Ecstacy No More Dangerous Than Horse Riding

[Meirionnydd]

You have got to be kidding? The Coumbine guys when mental because they smoked weed? Trust me, going on a rampage is the last thing you feel like doing when stoned! Much more likely to do it when you're drunk on legal alcohol.

X2

Weed wouldn't of had anything with them doing the shootings. They were mentally ill - Not related to any of the psychological effects of weed (which by the way, may take a long time to materialise from excessive smoking).

The behavioural patterns of the individuals would be consistent with Narcissistic personality disorder or 'psychopathy' (which isn't recognised as a personality disorder).

Jus' sayin'

 

[Meirionnydd]

And if this was a real debate. I could end it by asking you one question.

How would the United States of America or any country and its citizens benefit from the legalization of marijuana?

Your prisons wouldn't be overcrowding like they are now

 

[DoctorDisco]

Your prisons wouldn't be overcrowding like they are now

That wouldn't benefit society

 

[Meirionnydd]

That wouldn't benefit society

Uhhh.... probably would.

 

[DoctorDisco]

Uhhh.... probably would.

I would hesitate before considering that as true

 

[DoctorDisco]

Uhhh.... probably would.

How so?

 

[flipx]

You can overdose on weed. Its a recorded fact.

The high has nothing to do with the effects on the brain. The random effects I speak of are effects to nerves, cognitive ability, and motor skills. Which they do effect long term in many cases. Though not in all. Which is why I imply that it is completely random with every person. Its like every person who smokes weed uses a slot machine. The effects might be good... or bad. You can never know. We just don't know enough about it.

The American government barely holds onto control as it is. In a free capitalist country whom ever has the gold makes the rules. Give em an inch and they will take a mile. If you let them sell in a coffee shop the government fears that it will become popular and expand with time. With billion dollar corporations working together to market this new product they will, with time, buy out enough people to petition without appeal for mass marketing.

My point with it being worse than alcohol is made by asking what is easier to do.. Alcohol or weed? And how many more pot heads are there than alcoholics. A LOT more pot heads. We would be creating a whole new breed of addicts for the few recreational smokers that want a slight convenience.

Regardless of how it compares to alcohol, crimes and accidents would skyrocket.

What I mean by "intense" is that it makes you feel so good you can escape reality. And its easy to do. I am concerned as is everyone else with the potential addicts mental stability by avoiding reality.

I am aware you are from Scotland but when I said "we" I was referring the the states. Which is where I am.

I have been addicted. And I know many who have been addicted and still are.

And if this was a real debate. I could end it by asking you one question.

How would the United States of America or any country and its citizens benefit from the legalization of marijuana?

It is NOT a recorded fact that you can overdose on weed! Show me some proof that that is the case, because that is complete bullshit. It even says so in the link that I posted, here is the quote:

"By comparison, marijuana is nontoxic and cannot cause death by overdose."

This is a fact! The very fact you have even said this, shows again that you do not know much on the subject. For this very statement, I'm not really going to read much else of what you have to say, because this is the 3rd or 4th time you have made a statement that doesn't make sense, and that is not true. Your ignorance about what the effects are, how much we know about the drug, and generally on the whole subject is rather frustrating now.

I'm not bothered about America, I don't live there, and I never will (for many reasons). You have no point, yet again... what on earth do you mean, "what is easier to do"? None of them are easier to do... in fact, if you want to be really picky about it, alcohol is clearly, and obviously easier to do. Why? You drink it, to consume it, easy. Smoke a joint, you need to have a skin (paper), pack it with tobacco and/or grass, shape, then roll, then light it up. You have no idea what the statistics are on how many people smoke weed, and how many people drink. AND to say that more people smoke weed, than drink alcohol is just another completely absurd statement to make to be perfectly honest.

Crimes and accidents wouldn't "skyrocket", maybe that's your opinion, but based on what I have said about the statistics compared to Holland where it is legal, why would it "skyrocket" if the crime rate is less over there? You don't seem to base your argument and debate on facts, and stats, but more or less your own crazy opinions, and assumptions.


