:


> Your solution for the ugly people is an old and proven method.



Come on now. Paper bags have been long gone and now replaced by plastic bags. Sheesh, you oldies.


----------



## awg (30 October 2009)

derty said:


> We quickly realised that they were addicted to nicotine.
> 
> With the potency and cost of pot these days I doubt if there are many who don't mix their dope with tobacco.




Yes, my understanding it is almost universal nowadays, (and traditional as well, in Middle East etc.)

Stupid thing is for non-tobacco users, it is difficult to smoke mix, as the tobacco causes headspins and nausea, which can only be overcome by habituation ( a bit like heroin eh)

One of the big problems for young people to, is that nowadays many jobs require drug testing, and marijuana, being fat soluble, has a residual effect, in excess of the psychotropic effect..bad for your career to have that on your record.

Same for driving, which dope smoking does adversly affect.

Being illegal, presumably any measurable quantity in your system constitutes an offence.

Just got in trouble off my son..he wanted me to buy Coke..told him I dont buy Coke, just drink water


----------



## Chris45 (30 October 2009)

Wysiwyg said:


> Come on now. Paper bags have been long gone and now replaced by plastic bags. Sheesh, you oldies.



Yes ... but plastic bags tend to result in suffocation. I guess that when my dwindling supply of paper bags runs out I'll have to resort to wearing a blindfold.


----------



## Krusty the Klown (30 October 2009)

awg said:


> Yes, my understanding it is almost universal nowadays, (and traditional as well, in Middle East etc.)
> 
> Stupid thing is for non-tobacco users, it is difficult to smoke mix, as the tobacco causes headspins and nausea, which can only be overcome by habituation ( a bit like heroin eh)




awg, your last few posts were very well informed, accurate and logical.

I remember when I used to smoke quite a lot I was a non-tobacco smoker, I used to hate it when the pot was mixed with tobacco. It used to make me dizzy, sick in the stomach, and I vomited on more than one occasion. When it was pure pot, no problem.

I agree wholeheartedly with the your statements. I have seen non-tobacco smoker friends, seemingly get addicted to pot, but they always mixed the pot with tobacco to make their stash last longer and save money.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (30 October 2009)

I reckon if I had a choice of banning weed or grog, I'd ban grog.

gg


----------



## Krusty the Klown (30 October 2009)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I reckon if I had a choice of banning weed or grog, I'd ban grog.
> 
> gg




I agree gg, much better high, no loss of self control (ie no blackouts) and no hangover and less pregnancies.

Yes, you read right, one of the physical effects of alcohol on the female body is that it raises the level of testosterone in the blood, which increases a female's sexual appetite to that of a male. 

In fact I would be quite happy to live in a world of illegal alcohol, even though I have no problem with marijuana. I do not condone the use of all drugs. Just pot and only for people over 18 - the same as religion.

Are there any prohibitionists out there who are ex-users or current users?

Or have all contributing prohibitionists never tried it?


----------



## GumbyLearner (30 October 2009)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I reckon if I had a choice of banning weed or grog, I'd ban grog.
> 
> gg




No offence intended gg. But wouldn't that contradict your avatar? LOL


----------



## Krusty the Klown (30 October 2009)

Chris45 said:


> Yes ... but plastic bags tend to result in suffocation.




And you can still see through a plastic bag. :


----------



## Krusty the Klown (30 October 2009)

GumbyLearner said:


> No offence intended gg. But wouldn't that contradict your avatar? LOL




LOL, very astute!!!!!!


----------



## Wysiwyg (30 October 2009)

Chris45 said:


> Yes ... but plastic bags tend to result in suffocation.



Oh no. Simply pierce the bag with several small holes for ventilation. Ordinary table forks or skewers suffice as the holes need to be kept small (can't have peaking now) and once the head is covered it is simply a matter of maintaining a regular breathing pattern consistent with those applied in yoga teachings.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (30 October 2009)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I reckon if I had a choice of banning weed or grog, I'd ban grog.
> 
> gg






GumbyLearner said:


> No offence intended gg. But wouldn't that contradict your avatar? LOL






Krusty the Klown said:


> LOL, very astute!!!!!!




Not really, think about it.

Grog is banned.

People need grog

Ergo....

gg


----------



## awg (30 October 2009)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I reckon if I had a choice of banning weed or grog, I'd ban grog.
> 
> gg




I have a notion they have "defacto" done this in many aboriginal communities.

This account was a personal source who is very well informed.

According to him, where the land is now controlled by the local community, grass growing is often tolerated and not pursued by authorities, within reason.

The terrible harm from grog in the aboriginal communities is fairly well known, and has resulted in prohibition.


----------



## Chris45 (31 October 2009)

Krusty the Klown said:


> And you can still see through a plastic bag. :



Yes, and as if it wasn't difficult enough already, I must confess the bulging eyes and purple skin was a major turn off!


----------



## stockGURU (31 October 2009)

I think we need to lighten up this thread a little.


----------



## Putty7 (31 October 2009)

If the government of the day could work out how to tax marijuana the same way they tax cigarettes and alcohol it would already be legal


----------



## Krusty the Klown (31 October 2009)

stockGURU said:


> I think we need to lighten up this thread a little.





Absolutely hilarious!!!!!

Nice one Guru!!!!!


----------



## overit (31 October 2009)

overit said:


> Hello whats going on here? Someone forgot to follow the script.




The professor has been axed. Professor David Nutt asked to resign after his claims that ecstasy and LSD were less dangerous than alcohol. You can bet the next bloke will be towing the line with an unbiased view! 

News Video from Liveleak.  



> "But politics is politics and science is science and there's a bit of a tension between them sometimes."





> Garside added: "I'm shocked and dismayed that the home secretary appears to believe that political calculation trumps honest and informed scientific opinion. The message is that when it comes to the Home Office's relationship with the research community honest researchers should be seen but not heard.
> 
> "The home secretary's action is a bad day for science and a bad day for the cause of evidence-informed policy making."




Yes like when the science doesnt match the political agenda. Sounds like another debate which is going on at the moment.


----------



## prawn_86 (31 October 2009)

overit said:


> Professor David Nutt asked to resign after his claims that ecstasy and LSD were less dangerous than alcohol. You can bet the next bloke will be towing the line with an unbiased view!
> 
> Yes like when the science doesnt match the political agenda. Sounds like another debate which is going on at the moment.




Yep, its a sad state of affairs when propaganda trumps facts. If people do the research they will see what Prof Nutt and others (including amatuers like me) have been saying.

Perhaps in a few generations time....


----------



## gav (5 November 2009)

Spending 12hrs in the Emergency Ward on Saturday night reaffirms my view that I'd have no problem if alcohol were to be banned.  The amount of alcohol related cases in the Emergency Ward was rediculous.  People needing their stomach's pumped, injuries from alcohol fuelled fights, or people simply being so drunk they fall and hurt themselves.  What's worse is that there were people waiting in the waiting room for hours whilst these scumbags were attended to.

And on more than one occasion these drunks were physically aggressive towards the poor hospital staff and patients.


----------



## Mofra (5 November 2009)

Sugar Dunkaton said:


> Im not a drug taker myself, but from everything I understand, weed is just a gateway towards other drugs, so having pot legalized, is just going to improve the numbers of people who cross over to harder drugs - but i am fairly sure that most people will get there anyway.



You could argue that alcohol is a gateway drug, as most people try alcohol before anything else. Alcohol is the only drug I know of that has the ability to attack every cell in the human body.

I wonder how many of the "all drugs are bad, the government said so, m'kay" crowd "can't survive without their morning coffee"?


----------



## Krusty the Klown (5 November 2009)

I don't believe there is any such substance as a gateway drug. There are addictive drugs and addictive personalities which have been clinically proven to be fact.

If anyone can show me some clinical evidence of a gateway drug effect, I would be grateful to see it.

Until then I will treat the concept as an urban myth propagated by the uninformed.


----------



## Krusty the Klown (5 November 2009)

gav said:


> Spending 12hrs in the Emergency Ward on Saturday night reaffirms my view that I'd have no problem if alcohol were to be banned.  The amount of alcohol related cases in the Emergency Ward was rediculous.  People needing their stomach's pumped, injuries from alcohol fuelled fights, or people simply being so drunk they fall and hurt themselves.  What's worse is that there were people waiting in the waiting room for hours whilst these scumbags were attended to.
> 
> And on more than one occasion these drunks were physically aggressive towards the poor hospital staff and patients.




I agree, the world could be a better place without alcohol. I will not say "would" be a better place without it, because in countries where alcohol is prohibited they still have extreme violence...e.g Pakistan.

I'm still trying to find some evidence or instance of a violent act committed by a pot smoker.........


----------



## Julia (5 November 2009)

Reccomendation by Queensland's top policeman of zero level alcohol when driving:

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/...952,00.html?referrer=email&source=CM_email_nl

Seems over the top and unrealistic to me.  Those who have always ignored drink driving laws will continue to do so, and people who have a single glass of wine after work, will no longer be able to do so safely.

Typical exaggerated and thoughtless response.


----------



## Tink (6 November 2009)

I dont agree with zero level. 

I think people that drink and drive 'try' to continue to do so, but the attitude has changed within society regarding alcohol which has been a good thing.

For once I am glad the media has put it out there. 

I have noticed a few now more concerned about drink driving than they ever did.


----------



## Kremmen (10 November 2009)

BradK said:


> I know its anecdotal, but long term daily or weekly use (Im talking over 10 years here) is utterly destructive. And the ONLY PEOPLE WHO DISAGREE WITH THAT ARE THE USERS!!! And they dont count - because they are ADDICTS.



