Why is weed illegal?

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Because it's a drug, and drugs are bad.

Plain and simple.

Your escapades in the transsexual thread are at least amusing. This thread, on the other hand, would appreciate some actual content. Please, you know, make an argument.

 

[Diddy Kong]

Because it's a drug, and drugs are bad.

Plain and simple.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Hey @ Diddy Kong any plans to address my rebuttal of your previous points?

 

[Lysergic]

Except it's really just a plant tho. Plants are neither good or bad.

Yeah you are right it is a plant. A plant that contains many different types of mind altering substances including THC which are all drugs. That is why it is illegal.

 

[Sucumbio]

Yeah you are right it is a plant. A plant that contains many different types of mind altering substances including THC which are all drugs. That is why it is illegal.

I'll agree that people can use the plant for medicinal or recreational purposes but Im almost positive this has no bearing on its legality.

 

[Lysergic]

*sigh*

I suppose I'm going to have explain everything to you people.

Sorry Mr. Sucumbio but you are wrong on both aspects for these reasons are exactly why it has bearing on its legality.

It is a controlled substance (in most places) because it should only be used through prescription. If used medically then it is not "bad" per se but is still legal. Using marijuana illegally (recreational) is bad because you will get arrested (A) and it is a mind altering substance so it will change the way you perceive things (B). I do agree that sometimes a little perception change can be for the better but 99.9% of the time it is going to be bad when dealing with pot. Some drugs are a lot worse and yes THC changes your perception in a lot more of a subtle way but it is still bad. It makes humans dependable when on it even if it is just a little bit of dependency. No chemical should be needed for life to live but when consumed it produces the illusion in your mind that it is needed. That it makes things "better" or makes you feel "euphoric" or whatever else. All drugs produce this illusion and everyone will eventually become addicted when continuing to use. You will convince yourself you're not, that you have control, or that it is okay even though you'll start to forget about some of the things you used to care and think about. Physical and mental addictions are guaranteed when messing with psychoactive substances enough regardless of which substance. Some may say, "No you're wrong Lysergic you're just a dumb troll who doesn't know anything because you don't explain yourself and you believe in God." But I am here to tell you that this assumption is very wrong and I am right about how all drugs will lead to mental addiction and sometimes physical addiction too depending on the substance.

Furthermore this is why all drugs should be illegal unless prescribed in a controlled setting. They deceive your mind and thus steal your identity and mentality. If you can't accept this then you're probably already addicted to drugs and need to go get help at a rehab center as soon as possible.

 

[Deleted member 269706]

Furthermore this is why all drugs should be illegal unless prescribed in a controlled setting. They deceive your mind and thus steal your identity and mentality. If you can't accept this then you're probably already addicted to drugs and need to go get help at a rehab center as soon as possible.

You cannot generalize a group of people like this. I'm in no way addicted, and I disagree with your statement bolded and italicized above. Maybe if the statement wasn't so extreme we could meet in the middle, but that is such an overstatement, and disgusting generalization. In a way it will distort your mental perception, but to say it steals your identity? or deceive your mind? That's bull****, through and through.

 

[Lysergic]

You cannot generalize a group of people like this. I'm in no way addicted, and I disagree with your statement bolded and italicized above. Maybe if the statement wasn't so extreme we could meet in the middle, but that is such an overstatement, and disgusting generalization. In a way it will distort your mental perception, but to say it steals your identity? or deceive your mind? That's bull****, through and through.

A user saying, "I'm in no way addicted." Typical. You say maybe if the statement was not so "extreme" you could meet me in the middle? Perhaps you just don't like hearing the truth and are in denial. That's what it sounds like to me. Again my post was in reference to why drugs in general are bad. I did make a few statements singling out marijuana but when I said it could steal your identity I was talking about drugs with more potential for abuse. Though it is possible for marijuana to do this just not as probable. If you disagree, then you must be young and will eventually see that I am in fact right if you continue to use.

I hate to bring another Bible reference up and will stay away from religious arguments in the future, but all drug abusers will burn in hell for all eternity. This is another reason it is bad.

 

[Deleted member 269706]

A user saying, "I'm in no way addicted." Typical. You say maybe if the statement was not so "extreme" you could meet me in the middle? Perhaps you just don't like hearing the truth and are in denial. That's what it sounds like to me. Again my post was in reference to why drugs in general are bad. I did make a few statements singling out marijuana but when I said it could steal your identity I was talking about drugs with more potential for abuse. Though it is possible for marijuana to do this just not as probable. If you disagree, then you must be young and will eventually see that I am in fact right if you continue to use.

I hate to bring another Bible reference up and will stay away from religious arguments in the future, but all drug abusers will burn in hell for all eternity. This is another reason it is bad.

Yeah, haven't smoked for a month, and only once or twice a month before that, I'm totally addicted. But here's the thing dude, I'm not some dumbass zombie, or some drone of Satan (maybe if I use Biblical analogies you'll understand?). I can still think, I can still make rational decisions, I can still fight a point. No, I'm not the smartest guy, but I never was to begin with, so what's the real harm? If smoking makes someone happy, who are you to take it away from them? And lets not bring religion into this, it's only gonna get more out of control. (But God can forgive all sins...yourarguementsinvalid)

 

[Lysergic]

Yeah, haven't smoked for a month, and only once or twice a month before that, I'm totally addicted. But here's the thing dude, I'm not some ******* zombie, or some drone of Satan (maybe if I use Biblical analogies you'll understand?). I can still think, I can still make rational decisions, I can still fight a point. No, I'm not the smartest guy, but I never was to begin with, so what's the real harm? If smoking makes someone happy, who are you to take it away from them? And lets not bring religion into this, it's only gonna get more out of control. (But God can forgive all sins...yourarguementsinvalid)

Let me take a guess, 16? 17 years old? You have no idea what it can and will lead too. People don't just smoke pot for the first time and automatically do it everyday or every week. For some drugs this is possible but marijuana does have a lower potential for abuse though it can still be abused and will cause addiction. You can choose to do whatever you wish but like you said you aren't the smartest guy in the world which is probably why you chose to start using drugs.

By the way God will forgive your sins only if you repent/ask for forgiveness, but if you continue to make the same mistakes and sins then you will go to hell and burn for all eternity. Stop while you can, bud.

No, I'm not the smartest guy, but I never was to begin with, so what's the real harm?

I rest my case.

 

[Deleted member 269706]

I started doing drugs because I was curious and didn't want to live and die as some close-minded *******. If I was going to advocate or argue against something, I wanted first hand experience. Ultimately, I wanted to learn more. And let me tell you, smarts have nothing to do with trying out drugs: http://www.mpp.org/outreach/top-50-marijuana-users-list.html

 

[Lysergic]

Look kid you are missing the point.

I started doing drugs because I was curious and didn't want to live and die as some close-minded *******. If I was going to advocate or argue against something, I wanted first hand experience. Ultimately, I wanted to learn more. And let me tell you, smarts have nothing to do with trying out drugs: http://www.mpp.org/outreach/top-50-marijuana-users-list.html

Obviously. It is the continuation of abuse that makes a person dumb. I agree since marijuana has such a low potential it is easier to control but a lot of people can't control marijuana. Most of those people in the link either quit or are extremely light users and are smart enough to control it. Just keep in mind that all drugs can and will put you in an endless cycle of meaningless obsession and unnecessary addiction.

I'm just trying to help you but obviously you're still an ignorant naive child. So do what you like but you will have to deal with the consequences.

So go on, shoo, live in your fantasy world until you realize everything you have said on this forum and think on this topic is exactly what your world is. Fantasy.

Sorry but nothing else that you say will be considered valid, taken seriously, or replied too so don't bother replying. Later and good luck realizing the error of your ways. - Lysergic

 

[Sehnsucht]

Concerning the legalization and decriminalization of drugs, just yesterday I watched a brief interview on the David Pakman Show in which a guy named Johann Hari discusses the contents of his most recent book (Chasing the Scream: The First and Last Days of the War on Drugs).

I thought it was an interesting interview. Hari advocates for the legalization and decriminalization of not just marijuana, but all drugs (including meth, cocaine, and others). The decriminalization is to rectify the wasteful incarceration of people for possession charges, and the legalization is to return the power of supply in the hands of government, thereby wresting control from black markets and drug rings. He cites what they're doing in places like Portugal and Switzerland as examples of why legalization and decriminalization of drugs is optimal (while also touching on such things as the roots and evolution of the War on Drugs movement in the US, as well as touching on stories of individuals he's encountered).

Obviously, I've not read the book, so I can't fact-check anything. But I will leave the interview (which is only 13-ish minutes) for those who want to see a case made for legalization and decriminalization. While only a cursory, introductory examination of these topics, I found the arguments to have been compelling ones. It's certainly given me (even more) cause to consider that legalization and decriminalization are the ways to go.

At the very least for marijuana, anyway.

So I just thought I'd share this for the floor, in support (however meager) for the pro-legalization position.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

*sigh*

I suppose I'm going to have explain everything to you people

I'm having trouble determining if you're like 13 or 40 and live in Texas or something.

Using marijuana illegally (recreational) is bad because you will get arrested (A)

In Saudi Arabia, you can be arrested for leaving the Muslim faith. The law has, at best, a tangential relationship to morality. Ideally, the law will form itself around what is moral; however, this is not always the case. What's more, I have friends who have used Marijuana for their entire lives on a regular basis and have yet to be arrested.

and it is a mind altering substance so it will change the way you perceive things (B).

But the change is so minor and benign that it is extremely rare that any damage comes of it. Hence my puzzlement with this next statement:

I do agree that sometimes a little perception change can be for the better but 99.9% of the time it is going to be bad when dealing with pot.

For most people I know, pot makes them more relaxed, more happy, and generally more pleasant. What gives you the idea that it's going to be bad?

Some drugs are a lot worse and yes THC changes your perception in a lot more of a subtle way but it is still bad. It makes humans dependable when on it even if it is just a little bit of dependency. No chemical should be needed for life to live but when consumed it produces the illusion in your mind that it is needed. That it makes things "better" or makes you feel "euphoric" or whatever else. All drugs produce this illusion and everyone will eventually become addicted when continuing to use. You will convince yourself you're not, that you have control, or that it is okay even though you'll start to forget about some of the things you used to care and think about. Physical and mental addictions are guaranteed when messing with psychoactive substances enough regardless of which substance. Some may say, "No you're wrong Lysergic you're just a dumb troll who doesn't know anything because you don't explain yourself and you believe in God." But I am here to tell you that this assumption is very wrong and I am right about how all drugs will lead to mental addiction and sometimes physical addiction too depending on the substance.

I love the projection here. Makes your case so much stronger. The fact is that any substance or activity you enjoy can make you addicted to it. Sugary snacks, coffee, video games, masturbation, going to church... And when it comes to physical addiction, countless legal substances are more extreme. There is withdrawal, but the symptoms are very, very mild even in the worst case - in many cases, they don't occur at all. Coffee has more extreme withdrawal symptoms. I don't know where you got the idea that you'll start forgetting things you cared about (honestly I don't know where you got most of this ****, as you offer no sources and try to paint it all as just common sense). I never had the illusion that I "needed" cannabis (unlike, say, alcohol, where I can admit I've had some issues with addiction).

Furthermore this is why all drugs should be illegal unless prescribed in a controlled setting. They deceive your mind and thus steal your identity and mentality. If you can't accept this then you're probably already addicted to drugs and need to go get help at a rehab center as soon as possible.

Let me tell you something. If you can't see past this ludicrous "I'm automatically right and everyone who disagrees with me is deceived" mentality, you will never be able to see the world as it is.

 

[Sucumbio]

And still no one noticed that Lysergic is the first acronym in LSD, a schedule 1 hallucinogenic. He has been given a final warning, formally, for the concerned troll posts.

 

[Sehnsucht]

And still no one noticed that Lysergic is the first acronym in LSD, a schedule 1 hallucinogenic. He has been given a final warning, formally, for the concerned troll posts.

I noticed in the Crossdressing thread, but he ignored my post where I touched on that reference. 8(

But he does have a point. Psychedelics, like LSD and psylocybin and MDMA, are perfectly acceptable because they bring you closer to God.

 

[Deleted member 269706]

And still no one noticed that Lysergic is the first acronym in LSD, a schedule 1 hallucinogenic. He has been given a final warning, formally, for the concerned troll posts.

I'm just glad I'm not the only one who thought he was crazy and trolling with those posts. Apologies for "fueling" the troll, wasn't my intention.

 

[Sucumbio]

It is a controlled substance (in most places) because it should only be used through prescription.

Firstly let me correct your usage of the term "controlled substance." The term controlled substance was originally coined when President Nixon signed into law the Controlled Substances Act, which gave the US government a means to tax drugs, regulate drug trades, and prosecute drug cases.

Schedule I substances are those that have the following findings:

1. The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse.
2. The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.
3. There is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision.

Dozens of medicines and substances technically fall under one of the several Schedule Categories, even if the source substance itself does not. For instance, the South American spiritual cleansing tea called yage (pronounced YAH-hey) is NOT a controlled substance, and yet contains DMT (dimethyltryptamine) which IS a controlled substance. So basically because the one component is Scheduled, the whole compound is questionable, legally. There are of course, religious exemptions in play with this particular concoction, similar to Peyote in the Native American Church, but without strict documentation, you cannot just say "oh it's for my worship ceremonies."

Alright, now for a history lesson. Originally, pot was not illegal. King James I had his American Colony produce large amounts of Hemp for export purposes. After winning our Independence from England, marijuana remained legal. It had been used for recreation and medically, for literally centuries. But, because there were SO many people in the new United States who wanted to go into business for themselves, the markets started to become flooded with untrustworthy products. Pot was one of them. People used to distill it and bottle it and call it a potion, and if you were lucky to get a safe bottle full, yeah it was nice. Hash dens, and opium dens, were popular in the US and in every state right until the 1900s.

True, some states had outlawed it as far back as 1860 (New York) due to a string of seemingly random suicides being linked to cannabis use. However, forensic technology was so far behind where we are today, that there's no credible way to assume that the NY legislature made the right decision. I will submit it is possible that there was just simply a bad batch going around and it made some people insane. Very possible.