Again, no you could not end this debate with that one, absurd question. As I have already said, and which I feel now I just keep repeating myself, look at these factual statistics:

Enforcing marijuana prohibition costs taxpayers an estimated $10 billion annually and results in the arrest of more than 872,000 individuals per year -- far more than the total number of arrestees for all violent crimes combined, including murder, rape, robbery and aggravated assault.

Of those charged with marijuana violations, approximately 89 percent, 738,915 Americans were charged with possession only. The remaining 90,710 individuals were charged with "sale/manufacture," a category that includes all cultivation offenses, even those where the marijuana was being grown for personal or medical use. In past years, roughly 30 percent of those arrested were age 19 or younger.

If that does not show, how " the United States of America or any country and its citizens benefit from the legalization of marijuana?", then I don't know what will. That is merely one reason that it would benefit as well. I could go on, and on as you can probably tell.

Anyway, I feel I have argued a very good case against the 'legalisation of marijuana for personal use', and these are my opinions, based on facts and statistics. If you don't agree with me, fair enough, I'll respect your opinion. I do not respect ignorant assumptions based on nothing though.

 

[DoctorDisco]

It is NOT a recorded fact that you can overdose on weed! Show me some proof that that is the case, because that is complete bullshit. It even says so in the link that I posted, here is the quote:

"By comparison, marijuana is nontoxic and cannot cause death by overdose."

This is a fact! The very fact you have even said this, shows again that you do not know much on the subject. For this very statement, I'm not really going to read much else of what you have to say, because this is the 3rd or 4th time you have made a statement that doesn't make sense, and that is not true. Your ignorance about what the effects are, how much we know about the drug, and generally on the whole subject is rather frustrating now.

I'm not bothered about America, I don't live there, and I never will (for many reasons). You have no point, yet again... what on earth do you mean, "what is easier to do"? None of them are easier to do... in fact, if you want to be really picky about it, alcohol is clearly, and obviously easier to do. Why? You drink it, to consume it, easy. Smoke a joint, you need to have a skin (paper), pack it with tobacco and/or grass, shape, then roll, then light it up. You have no idea what the statistics are on how many people smoke weed, and how many people drink. AND to say that more people smoke weed, than drink alcohol is just another completely absurd statement to make to be perfectly honest.

Crimes and accidents wouldn't "skyrocket", maybe that's your opinion, but based on what I have said about the statistics compared to Holland where it is legal, why would it "skyrocket" if the crime rate is less over there? You don't seem to base your argument and debate on facts, and stats, but more or less your own crazy opinions, and assumptions.


Again, no you could not end this debate with that one, absurd question. As I have already said, and which I feel now I just keep repeating myself, look at these factual statistics:

If that does not show, how " the United States of America or any country and its citizens benefit from the legalization of marijuana?", then I don't know what will. That is merely one reason that it would benefit as well. I could go on, and on as you can probably tell.

Anyway, I feel I have argued a very good case against the 'legalisation of marijuana for personal use', and these are my opinions, based on facts and statistics. If you don't agree with me, fair enough, I'll respect your opinion. I do not respect ignorant assumptions based on nothing though.

Its not the fourth statement that doesn't make sense. They are not ignorant assumptions. Calm down flip! You are missing the big picture. :ninja

Overdose for death would take ridiculous amounts for an adult. So there has been no recorded deaths, which is a well known fact. Although overdose to the point where it causes convulsions and acting as a poison to ones nerves and senses, is very possible, recorded, and always has been.


I disagree. Picking up a pipe or bong, stuffing it, lighting, and inhaling is definitely faster, easier, and longer lasting a high then alcohol.

I have proof that marijuana causes crime, I don't need to dig up proof. Introducing it to new people would definitely be something to hesitate.

Prove to me that there is less pot heads than alcoholics. That is not an absurd statement. From where I am standing it is absurd to call that absurd. Go to college and ask around the dorms. You will be surprised. Or look on the internet.

The chart still doesn't tell us how we would benefit from it.