Emotive rants like this are really just distractions, especially the irrelevant comment in all caps. Even if daily use over 10 years is destructive, so what? Eating a huge block of chocolate every day for 10 years is destructive too, so do we ban chocolate, too?

Dope is less physically addictive than caffeine. If someone wants to hide themselves away in a life of dope abuse, it's like someone who is "addicted" to poker machines. Why should the 99% of the population who can control themselves have their enjoyment legally limited because of the 1% who can't? Worse still, why should we all be wasting over $200 a year per person ($4.7 billion) on trying to prevent a tiny minority of people messing up their lives?

If you really believe that the role of society is to provide a nanny state to look after everyone and shield them from everything that's dangerous, I suggest you go and join the Amish. Cars, machines and processed food are far more dangerous than dope. And I don't mean that as a flippant line. I really wish the people who think that way would just go and live in a highly controlled environment somewhere and feel safe. That is a totally valid way to want to live your life ... just stop trying to inflict your own restrictions on others who do not share your lack of self-control.


----------



## theasxgorilla (10 November 2009)

Kremmen said:


> Emotive rants like this are really just distractions, especially the irrelevant comment in all caps. Even if daily use over 10 years is destructive, so what? Eating a huge block of chocolate every day for 10 years is destructive too, so do we ban chocolate, too?




It's an interesting angle this one.  I see overweight people and think, we gotta ban drive-thru!   So I guess it stands to reason that the general populous sees a stoner and figures we gotta keep weed banned.


----------



## Jackman (10 November 2009)

Julia said:


> Reccomendation by Queensland's top policeman of zero level alcohol when driving:
> 
> http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/...952,00.html?referrer=email&source=CM_email_nl
> 
> ...




Julia so what limit is fine with you 2 glasses of wine 4 stubbies of beer!  At the end of the day I dont have a problem with zero limit its called get a cab

Jack


----------



## bunyip (10 November 2009)

Krusty the Klown said:


> I'm still trying to find some evidence or instance of a violent act committed by a pot smoker.........




A relative of mine worked as a mental health nurse in the acute psychiatric ward of a hospital.
She could tell you stories of many of her patients who suffered from severe psychosis as a result of heavy and prolonged smoking of pot.
Extreme violence was only one of their symptoms.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (10 November 2009)

The arguments against legalising marijuana, seem to dwell on the risk of psychosis occurring in vulnerable young people and the deadening effect on the personalities of long term older users. Why allow another substance to be legalised when we have legal harmful substances such as tobacco and alcohol, the wowser camp say.

The arguments for, seem to concentrate on the widespread use by a signficant minority of the population without apparent effect and the criminalisation of those unlucky enough to be caught in possession. The stoners further argue the cost of policing a widely flouted law.

There seems to be no push to legalise it, except from the Marijuana Party who routinely poll less than 5% of the vote, so even the stoners couldn't be bothered to vote for them. This may be because elections are held on Saturdays when bongs are being filled and apathy reigns.

The ASF poll is not convincing enough to show a push among the indigent and reckless who haunt these pages.

So it looks as f it will remain an illegal substance.

gg


----------



## moXJO (10 November 2009)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> The arguments against legalising marijuana, seem to dwell on the risk of psychosis occurring in vulnerable young people and the deadening effect on the personalities of long term older users. Why allow another substance to be legalised when we have legal harmful substances such as tobacco and alcohol, the wowser camp say.
> 
> The arguments for, seem to concentrate on the widespread use by a signficant minority of the population without apparent effect and the criminalisation of those unlucky enough to be caught in possession. The stoners further argue the cost of policing a widely flouted law.
> 
> ...




That’s a U turn from your other posts GG. I was getting ready for you to embark in a new life amongst a commune of pot smoking basket weavers, while freeballing in a kaftan or something.


----------



## GumbyLearner (10 November 2009)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> There seems to be no push to legalise it, except from the Marijuana Party who routinely poll less than 5% of the vote, so even the stoners couldn't be bothered to vote for them. This may be because elections are held on Saturdays when bongs are being filled and apathy reigns.
> 
> The ASF poll is not convincing enough to show a push among the indigent and reckless who haunt these pages.
> 
> ...




I think gg is making a valid point here. This guy has been trying to get in on that monolith called the Brisbane City Council for years.

And here's the kicker on page 3

(d) In 1996 the applicant became involved in another organisation known as Help Activate
Student Hempsters but the applicant was *unresponsive* as to the activities of this organisation

Gee I wonder why?? 

http://www.aec.gov.au/pdf/committee/jscem/2001_election/sub147/part147c.pdf


----------



## Julia (11 November 2009)

Jackman said:


> Julia so what limit is fine with you 2 glasses of wine 4 stubbies of beer!  At the end of the day I dont have a problem with zero limit its called get a cab
> 
> Jack



I don't see any need to change it from what it is at present.  



moXJO said:


> That’s a U turn from your other posts GG. I was getting ready for you to embark in a new life amongst a commune of pot smoking basket weavers, while freeballing in a kaftan or something.



I think it's the basket weaving that gg would have a difficulty with, moXJO.
The kaftan etc is probably already de rigeur at Garpalmansion.


----------



## GumbyLearner (11 November 2009)

Don't worry Jackman schizos probably smoke the same gear.


----------



## theasxgorilla (11 November 2009)

Who says???


----------



## Mofra (11 November 2009)

Kremmen said:


> Emotive rants like this are really just distractions, especially the irrelevant comment in all caps. Even if daily use over 10 years is destructive, so what? Eating a huge block of chocolate every day for 10 years is destructive too, so do we ban chocolate, too?



Kremmen, given he/she can't even distinguish between a user and an addict, I'm not sure you're going to get a response of the same quality as your reply.


----------



## Mofra (11 November 2009)

Tink said:


> I dont agree with zero level.
> 
> I think people that drink and drive 'try' to continue to do so, but the attitude has changed within society regarding alcohol which has been a good thing.
> 
> ...



There is also soem alcoholic content in simple cough medicines, so someone with a cold may register a 0.01% reading without consuming non-medicinal drinks and under a zero tolerance policy would be pinged. Doesn't seem right.


----------



## moXJO (11 November 2009)

Mofra said:


> There is also soem alcoholic content in simple cough medicines, so someone with a cold may register a 0.01% reading without consuming non-medicinal drinks and under a zero tolerance policy would be pinged. Doesn't seem right.




If you eat one of those bubble-o-bill ice creams it will put you over as well. A judge actually made a man using this defense eat one in court then blow into a breathalyzer. Sure enough it gave a reading.


----------



## Wysiwyg (11 November 2009)

moXJO said:


> If you eat one of those bubble-o-bill ice creams it will put you over as well. A judge actually made a man using this defense eat one in court then blow into a breathalyzer. Sure enough it gave a reading.




Listerine measured .02 on a breathalyzer from personal experience. Mouth washed about 30 minutes prior to a bottle shop visit in Hamilton. Fact.


----------



## bloomy88 (11 November 2009)

moXJO said:


> If you eat one of those bubble-o-bill ice creams it will put you over as well. A judge actually made a man using this defense eat one in court then blow into a breathalyzer. Sure enough it gave a reading.




Wow that's amazing! Why do Bubble-o-Bill ice creams give a reading? What ingedient is it?
Cheers


----------



## bloomy88 (11 November 2009)

Oh and apparently if you eat a Cherry Ripe close to the useby date it can give you a reading as well, remember seeing it in the news a while ago


----------



## Krusty the Klown (11 November 2009)

bunyip said:


> A relative of mine worked as a mental health nurse in the acute psychiatric ward of a hospital.
> She could tell you stories of many of her patients who suffered from severe psychosis as a result of heavy and prolonged smoking of pot.
> Extreme violence was only one of their symptoms.




Really? So it does happen then, I thought there had to be at least one case out there.

Do you know if these patients used any other sort of drugs as well?


----------



## bunyip (11 November 2009)

Krusty the Klown said:


> Really? So it does happen then, I thought there had to be at least one case out there.
> 
> Do you know if these patients used any other sort of drugs as well?




When patients come into a hospital's Acute Psychiatric Unit, (APU), they're interviewed and if possible their families are interviewed as well, to try and build up some sort of patient profile to assist the staff in making decisions about their treatment. If the patient is too unwell to be interviewed on admission, the interview is conducted a few days or a week later after they're settled down and the drugs are starting to leave their system.
According to my relative, their patient files said only that they were heavy and habitual users of marijuana. Most of them were only young, still in their late teens, but had been heavy users since early teens. A couple were still in school.
They'd spend a week or two in hospital, get settled down with the help of medication, get discharged, and a month or two later would be back in hospital again with another psychotic episode.
This same relative worked in a full blown mental hospital after she'd spent a few years working in the Acute Psychiatric Unit (APU) of the base hospital. Some of the young dope patients she'd nursed in APU were deemed incurable and ended up in the full mental hospital as permanent residents.

There's a hell of a lot of misinformation about marijuana. People have a puff, feel good because of it, become regular users, continue in jobs or uni or whatever, and think it's doing them no harm. They choose to ignore the medical evidence that long term use kills off brain cells, just like long term and excessive use of alcohol does.
Also, smoking is smoking, whether it's tobacco or pot or anything else, and smoking as we know is in itself a very risky habit. 
Pot is a mind-altering drug, just like alcohol. We've seen the havoc that alcohol wreaks in society. When then in the name of god would we be stupid enough to legalise another mind-altering drug.

Anyone who thinks there's no harm in marijuana needs to get in touch with the facts. 
Talk to the medical people who've done the research. 
Talk to the folks who have conducted driving tests on people when they have dope in their systems, and again when they have no dope, and find out the facts about how dope-driving slows down a drivers reaction time, affects their judgement, and makes them take risks they wouldn't normally take when driving dope-free.
Talk to the staff at mental health units of hospitals to get the true picture of the devastating effects that dope can have. 