Anyway, prior to the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937 (which would be later declared unconstitutional, and thus repaired in Nixon's bill) criminal penalty for pot use, distribution, sale, etc... it was very aloof. Doctors could still prescribe it, Pharmacies still stocked in on their shelves, and people still enjoyed it recreationally. The legal issues didn't spawn until the Tax Act. That one document suddenly gave the government a LEGAL way, to seize pot, and confine people who were guilty of dealing with it, or using it. Originally, a first-time pot smoker who got caught could get 2-10 years in jail. But make no mistake, this wasn't because the government cares about its citizens. It's because until now, the US Treasury had no way to get paid from the drug trade. International Conventions were held every few years in an attempt to make it so that world governments could at least make a profit off of their citizen's habits. Alcohol and Tobacco, Caffeine, Sugar, these substances had been regulated for ages already, so the governments of the world decided it made sense to tax drugs and then declare them illegal.

So basically, you're putting the horse before the cart in your argument. Pot was always regulated to some extent and with good reason, to prevent citizens from ingesting poisonous substances. But its legality did not really come into play until the unconstitutional tax act was passed.

If used medically then it is not "bad" per se but is still legal. Using marijuana illegally (recreational) is bad because you will get arrested (A) and it is a mind altering substance so it will change the way you perceive things (B).

What exactly do you think happens when a person uses marijuana, medically? I don't expect you to be a pothead to know how pot works, but just think before you type. The ONLY difference between Medical Marijuana and Street Marijuana is where it comes from, the pharmacy or the street. For instance, a cancer patient whose lost their appetite, may rely on medical marijuana to get the munchies. But other than the source being different, pot is pot. So it's either bad for both uses, or not bad for both uses. Just because a doctor writes "for medical use only" on a piece of paper, that doesn't suddenly change the chemical makeup of the pot being ingested. I can go to the street right now and get pot that's high cannabidiol (thing that gives you the munchies) and low THC (thing that makes you feel "high"). This is what medical grade means normally. It gives profound effects towards eating, sleeping, tremors, seizures, etc, without the hallucinogenic effects (which is what THC does). And because doctors in many states can still prescribe it, and because there's been so much research done into its effects for medical purposes, there is a lot of motion in the populace to have it changed to a lower Schedule) as it does NOT meet the original 3 requirements I outlined above: 1.) Can it potentially be abused? Yes 2.) No currently accepted Medical Use? No! It DOES have currently acceptable medical uses. In several states, its use has been legalized for this purpose. 3.) Must it be used under Medical Supervision, or is it dangerous to not do so? No! It is NOT unsafe. The WORST that can happen, is you develop a bad cough. And that's over prolonged use. NOTHING should ever be used over prolonged periods without proper safety precautions taken, this is common sense.
Now remember when I mentioned poison control? Laudanum was prescribed and even available without prescription during most of the 1800s. It is also almost always fatal if taken for a prolonged period of time. It is also REALLY EASY TO OD on. Pot is not this. It got lumped into other poisons because at the time they didn't think to separate the various wonder elixirs available.

I do agree that sometimes a little perception change can be for the better but 99.9% of the time it is going to be bad when dealing with pot. Some drugs are a lot worse and yes THC changes your perception in a lot more of a subtle way but it is still bad.

Perception change IS good, I agree too. I also submit that you don't need anything to gain fresh perspective. What you're really referring to is intoxication. And like with alcohol, it's not great to be intoxicated for hours or days at a time. It's not great to get intoxicated regularly, and it's even worse to "binge" every few weeks or months. Yes, most drugs are much worse for you, in terms of how it damages your body. Heroin leads to kidney failure. Coke and Crack lead to heart issues and blood pressure issues. LSD, MDMA, and the trippy drugs, lead to mental problems and neurochemical issues. I think really the only other "drug" that's as innocuous as pot is shrooms. They have a similar track record in documented deaths due to OD (less than 1 tenth of 1 percent).

It makes humans dependable when on it even if it is just a little bit of dependency. No chemical should be needed for life to live but when consumed it produces the illusion in your mind that it is needed. That it makes things "better" or makes you feel "euphoric" or whatever else. All drugs produce this illusion and everyone will eventually become addicted when continuing to use.

Ummm yah. Okay, so if someone is continuing to use a drug, then they ARE addicted, they don't -become- addicted after prolonged use, addiction IS prolonged use. And no, not everyone that uses drugs becomes addicted. Not everyone that smokes pot becomes a pot-head. Now, obviously there are people out there that DO become pot-heads. Are they so detrimental to society that they should be rounded up and jailed or worse? Actually I doubt it. I have yet to meet a pot head who was ****** their child, or killing someone, or robbing a bank, or doing anything, really (hah). But they're still contributing members to society. They have to buy their paraphernalia, 2-pack of rillos and a lighter, pls, they have to eat, sleep, urinate, defecate, etc. They have jobs too! And wouldn't you know, some of these people are actually astounding member of society, contributing all kinds of important things for the rest of the world to enjoy.

Physical and mental addictions are guaranteed when messing with psychoactive substances enough regardless of which substance.

Okay, again this is only partially true. Physical and mental addiction is possible with anything, first. Running can become mentally and physically addicting, so much so that you HAVE to run 10 miles a day or you FEEL worse. Drugs that affect the brain, are only risks towards addiction if the user is already 1.) an addictive personality 2.) suffering from depression/other mental health issues 3.) using something other than pot.

As it turns out, Pot is not actually habit forming. It's the state of being "baked" that becomes habit. A perpetual smoker, someone who chain smokes pot from sun up to sun down and every moment in between, WILL FEEL as if it's time to spark up, when it's time to spark up. This is not inevitable, though. Most people don't get into pot like that. They puff puff pass and are high for 2-3 hours and then go back to drinking. Why? Is it because alcohol is socially acceptable? Or is it that a "drunk" buzz is better than a pot high? I can tell you I much prefer a pot high to being drunk. Not only do I not suffer from hangover with pot, but my stomach doesn't end up all tore up.

Furthermore this is why all drugs should be illegal unless prescribed in a controlled setting. They deceive your mind and thus steal your identity and mentality. If you can't accept this then you're probably already addicted to drugs and need to go get help at a rehab center as soon as possible.

Well, all drugs -are- illegal unless prescribed or unless they're considered over-the-counter. But again, because you've mistaken normal pot use for addiction, and further mistaken addiction to Pot as to being High... basically you've missed the whole point of the thread, which is to learn why Pot is still illegal when historically, demographically and scientifically, it has never once been truly shown to be the bad guy in all this.

 

[Lysergic]

Whew.

This has really been an eye opening experience for me. The thought of quitting Smash literally crossed my mind from the ignorance and hypocritical people I've come across within the Smash community forums (Debate Hall). Deep down inside I would like to think that not all Smash members are like this but what I have witnessed in this forum has been devastating. I personally believe one of the main problems is the "moderator" of this forum if that's what you want to call him. He is extremely biased and gets his feelings hurt when someone proves a point that counters what he thought was true and reports specific users when other users are committing (to even a much larger scale) the same "violations." I've noticed there is a small circle of forum dweller veterans that bond together and try and team up against anyone they find that goes against their beliefs. The moderator is completely biased and only punishes the poor victim that is not within this circle. I must say, this is totally despicable and I will be reporting all of you to the administrator.

I'll probably get reported for this post due to the unsophisticated biased hypocritical moderator and I even told him I probably wouldn't post in the debate thread anymore but this will be my last post and within it I will set things straight once and for all. I'm not going to explain myself any further than I will in this post so try and use your brain's full capacity to grasp the directness of the truth that lies within my words. I will be answering pony boy's ridiculous under thought attack on me which (if what I got reported for was "trolling") was trolling for the record (Mr. Oh So Great Moderator) and I will be exposing the lying undeserved moderators pathetic ways. I'll also throw a little feedback to a few other users who have attacked me throughout my time in the Debate Hall threads.

So please listen closely; for all of what I am about to say is much needed information for all you cross-dressing atheist.

I'm having trouble determining if you're like 13 or 40 and live in Texas or something.

Like I said before; this My Little Pony horn dog is a total hypocrite and if I'm a "troll" then he is a "troll" due to this statement. First of all he attempts (and fails terribly) in trying to insult me (I think) by stating I am probably 13. Obviously no 13 year old could write and present such clear and vivid ideas such as I have and have accumulated the knowledge I have presented. So I guess this brony is trying to intimidate me and make me think I sound young and dumb which I obviously don't.

Then on the other hand he says I could be a 40 year old that lives in Texas or something. Wow.

Based on your flaming and negative input on your opinion towards my thoughts and myself you are obviously insulting the entire state of Texas. Should at least get a warning for that (Mr. Moderator). Also it is extremely ignorant and closed minded to assume all Texas natives are the same or think a certain way.

This statement you made proves you a complete uninformed biased hypocrite.

In Saudi Arabia, you can be arrested for leaving the Muslim faith. The law has, at best, a tangential relationship to morality. Ideally, the law will form itself around what is moral; however, this is not always the case. What's more, I have friends who have used Marijuana for their entire lives on a regular basis and have yet to be arrested.

Man you suck at making points. First of all this law in Saudi Arabia has nothing to do about what we were talking about. Nothing to do about weed or the legalization of drugs. Congratulations on discovering different laws exist in different countries; you're so smart.

Not.

In case you didn't know morality is subjective and right and wrong are merely perception. However the case for why drugs should be legal or not has strong reasons it shouldn't to the physical and mental harm it causes to humans. There is so much data, information, facts, whatever to prove this is true and don't worry, I will leave plenty of sources for your little unicorn mind.

But the change is so minor and benign that it is extremely rare that any damage comes of it. Hence my puzzlement with this next statement:

For most people I know, pot makes them more relaxed, more happy, and generally more pleasant. What gives you the idea that it's going to be bad?

Look brony; your knowledge on medicine is no where near my level so let me fill you in with the obvious fact that all drugs affect all people differently. This is a known fact and some people will react more sensitively than others. While some may be able to smoke pot and hardly feel a thing and never do it again some people will become obsessed and potentially severely mentally addicted. Not only have I seen marijuana make people obsessed, lazy, jobless, and unable to survive on their own but it has been documented countless of times. Trust me, I will provide the links to provide you the obvious facts.

I understand it is not the most addictive drug and I agree as well. I have seen people smoke marijuana for long periods of time and maintain their life normally but the matter of the fact is that it can induce serious addiction and mental health problems. It may be minor to you but for some people it is quite serious; this is something you need to realize.

https://www.erowid.org/experiences/subs/exp_Cannabis_Addiction_Habituation.shtml
https://www.erowid.org/experiences/exp.php?ID=64114
https://www.erowid.org/experiences/exp.php?ID=52875

I love the projection here. Makes your case so much stronger. The fact is that any substance or activity you enjoy can make you addicted to it. Sugary snacks, coffee, video games, masturbation, going to church... And when it comes to physical addiction, countless legal substances are more extreme. There is withdrawal, but the symptoms are very, very mild even in the worst case - in many cases, they don't occur at all. Coffee has more extreme withdrawal symptoms. I don't know where you got the idea that you'll start forgetting things you cared about (honestly I don't know where you got most of this ****, as you offer no sources and try to paint it all as just common sense). I never had the illusion that I "needed" cannabis (unlike, say, alcohol, where I can admit I've had some issues with addiction).

True anything can become mentally addictive to do. However there is fine line between things like video games and going to church compared to narcotic addiction. Obviously pot isn't the most serious of drugs as far as addiction potential goes but opiates, amphetamines, and many others will take over your mind and change your perception in an extremely powerful way that video games or coffee never can. Illegal opiates and amphetamines lead to true physical addiction and honestly it depends on the person and drug they are on to determine the withdrawal symptoms. You will start forgetting things you cared about and eventually forget about who you even were before you started doing the drug. I've know people who have been on heroin and I've seen what it does. Regardless it is a known medical fact that these drugs can and will destroy your life. Marijuana may have a lower potential for abuse and certainly will not kill you but can worsen your life depending on the person.

http://www.helpguide.org/articles/addiction/drug-abuse-and-addiction.htm

Let me tell you something. If you can't see past this ludicrous "I'm automatically right and everyone who disagrees with me is deceived" mentality, you will never be able to see the world as it is.

I wouldn't think like that if it weren't true. 80% of everything I have said is either the truth or true statements based on a reference. You people might not of liked my approach but when it comes to medicine and religion I know my stuff. I studied both Medicine and Philosophy/Religion & Spiritually in college and have my own dark past of first hand experience with some pretty nasty substances so I know what I'm talking about. I've seen what all drugs can cause to people and I know how they all affect your brain an body. To be honest no matter how smart or 'in control' you think you are a chemical has the potential to completely rewire your psyche in away you'll never be aware it is even happening. You are all only human and no human can handle many illegal synthetic substances and that is why they are illegal. Marijuana really isn't that bad and honestly I don't care if you use it for it is your decision, but I think that the FDA has it right to make opiates, amphetamines, benzos, and many other drugs illegal (including pot). Honestly I don't even think drugs like oxycodone should be allowed to be brought back home with a patient when prescribed. They are too addictive and it is this reason that so many have access and thus get addicted to opiates. There should be a mandatory schedule time where you go to the doctor's office in which he gives you the dose there. No opiate should be allowed to be brought home because no human can control the effects it causes to the brain.

I'm just glad I'm not the only one who thought he was crazy and trolling with those posts. Apologies for "fueling" the troll, wasn't my intention.

By trolling he means flaming I'm not a troll. Everything I said was the truth and I'm nearly certain I told you not to respond. Leave this discussion for the big kids pal, go practice your Pikachu on Smash or something. Jeez. Lol.

Lastly I will be exposing and disposing of the most despicable of all you hypocritical morons. Sucumbio, the lying butt-hurt moderator trying to play God and pretend he has some type of divine understanding and power just because he was mistakenly made a moderator. Before I finish this debate and prove you are and have always been wrong I would like to let you know that I will be contacting an administrator and let him know how you have been targeting only me through the last few days for no reason at all when others are committing much worse infractions.

So with that, let the enlightenment begin.

Firstly let me correct your usage of the term "controlled substance." The term controlled substance was originally coined when President Nixon signed into law the Controlled Substances Act, which gave the US government a means to tax drugs, regulate drug trades, and prosecute drug cases.

Schedule I substances are those that have the following findings:

1. The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse.
2. The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.
3. There is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision.

Dozens of medicines and substances technically fall under one of the several Schedule Categories, even if the source substance itself does not. For instance, the South American spiritual cleansing tea called yage (pronounced YAH-hey) is NOT a controlled substance, and yet contains DMT (dimethyltryptamine) which IS a controlled substance. So basically because the one component is Scheduled, the whole compound is questionable, legally. There are of course, religious exemptions in play with this particular concoction, similar to Peyote in the Native American Church, but without strict documentation, you cannot just say "oh it's for my worship ceremonies."