So I reaffirm my question because it was unsatisfied: How would tolerating or legalizing Marijuana benefit society?

 

[Zorak]

e or mdma or whatever is a pretty potent drug in terms of effect. not dangerous in the short term at all though really, most deaths you hear are because they drink too much water (usually if they are drinking alcohol you do this a lot) or cos its cut with something else.

i like ecstasy a lot, and i think it belongs in the class b section, simply because i think it's actually the appropriate level it should be at.

 

[flipx]

Its not the fourth statement that doesn't make sense. They are not ignorant assumptions. Calm down flip! You are missing the big picture. :ninja

Overdose for death would take ridiculous amounts for an adult. So there has been no recorded deaths, which is a well known fact. Although overdose to the point where it causes convulsions and acting as a poison to ones nerves and senses, is very possible, recorded, and always has been.


I disagree. Picking up a pipe or bong, stuffing it, lighting, and inhaling is definitely faster, easier, and longer lasting a high then alcohol.

I have proof that marijuana causes crime, I don't need to dig up proof. Introducing it to new people would definitely be something to hesitate.

Prove to me that there is less pot heads than alcoholics. That is not an absurd statement. From where I am standing it is absurd to call that absurd. Go to college and ask around the dorms. You will be surprised. Or look on the internet.

The chart still doesn't tell us how we would benefit from it.

So I reaffirm my question because it was unsatisfied: How would tolerating or legalizing Marijuana benefit society?

It is, and they are. You just don't want to admit to it, being stubborn, which is fair enough. I am calm, don't worry. This argument is over, as I said, your opinions are void.

 

[Zorak]

I disagree. Picking up a pipe or bong, stuffing it, lighting, and inhaling is definitely faster, easier, and longer lasting a high then alcohol.

I don't see the arguement.

It's harder to drink than to smoke up?
Ok, if you insist on taking alcohol only intraveniously, then maybe.
But otherwise your exagerrating quite a lot.

 

[Peter Parka]

You can rarely find a pot head who will say that pot is bad. Even though they have no real friends(but they think they really are), they are fighting with their parents, dont have a girlfriend, aren't advancing in their jobs, have a messy home, and crave weed every time they have a emotional problem when sober.

Way to stereotype. Most of the people I know who smoke weed have friends, do ok in their jobs, have clean homes and are in relationships, thank you very much.

How would the United States of America or any country and its citizens benefit from the legalization of marijuana?

Less kids smoking weed because there would be an age limit. Less costly prosecutiions of drug dealers, more money for the country because of tax on weed.

 

[DoctorDisco]

Ok, the information you required, which I thought you knew

Marijuana arrests yearly:
872,720 2007
829,627 2006
771,605 2005

And is steadily on the rise. I assumed since you put up a chart for me it was a known fact that people do stupid shit when high. The first thing you need to do to get arrested is to do something illegal. Police can't just randomly search you for contraband.


And Peter Parka:
Adults are no doubt more responsible with their lives while still being able to use marijuana. But for the youth, yes, that stereo type is 90% true. I'm sorry if I offended you, it wasn't my intention. I should have been more specific.

Age limit doesn't stop underage tobacco smokers, underage kids using tobacco is high and on the rise, so it proves that kids won't listen to authority. With marijuana being so "appealing" I wouldn't be surprised if store distribution would encourage them. The federal Office on Smoking and Health estimates that 3,000 young people begin smoking every day.

Less costly prosecutions of drug dealers may mean less effective. And I think that's not what society wants. As soon as some woman's son gets into it.. or heaven forbid selling them, she will see it differently. Rappers even complain about them infesting their streets.

Taxing would present regulating problems and we could very well be funding something we don't want, like terrorists, or murderers of another country.

You avoided my question again. You are labeling me which is a fallacy and is a strategy for someone who is at disadvantage. If you don't want to debate with me I am cool with that.

 

[Peter Parka]

And Peter Parka:
Adults are no doubt more responsible with their lives while still being able to use marijuana. But for the youth, yes, that stereo type is 90% true. I'm sorry if I offended you, it wasn't my intention. I should have been more specific.