If what I've said above isn't enough to convince people that dope is bad, consider this......cigarette smoking is bad, but it doesn't lead to heavier drugs.
Pot smoking is frequently the first step that leads to experimentation with heavier drugs. Many junkies took their first step towards full-blown hard drug addiction when they took their first puff on a joint of pot.

Dope is for dopes.


----------



## Timmy (11 November 2009)

moXJO said:


> If you eat one of those bubble-o-bill ice creams it will put you over as well. A judge actually made a man using this defense eat one in court then blow into a breathalyzer. Sure enough it gave a reading.




Here is the scientific literature on this.
The Journal of 2DayFM (peer reviewed ).
Professors Hamish and Andy.

_After reading that eating Bubble-O-Bill ice-creams could cause people to register on breathalyzers the boys decided to put it to the test. How better to do that than have Andy eat as many as possible during a show and breath testing him._

http://www.2dayfm.com.au/shows/hamishandandy/galleries/andy-bubble-o-bill


----------



## prawn_86 (11 November 2009)

It all comes back to moderation. If you use something excessivley once a week or more, it is more than likely going to do damage.

Pills (prescription and illegal), grog, weed, smokes, even contact sports all cause long term damage of some form or another...


----------



## nunthewiser (11 November 2009)

prawn_86 said:


> Pills (prescription and illegal), grog, weed, smokes, even contact sports all cause long term damage of some form or another...




Yep , i know a boxer that is now a trainer that finds it difficult to string sentences together now from being " punch drunk " from recieving so many blows to the head over the course of the years in the ring.

I know someone that has smoked dope for that same amount of time he spent in the ring and he is an articulate switched on person .

I suppose its all about how one conducts there studies on various things to see whatever outcome that suits there bias at the time .


----------



## bunyip (11 November 2009)

nunthewiser said:


> I suppose its all about how one conducts there studies on various things to see whatever outcome that suits there bias at the time .




That's a presumptuous statement if ever I heard one!

I'm not aware of any evidence to suggest that researchers were in any way biased.
While the possibility of bias cannot be ruled out, it's equally possible, even likely, that they conducted independent and unbiased research in a genuine attempt to establish the facts.


----------



## nunthewiser (11 November 2009)

bunyip said:


> That's a presumptuous statement if ever I heard one!
> 
> I'm not aware of any evidence to suggest that researchers were in any way biased.
> While the possibility of bias cannot be ruled out, it's equally possible, even likely, that they conducted independent and unbiased research in a genuine attempt to establish the facts.





And i have seen varying reports via other "respected" outlets through various media and actually first hand that refute totally other "respected" outlets in regards to marijuana use in regards to the AVERAGE user ...

Yes they all agree that ppl with ongoing mental ilnesses are more prone for bigger problems but they also say that in regards to alcohol.

So yes i do believe there is a bias and my previous post still stands .


----------



## condog (11 November 2009)

No - definitely not...  no explanation necessary...

Medicinal use and legalisation are two completely separate arguments.  Clinical trials for pain relief are already operating in most states.


----------



## Dowdy (11 November 2009)

Want to get rid of the criminals - then make it legal!

Todays weed is about 10-20X stronger then the weed from the 60's. 

Growers have increased the THC content (the chemical that makes you high) through genetic modification and the need to grow it quicker by planting it in high chemical soil.

If the government took over the growing they can limit the use of THC and if they were smart they would grow hemp (which contains next to no THC) to use for paper production and replace cotton as fabric. The hemp tree is more efficient, uses less water, less space and grows way quicker


----------



## Kipp (11 November 2009)

Krusty the Klown said:


> Logic dictates outlaw tobacco and alcohol and legalise Marijuana.
> 
> I don't understand the demonisation of the the lesser evil marijuana when you have 2 worse legal drugs that cause so much death, violence and disease.
> 
> To quote Mr Spock - "It is illogical".




Very nice summary Krusty - an interesting little tidbit that I once heard(sorry, I conveniently have no source) is that the NET impact of the tobacco is actaully a drain on the taxpayer $$$.  Nevermind all of the billions
of dutys and tax, it is such a horrific burden on healthcare.  

I disagree with other posters saying there is no point to growing it as it can be grown so easily in the backyard.  In the netherlands, coffee shops still do a roaring trade (through locals as well I might add) even though it is legal to own a few plants.  For the same reason as we don't all bake our own bread, and brew our own beer... convenience.  Going to Amsterdam was one of th best things I have ever done, it is an open-minded and beautiful city, though the do-gooders are moving there also... (magic mushrooms where made illegal last year, and also it is now illegal to smoke in a coffee shop )  

Good thread gg.... like all threads.... probably running near the end of its life (most non-stock threads don't have great longevity).


----------



## Julia (11 November 2009)

nunthewiser said:


> And i have seen varying reports via other "respected" outlets through various media and actually first hand that refute totally other "respected" outlets in regards to marijuana use in regards to the AVERAGE user ...
> 
> Yes they all agree that ppl with ongoing mental ilnesses are more prone for bigger problems but they also say that in regards to alcohol.
> 
> So yes i do believe there is a bias and my previous post still stands .



There will always be anecdotal accounts and quotes of 'studies'.
The only way to resolve these disputes is to examine the protocols of any studies that may have been done, i.e. they would obviously have to have been logitudinal studies for a start, and their validity would depend on numbers, whether they were double blind, double blind plus cross over, etc etc.  To be statistically valid, such a study would be complicated and costly to organise and complete, then it would need to be peer reviewed.
This is the only way to avoid any accusations of bias.



Kipp said:


> Very nice summary Krusty - an interesting little tidbit that I once heard(sorry, I conveniently have no source) is that the NET impact of the tobacco is actaully a drain on the taxpayer $$$.  Nevermind all of the billions
> of dutys and tax, it is such a horrific burden on healthcare.



And I've heard quite the opposite, from an interview on Radio National with researchers into tobacco related diseases, i.e. that the taxes on tobacco products are in excess of the health costs.
I'd say it would be pretty difficult to measure this, as many diseases are overlapping, and would have other contributing factors such as obesity and hypertension.


----------



## bunyip (12 November 2009)

Dowdy said:


> Want to get rid of the criminals - then make it legal!
> 
> Todays weed is about 10-20X stronger then the weed from the 60's.
> 
> ...




How about we get rid of all criminals by making everything legal!


----------



## Ageo (12 November 2009)

bunyip said:


> How about we get rid of all criminals by making everything legal!




Dont laugh if you outlaw something the only people left with them are outlaws!

Legalise everything = less things to do underground.

Have you noticed everything that gets banned actually increases the crime rate?


----------



## Krusty the Klown (12 November 2009)

bunyip said:


> When patients come into a hospital's Acute Psychiatric Unit, (APU), they're interviewed and if possible their families are interviewed as well, to try and build up some sort of patient profile to assist the staff in making decisions about their treatment. If the patient is too unwell to be interviewed on admission, the interview is conducted a few days or a week later after they're settled down and the drugs are starting to leave their system.
> According to my relative, their patient files said only that they were heavy and habitual users of marijuana. Most of them were only young, still in their late teens, but had been heavy users since early teens. A couple were still in school.
> They'd spend a week or two in hospital, get settled down with the help of medication, get discharged, and a month or two later would be back in hospital again with another psychotic episode.
> This same relative worked in a full blown mental hospital after she'd spent a few years working in the Acute Psychiatric Unit (APU) of the base hospital. Some of the young dope patients she'd nursed in APU were deemed incurable and ended up in the full mental hospital as permanent residents.
> ...




Cheers for the info bunyip.

I just read an article that agrees with your relo's experience - heavy and prolonged use by youths has a greater instance of phychosis. Particularly the higher the THC content. There was no mention of violence though.

The studies showed, however, that the risk of psychosis was dramatically lower if use started when an adult.

The dangerous effects of smoking the drug can be eliminated by ingesting through the stomach, like in cookies or tea. 

A doco on the National Geographic Channel interviewed a guy in Canada who legally grows his own MJ for pain relief and he makes it in to a butter, which he uses to make cakes, bikkies etc. He has been doing this for quite a few years with no adverse effects (so far) but he will be monitored for continuing research purposes.

The article was in New Scientist magazine.


----------



## bunyip (12 November 2009)

Krusty the Klown said:


> Cheers for the info bunyip.
> 
> I just read an article that agrees with your relo's experience - heavy and prolonged use by youths has a greater instance of phychosis. Particularly the higher the THC content. There was no mention of violence though.
> 
> ...




Believe me mate, the violence is for real, according to my rellie.

For some reason I thought  these young druggies would most likely have come from dysfunctional families. And while that's certainly the case with some of them, there are others she told me about who were private school products from professional parents. For example, one was the 17 year old son of a well known medical specialist.

I'm just damned pleased I never tried illicit drugs myself. I tried pretty much all the other vices.....cigarettes, booze, fast cars, slow horses, fast women! LOL 
And thoroughly enjoyed all of them until I grew up a bit and starting behaving more responsibly!


----------



## Krusty the Klown (13 November 2009)

bunyip said:


> I tried pretty much all the other vices.....cigarettes, booze, fast cars, slow horses, fast women! LOL




Yes, think most of us have that in common!!


----------



## awg (13 November 2009)

bunyip said:


> Believe me mate, the violence is for real, according to my rellie.
> 
> For some reason I thought  these young druggies would most likely have come from dysfunctional families. And while that's certainly the case with some of them, there are others she told me about who were private school products from professional parents. For example, one was the 17 year old son of a well known medical specialist.
> 
> ...





More cash = more access to drugs.