Alright, now for a history lesson. Originally, pot was not illegal. King James I had his American Colony produce large amounts of Hemp for export purposes. After winning our Independence from England, marijuana remained legal. It had been used for recreation and medically, for literally centuries. But, because there were SO many people in the new United States who wanted to go into business for themselves, the markets started to become flooded with untrustworthy products. Pot was one of them. People used to distill it and bottle it and call it a potion, and if you were lucky to get a safe bottle full, yeah it was nice. Hash dens, and opium dens, were popular in the US and in every state right until the 1900s.

True, some states had outlawed it as far back as 1860 (New York) due to a string of seemingly random suicides being linked to cannabis use. However, forensic technology was so far behind where we are today, that there's no credible way to assume that the NY legislature made the right decision. I will submit it is possible that there was just simply a bad batch going around and it made some people insane. Very possible.

Anyway, prior to the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937 (which would be later declared unconstitutional, and thus repaired in Nixon's bill) criminal penalty for pot use, distribution, sale, etc... it was very aloof. Doctors could still prescribe it, Pharmacies still stocked in on their shelves, and people still enjoyed it recreationally. The legal issues didn't spawn until the Tax Act. That one document suddenly gave the government a LEGAL way, to seize pot, and confine people who were guilty of dealing with it, or using it. Originally, a first-time pot smoker who got caught could get 2-10 years in jail. But make no mistake, this wasn't because the government cares about its citizens. It's because until now, the US Treasury had no way to get paid from the drug trade. International Conventions were held every few years in an attempt to make it so that world governments could at least make a profit off of their citizen's habits. Alcohol and Tobacco, Caffeine, Sugar, these substances had been regulated for ages already, so the governments of the world decided it made sense to tax drugs and then declare them illegal.

So basically, you're putting the horse before the cart in your argument. Pot was always regulated to some extent and with good reason, to prevent citizens from ingesting poisonous substances. But its legality did not really come into play until the unconstitutional tax act was passed.

Thanks for pointing out something that I already knew. Illegal drugs are classified differently in all countries; yes, in United States they are categorized in schedules. Yes, I know pot was not always illegal all drugs were once not illegal. Do you think civilizations have existed like they have forever? Wrong. People have been using DMT for thousands of years and while it is currently an illegal hallucinogenic many plants contain this substance and can even be purchased online. The plant you mentioned, many types of grass, more famously known the mimosa hostilis root bark contains extremely high amounts of DMT. However nearly all of these substances are still illegal when used for human consumption. In fact in some states many of the plants are illegal all together due to containing DMT. Louisiana for an example passed a law in the last decade making over 50 different types of plants illegal because they contained DMT and other similar entheogens. Thanks for the history lesson I already knew, and I never said pot was always illegal I was just stating why I think it should be illegal.

What exactly do you think happens when a person uses marijuana, medically? I don't expect you to be a pothead to know how pot works, but just think before you type. The ONLY difference between Medical Marijuana and Street Marijuana is where it comes from, the pharmacy or the street. For instance, a cancer patient whose lost their appetite, may rely on medical marijuana to get the munchies. But other than the source being different, pot is pot. So it's either bad for both uses, or not bad for both uses. Just because a doctor writes "for medical use only" on a piece of paper, that doesn't suddenly change the chemical makeup of the pot being ingested. I can go to the street right now and get pot that's high cannabidiol (thing that gives you the munchies) and low THC (thing that makes you feel "high"). This is what medical grade means normally. It gives profound effects towards eating, sleeping, tremors, seizures, etc, without the hallucinogenic effects (which is what THC does). And because doctors in many states can still prescribe it, and because there's been so much research done into its effects for medical purposes, there is a lot of motion in the populace to have it changed to a lower Schedule) as it does NOT meet the original 3 requirements I outlined above: 1.) Can it potentially be abused? Yes 2.) No currently accepted Medical Use? No! It DOES have currently acceptable medical uses. In several states, its use has been legalized for this purpose. 3.) Must it be used under Medical Supervision, or is it dangerous to not do so? No! It is NOT unsafe. The WORST that can happen, is you develop a bad cough. And that's over prolonged use. NOTHING should ever be used over prolonged periods without proper safety precautions taken, this is common sense.
Now remember when I mentioned poison control? Laudanum was prescribed and even available without prescription during most of the 1800s. It is also almost always fatal if taken for a prolonged period of time. It is also REALLY EASY TO OD on. Pot is not this. It got lumped into other poisons because at the time they didn't think to separate the various wonder elixirs available.

There are some biological factors taking place as THC is processed through your body and eventually your brain which causes it's effects. It produces a 'high' or altered state of consciousness. I'm not sure if you were asking for the exact description of the biochemistry and processing of THC or how THC itself causes negative medical effects but.. THC doesn't really harm the body, physically (besides the smoke of course). In fact the negative potential of THC doesn't lie within the physical body at all, it's completely psychological and is focused within your brain and perception.

I don't know why you're telling me there is no difference between medical and street marijuana. No crap. I never said there was, I just stated that people with cancer should be allowed to smoke weed because it promotes an appetite and ease the pain and discomfort in a much better and safer way than opiates will. Jeez, you are totally lost and making a lot of ignorant assumptions Mr. Moderator. Recreational marijuana is when people have nothing wrong with them and just smoke to get wasted/high or whatever. There is a big difference.

The bottom line is no pot isn't very dangerous physically. Though since it is a drug that can greatly change your perception thus personality it can (for some people) drain your will and determination to exist and function normally in the world. It happens to many people so any argument stating (Oh I know people who smoke pot and they love it so it can't be bad) is 100% invalid.

Perception change IS good, I agree too. I also submit that you don't need anything to gain fresh perspective. What you're really referring to is intoxication. And like with alcohol, it's not great to be intoxicated for hours or days at a time. It's not great to get intoxicated regularly, and it's even worse to "binge" every few weeks or months. Yes, most drugs are much worse for you, in terms of how it damages your body. Heroin leads to kidney failure. Coke and Crack lead to heart issues and blood pressure issues. LSD, MDMA, and the trippy drugs, lead to mental problems and neurochemical issues. I think really the only other "drug" that's as innocuous as pot is shrooms. They have a similar track record in documented deaths due to OD (less than 1 tenth of 1 percent).

It can be good but it can also be extremely bad. You don't need any drug to gain fresh perspective either, this is true, in fact this is the best way to go about changing your perception.. through experience, with no mind altering substances involved. Alcohol will almost NEVER lead to a better perception change in the long run and typically will only poison your body and make you think less intelligently. Heroin leads to all kind of problems (a lot more than just kidney failure). Coke and Crack and cause serious neurochemical in balances and permanent damage as well as heart issues and are the worst for your physical body. In fact they can cause more neurochemical problems than phenethylamines (a specific type of hallucinogenic) will. Not all 'trippy' (lol) drugs are the same. In fact MDMA affects your brain in a completely different way than LSD, psilocybin, and DMT. MDMA is a phenethylamine and can cause extreme neurochemical damage more specifically permanent damage to your serotonin levels. Though this will typically only occur through extreme heavy abuse. LSD and shrooms are tryptamines and are practically harmless to your physical body. The only thing bad is either they can bring out mental illnesses that already exist (though so can all drugs) and they can cause extremely dangerous behavior through powerful delusions when way too much of the drug is taken (suicide, harm your self or other people). You say pot and shrooms are the safe drugs? Lol, shrooms are the same type of drug as LSD and affect your brain in almost the same exact way. In fact shrooms can be as powerful as LSD depending on the dose. Though regardless it is obvious that tryptamines and marijuana are certainty the safer drugs out of all the different types, at least physically (and for the most part mentally as well). For the record there have never been confirmed overdose deaths from LSD, shrooms, or DMT besides people committing suicide.

Well, all drugs -are- illegal unless prescribed or unless they're considered over-the-counter. But again, because you've mistaken normal pot use for addiction, and further mistaken addiction to Pot as to being High... basically you've missed the whole point of the thread, which is to learn why Pot is still illegal when historically, demographically and scientifically, it has never once been truly shown to be the bad guy in all this.

Wrong. All drugs are not illegal. They create new designer drugs every year that are not scheduled and can not be found over the counter. While I have stated before that pot can be used casually it typical will become habit forming and thus a small if not possibly more serious addiction. Obviously it is the affects of THC that cause this, just like it is the affects of heroin that causes it's addiction. You are trying to be clever or project I'm wrong by producing obvious meaningless statements that have no validity in your argument. Regardless of all the bull crap you have said you still haven't countered the fact that pot can and will lead to a negative lifestyle. I will admit (and have stated before) that some people can casually smoke pot without problems but it still has the potential to be very bad. I won't only provide links but I will tell you I knew someone who admitted (openly) about how he was addicted to pot. He even told me once after I left a room in my house in which he was in that had some marijuana that belonged to me when I returned that he had the overwhelming urge to take it/steal some because of how strong his marijuana urges were. At the time he was 22 years old, living with his grandma, no job, no money, absolutely nothing going for him because of obsession with pot. So don't you ever think marijuana is 100% safe and OK when it can cause problems and addiction in peoples lives.



So I'd love to go in more detail and explain to all of you how I am right. Though I had to be short with this post and not as detailed as I like to be due to the time frame I have right now(even though I did cover quite a lot). This post will probably get deleted and I'll probably get an infraction but you uninformed individuals really needed this information. I hope one day instead of seeing me as a troll pulling information out of 'nowhere' you will see that my words and statements are indeed true and I am a messenger of God. Everything I've said is true thus proving I am right so there really is no need to respond with foolish lower IQ questions and arguments. Use this post as a reference in the future when you need reliable information on the concepts I covered, because that's one big reason why I wrote it. I would love to stay and chat but I'm closing this thread. Weed should be illegal due to it does have potential for abuse. It may have originally become illegal for other reason but the fact is it still can negatively impact people's life even if it's not yours. If you really care that much about doin pot/drugs then move to Portugal or Colorado or something. That's all there really is to it folks, with that I rest my case.

THREAD CONQUERED AND CLOSED by your friend, Lysergic

 

[JayTheUnseen]

Whew.

This has really been an eye opening experience for me. The thought of quitting Smash literally crossed my mind from the ignorance and hypocritical people I've come across within the Smash community forums (Debate Hall). Deep down inside I would like to think that not all Smash members are like this but what I have witnessed in this forum has been devastating. I personally believe one of the main problems is the "moderator" of this forum if that's what you want to call him. He is extremely biased and gets his feelings hurt when someone proves a point that counters what he thought was true and reports specific users when other users are committing (to even a much larger scale) the same "violations." I've noticed there is a small circle of forum dweller veterans that bond together and try and team up against anyone they find that goes against their beliefs. The moderator is completely biased and only punishes the poor victim that is not within this circle. I must say, this is totally despicable and I will be reporting all of you to the administrator.

I'll probably get reported for this post due to the unsophisticated biased hypocritical moderator and I even told him I probably wouldn't post in the debate thread anymore but this will be my last post and within it I will set things straight once and for all. I'm not going to explain myself any further than I will in this post so try and use your brain's full capacity to grasp the directness of the truth that lies within my words. I will be answering pony boy's ridiculous under thought attack on me which (if what I got reported for was "trolling") was trolling for the record (Mr. Oh So Great Moderator) and I will be exposing the lying undeserved moderators pathetic ways. I'll also throw a little feedback to a few other users who have attacked me throughout my time in the Debate Hall threads.

So please listen closely; for all of what I am about to say is much needed information for all you cross-dressing atheist.



Like I said before; this My Little Pony horn dog is a total hypocrite and if I'm a "troll" then he is a "troll" due to this statement. First of all he attempts (and fails terribly) in trying to insult me (I think) by stating I am probably 13. Obviously no 13 year old could write and present such clear and vivid ideas such as I have and have accumulated the knowledge I have presented. So I guess this brony is trying to intimidate me and make me think I sound young and dumb which I obviously don't.

Then on the other hand he says I could be a 40 year old that lives in Texas or something. Wow.

Based on your flaming and negative input on your opinion towards my thoughts and myself you are obviously insulting the entire state of Texas. Should at least get a warning for that (Mr. Moderator). Also it is extremely ignorant and closed minded to assume all Texas natives are the same or think a certain way.

This statement you made proves you a complete uninformed biased hypocrite.



Man you suck at making points. First of all this law in Saudi Arabia has nothing to do about what we were talking about. Nothing to do about weed or the legalization of drugs. Congratulations on discovering different laws exist in different countries; you're so smart.

Not.

In case you didn't know morality is subjective and right and wrong are merely perception. However the case for why drugs should be legal or not has strong reasons it shouldn't to the physical and mental harm it causes to humans. There is so much data, information, facts, whatever to prove this is true and don't worry, I will leave plenty of sources for your little unicorn mind.



Look brony; your knowledge on medicine is no where near my level so let me fill you in with the obvious fact that all drugs affect all people differently. This is a known fact and some people will react more sensitively than others. While some may be able to smoke pot and hardly feel a thing and never do it again some people will become obsessed and potentially severely mentally addicted. Not only have I seen marijuana make people obsessed, lazy, jobless, and unable to survive on their own but it has been documented countless of times. Trust me, I will provide the links to provide you the obvious facts.

I understand it is not the most addictive drug and I agree as well. I have seen people smoke marijuana for long periods of time and maintain their life normally but the matter of the fact is that it can induce serious addiction and mental health problems. It may be minor to you but for some people it is quite serious; this is something you need to realize.

https://www.erowid.org/experiences/subs/exp_Cannabis_Addiction_Habituation.shtml
https://www.erowid.org/experiences/exp.php?ID=64114
https://www.erowid.org/experiences/exp.php?ID=52875



True anything can become mentally addictive to do. However there is fine line between things like video games and going to church compared to narcotic addiction. Obviously pot isn't the most serious of drugs as far as addiction potential goes but opiates, amphetamines, and many others will take over your mind and change your perception in an extremely powerful way that video games or coffee never can. Illegal opiates and amphetamines lead to true physical addiction and honestly it depends on the person and drug they are on to determine the withdrawal symptoms. You will start forgetting things you cared about and eventually forget about who you even were before you started doing the drug. I've know people who have been on heroin and I've seen what it does. Regardless it is a known medical fact that these drugs can and will destroy your life. Marijuana may have a lower potential for abuse and certainly will not kill you but can worsen your life depending on the person.

http://www.helpguide.org/articles/addiction/drug-abuse-and-addiction.htm

I wouldn't think like that if it weren't true. 80% of everything I have said is either the truth or true statements based on a reference. You people might not of liked my approach but when it comes to medicine and religion I know my stuff. I studied both Medicine and Philosophy/Religion & Spiritually in college and have my own dark past of first hand experience with some pretty nasty substances so I know what I'm talking about. I've seen what all drugs can cause to people and I know how they all affect your brain an body. To be honest no matter how smart or 'in control' you think you are a chemical has the potential to completely rewire your psyche in away you'll never be aware it is even happening. You are all only human and no human can handle many illegal synthetic substances and that is why they are illegal. Marijuana really isn't that bad and honestly I don't care if you use it for it is your decision, but I think that the FDA has it right to make opiates, amphetamines, benzos, and many other drugs illegal (including pot). Honestly I don't even think drugs like oxycodone should be allowed to be brought back home with a patient when prescribed. They are too addictive and it is this reason that so many have access and thus get addicted to opiates. There should be a mandatory schedule time where you go to the doctor's office in which he gives you the dose there. No opiate should be allowed to be brought home because no human can control the effects it causes to the brain.



