Alcohol vs Tobacco vs MarijuanaFollow

Well, Mr. Genius, just tell me how (outside of legality)it has more of a negative impact on someone's life than alcohol or tobacco?

Makes you shoot your friends and run over little girls. Tobacco makes you a huge dicked cowboy, and alcohol makes models turn into nymphomaniacs for you. Also apparently teaches your pets to have astounding intelligence and balance.

If marijuana were legalized it would open up a whole new multimillion (possibly billion) dollar industry which would definitely shake up the economy/black market/drug war.

Tobacco and alcohol companies would see a slight drop in revenue because marijuana would become a viable alternative recreational drug for some people.

The DEA would lose funding because we wouldn't need to spend as much money fighting illegal drug trade through the borders.

The Mexican mafia would suffer greatly, as most of the marijuana in the United States is imported from Mexico. Since marijuana grows readily almost anywhere in the northern hemisphere, many people would simply grow their own, although I suspect most of it would be imported from multinational corporations that would go someplace tax-free with cheap (slave) labor and mass produce high-quality plants.

Because of the ease of production and distribution, it wouldn't be very expensive to buy and it wouldn't generate much profit.

So why is it illegal?

- Harry J. Anslinger (a recommended book that deals with Anslinger and history of the drug war is "Cocaine" by Dominic Streatfeild)

- Tobacco and alcohol companies have a vested interest in keeping it illegal and have powerful lobbyists and politicians

- The DEA and the CIA generate a massive amount of secret revenue by playing both sides of the drug war and have close ties to US politicians

- No major corporate interests find it an appealing enough investment to push for legalization which would need to happen in our current capitalistic political system (yes, I classified our politics as an economic system)

Well for one there isn't just a little high with marijuana. It tends to be an all or nothing high. With alcohol you can have a beer or a drink and get a little buzzed and feel fine a short time later.

The second thing is people like YOU think that you can fully function stoned. I don't want some STONED pothead driving my kids school bus around because he thinks, like you, there are no negative effects of marijuana.

I can attest to this - I drive high all the time (though not a schoolbus full of kids) and the only time I have any problem is when I'm talking on the phone. With a headset. I always accuse my wife of making me miss turns and exits.
Driving even a little bit drunk is a whole other thing.


Pure, unadulterated bullShit. I take it you're from the "I've never tried it I can still tell you how bad it is" camp?

Maybe you can list the top 5 reasons to smoke it. This will make my point.

It's not dangerous right now fuck tard because people grow their own and can keep it clean. If you institutionalize the prospect then you suddenly get a ******** of carcinogins through into the mix. There are other reason of course but that's a main one.

I disagree. "High's" come in all shapes and sizes. Different kinds of pot do different things to you.

Generally, I find most outdoor "brands" (or whatever your dealer decides to call it) tend to give you a "happier high" while indoor tends to make you a dumbass. While the amount you smoke definitely plays a part, at least for me, there seems to be a "limit" to how how you can get on any single type of pot. It's almost physically impossible to OD on pot (I think you'd have to like, eat a pound of it) so there really isn't a limit to HOW much one can smoke, besides one's supply. But pot enhances pretty much everything, so if you're drinking the effects of alcohol will be enhanced (can lead to "the spins").

Of course, even if you've reached your "limit", you can always go bong or, smoke a different ( & preferably better) kind of pot to get "higher".

As for the length of time your high: The higher your tolerance, the longer you're high. I'm a heavy smoker (About an 1/8th a week) and can "come down" (In other words: Get a little tired & hungry) about an hour or two after. However, if I don't smoke for a while, a hit can get me lit for 6+ hours.

Things to note:

-There has never been a single death from marijuana overdose.
-Smokers do not become violent.
-Marijuana is not addictive.

Decriminalization would be the first step to legalization. Personal possession of say, under an ounce without "intent to distribute". As for testing, mouth swabs are easily administered (and detect to up to about 12hrs), & could be sent for testing for a post driving ticket.

Phillip Morris should really look into it, as their products use in the states is declining.

Marijuana is damn good for you.

It makes you run really really quickly!

In fact, so quickly, you can finish races sideways!!!!11!!

What a bloke!

Not to rain on your parade, but...



Technically true. While the drug itself pretty much can't kill you, its effects most definitely can. There's also very little solid information about the long term health effects of smoking pot. Overdose is not the only health concern when assessing a drug.

This is also a bit misleading when compared to other illegal drugs. Most drug overdoses occur as a result of significant variation in the ingredients in the drugs themselves and/or harmful additives. It can be easily argued that the overdose rate of drug users in general would be decreased significantly more by legalizing cocaine and meth for example, than by legalizing marijuana.

I'm not refuting the basic point here, but just suggesting that it's not as significant as you're making it out to be. It's equally virtually impossible to die of an overdose from LSD, but that doesn't mean that it's completely "safe" by any means.



That's just plain not true

It's a common myth that marijuana smokers are all happy mellow people. Howver, statistics show a pretty common pattern of paranoia and violence over time in those who smoke it. The connection between the two is not perfectly understood though, largely due to the illegality and underground nature of marijuana smoking. It's certainly possible that somehow people who are innately more violent tend to smoke more pot (or smoke more obsessively), or that there's some other psychological factors involved.

Point being that it's utterly false to make this broad claim. Lots of people drink alcohol and don't become violent either, but that does not change the fact that there's a strong link between alcohol use and violence, just as there is with marijuana.



Also completely false.

You're tossing out myths about Marijuana, presumably perpetuated by various advocacy and legalization sites. I happen to believe that marijuana should be legalized, but let's do so with open eyes about it, not by presenting a false rosy picture of the drug.

It's not as strongly physically additive as other drugs, but it has some profound effects on brain chemistry that in some ways make it harder to kick as a habit. Most sources claiming that it's not addictive are using a definition of addiction that includes "harm", and using the drugs relatively light detrimental health effects to argue that it's not addictive. That's a wrong argument IMO. If you're going to separate the health effects and addictiveness into two separate categories, you need to discuss each without relation to the other. Doing otherwise confuses the issue IMO and gives a false impression that people who use marijuana don't have a hard time quitting.


One more thing:



At the risk of being obvious, these really are the same thing. If you decriminalize it, you are by definition "legalizing" it. I suppose you could be talking about whether you can go to jail for possession or not, versus degrees of regulation on use (ie: prescription versus over the counter), but that's not really what you just said...

The 300,000 people who entered drug treatment programs for marijuana addiction would seem to support my position Smash. What do you have? Clever remarks?

The 300,000 people who entered drug treatment programs for marijuana addiction would seem to support my position Smash. What do you have? Clever remarks?

You left out "court mandated". Or did you mean the 11 people who entered then of their own free will?

Fuck you're ignorant. Infants realize these things you obliviously miss so frequently. It's almost impossible to accept that you didn't suffer a severe head trauma at some point in your past.