A lot of guys that find themselves in acute psychiatric wards due to drug induced psychosis are "poly-drug abusers"..ie they will have a go at anything. 

When I said earlier stoners wern't violent, I was thinking of ones I had personal knowledge of.

However, some that I met in my work capacity, were nasty bits of work, who often smoked a lot of pot to take the "edge" of themselves.

Didnt always work too well, and these guys usually drank and took other drugs, they were potentially violent persons, and the reduction in inhibition and rational thinking caused by cannabis use made them unpredictable.

As a general rule, there is a problem in the treatment of these issues, in that on the hierachy of mental conditions, substance abuse is higher than psychological disorders, so they dont get very good treatment unless they stop taking drugs.

Quite a common weekend routine for young men is to drink and smoke from Friday to Sunday, throw in an eccy or two, and some snorts of speed or coke, a recipe for craziness.(hopefully short-term)

Apparently the staff are not able to distinguish drug induced psychosis, from the non-drug, takes a few days. Insofar as violence goes, I guess once a person is psychotic, from whatever cause, the risk of violence increases. 

Although I dont think pot smoking of itself tends to make one violent, (unless associated with other substances, or psychosis), I do note for Krustys benefit that Hashish and Assasins are associated, also Vikings and Scythians were apparently believed to use cannabis as part of their battle preparations


----------



## Mofra (13 November 2009)

Dowdy said:


> Want to get rid of the criminals - then make it legal!
> 
> Todays weed is about 10-20X stronger then the weed from the 60's.
> 
> Growers have increased the THC content (the chemical that makes you high) through genetic modification and the need to grow it quicker by planting it in high chemical soil.



... before you include additives some dealers use to increase the weight of buds - hairspray being not uncommon. Legalisation would result in a less contaminated, safer product (I know people who will only smoke what they grow themselves, organic only). 



Dowdy said:


> If the government took over the growing they can limit the use of THC and if they were smart they would grow hemp (which contains next to no THC) to use for paper production and replace cotton as fabric. The hemp tree is more efficient, uses less water, less space and grows way quicker



Not to mention a hectare of hemp will produce the same amount of paper as 4 hectares of platation pine.


----------



## Krusty the Klown (13 November 2009)

awg said:


> I do note for Krustys benefit that Hashish and Assasins are associated, also Vikings and Scythians were apparently believed to use cannabis as part of their battle preparations




Yes, that's true about the Assassins, I forgot about them. The name "Assassin" is a derivative of the word "Hashish".

For those not aware the Assassins were an ancient middle eastern tribe who were famed for their assassination skills, much like the Japanese Ninja. They were just as famous for their use of hashish, hence the moniker.

Didn't know that about the Vikings and Scythians though.

You know a very interesting archaelogical/historical research project would be to look at the use of MJ throughout history.

I remember reading that around the time of Jesus, that all their clothes and shoes, ropes etc were made out of hemp. 

Now when you grow that stuff the same way we grow cotton, you would have to find as many uses for it as possible wouldn't you?

I suspect a fair bit was used for medicinal/pain relief purposes back then too, especially when you consider the use of botanical herbs for this in every culture around the world through the ages.

Especially when you consider that marijuana was only demonised in the 20th Century.


----------



## Mofra (13 November 2009)

Captain Cook was a pot smoker. There was an anecdote (not sure of the validity) of him cutting up a damaged sail on his last voyage to Hawaii to untreat & smoke (the sails were all made of hemp in those days).

Of course, it makes sense when you think about it - he gave the honour of the first man from his ship to step ashore on mainland Australia to Joseph banks; his botanist


----------



## wayneL (13 November 2009)

Mofra said:


> Not to mention a hectare of hemp will produce the same amount of paper as 4 hectares of platation pine.



It seems insane that the industrial variety of hemp is not extensively grown.

You would have to smoke a whole hectare to get high apparently.


----------



## bunyip (15 November 2009)

Mofra said:


> Captain Cook was a pot smoker. There was an anecdote (not sure of the validity) of him cutting up a damaged sail on his last voyage to Hawaii to untreat & smoke (the sails were all made of hemp in those days).
> 
> Of course, it makes sense when you think about it - he gave the honour of the first man from his ship to step ashore on mainland Australia to Joseph banks; his botanist




Perhaps that explains why Cook's judgement became so adversely affected in the end!
Apparently he became increasingly moody and irrational and difficult to work with as time went on. I read somewhere that he cut off the ears of a crew member for some minor misdemeanour.
He got himself killed in Hawaii through his own errors of judgement in dealing with the natives.


----------



## Bafana (16 November 2009)

Legalise it - Never a hangover again I shall have...


----------



## wayneL (16 November 2009)

Myths and Facts?  http://www.drugpolicy.org/marijuana/factsmyths/

Obviously a pro-weed site, but for your perusal.



> Top Five Marijuana Myths
> 
> Marijuana Can Cause Permanent Mental Illness
> Marijuana Is Highly Addictive
> ...






> More Marijuana Myths
> 
> Marijuana Has No Medicinal Value
> Marijuana Is a Gateway Drug
> ...


----------



## theasxgorilla (16 November 2009)

wayneL said:


> Myths and Facts?  http://www.drugpolicy.org/marijuana/factsmyths/
> 
> Obviously a pro-weed site, but for your perusal.




Re: point 4 on your list.  I found this article uplifting when I read it.  Clearly California and Europe is not the USA though.

http://www.economist.com/world/international/displaystory.cfm?story_id=14845095


----------



## Mofra (17 November 2009)

bunyip said:


> Perhaps that explains why Cook's judgement became so adversely affected in the end!
> *Apparently he became increasingly moody and irrational and difficult to work with as time went on.* I read somewhere that he cut off the ears of a crew member for some minor misdemeanour.
> He got himself killed in Hawaii through his own errors of judgement in dealing with the natives.



Yeah, if only he had some weed to chill him out, he would have survived


----------



## Mofra (17 November 2009)

wayneL said:


> It seems insane that the industrial variety of hemp is not extensively grown.
> 
> You would have to smoke a whole hectare to get high apparently.



The crops have been modified to have almost no THC in them. Unfortunately the word hemp seems to have a poor association with it so it is a policially charged decision to make, and conservatives tend to avoid anything associated with the Left.


----------



## Atlas79 (11 December 2009)

Krusty the Klown said:


> Any prohibitionists please name one incident where a person stoned on weed has harmed another person other than themselves.





If you would include for instance violence done during psychotic episodes, you may find a vast catalogue of violent acts to pick and choose from, some of them truly hideous.

I have known plenty of violently inclined people who were daily users. Some of them became schizophrenic. Legitimizing the drug via the law is a bad idea. The law may deter some young users before they are too heavily into the habit.

People cite taxes as a material gain. I'm guessing the many millions spent is already taxed one way or another along the way. But you are also losing human resources if enterprising young people are too "relaxed" to be ambitious. Picture a dozen of our great achievers, money makers, empire builders, etc. Picture them instead of pursuing their vocations, sitting on a couch playing X-box and coughing.


----------



## Krusty the Klown (11 December 2009)

Atlas79 said:


> I have known plenty of violently inclined people who were daily users. Some of them became schizophrenic. Legitimizing the drug via the law is a bad idea. The law may deter some young users before they are too heavily into the habit.




Were they violently inclined before ever using weed?




> People cite taxes as a material gain. I'm guessing the many millions spent is already taxed one way or another along the way. But you are also losing human resources if enterprising young people are too "relaxed" to be ambitious. Picture a dozen of our great achievers, money makers, empire builders, etc. Picture them instead of pursuing their vocations, sitting on a couch playing X-box and coughing.




Marijuana was only made illegal in the 20th century. The human race still had all these high achievers before then.


----------



## Mr J (11 December 2009)

Atlas79 said:
			
		

> But you are also losing human resources if enterprising young people are too "relaxed" to be ambitious. Picture a dozen of our great achievers, money makers, empire builders, etc. Picture them instead of pursuing their vocations, sitting on a couch playing X-box and coughing.




1. People who want to smoke marijuana will tend to do so regardless of whether or not it is illegal.
2. The Netherlands don't seem to have a problem with it.
3. Why do you think marijuana would be any more destructive than alcohol? The sensible people will use it in moderation or not at all. Also, quite a few greater achievers have been known to get high in their time :.


----------



## awg (24 February 2010)

Something I had forgotten, but remembered recently when a friend suffered very ill effects from drinking.

Marijuana is THE most effective cure for severe hangovers that involve nausea or vomiting.

Something in it numbs the part of the brain that commands the stomach to throw up, so in the case someone cant stop retching, an infusion of cannabis smoke works excellently.

I suppose thats why it is used medicinally for nausea from chemotherapy etc, and was used extensivly as a tincture in the 19th century.

It seems to alleviate many other hangover symptons as well

said person was amazed and thankful

I would have no hesitation recommend it to anyone as an anti-emetic.


----------



## nulla nulla (24 February 2010)

awg said:


> Something I had forgotten, but remembered recently when a friend suffered very ill effects from drinking.
> 
> Marijuana is THE most effective cure for severe hangovers that involve nausea or vomiting.
> 
> ...




Your post is a little bit at odds with people that have over-indulged in smoking marijana and then experienced spinning out and throwing up.


----------



## awg (24 February 2010)

nulla nulla said:


> Your post is a little bit at odds with people that have over-indulged in smoking marijana and then experienced spinning out and throwing up.




True, I have heard of that phenomena, and even seen it happen to people.

Perhaps it would have been more accurate to say "something in the cannabis ...affects... the vomiting response".

It seems to be to do with the dosage, order and timing.