By trolling he means flaming I'm not a troll. Everything I said was the truth and I'm nearly certain I told you not to respond. Leave this discussion for the big kids pal, go practice your Pikachu on Smash or something. Jeez. Lol.

Lastly I will be exposing and disposing of the most despicable of all you hypocritical morons. Sucumbio, the lying butt-hurt moderator trying to play God and pretend he has some type of divine understanding and power just because he was mistakenly made a moderator. Before I finish this debate and prove you are and have always been wrong I would like to let you know that I will be contacting an administrator and let him know how you have been targeting only me through the last few days for no reason at all when others are committing much worse infractions.

So with that, let the enlightenment begin.


Thanks for pointing out something that I already knew. Illegal drugs are classified differently in all countries; yes, in United States they are categorized in schedules. Yes, I know pot was not always illegal all drugs were once not illegal. Do you think civilizations have existed like they have forever? Wrong. People have been using DMT for thousands of years and while it is currently an illegal hallucinogenic many plants contain this substance and can even be purchased online. The plant you mentioned, many types of grass, more famously known the mimosa hostilis root bark contains extremely high amounts of DMT. However nearly all of these substances are still illegal when used for human consumption. In fact in some states many of the plants are illegal all together due to containing DMT. Louisiana for an example passed a law in the last decade making over 50 different types of plants illegal because they contained DMT and other similar entheogens. Thanks for the history lesson I already knew, and I never said pot was always illegal I was just stating why I think it should be illegal.


There are some biological factors taking place as THC is processed through your body and eventually your brain which causes it's effects. It produces a 'high' or altered state of consciousness. I'm not sure if you were asking for the exact description of the biochemistry and processing of THC or how THC itself causes negative medical effects but.. THC doesn't really harm the body, physically (besides the smoke of course). In fact the negative potential of THC doesn't lie within the physical body at all, it's completely psychological and is focused within your brain and perception.

I don't know why you're telling me there is no difference between medical and street marijuana. No crap. I never said there was, I just stated that people with cancer should be allowed to smoke weed because it promotes an appetite and ease the pain and discomfort in a much better and safer way than opiates will. Jeez, you are totally lost and making a lot of ignorant assumptions Mr. Moderator. Recreational marijuana is when people have nothing wrong with them and just smoke to get wasted/high or whatever. There is a big difference.

The bottom line is no pot isn't very dangerous physically. Though since it is a drug that can greatly change your perception thus personality it can (for some people) drain your will and determination to exist and function normally in the world. It happens to many people so any argument stating (Oh I know people who smoke pot and they love it so it can't be bad) is 100% invalid.


It can be good but it can also be extremely bad. You don't need any drug to gain fresh perspective either, this is true, in fact this is the best way to go about changing your perception.. through experience, with no mind altering substances involved. Alcohol will almost NEVER lead to a better perception change in the long run and typically will only poison your body and make you think less intelligently. Heroin leads to all kind of problems (a lot more than just kidney failure). Coke and Crack and cause serious neurochemical in balances and permanent damage as well as heart issues and are the worst for your physical body. In fact they can cause more neurochemical problems than phenethylamines (a specific type of hallucinogenic) will. Not all 'trippy' (lol) drugs are the same. In fact MDMA affects your brain in a completely different way than LSD, psilocybin, and DMT. MDMA is a phenethylamine and can cause extreme neurochemical damage more specifically permanent damage to your serotonin levels. Though this will typically only occur through extreme heavy abuse. LSD and shrooms are tryptamines and are practically harmless to your physical body. The only thing bad is either they can bring out mental illnesses that already exist (though so can all drugs) and they can cause extremely dangerous behavior through powerful delusions when way too much of the drug is taken (suicide, harm your self or other people). You say pot and shrooms are the safe drugs? Lol, shrooms are the same type of drug as LSD and affect your brain in almost the same exact way. In fact shrooms can be as powerful as LSD depending on the dose. Though regardless it is obvious that tryptamines and marijuana are certainty the safer drugs out of all the different types, at least physically (and for the most part mentally as well). For the record there have never been confirmed overdose deaths from LSD, shrooms, or DMT besides people committing suicide.

Wrong. All drugs are not illegal. They create new designer drugs every year that are not scheduled and can not be found over the counter. While I have stated before that pot can be used casually it typical will become habit forming and thus a small if not possibly more serious addiction. Obviously it is the affects of THC that cause this, just like it is the affects of heroin that causes it's addiction. You are trying to be clever or project I'm wrong by producing obvious meaningless statements that have no validity in your argument. Regardless of all the bull crap you have said you still haven't countered the fact that pot can and will lead to a negative lifestyle. I will admit (and have stated before) that some people can casually smoke pot without problems but it still has the potential to be very bad. I won't only provide links but I will tell you I knew someone who admitted (openly) about how he was addicted to pot. He even told me once after I left a room in my house in which he was in that had some marijuana that belonged to me when I returned that he had the overwhelming urge to take it/steal some because of how strong his marijuana urges were. At the time he was 22 years old, living with his grandma, no job, no money, absolutely nothing going for him because of obsession with pot. So don't you ever think marijuana is 100% safe and OK when it can cause problems and addiction in peoples lives.


So I'd love to go in more detail and explain to all of you how I am right. Though I had to be short with this post and not as detailed as I like to be due to the time frame I have right now(even though I did cover quite a lot). This post will probably get deleted and I'll probably get an infraction but you uninformed individuals really needed this information. I hope one day instead of seeing me as a troll pulling information out of 'nowhere' you will see that my words and statements are indeed true and I am a messenger of God. Everything I've said is true thus proving I am right so there really is no need to respond with foolish lower IQ questions and arguments. Use this post as a reference in the future when you need reliable information on the concepts I covered, because that's one big reason why I wrote it. I would love to stay and chat but I'm closing this thread. Weed should be illegal due to it does have potential for abuse. It may have originally become illegal for other reason but the fact is it still can negatively impact people's life even if it's not yours. If you really care that much about doin pot/drugs then move to Portugal or Colorado or something. That's all there really is to it folks, with that I rest my case.

THREAD CONQUERED AND CLOSED by your friend, Lysergic

He does make a good point when he says that veterans to the forum get away with more insults than new comers.

 

[IsmaR]

hello, non-affiliated/completely unaware and as close to unbiased mod here. your continued attitude and ****posting will continue being warned/infracted by any staff member, including the administrators you're inclined to report people to.

arguments, differing opinions, even showing off your flashy knowledge/insight of everything ever are all perfectly acceptable

making entire portions of your posts dedicated to calling people out as hypocritical morons, regardless of whether it's a staff member or someone who is being equally as toxic/"deserves" it, will get you infracted both for being off topic, and being the definition of trolling/flaming

if you disagree with a post, feel like they "shouldn't get away with it" or for any other reason consider it inappropriate, then use the report button yourself rather than take matters into your own hands/call people out or reply to them by flaming. veteran members are not exempt from rules, nor do we go "easier" on them. if nothing else, reports also are seen by more than just board-specific moderators

lastly, if you disagree with a moderator, infraction, way a section/thread is run, or any other site-related policy, then I implore you to voice your concerns in Forum Support. it's listed in literally every warning PM for a reason. bringing any personal beef you have with a moderator up in public serves only to stir up trouble and derail from the thread you're posting in

should you continue your demeanor of playing the victim, acting stubborn/superior to everyone and making personal attacks/comments such as you "closing the thread" when clearly you have neither authority nor jurisdiction in the matter, then everyone will continue to treat you as they have been. furthermore, if you continue disregarding site rules and intentionally stirring up trouble, the infractions you keep building up will end up getting you banned. the warnings up to now have more or less had the underlying message of "maybe you should stop doing acting the same way that keeps getting you in trouble, and quit while you're ahead"

that said, have a nice day

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

He does make a good point when he says that veterans to the forum get away with more insults than new comers.

I'm not seeing a warning on that last post.

Whew.

This has really been an eye opening experience for me. The thought of quitting Smash literally crossed my mind from the ignorance and hypocritical people I've come across within the Smash community forums (Debate Hall). Deep down inside I would like to think that not all Smash members are like this but what I have witnessed in this forum has been devastating. I personally believe one of the main problems is the "moderator" of this forum if that's what you want to call him. He is extremely biased and gets his feelings hurt when someone proves a point that counters what he thought was true and reports specific users when other users are committing (to even a much larger scale) the same "violations." I've noticed there is a small circle of forum dweller veterans that bond together and try and team up against anyone they find that goes against their beliefs. The moderator is completely biased and only punishes the poor victim that is not within this circle. I must say, this is totally despicable and I will be reporting all of you to the administrator.

You got away with telling me I deserve to be tortured forever. The mods are incredibly lenient.

So please listen closely; for all of what I am about to say is much needed information for all you cross-dressing atheist.

LOL!

Like I said before; this My Little Pony horn dog is a total hypocrite and if I'm a "troll" then he is a "troll" due to this statement. First of all he attempts (and fails terribly) in trying to insult me (I think) by stating I am probably 13. Obviously no 13 year old could write and present such clear and vivid ideas such as I have and have accumulated the knowledge I have presented. So I guess this brony is trying to intimidate me and make me think I sound young and dumb which I obviously don't.

I say 13 because that was the last time I was so ****-sure and certain about my beliefs. Wrote a political manifesto too, and it was phenomenally stupid. Everyone goes through this phase, usually until a combination of public high school and actually learning more about how easy it is to be wrong beats it out of them.

Then on the other hand he says I could be a 40 year old that lives in Texas or something. Wow.

Because the other brand of person I've seen who's so certain they're right about every issue and simultaneously so bad at making their case is aging religious nuts.

Man you suck at making points. First of all this law in Saudi Arabia has nothing to do about what we were talking about. Nothing to do about weed or the legalization of drugs. Congratulations on discovering different laws exist in different countries; you're so smart.

Not.

You said something stupid and I refuted it. You don't get to accuse me of going off-topic when I respond to a point you made.

In case you didn't know morality is subjective and right and wrong are merely perception.

Of course I'm okay with [you being tortured forever]. I'm okay with anything God says. If you want to make the decision to go against what God made you then you are what he said. An abomination, a sinner. If you don't repent then you will suffer the consequences. Sounds fair to me.

You are a very confused individual. I find it interesting that the fundamentalist christian says that morality is subjective. No, not in the way you're saying it.

However the case for why drugs should be legal or not has strong reasons it shouldn't to the physical and mental harm it causes to humans. There is so much data, information, facts, whatever to prove this is true and don't worry, I will leave plenty of sources for your little unicorn mind.

Kinda wishing I could make you spend a thousand years on the moon. Unfortunately, that privilege is reserved for alicorns.

Look brony; your knowledge on medicine is no where near my level so let me fill you in with the obvious fact that all drugs affect all people differently. This is a known fact and some people will react more sensitively than others. While some may be able to smoke pot and hardly feel a thing and never do it again some people will become obsessed and potentially severely mentally addicted. Not only have I seen marijuana make people obsessed, lazy, jobless, and unable to survive on their own but it has been documented countless of times. Trust me, I will provide the links to provide you the obvious facts.

I understand it is not the most addictive drug and I agree as well. I have seen people smoke marijuana for long periods of time and maintain their life normally but the matter of the fact is that it can induce serious addiction and mental health problems. It may be minor to you but for some people it is quite serious; this is something you need to realize.

https://www.erowid.org/experiences/subs/exp_Cannabis_Addiction_Habituation.shtml
https://www.erowid.org/experiences/exp.php?ID=64114
https://www.erowid.org/experiences/exp.php?ID=52875

There's an episode of Extra Credits where James Portnoy, the developer behind the series, goes into his addiction to video games and how it impacted his life. You should look into it. And of course, these experiences pale in comparison to that of various alcoholics. You believe alcohol should be made illegal, I'd assume? It causes severe physical dependency and is far more deadly than weed.

Look, all of this ignores a crucial element - cost-benefit analysis. The cost-benefit analysis in this case is entirely one-sided. You're looking at the costs of having it legal without looking at thre costs of making it illegal. Yes, some people become addicted to marijuana. Just like some people become addicted to gaming. Hell, it's reasonable to say that addiction to gaming sunk my college education. But we don't ban these things, because addiction is an unfortunate part of human nature, and banning them would be more trouble than it's worth, and have significant costs to industry, personal liberty, society, and the government (check out how many people are in jail over possession charges and how much that costs!).

True anything can become mentally addictive to do. However there is fine line between things like video games and going to church compared to narcotic addiction. Obviously pot isn't the most serious of drugs as far as addiction potential goes but opiates, amphetamines, and many others will take over your mind and change your perception in an extremely powerful way that video games or coffee never can. Illegal opiates and amphetamines lead to true physical addiction and honestly it depends on the person and drug they are on to determine the withdrawal symptoms.

Yes, and I support prohibition (not criminalization, mind you, there's a difference) of drugs that are particularly addictive narcotics. A person addicted to heroin can reasonably be said to have lost control of their life, and the withdrawal symptoms can range from debilitating to downright deadly. Such people need help, and such substances should be controlled, I agree. Marijuana is not one of them.

You will start forgetting things you cared about and eventually forget about who you even were before you started doing the drug. I've know people who have been on heroin and I've seen what it does. Regardless it is a known medical fact that these drugs can and will destroy your life. Marijuana may have a lower potential for abuse and certainly will not kill you but can worsen your life depending on the person.