Legalising it would make it harder for youths to get hold of it.

Age limit doesn't stop underage tobacco smokers, underage kids using tobacco is high and on the rise, so it proves that kids won't listen to authority. With marijuana being so "appealing" I wouldn't be surprised if store distribution would encourage them.

I am under no illution that it wouldn't stop them but it would reduce it. Stores would encoragere kids and sell it to them illegally despite being liable for prosecution? Ludicrous argument. You dont see shops encoraging underage kids to buy booze and cigarettes of them.

Less costly prosecutions of drug dealers may mean less effective. And I think that's not what society wants. As soon as some woman's son gets into it.. or heaven forbid selling them, she will see it differently. Rappers even complain about them infesting their streets.

So what better way to get them off the street than to make them legal. If it was legal there would be no business for street dealers.

Taxing would present regulating problems and we could very well be funding something we don't want, like terrorists, or murderers of another country.

What, like we do already? Its not too difficult to tax alcohol and tobacco so I dont see why this would be any different.

 

[BadBoy@TheWheel]

I don't condone the use of drugs. So I'll make that clear.

I think weed should be flat out legalized and taxed, I see no harm in it.

Ecstasy, I'm not sure about anywhere else around the world, but here, it has been found mixed with rat poison, Strictnine.

I'm not sure how one could say it doesn't pose a threat to your health. Gone are the days where it is available over the counter like it was when it was prescribed.

What's out there now, is a lot of trash.

 

[Peter Parka]

Holland had the right idea with ecstasy. Despite it being illegal, they had places at raves where you could get it tested without fear of prosecution. If it turned out to be dog worming pills or some other shit, the person was very likely to then grass the dealer up.

 

[Wookiegirl]

Holland had the right idea with ecstasy. Despite it being illegal, they had places at raves where you could get it tested without fear of prosecution. If it turned out to be dog worming pills or some other shit, the person was very likely to then grass the dealer up.

THAT is an excellent idea cuz you just don't know what your getting with that stuff. I did it twice and I was not impressed at all. I don't know why anyone would want to do it but maybe that's just me.

 

[flipx]

Ok, the information you required, which I thought you knew

Marijuana arrests yearly:
872,720 2007
829,627 2006
771,605 2005

And is steadily on the rise. I assumed since you put up a chart for me it was a known fact that people do stupid shit when high. The first thing you need to do to get arrested is to do something illegal. Police can't just randomly search you for contraband.


And Peter Parka:
Adults are no doubt more responsible with their lives while still being able to use marijuana. But for the youth, yes, that stereo type is 90% true. I'm sorry if I offended you, it wasn't my intention. I should have been more specific.

Age limit doesn't stop underage tobacco smokers, underage kids using tobacco is high and on the rise, so it proves that kids won't listen to authority. With marijuana being so "appealing" I wouldn't be surprised if store distribution would encourage them. The federal Office on Smoking and Health estimates that 3,000 young people begin smoking every day.

Less costly prosecutions of drug dealers may mean less effective. And I think that's not what society wants. As soon as some woman's son gets into it.. or heaven forbid selling them, she will see it differently. Rappers even complain about them infesting their streets.

Taxing would present regulating problems and we could very well be funding something we don't want, like terrorists, or murderers of another country.

You avoided my question again. You are labeling me which is a fallacy and is a strategy for someone who is at disadvantage. If you don't want to debate with me I am cool with that.

You are really not grasping this, are you? No offense, but what does it say about these arrest statistics:

Enforcing marijuana prohibition costs taxpayers an estimated $10 billion annually and results in the arrest of more than 872,000 individuals per year -- far more than the total number of arrestees for all violent crimes combined, including murder, rape, robbery and aggravated assault.

Of those charged with marijuana violations, approximately 89 percent, 738,915 Americans were charged with possession only.

