Should Marijuana Be Legalized?

Should Marijuana Be Legalized?

  • No, it is an illegal gate way drug. Keep the laws right here.

    Votes: 31 21.5%

  • Yes, for adults. Tax and regulate it.

    Votes: 109 75.7%

  • Maybe, if more studies are done.

    Votes: 1 0.7%

  • What is marijuana anyway?

    Votes: 3 2.1%
  • Total voters
    144
Ahhh, there's nothing quite like a good push poll.
 
Last edited:
I am against it, mainly because I object to smoking in general. I know there are other ways to ingest marijuana, but most people smoke it and I don't think I or the public should be subject to anyone's second hand smoke. Some smokers may be considerate, but there are a vast many who are not.
 
Personally I voted."No, it is an illegal gate way drug. Keep the laws right here. "..

In this day and age of no responsibility of most kids and ALOT of adults I would say pot will get more people in trouble then not... IMHO..
 
The easy availability has proven that enforcement is not working and it never will. I am in favor of spending our dollars wisely and whether or not I like MJ it's here to stay. So I said legalize it and tax it.

In 2010 alone we spent $3.6B on enforcement, I would rather see that put into infrastructure, jobs creation, healthcare, whatever (anything would be more productive).

http://www.cnbc.com/id/100791442
 
With the general popularity of the 'medical marijuana' scam, it pretty is already legalized.
Itchy toe --> MJ script
Terminal Cancer --> MJ script
Nonspecific not feelingwelliness --> MJ script

In the battle for the legalization of cannabis, the potheads have prevailed.
 
Didn't vote options suck. What about legalization without regulation and taxes? Pot is bad for kids so any amount of tax/regulation is OK. Ummm sure. You know what else is bad for kids? Getting hit with a GA plane while playing in their house. Let's let housewives vote on whether or not GA should be legal, that should be fun. I don't smoke, just love freedom and am less a hypocrite then most.
 
Geico266 said:
Is that like Maui Wowie?? :goofy:



:lol:
Click to expand...
No, a push poll is when you inject your opinion and/or patently false information into the poll question or answer in an attempt to sway the results.

The two most eggregious examples that I'm aware of are:

During a Texas governor's election, voters were phone polled with the question "would you be less likely to vote for Richards if you were told that she and her staff were gay?"

During the 2000 presidential primaries, voters were phone polled with the question "would you be less likely to vote for McCain if you were told that he fathered a child with a black servant?"

Both of those polls are quoted from memory so I'm sure neither representation is exact but they are adequately representative.

You're still in the minor leagues by comparison. :rofl:
 
John221us said:
I am against it, mainly because I object to smoking in general. I know there are other ways to ingest marijuana, but most people smoke it and I don't think I or the public should be subject to anyone's second hand smoke. Some smokers may be considerate, but there are a vast many who are not.
Click to expand...

Do you feel the same way about tailpipes on cars? Should they be banned?

How about anuses? Do you feel the same about farts? May humans near you ingest burritos, oh great one? ;)

Ban Ye, The Anuses of Flatulation, for Squire John's nose may yet detect even a minuscule amount in the air -- upon whence he shall complain mightily, in a most self-righteous fashion.

We shall have none of this. Ban Anus! Ban Anus!

ROFL.
 
denverpilot said:
Do you feel the same way about tailpipes on cars? Should they be banned?

How about anuses? Do you feel the same about farts? May humans near you ingest burritos, oh great one? ;)

Ban Ye, The Anuses of Flatulation, for Squire John's nose may yet detect even a minuscule amount in the air -- upon whence he shall complain mightily, in a most self-righteous fashion.

We shall have none of this. Ban Anus! Ban Anus!

ROFL.
Click to expand...


Don't you love it when you crack yourself up?
 
denverpilot said:
Do you feel the same way about tailpipes on cars? Should they be banned?

How about anuses? Do you feel the same about farts? May humans near you ingest burritos, oh great one? ;)

Ban Ye, The Anuses of Flatulation, for Squire John's nose may yet detect even a minuscule amount in the air -- upon whence he shall complain mightily, in a most self-righteous fashion.

We shall have none of this. Ban Anus! Ban Anus!

ROFL.
Click to expand...

It is not the same thing and yes, I am in favor of emissions control for vehicle and manufacturing exhaust. Your entitled to your opinion, but mocking mine does not make your point, whatever it might have been.
 
Oh the poll. They don't work without jumping through hoops via Tapatalk.

But hey, freedom is freedom. There's at least one generation represented here, who's age group matches all the stuck up politicians, who were once "Flower Power" children.

Kids can't even ride a bike today without a helmet.