Congratulations, you've just described every thing ever. Yes, it can worsen your life. It can also make your life better, as countless adults in my life can attest, and making it illegal accomplishes very little at an extremely high cost. This is where most such arguments to make marijuana illegal fall apart - they act like the only thing existing is the cost/benefit for marijuana being legal. Even assuming that the benefit of personal freedom and potential medical research does not outweigh the cost of some people who become addicted to the drug and suffer as a result (I don't believe it does), it ignores the other important factor - the cost/benefit analysis of making the drug illegal. And here, we weigh the benefit of more people not becoming addicted due to not having access to the drug against the cost of, basically, our burgeoning prison system.

http://www.helpguide.org/articles/addiction/drug-abuse-and-addiction.htm

I wouldn't think like that if it weren't true.

Hey, I know, I'm like that too. But you know what I don't do? I never say "I cannot be wrong", and I never say "people who disagree with me are dishonest or misled". Even if it's something where the other side is clearly wrong, like global warming or evolution, I always go into the discussion with the attitude, "The person I'm talking to has something of value that is worth at least listening to." Because if I don't, I might as well not bother, because I've assumed from the start that I cannot teach anything and that I have nothing to learn. In that case, there's no point in a discussion. And, you know, it sounds really, really arrogant when you say it like that.

hello, non-affiliated/completely unaware and as close to unbiased mod here. your continued attitude and ****posting will continue being warned/infracted by any staff member, including the administrators you're inclined to report people to.

arguments, differing opinions, even showing off your flashy knowledge/insight of everything ever are all perfectly acceptable

making entire portions of your posts dedicated to calling people out as hypocritical morons, regardless of whether it's a staff member or someone who is being equally as toxic/"deserves" it, will get you infracted both for being off topic, and being the definition of trolling/flaming

if you disagree with a post, feel like they "shouldn't get away with it" or for any other reason consider it inappropriate, then use the report button yourself rather than take matters into your own hands/call people out or reply to them by flaming. veteran members are not exempt from rules, nor do we go "easier" on them. if nothing else, reports also are seen by more than just board-specific moderators

lastly, if you disagree with a moderator, infraction, way a section/thread is run, or any other site-related policy, then I implore you to voice your concerns in Forum Support. it's listed in literally every warning PM for a reason. bringing any personal beef you have with a moderator up in public serves only to stir up trouble and derail from the thread you're posting in

should you continue your demeanor of playing the victim, acting stubborn/superior to everyone and making personal attacks/comments such as you "closing the thread" when clearly you have neither authority nor jurisdiction in the matter, then everyone will continue to treat you as they have been. furthermore, if you continue disregarding site rules and intentionally stirring up trouble, the infractions you keep building up will end up getting you banned. the warnings up to now have more or less had the underlying message of "maybe you should stop doing acting the same way that keeps getting you in trouble, and quit while you're ahead"

that said, have a nice day

Ouch.

 

[Sucumbio]

So please listen closely; for all of what I am about to say is much needed information for all you cross-dressing atheist.

Statements such as these are not tolerated here at SmashBoards. We are an affirming community. We do not discriminate against LGBT, peoples of different races, religions, creeds, non-religions, etc. We accept all members with open arms. It is when those members feel it necessary to lecture other users on "right" and "wrong" and especially those who go about it in a condescending, or otherwise inappropriate manner, that we mods have to take action in order to ENSURE that our site remains a FRIENDLY and Affirming destination. That is our business model. You don't like it? You may stop coming, it's a free country. And if for some reason you've become ... ADDICTED, I got ya there too, be more than happy to put your name in for a perma-ban. Shame, though, considering you joined SB for SMASH and instead decided to troll the one place that has nothing to do with smash. w/e

Oh, and furthermore, this is not the place for evangelicals who want to spread the word. Why? Because not everyone believes as they do, and it is not fair for them to assume authority over other SB members and attempt to dictate what is or isn't "valuable" information, or to "save" their "soul." WE (the users) judge information to be valuable or not, YOUR role, as a poster, is to simply put the information in your post, NOT to add a bunch slick words after the statement such as "if you don't pay heed to my information you will burn in hell" or something ridiculous. Let me be clear. As far as =I= am concerned, there IS no Hell. I AM almost 40 years old. I can PROMISE you, that NOTHING on Earth will EVER change my mind about this. Why? Because you have to DIE first, in order to know if it's real. Faith is something best kept to YOURSELF. Please and thank you.

Lastly I will be exposing and disposing of the most despicable of all you hypocritical morons. Sucumbio, the lying butt-hurt moderator trying to play God and pretend he has some type of divine understanding and power just because he was mistakenly made a moderator. Before I finish this debate and prove you are and have always been wrong I would like to let you know that I will be contacting an administrator and let him know how you have been targeting only me through the last few days for no reason at all when others are committing much worse infractions.

So with that, let the enlightenment begin.

haha, actually I take this as confirmation that my latest rebuttal hit pretty close to home. I have that effect on people, it's a gift, really. I knew before you even really got hard into this debate, that you were just making fun of everyone in here. But it's been my experience over the last 23 years on the Internet, that the best way to out-concern a concerned troll, is to play into their hands and beat them at their own game. I think I succeeded. Instead of me getting all bent out of shape at your comments thus far and rage-quitting or resorting to petty insults and flames (wait, you did that, heh...), I simply treated you as misinformed, and brought to the table a magical little thing called facts. (why? Because history is static. Facts don't change. Therefore neither can be truly refuted.)

Thanks for the history lesson I already knew, and I never said pot was always illegal I was just stating why I think it should be illegal.

Another classic troll maneuver. Because you cannot properly rebut my argument, you instead pretend as if I either 1.) misquoted you 2.) misunderstood you, or you 3.) just straight up ignored what I said. So although you intended to "move this along" you really caused this to move backwards. But that's okay, patience is a virtue, and I have all the time in the world.

@ Lysergic said "It is a controlled substance (in most places) because it should only be used through prescription."

This is categorically false. Pot was made a controlled substance category 1, because of the largely untapped potential in money that the US government could make in regulating it (unofficial reason, subject to debate), and because the Supreme Court of the United States declared the Marijuana Tax Act to be unconstitutional, thereby leaving NO CHOICE, but to add it to the CSA (official reason, irrefutable). The only questionable decision is WHICH category it went into, and remains in today (hence this debate topic in the first place *sigh*).

There are some biological factors taking place as THC is processed through your body and eventually your brain which causes it's effects. It produces a 'high' or altered state of consciousness. I'm not sure if you were asking for the exact description of the biochemistry and processing of THC or how THC itself causes negative medical effects but.. THC doesn't really harm the body, physically (besides the smoke of course). In fact the negative potential of THC doesn't lie within the physical body at all, it's completely psychological and is focused within your brain and perception.

I don't know why you're telling me there is no difference between medical and street marijuana. No crap. I never said there was, I just stated that people with cancer should be allowed to smoke weed because it promotes an appetite and ease the pain and discomfort in a much better and safer way than opiates will. Jeez, you are totally lost and making a lot of ignorant assumptions Mr. Moderator. Recreational marijuana is when people have nothing wrong with them and just smoke to get wasted/high or whatever. There is a big difference.

Hm.. okay: @ Lysergic said "If used medically then it is not "bad" per se but is still legal. Using marijuana illegally (recreational) is bad because you will get arrested (A) and it is a mind altering substance so it will change the way you perceive things (B)."

Once again you've managed to draw attention away from the logical inconsistency in your statement and instead attempted to paint my rebuttal as irrelevant to the discussion. SO once again I will backtrack for you.

The logical syntax of your statement translates as follows:

IF Poison A is used with Permission, then it is harmless. But if it is NOT used with permission, it becomes harmful.

This fails logical reasoning. Whether someone has a prescription (literally just a piece of paper) or not has zero bearing on the actual pot's effects themselves. So therefore: using marijuana medically is JUST as bad as using it recreationally, OR, it's just as harmless as using it recreationally.

Also, you've fallen into another logical fallacy, the False Dichotomy (framing an argument so that it appears there are only 2 choices). You've ignored the 3rd possibility, which is to use pot without a prescription, in the same manner as one would do WITH a prescription (not abusing it, low dose THC, etc.). Also you've mistaken something being illegal as automatically being "bad." This is also false. There are plenty of illegal things in this world that are not actually harmful (and thus probably shouldn't still be illegal (though I personally believe speeding is dangerous and should result in fines if violated.)

Example: Patient X suffers from grand mal seizures. He seeks medical help, happens to live in one of the 23 states/D.C. that allows for medical pot, and begins to show improvement once he starts to use it on a regular basis (ergo, habit or to use your word, addiction). Patient Y also suffers from this condition, but they happen to live in the other half of the country, where it's still illegal. Instead of taking the most expensive option, which would be to relocate, they decide to just get pot there, even though it's illegal. There's already a great chance that the penalties under the law for this patient's "habit" will be low. Even a couple bible-belt states, deep south states, like Mississippi (where I currently reside), have officially "decriminalized" marijuana possession and even some states have decriminalized its production and distribution. In Mississippi, Possession under 1 ounce carries with it NO jail time, even for multiple recurrences, and instead is simply a fine, like running a red light (and about as cheap, 100 bucks nuff for a nice 1/4 of sum of dat loud heehee).

SO that is why I felt it necessary to ensure you understood that a Prescription changes nothing about the safety of marijuana. All it does is prevent you from being a criminal, and that could change real easy (already has in many states, henceforth why this debate continues... I personally hope one day it will be 100 percent legal in all 50 states).

State and territorial laws about cannabis in the United States
Green Jurisdiction with legalized cannabis
Dark Blue Jurisdiction with both medical and decriminalization laws
Medium Blue Jurisdiction with legal medical cannabis
Light Blue Jurisdiction with decriminalized cannabis possession laws
Gray Jurisdiction with total cannabis prohibition
*Cannabis remains a Schedule I substance under federal law as of 2015. *Some cities and Indian Reservations have legalization policies separate from their surrounding states.

The bottom line is no pot isn't very dangerous physically. Though since it is a drug that can greatly change your perception thus personality it can (for some people) drain your will and determination to exist and function normally in the world. It happens to many people so any argument stating (Oh I know people who smoke pot and they love it so it can't be bad) is 100% invalid.

This is what BPC was referring to. You start off by agreeing that pot isn't very dangerous, physically, and then go on to state that FOR SOME PEOPLE, it can have negative effects on their daily lives. How is this considered a valid point? We're not interested in what SOME PEOPLE do. You even say so YOURSELF IN THE SAME PARAGRAPH that "any argument stating I know (some) people who smoke pot and they love it so it's not that bad" is an invalid statement, when the previous sentence in your paragraph uses the same syntax! Seriously? Wow. But that aside, the notion that you know someone, is also irrelevant. We do not cite personal experience as a means of persuasion. Why? Because it cannot be corroborated. At least if you use links, we can see who wrote it, when it was written, for what purpose, etc etc. We can -VET- the source. Can't vet your friends and colleagues and acquaintances.

marijuana are certainty the safer drugs out of all the different types, at least physically (and for the most part mentally as well).

If you believe this, then why are you even arguing with everyone? Pro-legalization hinges on the assertion that you JUST DESCRIBED YOURSELF. It is not physically addicting, and it is not dangerous. It is not harmful. ABUSE of -anything- can be, but that's not what we're talking about. IF you want to try and say that smoking pot automatically leads to pot abuse THAT is a position worth defending. But instead you've squandered every post in this place with half-truths, ad hom attacks. In fact I am almost positive I could make a better argument for strict pot bans, than you could. Why? Because -my- arguments don't depend on "feelings." Only facts. But that's the difficulty. Pot has never been found to be anything that makes it a Schedule 1 drug, with the only possible exception being the 1st criterion (high potential for abuse.) See, I find this arguable, because I for one do not believe that abuse is likely. I believe most people that smoke pot, do so on a non-regular basis, and in low enough doses so as to avoid potential physical/mental complications.

That and it's just not that easy to get drugs, you have to know somebody, you have to enter that world, and most US citizens are still law abiding citizens. According to statistics, there are approximately 3 million US citizens in our penal system at this time. Our total population, however, is over 320 million. That means that under 1 percent of the US population are incarcerated for crimes. And of ALL those criminals, as of 2012, only about 60 thousand were due to drug offenses, and that includes judges and prosecutors that throw drug charges on top of other charges in order to increase jail time duration. And of all THOSE, only about 23 percent are Pot related, between 15 and 16k.

SO basically, 15,000 Americans out of 320 MILLION Americans, have it "bad" as you put it, due to the criminal aspect of pot use.

Wrong. All drugs are not illegal. They create new designer drugs every year that are not scheduled and can not be found over the counter.

The Federal Analog Act of 1986 says hello. Quite literally this law made it ILLEGAL for ANYONE to manufacture ANYTHING that can be taken into the body, and that has like-effects to currently Scheduled drugs - unless they are willing to submit their invention to the FDA and Congress for review.

Dietary Supplements, now that's different, but of course NOT WHAT WE''RE EVEN TALKING ABOUT.

Example: St. John's Wort. This extract from a plant has been used in medicines to treat depression, anxiety, and to promote well being. It is not a scheduled drug, because it is not considered a drug, but instead a dietary supplement. That'd be like trying to schedule Chocolate, because of its effects on the human psyche. Instead these are considered "over the counter dietary supplements" meaning, they STILL fall under one of the two categories I outlined: Scheduled, or OTC. There is no 3rd legal category in the United States, so no, "they" do not create new designer drugs every year that avoid scheduling and yet cannot be purchased OTC. Besides, if you can't purchase something w/prescription or OTC (e-commerce is still considered OTC< just that it's an e-counter, lol), then you can't purchase it at all! At least not legally. Sure you can go to the street to get it, but that's not what we're talking about in this paragraph.

@ Lysergic said: "Furthermore this is why all drugs should be illegal unless prescribed in a controlled setting. They deceive your mind and thus steal your identity and mentality. If you can't accept this then you're probably already addicted to drugs and need to go get help at a rehab center as soon as possible."

Really. So Tylenol deceives my mind? Steals my identity? Vitamins too? Man... I'm so dead, I just took a couple Tylenol 500 MG "extra strength" and you're telling me I'm done for. /sarcasm

So no, once again you've overstated yourself. Not ALL drugs should be illegal, regardless of their settings. Only ones that belong in Schedules should be considered potentially dangerous enough to warrant laws prohibiting their use, possession, and distribution/manufacture.