What don't you get about the part in bold? These arrests were made for the person being in possession with marijuana, nothing else. Not murder, rape, burglary etc. or " stupid shit when high. " as you put it...
These pointless arrests are costing your tax money, more than all the other violent crimes out there (over $10 billion). Can't you see the vast amount of your money going to waste when this could evident ally be reversed as profit if marijuana were to be legalised/tolerated and taxed. Like what cigarettes and alcohol are, but not under the same selling policy. Police can actually perform a "random search" for contraband.

Less costly prosecutions of drug dealers may mean less effective. And I think that's not what society wants. As soon as some woman's son gets into it.. or heaven forbid selling them, she will see it differently. Rappers even complain about them infesting their streets.

Taxing would present regulating problems and we could very well be funding something we don't want, like terrorists, or murderers of another country.

You avoided my question again. You are labeling me which is a fallacy and is a strategy for someone who is at disadvantage. If you don't want to debate with me I am cool with that.

WTF... Drug dealers off the streets is not what society wants? I don't think you are fully understanding what we are saying.

C'mon, I'm at a disadvantage, how? You keep telling me to be calm just because I'm expression my opinion along with facts, that you keep batting away with assumptions, allegations, and misinformed information. You are the one that is getting defensive in each of your posts as the debate goes further on. Everyone else in the thread is pretty much agreeing and correcting you, yet you stick to your guns lol. Lets just leave it at this, unless you have something constructive, and evidentual to tell us.

 

[DoctorDisco]

You are really not grasping this, are you? No offense, but what does it say about these arrest statistics:

What don't you get about the part in bold? These arrests were made for the person being in possession with marijuana, nothing else. Not murder, rape, burglary etc. or " stupid shit when high. " as you put it...
These pointless arrests are costing your tax money, more than all the other violent crimes out there (over $10 billion). Can't you see the vast amount of your money going to waste when this could evident ally be reversed as profit if marijuana were to be legalised/tolerated and taxed. Like what cigarettes and alcohol are, but not under the same selling policy. Police can actually perform a "random search" for contraband.


WTF... Drug dealers off the streets is not what society wants? I don't think you are fully understanding what we are saying.

C'mon, I'm at a disadvantage, how? You keep telling me to be calm just because I'm expression my opinion along with facts, that you keep batting away with assumptions, allegations, and misinformed information. You are the one that is getting defensive in each of your posts as the debate goes further on. Everyone else in the thread is pretty much agreeing and correcting you, yet you stick to your guns lol. Lets just leave it at this, unless you have something constructive, and evidentual to tell us.

I am presenting facts and it feels like you are getting personal with your statements. Its not about attacking my comprehension or intelligence on the topic its about challenging my proposals. I am just debating for fun. I don't want this to be personal, I respect you. I understand though because tone is hard to pick up through text.

That website might be biased because its intent is to reform marijuana laws. I would like another reference from somewhere more credible if you don't mind.
Its hard to believe that 89% of those people are stupid enough to smoke it in public.

Also keep in mind everyone who is against me was not in this debate from the start and is asking me things that we have already covered. To be fair, this is between you and me. They all also smoke, so they may be biased. Correct me if I am wrong.

If an officer is just curious about your behavior and wants to frisk you, you can refuse the search. If the officer has a reasonable articulable suspicion that you may be armed, he can perform a "Terry" pat-down (Named after the case that established the procedure, Terry v. Ohio). It includes a pat-down of the exterior of your clothing as a frisk for weapons.

Keep in mind not everyone agrees with marijuana. Parents especially. So spending that money on investigation is money well spent as far as most citizens are concerned. Which means it doesn't benefit society.

If 3,000 kids start smoking cigs every day, what makes you think that it would be harder to get if it were legal past 18/21? It would be easier and more culturally accepted

 

[flipx]

Nope, not once did I get personal. I respect you obviously, just not some of your opinions and statements that you have said in the thread. I haven't gone off topic at all, and told you to 'Calm down' or anything, only yourself. I'm in here for a debate. I have said everything I have to say now and aint going to hunt for more proof when you can quite easily research it more yourself, if you wish.