Legalized marijuana causes deadly truck and bicycle wreck

[ajnl]

Each link has its own link towards reseaches, doesnt take a genious to find that out lol.

I dont really need to prove anything if there's all wide open for everyone to see lol, i can say whatever i want, and i could not care less if that other person takes time to research or not, reality is there, its up to them to read it or keep ignoring it, simple as.

Then your arguments are pointless.

 

business insider linked a few of their points, but not all.

 

healthline is the only other that shows their sources.

[SiD]

We know and agree that alc and cig are drugs as you can become addict to this too

But as there is already too many death because of it, the question is :

 

Why legalize another one ?

 

Why keep putting people in jail for it?

 

Why keep money in cartels pockets?

 

Why stunt medicinal research and scientific growth?

 

Why withhold a more natural painkiller from being circulated?

 

I could go on.

 

It isn't logical to keep Marijuana illegal in this day and age.

 

Nothing worse than the holier-than-thou moral crowd telling everyone else what they can and can not put into their own bodies. If people are free to be delusional and believe in fairy tales (which I think is more dangerous to critical thinking),  then I don't see why someone can't practice the recreational use of a non-lethal narcotic. The fact that we are still wasting tax payer dollars and tying up the court systems for misdemeanor offenses is f***ing illogical.

 

 

Also to hell with this thread. Another one for pointless debates.

[gibson66]

Why am I doing this...

 

The statement "weed isn't as bad as alcohol" is not a good argument. That's only a statement about weed relative to alcohol, not about weed by itself. Weed could be bad, and the fact that there are worse drugs does not make it any less bad. As such, the argument can be dismissed.

 

As for whether or not weed will be harmful if it is societally accepted, we have almost no information. Using countries like the Netherlands where it is already legalized as proof is faulty because there are a number of other factors that need to be considered (ethnic homogeneity, preexisting crime rate, cultural approach to consumption (French view of alcohol vs. American view, for example), income disparity, etc).

 

In regards to the "you can't talk about it if you haven't done it," let's take an extreme example: meth ( I am not comparing meth directly to marijuana, I'm only using it meth to demonstrate a point). I've never done it but that doesn't change the value of my beliefs about it. I can still reasonably determine what affect it has on its users. 

 

The "it's a plant" argument is faulty. We are not concerned about its origins, we are concerned about its affects.

 

The "people already use it and it seems ok" argument is also faulty. Legalization increases access to the substance and that's what we are concerned with. There's no reason to assume that because it is already used (mostly) illegally that it will act similarly when legal.

 

In regards to legalization, I am of the opinion that mass-adoption of legalization laws is moving too quickly. We don't know how this can affect Americans over time. The best approach would be to wait and collect data over a generation or two on how legalization has affected the populaces of those few places in America where it is already legal. If there's no distinct changes, then we have reason to proceed. If not, end the experiment.

 

Having said that, I do support lowering the penalties for possession. We all know this disproportionally affects african-Americans, and it's not out of the question that lowering the penalty down to a fine may benefit the community in some way.

[Ol Smoke]

Isnt this more fun than talking about how to get more fps out of your 10 year old video card?

 

I will start more of these.  Be prepared.

[Aniky]