Not to derail but a quick aside if you'll permit: Humans ever require a "get away" from "reality" in order to "cope" with life. Some people go to Church to pray to an imaginary ghost, or to sit in a wooden prison, prostrate before a Man, who believes he has the ability to make them think it's okay for them to have killed someone last year, or cheated on their wife last night, or got drunk last week and skipped Sunday mass because they were so drunk. People can even become addicted to Church, falling into Cults like the Boston Church of Christ, where literally ALL DAY LONG all you do is "pray" and "study" the bible. They even come to your job, and talk to your supervisor about changing your schedule to allow you more time to be in prayer meetings. Sound familiar? Lots of drug addicts (not so much potheads) have trouble at work too, and with congregations of like-minded people they all end up in the same place. Without moderation, anything can be bad. Pot is no different, but this should not automatically make it illegal.

While I have stated before that pot can be used casually it typical will become habit forming and thus a small if not possibly more serious addiction.

Too bad this source says otherwise. And wouldn't you know, it's from a website that's -against- legalization (like yourself) and yet even they can't lie about statistics. So no, it's not "typical" by any means. 1 in 6? Nah. Had it been 4 in 6, yah, I'd say definitely "typical" would work. But not 1 in 6. (Not to mention those numbers are bloated, we're only talking about 0.02 percent of the total US population. Hardly worth the fervor and tenacity in these flawed arguments by which you've displayed.

pot can and will lead to a negative lifestyle.

IN SOME PEOPLE (and I've demonstrated just how few that number is). Teens are at greater risk, but let's get real, teens are still children, and children shouldn't be using drugs recreationally to begin with, so it's non sequitur. That is, unless, you wish to change your position to: "Pot should be illegal because of the high risk it poses to teens and young adults in terms of motivation, rational thinking and problem solving." I cannot discount the medical research that has proven lower IQ test scores in potheads than non potheads. I also cannot refute the medical documentation that proves pot's effects can be permanent if abused before puberty is over.

it still has the potential to be very bad.

Everything has this potential. Congress does not vote to Schedule a drug based on what it MIGHT do, it's always based on what it is shown TO do. There is zero room for conjecture or theory craft when adding a drug to the Schedule. This is why the FDA works in tangent with Congress to ensure that a drug is getting it's "fair shake" if you will, in being Scheduled. Pot got the bad end of the stick on this, really. It was a necessary evil, because the prior law, the Tax Act of the 30s, was unconstitutional, and rather than leave a legal void to where Pot just became as like a rose bush, Congress acted, and Nixon signed. That's really all there is, it's just legal laziness, really. Especially considering that there is NO corroboration between sources as to the guaranteed effects of Pot. There is no evidence that says you WILL become an addict. Even drugs like Heroine technically can be non-habit forming, if that's indeed the body type of the user. But of course, the potential for abuse/addiction is much higher with strong opioid products like heroin. This is also documented clearly by various drug war .govs and so forth. It is also unanimously agreed that pot is not nearly as strong in this regard. Therefore its placement in Schedule I is really overkill. Should be a 3, like Tylenol-3s, or other painkillers. Maybe even a 4. Shoot Alcohol isn't even Scheduled and yet is the cause of more fatalities in one year than all of recorded history for Pot. Ever.

One day, I can aww Congress deciding to legalize low THC strains, while simultaneously outlawing high TCH strains. This would not only allow people who need cannibidiols, as seizure relief, appetite control, insomnia, etc. to get it, but it would greatly reduce the amount of "potheads" in the country, and reduce risk factors such as DWI, and things like job losses, accidents and injuries, etc. Problem with this is enforcement. By declaring "the good stuff" illegal, you basically guarantee an Escalation in the Drug War (which we really need to do away with, not make it worse).

I won't only provide links but I will tell you I knew someone who admitted (openly) about how he was addicted to pot. He even told me once after I left a room in my house in which he was in that had some marijuana that belonged to me when I returned that he had the overwhelming urge to take it/steal some because of how strong his marijuana urges were. At the time he was 22 years old, living with his grandma, no job, no money, absolutely nothing going for him because of obsession with pot. So don't you ever think marijuana is 100% safe and OK when it can cause problems and addiction in peoples lives.

Okay, well the thing is, nothing is 100 percent safe. Your friend obviously had an underlying condition: untreated mental depression/anxiety/OCD, etc. This means all bets are off. The statistics that we've been citing over and over, are unbiased in this regard, because they take into account the fact that a "normal" person who smokes pot, is far less likely to abuse it, than someone who is LOOKING to get high - so-called self-medicating. If someone just puffs, are they necessarily LOOKING for an escape, or are "self-medicating" as a Psychiatrist would say? Are they 100 percent going to end up worse off? Nah. Maybe they're just experimenting, just to see what it's like. Maybe they do like the buzz, but they can live without it too just fine. There's many variables involved. If this were as cut-n-dry as you've attempted to paint the issue as, well... there wouldn't be an issue, would there?

So I'd love to go in more detail and explain to all of you how I am right. Though I had to be short with this post and not as detailed as I like to be due to the time frame I have right now(even though I did cover quite a lot). This post will probably get deleted and I'll probably get an infraction but you uninformed individuals really needed this information. I hope one day instead of seeing me as a troll pulling information out of 'nowhere' you will see that my words and statements are indeed true and I am a messenger of God. Everything I've said is true thus proving I am right so there really is no need to respond with foolish lower IQ questions and arguments. Use this post as a reference in the future when you need reliable information on the concepts I covered, because that's one big reason why I wrote it. I would love to stay and chat but I'm closing this thread. Weed should be illegal due to it does have potential for abuse. It may have originally become illegal for other reason but the fact is it still can negatively impact people's life even if it's not yours. If you really care that much about doin pot/drugs then move to Portugal or Colorado or something. That's all there really is to it folks, with that I rest my case.

THREAD CONQUERED AND CLOSED by your friend, Lysergic

lol, okay...

anyway, so

1.) You've provided no real information that wasn't already known in this debate topic as supporting the "ban it" side. And you further do your side a disservice by repeating other people's paranoid delusions instead of forming a cogent opinion on your own and backing it with real sources. And in case you haven't noticed, every good point against your position, you relented and agreed with, then tried to backtrack and say "but even if you're right, you're still more wrong than right, and I'm more right than wrong." This isn't a playground. We don't just say "you're wrong." We demonstrate through evidence, and logic, why a position is right or wrong, or both! You have yet to really do this, and this is why you've been labeled a "troll."

Besides, this IS the Debate Hall after all. Most people don't come in here, and those that do, quickly discover that this sub-forum is a far more serious forum than the rest of site. Why? Lots of reasons. Debate and Forensics Teams in High School, Model UN, Moot Court, just to name a few. These activities involve at their core, the rules of proper discourse. They require a strong vocabulary. They require a reasonable grasp of logical fallacy. They require some insight into the metaphysical. And as such, this sub forum attempts to be a resource for its users and visitors to pick through, deliberate, join in on, etc. key issues that would otherwise be spoon fed to them through TV news. The DH teaches us the value of uncertainty; of skepticism.

2.) People WILL see your words. This is the net, dude. They're there forever, really. And I'm betting no one is going to believe that you're a messenger of God. In fact they'll probably think you're a nut. Me? Nah, I think you're just having some fun at our expense, but seeing as you've been warned both openly and officially behind closed doors, I think you've learned your lesson. If not, well... heh. Nice knowin' ya

 

[Deleted member 269706]

@ Lysergic Based on your name, I would love to know how you feel about hallucinogens. Should they be illegal too? Do they take away your perception and rob you of your identity? Also wanted to clarify, I am neither a cross-dresser, nor an atheist.

 

[Sehnsucht]

Geez, everyone is writing such long posts in this thread. Who even has the time to write such things? Let alone read them? winkwink

@ Lysergic Based on your name, I would love to know how you feel about hallucinogens. Should they be illegal too? Do they take away your perception and rob you of your identity? Also wanted to clarify, I am neither a cross-dresser, nor an atheist.

I had previously inquired on his username rationale, though he ignored that passage, and he mistook me for a transvestite when I was merely using myself as an example in hypotheticals. So I wouldn't expect much by way of a straightforward response.

Overall, though, I'm starting to suspect that, like myself, he's a big fan of Fringe.

 

[Braydon]

Statements such as these are not tolerated here at SmashBoards. We are an affirming community. We do not discriminate against LGBT, peoples of different races, religions, creeds, non-religions, etc. We accept all members with open arms. It is when those members feel it necessary to lecture other users on "right" and "wrong" and especially those who go about it in a condescending, or otherwise inappropriate manner, that we mods have to take action in order to ENSURE that our site remains a FRIENDLY and Affirming destination. That is our business model. You don't like it? You may stop coming, it's a free country. And if for some reason you've become ... ADDICTED, I got ya there too, be more than happy to put your name in for a perma-ban. Shame, though, considering you joined SB for SMASH and instead decided to troll the one place that has nothing to do with smash. w/e

Yet I don't see a warning when budget tries to use being from Texas as an insult.

I'm having trouble determining if you're like 13 or 40 and live in Texas or something.

He's right, you don't hand out infractions for statements like those, you hand them out when you're butt hurt. It doesn't matter if people are being insulted you only care if you're being insulted. I'm from Texas, I don't like implications that everyone from Texas is a hyper religious flamer with comparable intelligence to a 13 year old, but does it matter? HELL NO! Succumbio's not from Texas, why would it matter, Succombio doesn't give a ****.

You may be the worst moderator I've ever seen and I've had a drunken moderator flam me and then threaten to perma-ban me as soon as I responded to him.

And on top of it all you really don't understand what's important in a debate half as much as you think you do.

Except it's really just a plant tho. Plants are neither good or bad.

You know what the most important part of a debate really is? That your arguments are based in truth. You're repeating propaganda of drug cartels in your arguments, that weed isn't a drug? Really?

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Statements such as these are not tolerated here at SmashBoards. We are an affirming community. We do not discriminate against LGBT, peoples of different races, religions, creeds, non-religions, etc. We accept all members with open arms.

Funnily enough, I'm neither a crossdresser nor transgender nor gay. But yeah, trying to use that as a judgment... Hey @ Lysergic ? One of my friends is transgender. The **** he's going through because of intolerant religious people like you is downright incredible.

The logical syntax of your statement translates as follows:

IF Poison A is used with Permission, then it is harmless. But if it is NOT used with permission, it becomes harmful.

This fails logical reasoning. Whether someone has a prescription (literally just a piece of paper) or not has zero bearing on the actual pot's effects themselves. So therefore: using marijuana medically is JUST as bad as using it recreationally, OR, it's just as harmless as using it recreationally.

Ehh... I'd be careful with that. A carefully applied morphine drip is not the same thing as a crippling morphine addiction.

@ B Braydon Texas prides itself in its stubbornness and hard-headedness. I'm not calling him stupid, I'm calling him stubborn. Oh, and you seriously want to say that cartels are pro-legalization? Like, really? The guys whose profits are being undercut by cheaper weed, and who now have real competition on a legal market? That's one tall claim right there.

 

[Braydon]

@ B Braydon Texas prides itself in its stubbornness and hard-headedness. I'm not calling him stupid, I'm calling him stubborn. Oh, and you seriously want to say that cartels are pro-legalization? Like, really? The guys whose profits are being undercut by cheaper weed, and who now have real competition on a legal market? That's one tall claim right there.

I'm sorry, but someone with your severely limited brain capacity and psychopathic lack of empathy can't begin to understand Texas pride. Texas pride isn't about being hard headed, you're just insulting us more.

And yes drug dealers spread the lie that marijuana is not a drug in order to get idiots to smoke it. I never said they did it to try and get it legalized.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

I'm sorry, but someone with your severely limited brain capacity and psychopathic lack of empathy can't begin to understand Texas pride. Texas pride isn't about being hard headed, you're just insulting us more.

Well then I apologize. I'm not a native, most of what I know about Texas I get from listening to your political representatives, so that might explain a thing or two.

And yes drug dealers spread the lie that marijuana is not a drug in order to get idiots to smoke it. I never said they did it to try and get it legalized.

Seriously? Citation needed. I'm kind of wondering who the hell is actually that stupid.

 

[Braydon]

Seriously? Citation needed. I'm kind of wondering who the hell is actually that stupid.

Pot users.

Seriously with the amount of pot users just in this thread saying it's perfectly safe and natural you can tell that a lot of people are smoking pot under false pretenses. Who do you think starts these things? Have you ever went to a dealer and asked him "so is this stuff good?" And had him respond "oh no, it's laced with lead and will probably kill you, you should never buy it." No. They lie so people will buy it.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Pot users.

Seriously with the amount of pot users just in this thread saying it's perfectly safe and natural you can tell that a lot of people are smoking pot under false pretenses. Who do you think starts these things? Have you ever went to a dealer and asked him "so is this stuff good?" And had him respond "oh no, it's laced with lead and will probably kill you, you should never buy it." No. They lie so people will buy it.

See, now you've shifted the claim from "it's not a drug" (a bizarre claim which I'm not sure anyone believes) to "it's totally harmless" (wrong, but not all that unbelievable, and I'm not convinced that it's the cartels spreading that claim). From my experience, it's not the dealers saying "this is safe". It's the cultural zeitgeist, and a particularly noxious form of herbalistic jingoism.

 

[Sucumbio]

Yet I don't see a warning when budget tries to use being from Texas as an insult.

Did anyone report this post? Besides, it's not really an insult, so I'd have rejected it, anyway. Saying "oh you must be from Texas" is no different a kind of statement as "oh you must be from the Bible Belt" or "oh, you must be a Republican." BPC naturally assumed that he was arguing with either a child, or a fundamentalist and made the comment in earnest. Lysergic came into this topic to declare that his views are the only legitimate views, and then went on to flame and troll anyone that disagreed. As a moderator, it is my job to ensure that everyone remains civil. We have to ensure that no one makes posts that will incite flames. This would be why you and Lysergic have gotten a lot more points in the past few weeks/months. BPC isn't immune to moderation (even by me). No one is. Not even me. But when I tapped BPC on the shoulder and explained that he'd been given enough warnings and that he'd start accruing points, what did he do? The MATURE thing. He Stopped the behavior. Why can't you? What can't Lysergic? Because you get a kick of being a rebel? What is it? Enlighten me, please. No wait, I know why. It's because you're both trolls.