Let 'em puff their weed without fear of being shot by a militarized law enforcement twit, doing a no-knock raid. Wasn't the Mall in DC once inundated with potheads protesting various crap?

Oh. They were only tripping on LSD within the District, I forgot. ;)

Now those same potheads are in Congress, and have sphincters so tight you could stick coal up there and get back a perfect diamond in five minutes flat.

And one of their peers from DeBeers would be over toot sweet to slap a lawsuit on them for having the audacity to be in their turf.

Most everyone outgrows that crap eventually if they're even interested.

And it's not like their predecessors in Weed Power have started dropping dead very fast yet, opening up all those great middle management jobs for the 20-something's and 30-something's.

Might as well let 'em smoke enough weed to remove all their ambition for a decade or so. Maybe by then the Flower Children so worried about The Man in their youth, will have completely destroyed the Constitution by then.
 
You old farts (I'm getting close) should not only be advocating that it be legalized, you should definitely be smoking it:

When we are elderly, our brain displays a dramatic decline in neurogenesis within the hippocampus. This decline may underlie age-associated memory impairments as well as depression. Research in my laboratory has demonstrated that stimulating the brain's marijuana receptors restores neurogenesis. Thus, later in life, marijuana might actually help your brain, rather than harm it.
Click to expand...

Besides, if you're sitting back with a drink at night but advocating that pot remain illegal, then you're being quite hypocritical.

Here's the full article that the above quote was taken from. "A pot vs. alcohol, which is worse" article (This guy gave a great TED talk also).

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/your-brain-food/201012/alcohol-vs-marijuana-in-the-brain

It appears that alcohol is at least as bad.
 
I had someone tell me they will not use this stuff because its against the law.

As she where telling me this she was driving 10 miles over the posted speed limit. I said. Oh you break certain laws.

Smoking this stuff has never hurt anyone. Not one person has ever OD'ed from smoking this stuff, ever. It can not happen.

One would have to eat 15,000 lbs in 15 mins in order to OD on this, and we know that can not happen.

But you can OD on..Water, aspsrin, coffee, I could go on but why. This stuff is harmless. If you say different post some examples not your opinion.

This stuff should be legal and taxed like everything else. No one has died from smoking pot, never happened never will.

Tony
 
Good or bad the legality of pot is not based on harm. Heard an interview with a scientist that came out with a study claiming no long term cognitive defects from chronic pot use but that chronic users tended to be more depressed then normal. The poor guy said the anti drug folks were hating on him for a showing of no harm and the potheads were hating on him for calling them depressed. Cracked me up.
 
No vote from me in a biased poll, but if you enjoy seeing your money going to support some drug cartel have a smoke.
 
I was vote #13 in the "yes for adults" column.

Cannabis is certainly not "harmless", but it is probably less harmful than alcohol or tobacco and I've seen no hard evidence to justify prohibition.

As for supporting the drug cartels, taxing and regulating the stuff is probably the quickest way to put them out of business -- at least the weed business.

Could the moderators please move this to the SZ?
 
Making a marijuana thread about the "evils" of alcohol, while whining that alcohol is bad but marijuana is not, is the type of nonsense that got us a dysfunctional congress to begin with.

Whether you can OD on MJ, or not, is beside the point, IF you use the same standard that is applied to drinking. Drunks kill people in their cars, so while it is legal to drink, it is not legal to drive drunk.
'
Stoned drivers are JUST AS DANGEROUS and since it's always "for the children," why is MJ different?

Obama and Clinton were pot heads, obama probably still is, based on his behavior, so now we're supposed to embrace marijuana, I get it.
 
Never heard of a stoner beating his wife or getting in a bar fight. About the only thing you need to fear from a pot head is your Doritos stash. ;)

Does anyone really think the government would legalize marijuana and not tax it? What are you smoking? :lol:
 
Last edited:
Norman said:
No vote from me in a biased poll, but if you enjoy seeing your money going to support some drug cartel have a smoke.
Click to expand...
The guy down the road from me, who has been growing for at least a decade, isn't part of some cartel. At least I've never seen any Mexican's or Colombian's driving down the road. :rolleyes:
 
1600vw said:
Smoking this stuff has never hurt anyone. Not one person has ever OD'ed from smoking this stuff, ever. It can not happen.

One would have to eat 15,000 lbs in 15 mins in order to OD on this, and we know that can not happen.

But you can OD on..Water, aspsrin, coffee, I could go on but why. This stuff is harmless. If you say different post some examples not your opinion.

