Cannabis vs Alcohol

I saw a guy yelling at the Cathedral of Learning at Pitt once about some kind of Harvest. I think that is OAKLAND 89.

I'm not sure 420 magazine, individual blogs, and Myspace.com can be considered good sources.

Oakland, are you ever going to realize that sites like norml.org, 420magazine, and youtube are not reliable, unbiased sources of information?

On the contrary; organizations like Norml.org have such low credibility with the public that they're forced to report the facts to stay relevant.

Not to mention the fact that the scientific studies they report on are based solely in science; not opinion.


Cannabis is a natural plant that can provide an economic boon to the economy.  Cannabis can make better and cheaper medicine, paper, clothing, rope, fuel, houses, and its seeds are the most nutritious food known to science.

Ending cannabis prohibition has the potential to solve 40% of our economic woes within 10 years alone. 

It was criminalized through loopholes which stated that you must have a stamp to possess the hemp plant.  But to get the stamp for the hemp plant, you must already have had the hemp plant in hand, which was illegal in the first place.  And with that you see the quandary which gives evidence of corruption.

It's a little known fact that cannabis was completely legal over 100 years ago.  It's also rarely knowns that Cannabis was used in many medicinal treatments, that the US Founding Fathers used it freely, and promoted it as an essential crop to help the US economy.  Even Henry Ford made a hemp car that ran off of hemp oil. 

Fact: There were 3 large reasons that made it illegal:

1) Prejudice against Mexicans and Mexican workers.  A century ago Mexicans immigrated freely across US borders seasonally to help with US farmers' crops.  And rightly so, not enough US labor was available to fill the farmer's needs; so they hired Mexican workers.  But in the attempt to promise more US jobs and gain popularity, Southern US politicians started promising that they would rid the US of 'the immigrant threat to the US labor force' by banning hemp.  Of course this had almost no basis in reality, but it certainly got these corrupt politicians elected.

2)  The timber industry lobbies.  Hemp is such a cheap source of paper, clothing, fuel, and building materials that it could easily force most of the timber industry into bankruptcy.  Of course the timber industry cares nothing whatsoever about saving centuries-old forests in favor of using more efficient crops like cannabis. 

3) Prejudice against people with dark skin: they said that if black people smoked hemp, they would become criminals and rape white women.


And to what end?  Does it seriously remain logical to suppress our economy just to remain servile to these century-old prejudices?

Wouldn't 420magazine also want to be pro legalization because the readers are all stoners? If you can't appeal to them by saying legalize it you lose all your readers. Same thing with personal blogs and youtube videos. You become pro-legalization and all the stoners will flock to it, hence OAKLAND using them as a source. If you want it criminalized or just decriminalized who is going to read it? I feel like they stand to lose a lot by doing that.

And for the record, I am all for legalizing pot. They waste so much money chasing guys for possession and many times you see people getting longer prison sentences for possession than actual crimes. I don't think it should be mainstream sold and advertised (nor tobacco for that matter but at this point what are you going to do). 

By tobacco I mean cigarettes, not cigars.

Wouldn't 420magazine also want to be pro legalization because the readers are all stoners?

That wouldn't be the only reason, but it definitely would be an economic one.  Just as it would be an economic one for the forestry industry to say that cannabis gets you high and that is the 'devil's weed which makes black men rape white women'.

If you can't appeal to them by saying legalize it you lose all your readers.

I'm fairly certain the people who originate such organizations want cannabis to be legal again in the first place.  That in no way reduces their arguments on the topic, besides to those who don't understand how to utilize critical thinking.

You become pro-legalization and all the stoners will flock to it, hence OAKLAND using them as a source.

The scientific studies which these organizations report upon cannot be discounted unless one wants to completely abandon science.

If people don't defend people's simple civil liberties like cannabis freedom then it sets the precedent for more of their own freedoms to be taken away.

Obviouly you are of the liberal tendency, since you stated earlier that liberals, Democrates, and 18 to 29 year olds favaor legalization of pot.  That is assuming your not just another 18-29 just smoking pot.  If your in the last group then those are the same people that will sniff paint, smoke bath salts, inhail whipping cream, drink nyquil, etc,etc,etc anything to get a buzz, not people I find real responsible or care about their deep thoughts. 