The people I saw who got sick were drunk and then smoked, or smoked too much..tobacco will also cause the same spin out effect to many people

I dont think the anti-nausea properties of cannabis are much disputed in respect of chemotherapy. 

for use as an anti-emetic, which means you are already vomiting, dosage should be small.

Also, like most "medicines" it could me more or less effective, with diffrent side-effects for individuals


----------



## nunthewiser (24 February 2010)

OH LIKE WOW MAN!!

I havent had a choooof in yonks and then all of a sudden i did and like wow this thread got brought back up like all of a sudden like ........

man this is really like karma and stuff 

awwww fark hang on this is a bit strange 

 WTF IS GOING ON !!!??

why are you all looking at me??


----------



## awg (24 February 2010)

nunthewiser said:


> OH LIKE WOW MAN!!
> 
> IS GOING ON !!!??
> 
> why are you all looking at me??




Conroys Internet plan, allows remote webcam switching.

you are under surveilance, and could be detained for unspecified offences for an unknown time

ps. Conroy really reminds me of a prominent Nazi, in many ways..cant remember who it was though,my nazi history is not as good as it could be.. was it Goebbels?


----------



## Mofra (25 February 2010)

nulla nulla said:


> Your post is a little bit at odds with people that have* over-indulged *in smoking marijana and then experienced spinning out and throwing up.



Bolded the operative word. Almost anything in high proportion is going to make you feel ill - personally I avoid junk food because I know how it makes me feel if I have it more than once in a blue moon.


----------



## Krusty the Klown (4 March 2010)

awg said:


> Something I had forgotten, but remembered recently when a friend suffered very ill effects from drinking.
> 
> Marijuana is THE most effective cure for severe hangovers that involve nausea or vomiting.
> 
> ...




Will you be my personal physician????

I tip well!!!!


----------



## kotim (7 March 2010)

Why worry about it, workplace health and safety and its partner Mr law suit  will put a stop to various ‘recreational’ and long term drug use for many current users.

Simple fact is that it is only a matter of cheap enough technology, before EVERY person working in a ‘workplace' will have to be tested for alcohol and drugs in their system when they go to work and when they leave from work.  So if you want to maintain a job then you will have to be going to work with no alcohol or drugs in your system. 

So it will come down to how long various drugs stay in your system.

The government reguales commerce becasue it can very easily control corporations through regulation, harder to control a sole trader, however where the individual will be stuffed is in controlling who the corporation can deal with.


----------



## DB008 (14 June 2012)

*Rhode Island Gov Signs Marijuana Decriminalization Bill Into Law*

Came across this on Reddit. Interesting. I wonder how much could be saved here if we changed our laws?


*CBS News - Efforts to relax pot rules gaining momentum in US*



> Rhode Island is poised to become the 15th state to decriminalize marijuana possession. The state's General Assembly passed legislation last week that would eliminate the threat of big fines or even jail time for the possession of an ounce or less of pot. Instead, adults caught with small amounts of marijuana would face a $150 civil fine. Police would confiscate the marijuana, but the incident would not appear on a person's criminal record.
> 
> Minors caught with pot would also have to complete a drug awareness program and community service.




Link


AND


*USA - Rhode Island General Assembly overwhelmingly decriminalizes possession of small amounts of marijuana*



> Harvard economist Jeffrey Miron estimated that this proposal could save the state of Rhode Island up to $11 million dollars annually. In addition, allowing law enforcement to issue a simple citation as opposed to making an arrest for marijuana possession will free up law enforcement time to prevent, investigate, and solve crimes of violence and against property.
> Finally, by ending the draconian practice of criminalizing simple possession, many Ocean Staters will be spared from being labeled criminals for non-violent behavior – a label that carries a host of terrible collateral consequences.




Link


----------



## prawn_86 (14 June 2012)

Its nice that we are (slowly) beginning to see some rational, fact based debate about drugs, as oppossed to peoples opinions and perceptions and/or politiking.

The 'war on drugs' has been a complete and total failure. The sooner we realise it, the better.


----------



## Glen48 (14 June 2012)

I think the jails are filling up and costing to much to keep the bad guys locked up,once they depression kicks in they will look at taxing it to get some loot in for their pension.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (15 June 2012)

prawn_86 said:


> Its nice that we are (slowly) beginning to see some rational, fact based debate about drugs, as oppossed to peoples opinions and perceptions and/or politiking.
> 
> The 'war on drugs' has been a complete and total failure. The sooner we realise it, the better.




+1

gg


----------



## Glen48 (15 June 2012)

As the World taxpayers  are paying troops  to guard the poppie fields of all  the Stan's so the CIA can sell the Heroin then nothing wrong with growing and sell Hemp.

Maybe we can get a few boat people to show how it is done.


----------



## Smurf1976 (15 June 2012)

Not too many troops guarding the poppy fields around here. Apart from a sign or two and flimsy wire fences there's not much security at all so far as I can see when driving past.


----------



## Glen48 (15 June 2012)

Smurf:
Most likely to much government red tape and council restrictions to be profitable.


----------



## DB008 (22 June 2012)

*Uruguay aims to legalize, oversee marijuana market*



> *Uruguay aims to legalize, oversee marijuana market*
> 
> (Reuters) - Uruguay's government unveiled a proposal on Wednesday to legalize and monitor the marijuana market, arguing that the drug is less harmful than the black market where it is trafficked.
> 
> ...



http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/21/us-uruguay-marijuana-idUSBRE85K04R20120621

I did not know that marijuana consumption is already legal in Uruguay.


----------



## Spongle (25 June 2012)

All drugs should be legal (under controls of course)

I'm beaming away on dexamphetamine sulphate right now but since I have a prescription; for a condition that does not exist mind you, it's perfectly ok.


----------



## Glen48 (25 June 2012)

It is legal in California but you get arrested if you sell it. They reckon the market could be worth $5 to 10 B and save about the same on closing jails and law enforcement costs.
 The big drug companies won't allow it as it eats into their profits.


----------



## Timmy (25 June 2012)

Glen48 said:


> The big drug companies won't allow it as it eats into their profits.




Also worthwhile considering the interests of the businesses running penitentiaries in the US - I wonder how much of their business comes from marijuana (& other illegal substances) -related offences?


----------



## sails (9 July 2012)

Glen48 said:


> ... The big drug companies won't allow it as it eats into their profits.





I think you could be right, Glen.  I have seen my daughter come off marijuana, seroquel and pristiq.  Marijuana seems to be the least damaging and, at least, has some therapeutic benefits.  Not recommending any of them, but if something is needed to help with depression, I think marijuana would be the better choice.

Never thought I would come to this, but I have been absolutely shocked (and angry) at the withdrawal effects of seroquel and to a lesser degree, Pristiq.

It wouldn't surprise me if drug companies are behind keeping marijuana illegal - it might dent their sales somewhat especially on anti depressants and pain relief.

With the far more health damaging alcohol and cigarettes being legal, it makes little sense that something that does seem to have some therapeutic benefit is so illegal.


----------



## Glen48 (9 July 2012)

When China spends 3 B  building a city in Angola and selling units at 120 to 200K each and the average wage is $2 a day and then China explains no one can buy because credit is tight, when USA spends 800M on anti smoking and a few more M on supporting tobacco farmer's, then allowing people to use dope at home is never going to see the light of day.


----------



## DB008 (12 July 2012)

*NY Times*

*New York Times: What Do You Get From A Drug War Costing $25 Billion Annually? 
Cocaine 74 Percent Cheaper Than It Was 30 Years Ago*



> When policy makers in Washington worry about Mexico these days, they think in terms of a handful of numbers: Mexico’s 19,500 hectares devoted to poppy cultivation for heroin; its 17,500 hectares growing cannabis; the 95 percent of American cocaine imports brought by Mexican cartels through Mexico and Central America.
> 
> They are thinking about the wrong numbers. If there is one number that embodies the seemingly intractable challenge imposed by the illegal drug trade on the relationship between the United States and Mexico, it is $177.26. That is the retail price, according to Drug Enforcement Administration data, of one gram of pure cocaine from your typical local pusher. That is 74 percent cheaper than it was 30 years ago.




http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/04/b...art-with-the-numbers.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all


Blog also here
http://reason.com/blog/2012/07/05/new-york-times-what-do-you-get-from-a-dr


----------



## Glen48 (12 July 2012)

The war on plants is good business , the Police get new equipment, more jails are built,more anti plant forces employed, more Hi Tech equipment developed, more PR for the feds.
It will never stop.


----------



## DB008 (17 July 2012)

*Mexican Drug War*

Good article outlining the Mexican Drug War

http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/07/13/mexican-drug-cartels-spreading-influence-graphic/


----------



## Tisme (26 March 2018)

Maccas enters the big pharma circus:

http://demicmedia.com/colorado-mcdonalds-offers-first-marijuana-friendly-smoking-section/



> *Colorado McDonald’s Offers First Marijuana Friendly Smoking S*
> 
> 
> Colorado continues to blaze major trails when it comes to marijuana.
> ...


----------



## DB008 (23 October 2018)

*Colorado cracks a billion in annual marijuana sales in record time, generating $200M in tax revenue*
​Marijuana sales in Colorado exceeded $1 billion as of August of this year, with tax revenue from those sales coming in at $200 million, according to a report from the Colorado Department of Revenue and its Marijuana Enforcement Division.

It’s the earliest point in any of the four years Colorado has had legal recreational marijuana that combined medical and rec sales have cracked the billion-dollar mark.

Total combined recreational and medical marijuana sales through August hit $1,022,245,511, according to the MED, setting the state on a trajectory to break last year’s record of more than $1.5 billion in sales.

State officials highlighted the industry’s growth in a news release Thursday. The release also shared findings from the Marijuana Enforcement Division’s 2018 Mid-Year Update, released Sept. 10.