He's right, you don't hand out infractions for statements like those, you hand them out when you're butt hurt. It doesn't matter if people are being insulted you only care if you're being insulted. I'm from Texas, I don't like implications that everyone from Texas is a hyper religious flamer with comparable intelligence to a 13 year old, but does it matter? HELL NO! Succumbio's not from Texas, why would it matter, Succombio doesn't give a ****.

I can think of 2 people in the last 2 or 3 months who have been nothing but a nuisance in this sub-forum. You and Lysergic both refuse to read and agree to the rules of this sub-forum. You haven't read the "how to post in the debate hall" section, either. And when you get infracted, you think it's because of something personal? Dude... I've moderated this forum off and on for 5 years running. Everyone gets it, why can't you? Oh right, because you're not trying to. You remind me of one of those kids back in the day who comes in begging to join a board game, can't figure out how to play, and then just flips the board over in frustration as if it's THEIR fault. *sigh*

You may be the worst moderator I've ever seen and I've had a drunken moderator flam me and then threaten to perma-ban me as soon as I responded to him.

I'm sorry you feel this way, but I also know you're not interested in proper debating, so why I continue to see your face around here, I do not know. I'll kindly ask that you refrain from making further accusations in public. If you have an issue with the way this sub-forum in moderated, please bring this up in Forum Support. This was already declared by a Super Moderator (my direct superior) from another section entirely if you read a few posts up.

You know what the most important part of a debate really is? That your arguments are based in truth. You're repeating propaganda of drug cartels in your arguments, that weed isn't a drug? Really?

Uh, no. I didn't say weed isn't a drug. I said that it's just a plant, and that a plant, ergo something that is void of morality, cannot be either good or bad. It can be poisonous! But that's not what he said. Maybe you think I'm nitpicking his words, but this is the DH. Precision in the words you choose is of paramount importance. As for truth? Truth is subjective. Debates are about FACTS. And EVIDENCE. Sources. And if you read through this topic you'll see that for every 1 source that supports the Ban-it policy, there are 10 other sources that support it being re-scheduled. And no, they're not blogs from drug cartels (lolwut?) To be clear: the plant itself is just a plant. It's what people DO with the plant, that MIGHT lead to issues. Seems hardly a strong foundation of reasoning for "let's ban it."

Ehh... I'd be careful with that. A carefully applied morphine drip is not the same thing as a crippling morphine addiction.

... okay again I wasn't saying that MISUSING a drug isn't harmful. I was saying that simply having a drug prescribed to you doesn't automatically make it "safe." And furthermore getting a drug w/o a prescription doesn't automatically make it "dangerous." He was saying that and it just isn't true. Not logically, not forensically, not metaphysically, lol whatever, it's just plain wrong. Furthermore, drugs are not added to the Schedule simply because they should remain prescription-only (which is what he ultimately suggested is his post). They are added to the schedule because of their -potential- for abuse. A prescription does not eliminate this potential, as he asserted. One can get a script for any number of "mind-altering" drugs but if you OD, you OD. Hope that clears it up.

 

[Lysergic]

Unfortunately I have been unable to reply due to not having the spare time and I do apologize for that. I'm actually quite happy with these results to be honest. I'm not here today to argue or venture into paragraph after paragraph responses but I will give my last final thoughts on all of you people; briefly. So lets begin!

We can start off with IsmaЯ. Thanks for the input and advice on how I should go about reporting the corruption and disorder of the moderation in this forum. The corruption here is worse than the satanic cult running the Cecil Motel that sacrificed Elisa Lam in a satanic ritual. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if a similar situation is happening with this website. Pretending to be a welcoming friendly place when in reality is run by a select few of satanist that take advantage of their innocent new members.

Towards everything else you had to say; that's cool. I'm pretty much done in this thread anyway. Though I really am extremely happy you made that post. It has super importance to my validation in a point I'm about to make later on in this post.

Statements such as these are not tolerated here at SmashBoards. We are an affirming community. We do not discriminate against LGBT, peoples of different races, religions, creeds, non-religions, etc. We accept all members with open arms. It is when those members feel it necessary to lecture other users on "right" and "wrong" and especially those who go about it in a condescending, or otherwise inappropriate manner, that we mods have to take action in order to ENSURE that our site remains a FRIENDLY and Affirming destination. That is our business model. You don't like it? You may stop coming, it's a free country. And if for some reason you've become ... ADDICTED, I got ya there too, be more than happy to put your name in for a perma-ban. Shame, though, considering you joined SB for SMASH and instead decided to troll the one place that has nothing to do with smash. w/e

Oh, and furthermore, this is not the place for evangelicals who want to spread the word. Why? Because not everyone believes as they do, and it is not fair for them to assume authority over other SB members and attempt to dictate what is or isn't "valuable" information, or to "save" their "soul." WE (the users) judge information to be valuable or not, YOUR role, as a poster, is to simply put the information in your post, NOT to add a bunch slick words after the statement such as "if you don't pay heed to my information you will burn in hell" or something ridiculous. Let me be clear. As far as =I= am concerned, there IS no Hell. I AM almost 40 years old. I can PROMISE you, that NOTHING on Earth will EVER change my mind about this. Why? Because you have to DIE first, in order to know if it's real. Faith is something best kept to YOURSELF. Please and thank you.



haha, actually I take this as confirmation that my latest rebuttal hit pretty close to home. I have that effect on people, it's a gift, really. I knew before you even really got hard into this debate, that you were just making fun of everyone in here. But it's been my experience over the last 23 years on the Internet, that the best way to out-concern a concerned troll, is to play into their hands and beat them at their own game. I think I succeeded. Instead of me getting all bent out of shape at your comments thus far and rage-quitting or resorting to petty insults and flames (wait, you did that, heh...), I simply treated you as misinformed, and brought to the table a magical little thing called facts. (why? Because history is static. Facts don't change. Therefore neither can be truly refuted.)



Another classic troll maneuver. Because you cannot properly rebut my argument, you instead pretend as if I either 1.) misquoted you 2.) misunderstood you, or you 3.) just straight up ignored what I said. So although you intended to "move this along" you really caused this to move backwards. But that's okay, patience is a virtue, and I have all the time in the world.

@ Lysergic said "It is a controlled substance (in most places) because it should only be used through prescription."

This is categorically false. Pot was made a controlled substance category 1, because of the largely untapped potential in money that the US government could make in regulating it (unofficial reason, subject to debate), and because the Supreme Court of the United States declared the Marijuana Tax Act to be unconstitutional, thereby leaving NO CHOICE, but to add it to the CSA (official reason, irrefutable). The only questionable decision is WHICH category it went into, and remains in today (hence this debate topic in the first place *sigh*).



Hm.. okay: @ Lysergic said "If used medically then it is not "bad" per se but is still legal. Using marijuana illegally (recreational) is bad because you will get arrested (A) and it is a mind altering substance so it will change the way you perceive things (B)."

Once again you've managed to draw attention away from the logical inconsistency in your statement and instead attempted to paint my rebuttal as irrelevant to the discussion. SO once again I will backtrack for you.

The logical syntax of your statement translates as follows:

IF Poison A is used with Permission, then it is harmless. But if it is NOT used with permission, it becomes harmful.

This fails logical reasoning. Whether someone has a prescription (literally just a piece of paper) or not has zero bearing on the actual pot's effects themselves. So therefore: using marijuana medically is JUST as bad as using it recreationally, OR, it's just as harmless as using it recreationally.

Also, you've fallen into another logical fallacy, the False Dichotomy (framing an argument so that it appears there are only 2 choices). You've ignored the 3rd possibility, which is to use pot without a prescription, in the same manner as one would do WITH a prescription (not abusing it, low dose THC, etc.). Also you've mistaken something being illegal as automatically being "bad." This is also false. There are plenty of illegal things in this world that are not actually harmful (and thus probably shouldn't still be illegal (though I personally believe speeding is dangerous and should result in fines if violated.)

Example: Patient X suffers from grand mal seizures. He seeks medical help, happens to live in one of the 23 states/D.C. that allows for medical pot, and begins to show improvement once he starts to use it on a regular basis (ergo, habit or to use your word, addiction). Patient Y also suffers from this condition, but they happen to live in the other half of the country, where it's still illegal. Instead of taking the most expensive option, which would be to relocate, they decide to just get pot there, even though it's illegal. There's already a great chance that the penalties under the law for this patient's "habit" will be low. Even a couple bible-belt states, deep south states, like Mississippi (where I currently reside), have officially "decriminalized" marijuana possession and even some states have decriminalized its production and distribution. In Mississippi, Possession under 1 ounce carries with it NO jail time, even for multiple recurrences, and instead is simply a fine, like running a red light (and about as cheap, 100 bucks nuff for a nice 1/4 of sum of dat loud heehee).

SO that is why I felt it necessary to ensure you understood that a Prescription changes nothing about the safety of marijuana. All it does is prevent you from being a criminal, and that could change real easy (already has in many states, henceforth why this debate continues... I personally hope one day it will be 100 percent legal in all 50 states).

State and territorial laws about cannabis in the United States
Green Jurisdiction with legalized cannabis
Dark Blue Jurisdiction with both medical and decriminalization laws
Medium Blue Jurisdiction with legal medical cannabis
Light Blue Jurisdiction with decriminalized cannabis possession laws
Gray Jurisdiction with total cannabis prohibition
*Cannabis remains a Schedule I substance under federal law as of 2015. *Some cities and Indian Reservations have legalization policies separate from their surrounding states.



This is what BPC was referring to. You start off by agreeing that pot isn't very dangerous, physically, and then go on to state that FOR SOME PEOPLE, it can have negative effects on their daily lives. How is this considered a valid point? We're not interested in what SOME PEOPLE do. You even say so YOURSELF IN THE SAME PARAGRAPH that "any argument stating I know (some) people who smoke pot and they love it so it's not that bad" is an invalid statement, when the previous sentence in your paragraph uses the same syntax! Seriously? Wow. But that aside, the notion that you know someone, is also irrelevant. We do not cite personal experience as a means of persuasion. Why? Because it cannot be corroborated. At least if you use links, we can see who wrote it, when it was written, for what purpose, etc etc. We can -VET- the source. Can't vet your friends and colleagues and acquaintances.

If you believe this, then why are you even arguing with everyone? Pro-legalization hinges on the assertion that you JUST DESCRIBED YOURSELF. It is not physically addicting, and it is not dangerous. It is not harmful. ABUSE of -anything- can be, but that's not what we're talking about. IF you want to try and say that smoking pot automatically leads to pot abuse THAT is a position worth defending. But instead you've squandered every post in this place with half-truths, ad hom attacks. In fact I am almost positive I could make a better argument for strict pot bans, than you could. Why? Because -my- arguments don't depend on "feelings." Only facts. But that's the difficulty. Pot has never been found to be anything that makes it a Schedule 1 drug, with the only possible exception being the 1st criterion (high potential for abuse.) See, I find this arguable, because I for one do not believe that abuse is likely. I believe most people that smoke pot, do so on a non-regular basis, and in low enough doses so as to avoid potential physical/mental complications.

That and it's just not that easy to get drugs, you have to know somebody, you have to enter that world, and most US citizens are still law abiding citizens. According to statistics, there are approximately 3 million US citizens in our penal system at this time. Our total population, however, is over 320 million. That means that under 1 percent of the US population are incarcerated for crimes. And of ALL those criminals, as of 2012, only about 60 thousand were due to drug offenses, and that includes judges and prosecutors that throw drug charges on top of other charges in order to increase jail time duration. And of all THOSE, only about 23 percent are Pot related, between 15 and 16k.

SO basically, 15,000 Americans out of 320 MILLION Americans, have it "bad" as you put it, due to the criminal aspect of pot use.



The Federal Analog Act of 1986 says hello. Quite literally this law made it ILLEGAL for ANYONE to manufacture ANYTHING that can be taken into the body, and that has like-effects to currently Scheduled drugs - unless they are willing to submit their invention to the FDA and Congress for review.

Dietary Supplements, now that's different, but of course NOT WHAT WE''RE EVEN TALKING ABOUT.

Example: St. John's Wort. This extract from a plant has been used in medicines to treat depression, anxiety, and to promote well being. It is not a scheduled drug, because it is not considered a drug, but instead a dietary supplement. That'd be like trying to schedule Chocolate, because of its effects on the human psyche. Instead these are considered "over the counter dietary supplements" meaning, they STILL fall under one of the two categories I outlined: Scheduled, or OTC. There is no 3rd legal category in the United States, so no, "they" do not create new designer drugs every year that avoid scheduling and yet cannot be purchased OTC. Besides, if you can't purchase something w/prescription or OTC (e-commerce is still considered OTC< just that it's an e-counter, lol), then you can't purchase it at all! At least not legally. Sure you can go to the street to get it, but that's not what we're talking about in this paragraph.

@ Lysergic said: "Furthermore this is why all drugs should be illegal unless prescribed in a controlled setting. They deceive your mind and thus steal your identity and mentality. If you can't accept this then you're probably already addicted to drugs and need to go get help at a rehab center as soon as possible."

Really. So Tylenol deceives my mind? Steals my identity? Vitamins too? Man... I'm so dead, I just took a couple Tylenol 500 MG "extra strength" and you're telling me I'm done for. /sarcasm

So no, once again you've overstated yourself. Not ALL drugs should be illegal, regardless of their settings. Only ones that belong in Schedules should be considered potentially dangerous enough to warrant laws prohibiting their use, possession, and distribution/manufacture.

Not to derail but a quick aside if you'll permit: Humans ever require a "get away" from "reality" in order to "cope" with life. Some people go to Church to pray to an imaginary ghost, or to sit in a wooden prison, prostrate before a Man, who believes he has the ability to make them think it's okay for them to have killed someone last year, or cheated on their wife last night, or got drunk last week and skipped Sunday mass because they were so drunk. People can even become addicted to Church, falling into Cults like the Boston Church of Christ, where literally ALL DAY LONG all you do is "pray" and "study" the bible. They even come to your job, and talk to your supervisor about changing your schedule to allow you more time to be in prayer meetings. Sound familiar? Lots of drug addicts (not so much potheads) have trouble at work too, and with congregations of like-minded people they all end up in the same place. Without moderation, anything can be bad. Pot is no different, but this should not automatically make it illegal.


Too bad this source says otherwise. And wouldn't you know, it's from a website that's -against- legalization (like yourself) and yet even they can't lie about statistics. So no, it's not "typical" by any means. 1 in 6? Nah. Had it been 4 in 6, yah, I'd say definitely "typical" would work. But not 1 in 6. (Not to mention those numbers are bloated, we're only talking about 0.02 percent of the total US population. Hardly worth the fervor and tenacity in these flawed arguments by which you've displayed.