This stuff should be legal and taxed like everything else. No one has died from smoking pot, never happened never will.
Click to expand...
The error in this argument is equating "hurt" with death by overdose. When in high school and college in the late 70s/early 80s in the liberal haven of Madison, WI, I saw more than my share of people smoking pot. I saw it turn intelligent, enthusiastic young adults into passive, apathetic shells. I recall a couple people in particular who I would call brilliant turn into folks that wound up working dead end jobs -- for decades.

So who is hurt by this? The people whose potential was lost? The broader society that missed out on what could have been significant contributions from those individuals?

Yes, people should be responsible for their own actions. And with respect to the poll, I think this is something the government has long blown far out of proportion, both with its legal classification and the war on drugs. But I stand firmly against the opinion that it is harmless.
 
Last edited:
I don't drink nor smoke, but for the savings on LE and correctional system drug-related bloat alone, I say de-criminalize it.I rather see the money spent on public health approaches to substance abuse, than support the rent-seek that is federal and state law enforcement self-licking ice cream cone. Plus I dont like undereducated thugs with badges. At least the common thief in the street doesn't argue he's my friend while trespassing against me....
 
Ken Ibold said:
The error in this argument is equating "hurt" with death by overdose. When in high school and college in the late 70s/early 80s in the liberal haven of Madison, WI, I saw more than my share of people smoking pot. I saw it turn intelligent, enthusiastic young adults into passive, apathetic shells. I recall a couple people in particular who I would call brilliant turn into folks that wound up working dead end jobs -- for decades.

So who is hurt by this? The people whose potential was lost? The broader society that missed out on what could have been significant contributions from those individuals?

Yes, people should be responsible for their own actions. And with respect to the poll, I think this is something the government has long blown far out of proportion, both with its legal classification and the war on drugs. But I stand firmly against the opinion that it is harmless.
Click to expand...

If not pot, then alcohol. Not everyone can be a CEO, this is the falsehood of college. We need people working dead end jobs too. Because they are too stupid to figure it out you make others who want to enjoy a joint on Friday night suffer?
 
Pot being illegal didn't stop those folks from failing to thrive. If pot didn't exist would they have had the same path with alcohol, heroin, or internet porn addiction, etc? If pot was legal would more people have joined the failure to thrive wagon, less, same? The societal cost of running the war on plants is higher then the societal cost of some smart kids underachieving(which the war on plants hasn't stopped.)
Ken Ibold said:
The error in this argument is equating "hurt" with death by overdose. When in high school and college in the late 70s/early 80s in the liberal haven of Madison, WI, I saw more than my share of people smoking pot. I saw it turn intelligent, enthusiastic young adults into passive, apathetic shells. I recall a couple people in particular who I would call brilliant turn into folks that wound up working dead end jobs -- for decades.

So who is hurt by this? The people whose potential was lost? The broader society that missed out on what could have been significant contributions from those individuals?

Yes, people should be responsible for their own actions. And with respect to the poll, I think this is something the government has long blown far out of proportion, both with its legal classification and the war on drugs. But I stand firmly against the opinion that it is harmless.
Click to expand...
 
Speaking as a libertarian and a guy who flew many many many hours of interdiction patrols, if we would examine the history of Prohibition we would learn that if there is a market there will be a supply. Legalize and tax. The money we have spent on this futile attempt to legislate morality is staggering.
 
Geico266 said:
If not pot, then alcohol. Not everyone can be a CEO, this is the falsehood of college. We need people working dead end jobs too. Because they are too stupid to figure it out you make others who want to enjoy a joint on Friday night suffer?
Click to expand...
Not at all. I specifically said I disagree with the government's position on pot. But I disagree with the position that it's harmless, too. You want to take a few bong hits, go ahead. Unless you're a drummer; it tends to throw off your timing.
 
timwinters said:
Besides, if you're sitting back with a drink at night but advocating that pot remain illegal, then you're being quite hypocritical.
Click to expand...

I don't drink either.

The precription oxycodone I'm taking for pain. As a result, I'm not driving, not working, not shooting, not flying. I'll be very happy to finally dump the oxycodone. I'm sure as **** not interested in doing those activities under the influence. I'm also not interested in other people being under the influence if for no other reason than they are a danger to other people.
 
Bob Noel said:
I don't drink either.

The precription oxycodone I'm taking for pain. As a result, I'm not driving, not working, not shooting, not flying. I'll be very happy to finally dump the oxycodone. I'm sure as **** not interested in doing those activities under the influence. I'm also not interested in other people being under the influence if for no other reason than they are a danger to other people.
Click to expand...