The quarterly report found Denver, Boulder, El Paso and Pueblo counties are the industry’s hot spots, growing 80 percent of all plants in the state as of June.

It also found that while sales of marijuana flower remained relatively steady, sales of edible products and concentrates like hash oil and live resin grew significantly. Between January and June, edibles sales shot up 13.8 percent over the first six months of last year, and concentrates sales skyrocketed, growing 94.6 percent over the same period.

That growth comes as little surprise to Nancy Whiteman. She’s the founder and CEO of Wana Brands, the leading infused products and edibles brand in the state. After clearing $14.2 million in sales last year, Whiteman said her company — led by its marquee gummies — is on pace for 25 percent growth in 2018.  Wana is in the process of ramping up production of a new disposable vaporizer line that Whiteman said uses high-end mechanical components and high-end concentrates.

Continuing sales growth in Colorado can be linked to the shifting demographics of who is buying, in Whiteman’s view.

“I think there has been sort of a stereotype that the cannabis user is a young male,” she said. “The total pie is growing because new people are entering the market.” 

Who are those people? More women and more older folks, Whiteman said. They are being drawn in by diversifying options including more products containing cannabidiol, or CBD, the non-psychoactive marijuana ingredient that many people embrace for physical relaxation and pain management.

More on link below...
​*https://www.denverpost.com/2018/10/18/colorado-cracks-billion-marijuana-sales-record/*​*
From Reddit....
*
What's the total when you add in:

• Money not spent on prohibition policing
• Freeing up the courts and legal system
• Money saved by not locking up offenders
• Economic effects of people working instead of being incarcerated

This part might not be easily quantifiable, but I want the profits going to legal small business owners instead of drug lords.


----------



## So_Cynical (23 October 2018)

DB008 said:


> *Colorado cracks a billion in annual marijuana sales in record time, generating $200M in tax revenue*
> ​Marijuana sales in Colorado exceeded $1 billion as of August of this year, with tax revenue from those sales coming in at $200 million​




And none of it when into the banking system as the banks are federally regulated, all over the counter.​


----------



## DB008 (28 October 2018)

*Australia missing out on more than $5 billion by not legalising cannabis use, report finds*​SHOULD the recreational use of cannabis be legalised in Australia, the market would be worth more an estimated $5 billion annually.

That’s the finding of in-depth analysis by the global firm New Frontier Data, which looked at current illicit usage rates and comparable global regulated industries to model what a possible future legal marijuana market would look like.

Cannabis is the most widely used drug in the country, with 12 per cent of people reporting having used it in the past year.

At the moment, the black market is worth at least $4.5 billion a year — all of which goes into the pockets of criminals and organised gangs, the Oceania Cannabis Report found.

There has been a growing movement calling for recreational cannabis use to be decriminalised, on the back of several American states and Canada.

If Australia followed suit, the total market — combining recreational and medicinal use — would be worth $5.5 billion annually.

After successful lobbying, medicinal marijuana has become legal for certain sufferers of chronic illness and disease.

However, the high cost, low availability and strict regulations mean take-up has been lacklustre, the New Frontier Data report said.

“As of September 2018, there were just over 1000 medical cannabis patients registered in

Australia, which is a significantly lower patient participation rate than commonly seen in other legal medical cannabis markets.”​
https://www.news.com.au/finance/eco...s/news-story/50cef9f897412bdbcdb2ec33aa448c1e​


----------



## DB008 (8 November 2018)

*Michigan voters have passed an initiative to legalize marijuana*​Voters this evening passed _Proposal 18-1_ into law, making Michigan the 10th state to legalize marijuana. 

The initiative allows for the possession of up to 2.5 ounces, or up to 10 ounces at a private residence, for those 21 and older. The measure also legalizes the personal cultivation of up to 12 marijuana plants.

The initiative establishes a licensed and regulated system of marijuana retail outlets, which will be supplied by licensed cultivation centers. Marijuana will receive a 10% excise tax in addition to the standard 6% sales tax.

Michigan now joins nine other states that have legalized marijuana for all uses: Washington, Colorado, California, Oregon, Alaska, Massachusetts, Maine, Nevada and Vermont. The latter is the only state that does not authorize marijuana stores.

Below is the official ballot summary of _Proposition 18-1_ that voters approved:

_This proposal would:_

_Allow individuals 21 and older to; purchase, possess and use marijuana and marijuana-infused edibles, and grow up to 12 marijuana plants for personal consumption._
_Impose a 10-ounce limit for marijuana kept at residences and require amounts over 2.5 ounces be secured in locked containers._
_Create a state licensing system for marijuana businesses and allow municipalities to ban or restrict them._
_Permit retail sales of marijuana and edibles subject to a 10% tax, dedicated to implementation costs, clinical trials, schools, roads, and municipalities where marijuana businesses are located._
_Change several current violations from crimes to civil infractions._

https://themarijuanaherald.com/news/michigan-voters-legalize-marijuana/​
https://ballotpedia.org/Michigan_Proposal_1,_Marijuana_Legalization_Initiative_(2018)


----------



## DB008 (20 February 2019)

*Tough cannabis policies do not deter young people – study*


*Analysis of more than 100,000 teenagers found no link between*
*liberal policies and higher use*​
There is no evidence that tough policies deter young people from using cannabis, a study has found.

Analysing data about cannabis use among more than 100,000 teenagers in 38 countries, including the UK, US, Russia, France, Germany and Canada, the University of Kent study found no association between more liberal policies on cannabis use and higher rates of teenage cannabis use.

“My new study joins several others which show no evidence of a link between tougher penalties and lower cannabis use,” said Prof Alex Stevens, from the University of Kent’s school for social policy, sociology and social research.

“This is useful information for governments as they consider the best way to deal with cannabis. As it is, the harms and costs of imposing criminal convictions on people who use cannabis do not seem to be justified by an effect in reducing cannabis use.”
The new study, published in the International Journal of Drug Policy, challenged a 2015 study that concluded there was an association between cannabis policy liberalisation and a higher likelihood of adolescent use. This study was later used to justify calls against regulated, legal access to cannabis.

Stevens said these finding were based on a misinterpretation of that study’s own numerical results, and his re-analysis took in a wider collection of data, accounting for the differences in cannabis use between boys and girls in different countries. and did not find a significant association between policy liberalisation and adolescent cannabis use.

The news comes as Mexico appears set to become the third country, after Uruguay and Canada, to legalise cannabis, with calls growing in the UK for the country to follow suit in order to protect its users from harm by offering a greater variety of strains, while reducing policing costs and preventing criminal gangs from profiting from the illicit market.

However, fears remain that there is a link between cannabis smoking, particularly during teenage years, and mental health issues.

Niamh Eastwood, executive director at Release, the UK’s centre of expertise on drugs and drug laws, said the research added to the growing evidence that prohibitionist approaches to drugs, including cannabis, did not deter usage.

“Every year tens of thousands of people, including many young people, are needlessly criminalised in the UK for possession of a controlled drug, resulting in a criminal record that will devastate their future in terms of employment and educational opportunities,” she said.

“Countries that have ended criminal sanctions for possession of drugs have shown they have better health, social and economic outcomes, yet the UK government continues to have an evidence-free approach when it comes to the law around drugs.”

Ian Hamilton, a lecturer in mental health and addiction the University of York, said young people were unlikely to be dissuaded from using cannabis whether it was legal or not.

“For some of them the fact it is illegal will be part of the appeal, so if a country decides to open up access and allow regulated cannabis this may reduce part of the appeal the drug has,” he said.

“Also there is increasing attention given to the benefits of using cannabis, particularly for health, so many young people will think cannabis is a safer drug than tobacco.”​

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/feb/18/cannabis-policies-young-people​


----------



## DB008 (22 February 2019)

Well, water is wet...


*Cannabis May Pose a 'Long-Term Risk' to the Alcohol Industry*

*Marijuana Is More than a Consumer Good, It’s an Investment*

*And the industry is only getting bigger*​

The legal marijuana industry could emerge to become one of the biggest threats to the multi-billion dollar beverage alcohol business, according to a new report from a top analytical firm.

The IWSR, the leading source of data and intelligence on the alcoholic beverage market, in conjunction with and BDS Analytics, says a growing number of consumers, especially millennials, are showing a preferences to consume both booze and buds, versus older generations which tend to stick with just one. That could cut into long-term loyalty efforts by beverage makers, especially those in the beer and spirits fields.

“Our research shows that up to 40% of adults 21 and over consume cannabis in states where it’s legal,” said Jessica Lukas, vice-president at BDS Analytics. “Cannabis presents substantial opportunities across consumer industries, including new occasions that alcohol cannot and will not play. Consumers will continue to look to cannabis products over alcohol for occasions when they are feeling creative, need to get motivated, or seeking health, medical or wellness benefits.”

Certainly, money spend on cannabis is not necessarily money taken away from alcohol companies. But the IWSR is warning that makers of adult beverages need to begin anticipating consumer’s shifting demands now if they want to avoid trouble down the road.

Last year, Americans drank 3.345 billion cases of alcohol, a 0.8% decline from 2017. That worked out to about 7.9 billion gallons of booze, roughly 160 million bathtubs full.​


http://fortune.com/2019/02/21/cannabis-risk-to-alcohol-industry/​


----------



## DB008 (5 March 2019)

I spoke to my local MP and bought up the topic of MM and recreational cannabis.

Well, the way that the politicans think is - "if you purchase cannabis, you might not be purchasing alcohol, which has a higher % tax - so the Gov is losing money". Politicans only think about tax revenue streams, not the bigger picture.