IN SOME PEOPLE (and I've demonstrated just how few that number is). Teens are at greater risk, but let's get real, teens are still children, and children shouldn't be using drugs recreationally to begin with, so it's non sequitur. That is, unless, you wish to change your position to: "Pot should be illegal because of the high risk it poses to teens and young adults in terms of motivation, rational thinking and problem solving." I cannot discount the medical research that has proven lower IQ test scores in potheads than non potheads. I also cannot refute the medical documentation that proves pot's effects can be permanent if abused before puberty is over.



Everything has this potential. Congress does not vote to Schedule a drug based on what it MIGHT do, it's always based on what it is shown TO do. There is zero room for conjecture or theory craft when adding a drug to the Schedule. This is why the FDA works in tangent with Congress to ensure that a drug is getting it's "fair shake" if you will, in being Scheduled. Pot got the bad end of the stick on this, really. It was a necessary evil, because the prior law, the Tax Act of the 30s, was unconstitutional, and rather than leave a legal void to where Pot just became as like a rose bush, Congress acted, and Nixon signed. That's really all there is, it's just legal laziness, really. Especially considering that there is NO corroboration between sources as to the guaranteed effects of Pot. There is no evidence that says you WILL become an addict. Even drugs like Heroine technically can be non-habit forming, if that's indeed the body type of the user. But of course, the potential for abuse/addiction is much higher with strong opioid products like heroin. This is also documented clearly by various drug war .govs and so forth. It is also unanimously agreed that pot is not nearly as strong in this regard. Therefore its placement in Schedule I is really overkill. Should be a 3, like Tylenol-3s, or other painkillers. Maybe even a 4. Shoot Alcohol isn't even Scheduled and yet is the cause of more fatalities in one year than all of recorded history for Pot. Ever.

One day, I can aww Congress deciding to legalize low THC strains, while simultaneously outlawing high TCH strains. This would not only allow people who need cannibidiols, as seizure relief, appetite control, insomnia, etc. to get it, but it would greatly reduce the amount of "potheads" in the country, and reduce risk factors such as DWI, and things like job losses, accidents and injuries, etc. Problem with this is enforcement. By declaring "the good stuff" illegal, you basically guarantee an Escalation in the Drug War (which we really need to do away with, not make it worse).



Okay, well the thing is, nothing is 100 percent safe. Your friend obviously had an underlying condition: untreated mental depression/anxiety/OCD, etc. This means all bets are off. The statistics that we've been citing over and over, are unbiased in this regard, because they take into account the fact that a "normal" person who smokes pot, is far less likely to abuse it, than someone who is LOOKING to get high - so-called self-medicating. If someone just puffs, are they necessarily LOOKING for an escape, or are "self-medicating" as a Psychiatrist would say? Are they 100 percent going to end up worse off? Nah. Maybe they're just experimenting, just to see what it's like. Maybe they do like the buzz, but they can live without it too just fine. There's many variables involved. If this were as cut-n-dry as you've attempted to paint the issue as, well... there wouldn't be an issue, would there?



lol, okay...

anyway, so

1.) You've provided no real information that wasn't already known in this debate topic as supporting the "ban it" side. And you further do your side a disservice by repeating other people's paranoid delusions instead of forming a cogent opinion on your own and backing it with real sources. And in case you haven't noticed, every good point against your position, you relented and agreed with, then tried to backtrack and say "but even if you're right, you're still more wrong than right, and I'm more right than wrong." This isn't a playground. We don't just say "you're wrong." We demonstrate through evidence, and logic, why a position is right or wrong, or both! You have yet to really do this, and this is why you've been labeled a "troll."

Besides, this IS the Debate Hall after all. Most people don't come in here, and those that do, quickly discover that this sub-forum is a far more serious forum than the rest of site. Why? Lots of reasons. Debate and Forensics Teams in High School, Model UN, Moot Court, just to name a few. These activities involve at their core, the rules of proper discourse. They require a strong vocabulary. They require a reasonable grasp of logical fallacy. They require some insight into the metaphysical. And as such, this sub forum attempts to be a resource for its users and visitors to pick through, deliberate, join in on, etc. key issues that would otherwise be spoon fed to them through TV news. The DH teaches us the value of uncertainty; of skepticism.

2.) People WILL see your words. This is the net, dude. They're there forever, really. And I'm betting no one is going to believe that you're a messenger of God. In fact they'll probably think you're a nut. Me? Nah, I think you're just having some fun at our expense, but seeing as you've been warned both openly and officially behind closed doors, I think you've learned your lesson. If not, well... heh. Nice knowin' ya

Everything you have said is nothing more than cop out responses that don't disprove anything I've said. Just a way to help inflate your deflated ego from the truths that I have presented. Though there is one thing you said that I would like to respond to specifically.

I knew before you even really got hard into this debate, that you were just making fun of everyone in here. But it's been my experience over the last 23 years on the Internet, that the best way to out-concern a concerned troll, is to play into their hands and beat them at their own game.

The second you got the super moderator to step in and hold your hand was the second everything you have said became completely irreverent. It's over. I have won. All you have supporting your ideas are the same circle of basement dwellers and a super moderator. I have people I've never even talked to before come on these threads and have seen the same corruption and lies that exist in this forum. Supporting my points and stepping up to the problem. Eventually I will inspire more people to step up to the issue so that a balance and fairness can be met.

With that said, you have been vanquished.

I'm having trouble determining if you're like 13 or 40 and live in Texas or something.

Then on the other hand he says I could be a 40 year old that lives in Texas or something. Wow.

Based on your flaming and negative input on your opinion towards my thoughts and myself you are obviously insulting the entire state of Texas. Should at least get a warning for that (Mr. Moderator). Also it is extremely ignorant and closed minded to assume all Texas natives are the same or think a certain way.

Yet I don't see a warning when budget tries to use being from Texas as an insult.

He's right, you don't hand out infractions for statements like those, you hand them out when you're butt hurt. It doesn't matter if people are being insulted you only care if you're being insulted. I'm from Texas, I don't like implications that everyone from Texas is a hyper religious flamer with comparable intelligence to a 13 year old, but does it matter? HELL NO! Succumbio's not from Texas, why would it matter, Succombio doesn't give a ****.

You may be the worst moderator I've ever seen and I've had a drunken moderator flam me and then threaten to perma-ban me as soon as I responded to him.

And on top of it all you really don't understand what's important in a debate half as much as you think you do.

You know what the most important part of a debate really is? That your arguments are based in truth. You're repeating propaganda of drug cartels in your arguments, that weed isn't a drug? Really?

Vanquished.

He does make a good point when he says that veterans to the forum get away with more insults than new comers.

Did anyone report this post? Besides, it's not really an insult, so I'd have rejected it, anyway.

Vanquished.

Geez, everyone is writing such long posts in this thread. Who even has the time to write such things? Let alone read them? winkwink



I had previously inquired on his username rationale, though he ignored that passage, and he mistook me for a transvestite when I was merely using myself as an example in hypotheticals. So I wouldn't expect much by way of a straightforward response.

Overall, though, I'm starting to suspect that, like myself, he's a big fan of Fringe.

Vanquished! Vanquished! Vanquished!

Normally I don't reply to threads in which I had already provided enough information to prove that my points are correct, but obviously you people needed a little more clarity on your delusions through my insight. I respect everyone's opinions and expect the same from others. I've never came at anyone on this forum with dedicated intentional hate but only provided facts.

Even if some of the facts were subjective they were still based on objective standardized perceptions/ideologies and only used as a reference! If you can't deal with hearing the truth and can't deal with someone being more intelligent then you are simply not mature enough to be on the internet and need to get off.

Later friends!

 

[Deleted member 269706]

Haha, I didn't get vanquished!! Seriously though, how many warnings do you get before you get banned from these forums? And mods, it may be best to close this thread, even if Lysergenic actually leaves. All we're seeing is outsiders coming in with closed minded arguments and barely taking any legit points into consideration. There's very little actual debate going on, and what debate there is, is going absolutely nowhere. Everything else is personal attacks and acts of ignorance. Perhaps we should suspend this thread for a while?

 

[Claire Diviner]

Haha, I didn't get vanquished!! Seriously though, how many warnings do you get before you get banned from these forums? And mods, it may be best to close this thread, even if Lysergenic actually leaves. All we're seeing is outsiders coming in with closed minded arguments and barely taking any legit points into consideration. There's very little actual debate going on, and what debate there is, is going absolutely nowhere. Everything else is personal attacks and acts of ignorance. Perhaps we should suspend this thread for a while?

Agreed. It's not like the few debating against the legalization of marijuana are backing up their points (well enough) anyway, so this is hardly a debate anymore.

 

[Sucumbio]

eh, we'll see how it plays out. I'd like to give this topic a bit longer on the stick, but if we've exhausted all the angles then I suppose I can bump it out for one of the others.

 

[Braydon]

All we're seeing is outsiders coming in with closed minded arguments and barely taking any legit points into consideration.

Lysergic may be kind of crazy, but you're actually proving him right here. Like he said, this subforum is just you supporting each other and rejecting the "outsiders" without logical reason or legitimate arguments.

You talk about outsiders as if everyone not in your group is mentally and morally inferior...


The ones without arguments are the people who want weed legalized, you're just trying to use personal freedom as a catch 22 to justify whatever the hell you want.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Lysergic may be kind of crazy, but you're actually proving him right here. Like he said, this subforum is just you supporting each other and rejecting the "outsiders" without logical reason or legitimate arguments.

You talk about outsiders as if everyone not in your group is mentally and morally inferior...


The ones without arguments are the people who want weed legalized, you're just trying to use personal freedom as a catch 22 to justify whatever the hell you want.

All right, you clearly missed a few posts, but I'll gladly go over this again. Here's an argument:

Costs of Marijuana Legalization:

• Some people become addicted and suffer as a result
  
• Very mild increase of DUI cases
• ... (you should help fill up this side)

Benefits of Marijuana Legalization:

• Everything in the "costs of marijuana prohibition" section goes away
• Personal freedom is upheld
• Hurts the cartels.

Costs of Marijuana Prohibition:

• Millions of arrests on felony charges for victimless crime, billions of dollars wasted every year enforcing laws for victimless crimes, perpetuation of intense racial bias in law enforcement, and more than 12% of our burgeoning prison system for victimless crime (source: https://www.aclu.org/criminal-law-reform/marijuana-arrests-numbers, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/10/war-on-drugs-prisons-infographic_n_4914884.html)
• Obstruction of personal freedom
• Impossibility of meaningfully regulating the product or taxing it
• Serious difficulty in examining possible medical usages

Benefits of Marijuana Prohibition:

• Everything in the "costs of marijuana legalization" section goes away... to an extent.
• ... (you should help fill up this side)

Looking at this list, even completely ignoring personal freedom (which you shouldn't, because it's a phenomenally meaningful and important concept), the fact is that the cost of Marijuana being illegal is insane. We saw this before when alcohol was made illegal - gang activity sprung up like crazy around it, average every-day citizens were made into criminals for activities that didn't hurt anyone, and things got bad. I can't tell you about the prison system back then, but at this point, more than one in ten people in prison right now are there because of Marijuana. 88% of them were arrested on simple possession charges. Not selling, not growing, not smuggling, trafficking, or whatever else, just owning a little bit of weed. Oh, it's really racist. Of course it's racist. Did you expect any different? Black people get arrested up to 8 times as often, despite the fact that they smoke weed at pretty much the same rates as whites. Enforcing these laws costs billions of dollars a year, and I'm not even sure if that factors in the cost of putting people in prison. It definitely doesn't factor in the economic costs - for example, the opportunity costs to the economy of putting millions of people in jail.

The costs of Marijuana prohibition are extreme. If we want this **** illegal, we'd better have a damn good reason. It simply being mind-altering, a potential minor increase in DUI cases, and the potential for addiction is not good enough. At least, it shouldn't be. Is making marijuana illegal (not even preventing its use in any meaningful way, because it's really easy to get weed if you want it) so important that we're willing to spend billions of dollars, waste countless hours of police time, and generally act monstrous over something that is less harmful than alcohol or tobacco?

This is no echo chamber. At least, it shouldn't be. But your arguments have consistently been terrible, and I'm pretty sure Lysergic was just a bad troll. I'd love to see a well-informed, articulate alternative viewpoint. The fact that I haven't is not my fault, though.

 

[Deleted member 269706]

Lysergic may be kind of crazy, but you're actually proving him right here. Like he said, this subforum is just you supporting each other and rejecting the "outsiders" without logical reason or legitimate arguments.

You talk about outsiders as if everyone not in your group is mentally and morally inferior...

The ones without arguments are the people who want weed legalized, you're just trying to use personal freedom as a catch 22 to justify whatever the hell you want.

@ B Braydon , everyone who is supporting marijuana legalization has pulled facts and figures as to why it should be legal. There are people in this thread who DO NOT SMOKE who think that marijuana can and should be legalized. You have held onto the same argument that "drugs are bad" and "it's mind altering" and have contributed almost nothing else to this thread. The reason you feel like we are "rejecting the 'outsiders'" is because the "outsiders" that you speak of have shown no legitimate arguments against us, nothing but claims. Those in favor of legalization have addressed economic benefits, health concerns, addictive properties, the way it affects the cartel, other legal drugs, and personal benefits. None of these are from biased sources or taken out of context. Your posts, do make a strong stand, but offer absolutely no facts, they are all merely claims with almost no evidence or logic to back them up. Your posts are extremely biased, and instead of EVER agreeing with a point, you either call it bull****, write it off as a biased source, or ignore it even when it is factual information. This entire debate would be much different if you had taken the time to even consider the points we are bringing up. The first step to a proper debate is to listen to the other arguments. You can't be mad at us for agreeing on a topic that is primarily backed up by facts. We are not a little group who always get along and target those who disagree. Trust me, @ Budget Player Cadet_ and @ Claire Diviner and I have all had very different opinions from each other in different threads around the forums.

tl;dr Those favoring legalization have cited studies, facts, and figures showing benefits in multiple different areas. There have been very few proper counter-arguments if any from those in favor of keeping it illegal.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Yeah, I mean, seriously. Disagree on the subject of "Does homeopathy work" and you'll probably get a lot of people telling you you're wrong as well. That's because there's a pretty clear right and wrong. Now, could arguments convince me that I'm wrong? Sure! I'm open-minded; if your argument has merit I'll at least consider it. But your arguments thus far have not had merit. At all.