Problem is this stuff "Marijuana" stays in your system long after the effects. The effects are gone in a very short time within a few hours. The residue from this stays in your system for up to 45 days. Way after any effects of the stuff, so please explain to me how you can tell someone whom is on it and someone whom is not by doing a blood test?

War on drugs...a war that will never be won. How long has this been going on and still we have drugs more then ever so its a loosing war and a waste of money and peoples lives whom get locked up for life for the 3 strike rule. We have people in prison for no other reason then they had a joint.
 
Here's my observation: In California, pot is for all intents and purposes "legal" with the "medical marijuana" program. Before it was "legalized" through "medical marijuana", the stoners were still buying it and smoking it. The same stoners are still buying it and smoking it, with no substantial visible increase in presence other than the predominance of "dispensaries" advertised in papers that also advertise prostitution services.

Let's turn this around a little bit. How about prostitution? Should that be legalized? My opinion is that if you screw a prostitute, you will probably get aids, and certainly you are mixing it up hundreds of other dude's bodily fluids. Eww. People that are in to that stuff know that.

I say legalize it. The fact of the matter is I can go on to Craigslist, or Match.com, get a date, take her to dinner, likely go to sleep that night with a happy ending, and it's all perfectly legal. (But it's essentially the same thing.) I think the only reason it isn't legal is so that municipalities can keep their vice revenue up, which in itself is a system that is severely abused.
 
Years ago, I guess around ten or fifteen years ago, the voters of California voted to legalize medical marijuana. Most all municipalities are to this day spending thousands, if not millions of taxpayer dollars looking for ways to keep it illegal, or inaccessible in their communities.

If a national vote was held to legalize marijuana use within a month after the results were turned in, and it won by a landslide, it would be years, if not decades, before marijuana was legal in the U.S.

The voice of the people, at least in California, has little to do with anything.

There really is a distinct difference between medical marijuana and recreational marijuana in case y'all were wondering. There is also a distinct difference between marijuana and hemp rope, but that difference is lost on our DEA.

-John
 
"Medical marijuana" is just as much of a pretense as dancing is at a strip club. Anyone with $20 can get a card permitting them to buy dope at a dispensary. It's basically a way to let the State legalize it in a de-facto manner without totally blowing the Feds off. I personally think having individual States legalize it without retracting the Federal law sets a bad precedent. But I am in favor of legalizing it starting with the Fed.
 
1600vw said:
Problem is this stuff "Marijuana" stays in your system long after the effects. The effects are gone in a very short time within a few hours. The residue from this stays in your system for up to 45 days. Way after any effects of the stuff, so please explain to me how you can tell someone whom is on it and someone whom is not by doing a blood test?
Click to expand...

Don't know. But that doesn't mean I throw up my hands and give up.

DUI is DUI is DUI.

Oxycodone can be detected in urine looooong after any effects. Would you also advocate letting people drive while taking Oxycodone?
 
Sac Arrow said:
"Medical marijuana" is just as much of a pretense as dancing is at a strip club. Anyone with $20 can get a card permitting them to buy dope at a dispensary. It's basically a way to let the State legalize it in a de-facto manner without totally blowing the Feds off. I personally think having individual States legalize it without retracting the Federal law sets a bad precedent. But I am in favor of legalizing it starting with the Fed.
Click to expand...

How the heck do you embed a YouTube video here? Linky:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRm1yqSmsGY

Nevertheless, post #27 hit the nail on the head, IMO.
 
I'd rather be on the road with stoners then drunks. Cell phone use while driving is as bad as drinking, but you will never see that criminalized to the same extent. All imaginary morality to push or punish arbitrary things.
And prostitution is illegal to keep women's bargaining power high. Cracks me up where the keep your laws off my body shtick ends.
 
ClimbnSink said:
I'd rather be on the road with stoners then drunks. Cell phone use while driving is as bad as drinking, but you will never see that criminalized to the same extent. All imaginary morality to push or punish arbitrary things.
And prostitution is illegal to keep women's bargaining power high. Cracks me up where the keep your laws off my body shtick ends.
Click to expand...

Can you explain this? I always thought it was a morality thing.

BTW, if it matters, I've always sorta thought a woman should be allowed to do with her body what she wants.
 
Norman said:
No vote from me in a biased poll, but if you enjoy seeing your money going to support some drug cartel have a smoke.
Click to expand...
azure said:
As for supporting the drug cartels, taxing and regulating the stuff is probably the quickest way to put them out of business -- at least the weed business.
Click to expand...
This.

Plus, as a matter of personal liberty, adults should be free to make their own choices.
BTW, marijuana was legal until 1937. So it was legal far longer than it's been illegal.
 
Make it legal, have the post office sell it, nobody would use it after a while ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top