Also, said local MP put things into perspective - Colorado has a $28 billion budget - $200 million is peanuts. Who cares. They might have lost $100 million in tax on beer sales because you spent the money on cannabis not alcohol.


----------



## DB008 (7 September 2019)

Yesterday in LA


----------



## DB008 (26 September 2019)

Got back from the USA

We are so far behind. What surprised me was that the people l saw entering/in/exiting MM dispensaries were just normal people you would see everywhere else. No bogans, bums or what-not.

Anyways, some stuff l tried. It was expensive. Alcohol is cheap in the USA.

*LA*

























*Oregon*


----------



## DB008 (26 September 2019)

*
Washington State




































*​
Just wanted to add - everything l did in this post (and previous post) was all 100% legal, and l had a great time visiting the USA.

Did stop in Nevada, but didn't try any cannabis.

Saw this on the main strip though...

*




*​Obligatory Vegas picture...

*



*​


----------



## BanstokHoliday (1 October 2019)

I don't think legalizing marijuana is a good idea. I think we should decriminalize marijuana. It would be a much better solution. They won't put you away for Smoking marijuana, they'll put the dealer away.


----------



## DB008 (30 October 2019)

*Canberra laws legalising cannabis breach international law, United Nations warns*​The ACT Government has hit back at warnings from the United Nations that legalising cannabis will breach international law, telling the body to instead look at the United States and Canada where the laws go further.

In a letter to the Federal Government sent following recent "concerning" reports, the UNs' International Narcotics Control Board (INCB) reiterated that the legalisation and regulation of cannabis for non-medical use, including in small quantities, were inconsistent with international drug conventions.

Australia, along with more than 200 other countries, signed three international conventions agreeing to certain rules about illicit drug use and restrictions about medications.

But ACT Chief Minister Andrew Barr defended the laws that come into effect on January 31, 2020, saying the supply and traffic of cannabis will remain illegal and the UN should turn its attention elsewhere.

"Canada, Colorado and California have cannabis legalisation laws that are much more expansive than the laws passed by the ACT Legislative Assembly last month," Mr Barr said.

*Federal Health Minister Greg Hunt, who has already sounded his opposition to the ACT's move, said it was clear that the legislation was in breach of the UN convention.*

"The Australian Government remains committed to the international drug control regime established by the UN international drug conventions which do not support the legalisation of cannabis for recreational use," Mr Hunt said.​
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-10...sation-breaches-international-law-un/11649088​



Cliff notes: Politics 101, our federal government are weak as piss & Hunt is an idiot with no spine. Why can't our politicians do something good for a change?


----------



## Tink (30 October 2019)

Smoking ban: Bourke Street Mall tipped to go smoke-free

13/09/2019

Smokers look set to be banned from lighting up in Bourke Street Mall, and the Queen Victoria Market could soon follow.

The City of Melbourne has surveyed city-goers, and found overwhelming support for the ban, with 83 per cent of businesses and people supporting the idea.

The council will vote on the proposed ban next week.

https://www.3aw.com.au/smoking-ban-...-smoke-free-queen-victoria-market-may-follow/


----------



## DB008 (16 November 2019)

Currently in South Africa for work

Same brand CBD for sale here as was in LA (in my previous post #227 & #228)











​No THC, just CBD

Australia - let me introduce you my little friend call Red Tape...


----------



## DB008 (3 December 2019)

*Crowds of people line up for first day of legal*
*marijuana sales in Michigan*​Brand new recreational marijuana sales underway in Michigan marked a historic boom for the emerging industry – and had hundreds of people lined up for the first day of legal marijuana sales.

Shops in Ann Arbor were among the first in the state allowed to sell pot.

Business owners say the sale of recreational marijuana is something they’ve been working towards for years, and customers hope today is just the beginning.

On a busy Sunday doors opened at 10 a.m. sharp.

In the heart of Ann Arbor, marijuana retailers Greenstone Provisions on Ashley Street, Exclusive Provisioning Centers on Varsity Drive and Arbors Wellness on East Liberty are all eager to service recreational users.​
https://www.wxyz.com/news/hundreds-line-up-for-first-day-of-legal-marijuana-sales-in-michigan​


----------



## DB008 (17 December 2019)

*Changes to patient access for medicines containing codeine*

In December 2016, the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) announced the final decision that over the counter medicines containing low-dose codeine will become prescription only products from 1 February 2018. The current range of over the counter medicines containing codeine will continue to be available without prescription in pharmacies until 31 January 2018.

These changes are occurring because there is evidence of increasing public harm associated with the use of over-the-counter codeine containing medicines, in addition to research suggesting low-dose codeine provides little therapeutic benefit. The decision to reschedule codeine was made via a lengthy and robust process over a two year period.​https://www.health.qld.gov.au/clini...edicines/medicines-containing-codeine/changes​


All l do is ask the doctor for panadeine forte. Which is stronger than the over-the-counter stuff l was purchasing before.


*The Impact of Cannabis Access Laws on Opioid Prescribing*​
*Abstract*

While recent research has shown that cannabis access laws can reduce the use of prescription opioids, the effect of these laws on opioid use is not well understood for all dimensions of use and for the general United States population. Analyzing a dataset of over 1.5 billion individual opioid prescriptions between 2011 and 2018, which were aggregated to the individual provider-year level, we find that recreational and medical cannabis access laws reduce the number of morphine milligram equivalents prescribed each year by 11.8 and 4.2 percent, respectively. These laws also reduce the total days supply of opioids prescribed, the total number of patients receiving opioids, and the probability a provider prescribes any opioids net of any offsetting effects. Additionally, we find consistent evidence that cannabis access laws have different effects across types of providers, physician specialties, and payers.​
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0167629618309020?via=ihub​


----------



## DB008 (17 December 2019)

Markets in South Africa


----------



## DB008 (28 December 2019)

Very interesting.

Well worth watching the short news segment. What will probably happen here in Oz

*Amazon, Apple, Netflix bank on cannabis content*

*Data shows 42.7 percent increase in total streamed hours for*
*cannabis-related shows in 2019*​
Cannabis content is getting in on the streaming wars.

Joshua Otten, the CEO of content service and distribution agency Ronin, is rolling out a streaming service devoted entirely to cannabis- and CBD-related content. Social Club TV will launch Jan. 15 with distribution across Apple TV, Roku, Amazon Prime, Android TV and iOS in more than 100 million homes.

Viewers can expect new and existing shows like “Pot Pie,” “Marijuana Mania” and more than 200 hours of original cannabis-related programming from cooking shows to comedy and true crime. The network is currently being streamed on the THC Channel on the ViacomCBS-owned, ad-supported streaming service PlutoTV for free, and subscription service will launch in 2020 for viewers to access exclusive content, Otten told FOX Business.

“We want to be that library for cannabis consumers,” Otten said, adding that the company is on track to make more than $4 million in revenue next year. “The popularity of shows like ‘Marijuana Mania’ proves there is mainstream demand for engaging and entertaining cannabis content.”​
More on link below...

https://www.foxbusiness.com/lifestyle/amazon-apple-and-netflix-invest-in-more-cannabis-content​


----------



## DB008 (3 January 2020)

*Nearly $3.2M in Legal Cannabis Sold in Illinois on First Day, State Says*​
*Thousands of Illinois residents lined up Jan. 1 to be among the first to make a purchase as recreational marijuana officially became legal*
​
More than 77,000 transactions netted nearly $3.2 million in marijuana product sales on the first day of legal cannabis in Illinois, the state announced Thursday.

The Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation reported 77,128 transactions took place at cannabis dispensaries around Illinois, generating $3,176,256.71 on Day 1.

“As we start a new decade, Illinois has achieved a monumental milestone," said Toi Hutchinson, senior advisor to the governor for cannabis control, in a statement, "launching the legalization of cannabis in a way that includes communities left behind for far too long, creates good jobs and expunges thousands of records for those who have lost out on opportunities and ends prohibition."

While some disagree with the level of social equity worked into the state's legal marijuana plan, thousands of residents lined up early Wednesday to be among the first to purchase cannabis as recreational marijuana officially became legal.

"I wanted to be first in line because I have waited 46 years for this moment," he said Arnold Winslow, who walked nearly two hours to make the first purchase in Elmwood Park at Sunnyside dispensary.

Winslow said he hopes to frame the gram of weed he purchased to "have a momento."

Some dispensaries used paging systems similar to restaurants, others partnered with local restaurants to offer a warm place to wait before making a purchase. In Chicago’s Andersonville neighborhood, a coffee pop-up sprouted outside with a movie marathon and cannabis-themed trivia.

At EarthMed Dispensary in Chicago, which claims it has been the "busiest independent dispensary in the state," the first 100 customers also received a commemorative T-shirt with their purchase.

Purchases are restricted to anyone 21 and older with a government-issued ID. Non-Illinois residents won’t be able to buy as much as residents and all purchases must be made in cash.​
https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/illinois-reveals-first-day-marijuana-sales/2195516/

​


----------



## DB008 (3 February 2020)

And here I was thinking the Labor party is more progressive than the Libs.

Annastacia Palaszczuk is a muppet-head.

*Drug decriminalisation would 'save hundreds of millions', but Queensland Premier rules it out*​ 
​
Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk has ruled out decriminalising drugs despite a new report saying it would cut the state's record rate of incarceration and save hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars a year.

It is the centrepiece of 42 reforms proposed by the Queensland Productivity Commission (QPC), after its examination of the state's overcrowded prison system.

*The QPC found decriminalisation would improve the lives of drug addicts without increasing the rate of drug use.*

Its report estimated that if reforms were implemented immediately, "the prison population would be between 20 to 30 per cent lower in 2025".

*"This would save between $165 million and $270 million in annual prison costs and avoid $2.1 billion in prison investments," the report said.*

The QPC found imprisonment rates had been rising steadily for years, reaching the highest rate per 100,000 people since federation — with Indigenous people 10 times more likely to be jailed.

At the same time, it declared "all available evidence" suggested the so-called war on drugs by state authorities had "failed to curb supply or use", and cost the state about $500 million a year in law enforcement alone, with about 1,840 people jailed annually for drug crimes.

*The QPC said a cost-benefit analysis found decriminalising the use and possession of cannabis would save about $850 million, rising to $1.2 billion if the Government chose to fully legalise and regulate the supply of "lower-harm drugs such as cannabis and MDMA".*​
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-01-31/drug-offences-penalties-qld-police-prison/11918390​


----------



## DB008 (25 April 2020)

*Army veteran calls for access to legal cannabis to help treat post-traumatic stress disorder*​When Max Hill looks you in the eye, he still has the piercing gaze of the drug cop he used to be.

Now in retirement, he's still hunting cannabis suppliers. But this time, it's as a customer on behalf of his son, David — an army veteran of two tours of Afghanistan who uses it to treat post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

"I'm a bit slow on the uptake, I suppose," Max said.

"It took me 22 years in the police force, and 20 years since, to learn that cannabis is a medicine."

This is no 'Breaking Bad' story. Max is openly and defiantly flouting a law he says has passed its use-by date.

His turning point came when David — who was suffering terribly with PTSD — left a psychiatric ward after being treated with massive doses of benzodiazepines.

David said the medication made some symptoms worse.

"The benzodiazepines were not a positive impact on my life whatsoever," David said.

"They initially took away the pain. But then it caused addiction, then overt destructive behaviour. It caused me to cut off from other people. It almost exacerbated my symptoms."

Alone in his apartment, David was deteriorating fast as he tried to come off his medication.

"He was withdrawing terribly," Max said.

"Totally dishevelled, crying uncontrollably… incapable of managing anything other than lying in bed and looking at his phone."

David himself doesn't have much memory of that time, describing himself as a "medicated zombie".



*Push to legalise, and subsidise, cannabis*

David Hill's experience is no scientific study.

But it tallies with results from an open trial of CBD — the therapeutic element in cannabis — on severe anxiety in 30 young people conducted in Melbourne's west.

Professor Pat McGorry says the trial at Orygen Youth Health found "encouraging results along the lines that David experienced".

"We now have major funding to test it as a preventive treatment in young people who are in the early stages of psychosis," Professor McGorry said.

David says he's telling his story on Anzac Day because he's lost too many mates to suicide.

He fears for those going through the same treatment he did.

"Talking to them, you notice they're sluggish, unmotivated… it's a walking, unconscious being that you're talking to," David said.

"That's where I was before this treatment my father found for me. And I just want them to be able to reap the benefits that I have, and see them put their lives back together.

"There are laws being broken, but they're outdated laws.

"I'd like to see it available, I'd like to see it legalised, I'd like to see it subsidised by the department, and I'd like to see it pushed — because I am a case study. It has worked 100 per cent."​

More on link below...

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-04...-cannabis-for-army-veteran-sons-ptsd/12181306

​


----------



## marys (14 May 2020)

I thought that marijuana legalized in our country. Why not? Totally yes!


----------



## marys (14 May 2020)

I thought that marijuana legalized in our country. Why not? Totally yes!


----------



## marys (14 May 2020)

I thought that marijuana legalized in our country. Why not? Totally yes!


----------



## marys (14 May 2020)

So. I just want to say that I can recommend CBD flowers by https://berkshirecbd.com/ and their affiliate program - http://www.shareasale.com/join/96443


----------



## DB008 (10 September 2020)

*Over the counter medicinal cannabis could be*
*available next year*​Over the counter medicinal cannabis could be made available in Australian pharmacies as early as next year.

The Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) has flagged it intends to make cannabidiol (CBD) medicines available without a prescription.

An interim decision made by the TGA would mean patients would only need to consult with a pharmacist for access to the substance.

Josh Fegan, CEO at provider Althrea, said the TGA’s decision was one of the biggest developments in the industry to date.

“The interim decision reflects the significant shift in community and government attitudes towards medicinal cannabis since it was legalised in Australia in late 2016, which has seen it move from a fringe alternative towards an accepted mainstream option,” Fegan said.

“As a strong advocate for patient access, Althea has closely monitored the proposed amendment since it began and has participated in the consultation process.

“We are excited by the TGA’s interim decision to down schedule CBD products and see this development as a big step forward for prescription cannabis products already available in Australia.”

Fegan added the products would need to go through a registration process that involves safety and quality checks.

He said products should be available towards the end of 2021.​
https://7news.com.au/lifestyle/over...nnabis-could-be-available-next-year-c-1303716


.​


----------



## DB008 (15 September 2020)

Go the red tape train - aka - Australian politics/laws.

If anything, during this difficult time, the Federal Government should be fast tracking legislation on the red tape stranglehold that could be a booming industry, as seen in other countries....




*Months after the ACT decriminalised cannabis possession,*
*growers still face challenges*​


*Difficulties complying with the law*​​​The requirement that plants be grown outdoors, where they are a target for thieves, is one of a number of complaints cannabis users have with the ACT laws.​​"You can grow cannabis, but it's illegal to buy the seeds," says long-time cannabis legalisation advocate Jason Foster.​​"You can grow four cannabis plants [per household] but you can only have 50 grams, which is less than what one plant will produce."​​The complaints are nothing new to ACT Labor MLA Michael Pettersson, who introduced the legislation in 2018.​​"The model we've got in place in the ACT isn't perfect. It addresses possession but it doesn't address supply," he says.​​"The fundamental problem we face is that our ability to legislate in this space is limited... to deal with supply we're going to need changes at the Commonwealth level."​​As well as being restricted by federal law, the ACT legislation conflicts directly with Commonwealth cultivation and possession laws.​​In October last year Attorney-General Christian Porter warned the Commonwealth law "[was] still valid law in the ACT", but so far no legal challenge has been mounted.​​"The time for that has come and gone," says Mr Pettersson.​​"There was a lot of sabre-rattling at the time, but ultimately it came to nothing."​​ACT Police data obtained by The Drum shows there has not been any significant change to detections of THC — the main psychoactive compound in cannabis — in roadside drug tests since the laws came into force on January 31.​

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-09-14/months-on-frustration-over-act-cannabis-laws/12656348


.​


----------



## DB008 (8 October 2020)

*Vermont becomes 11th state to legalize recreational marijuana market*​

The adult-use marijuana club of the United States just grew to 11 with the addition of Vermont on Wednesday.​​Gov. Phil Scott, a Republican, announced that he allowed legislation to regulate and tax cannabis sales to become law without his signature, according to a news release from the governor’s office.​​The news, which sets the stage for yet more growth of the U.S. cannabis industry, was hailed by the Marijuana Policy Project (MPP) as a major victor, especially considering that Vermont is only the second state in the nation to legalize adult use via the legislature and not at the ballot box. Illinois did so in 2019.​​Recreational sales in Vermont are not expected to begin until October 2022.​​Although Vermont legalized the possession and use of recreational marijuana in 2018, lawmakers at the time declined to authorize any framework for the legal production and sale of adult use cannabis.​​Vermont lawmakers in September gave final approval to S. 54, which picks up where the 2018 law left off.​​“The significance of Vermont’s decision to legalize and regulate cannabis sales, especially in a state with a Republican governor and through the legislative process, cannot be overstated,” MPP Executive Director Steven Hawins said in a news release.​​“This is an historic move that adds to the momentum of our movement and underlines its breadth and depth, and importantly, it comes as other state legislatures are poised to seriously consider legalization in the very near future.”​​MPP’s summary of the bill can be found here.​​Although Scott declined to sign into law a bill that establishes a formal framework for the production and sale of recreational cannabis, he nevertheless allowed the measure to become law without a veto.​​In a  letter to the president of the state Senate, he wrote that Vermont lawmakers still have work to do.​​Scott said he declined to sign the bill because it didn’t address multiple concerns he has, including:​​
An “inequitable playing field,” which he said “will disproportionately benefit Vermont’s existing (MMJ) dispensaries.” (Protesters gathered last weekend outside the capitol to draw attention to the lack of a social equity program.)
 The allowance of marijuana vaping products when he’s not satisfied that vaping does not pose a threat to public health.
Adding stricter marketing prohibitions to ensure cannabis isn’t made attractive to minors.
An “aggressive” timeline for the appointment of cannabis control board members by Jan. 8, 2021.
Increasing law enforcement funding and training to handle a possible uptick in impaired drivers.


https://mjbizdaily.com/vermont-becomes-11th-state-to-legalize-recreational-marijuana-market/amp/​


----------



## DB008 (1 November 2020)

*Cannabis use among teens down by half after legalization in Canada*​
Just two years after legalizing the sale of marijuana in Canada, cannabis use among teens aged 15-17 years has slowed down by half. This is according to Michael Boudreau, a criminology professor at St. Thomas University. ​
*No feared increase in cannabis use*​​According to the professor, nearly six percent of Canadians say they use cannabis daily. This number has remained unchanged even before legalization. Cannabis use among teens in the age bracket of 15-17 went down by half, from 20 percent before legalization to 10 percent currently.​​“So there, we do not see a skyrocket use of cannabis. Now, some would argue that is still too high, and I think that’s a point that can be taken, so there could be more education directed towards cannabis use,” Boudreau said.​​However, according to the professor, cannabis consumption among teens aged 18 and 24 stands at 33 percent, which is equally unchanged.​


More on link below...


https://growcola.com/cannabis-use-among-teens-down-by-half-after-legalization-in-canada/



.​


----------