Now since you are worried about my civil liberities getting intuded apon I will join the discussion.  The first 2 groups which want to legalize pot, for their increased civil liberities, are the same 2 groups trying to take away my civil liberities of gun ownership!  My right to bear arms is even in the constitution, which for your information, and studies, smoking weed is not.  So is this whole post about who is intruding on who's civil liberities, or someones right to get high? 


I don't care if the federal government legalizes pot or not.  It should be a states right to decide how to govern their people on issues not covered in the constitution anyway.  If they do ever make it legal just tax it to the hilt, and let the government make tons of cash off the stoners that "need to get high".   Before it is ever legalized the government would have to do so many studies on health issues...cancer causing, lung problems, memory loss, impaired driving, etc, etc that pot would go the way cigarets are going, more and more illegal, do to health reasons not because of these other reasons.

There is also a HUGE difference between hemp and pot.  It is the amount of THC in the plants.  You could smoke a truck load of hemp and would get no more high than smoking cigarets.  Hemp can be used for making oil, rope, faberics, etc, etc.  Marijuana is a diferent animal all together, it's THC content is high and its' only purpose is to get people "high", there is no industrial use for marijuana that hemp can't provide with out the THC.  So don't try to hide a wolf in sheep's skin by telling me they are the same, and legalizing marijauna will increase our indusrial economy.  HEMP can Marijauna just is something to get people high.

As long as the pack of doobies or cigs has the health warnings on the side of the box, buy'em at your own risk.  When you get cancer or some other horrible life altering desease from them,  don't come crying to me about it.  Don't expect me, my goverment, or my insurance to pay for it either.

Cannabis plant extract 'could stop aggressive cancers from spreading'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/a
rticle-2206056/Cannabis-compound-st
op-breast-cancer-spreading.html

Updated NORML Report Reviews Nearly 200 Studies On The Therapeutic Use Of Cannabis

http://blog.norml.org/2011/01/11/up
dated-norml-report-reviews-nearly-2
00-studies-on-the-therapeutic-use-o
f-cannabis/

Obviouly you are of the liberal tendency, since you stated earlier that liberals, Democrates, and 18 to 29 year olds favaor legalization of pot.

This isn't the case for all.  He seems more like a Ron Paul conspiracy theorist to me more than a liberal

If your in the last group then those are the same people that will sniff paint, smoke bath salts, inhail whipping cream, drink nyquil, etc,etc,etc anything to get a buzz, not people I find real responsible or care about their deep thoughts. 

I sense the "gateway drug" argument developing here, which is actually really stupid.  If anything, people do these things you list because they are legally and easily obtainable and therefore, are you going to suggest that MJ falls in the same category as any of these ridiculous things you listed if it's legal?  If you do then you are clueless on the issue.  Your 3 group summary is dumb as well

Now since you are worried about my civil liberities getting intuded apon I will join the discussion.  The first 2 groups which want to legalize pot, for their increased civil liberities, are the same 2 groups trying to take away my civil liberities of gun ownership!

So, the 18 to 29 year old glue sniffers and bath salt smokers are against gun control?  Huh?  That's very interesting

So is this whole post about who is intruding on who's civil liberities, or someones right to get high? 

Yes

I don't care if the federal government legalizes pot or not.  It should be a states right to decide how to govern their people on issues not covered in the constitution anyway.  If they do ever make it legal just tax it to the hilt, and let the government make tons of cash off the stoners that "need to get high".   Before it is ever legalized the government would have to do so many studies on health issues...cancer causing, lung problems, memory loss, impaired driving, etc, etc that pot would go the way cigarets are going, more and more illegal, do to health reasons not because of these other reasons.

Oh, so you don't care if it's legalized or not, but you think government should waste even more money on biased studies?  There is no memory loss (long term), impared driving is ridiculous (it doesn't affect everyone the same way like alchohol does), no proof of cancer causing agents, lung problems, well, that's not certain either way. 

And the whole argument about taxing it because stoners "need to get high", do you want to know why this isn't going to be an effective strategy?  Becuase it's a plant and it's easily grown at little to no cost.  How will they make money off of taxes if people are growing it for free?  How will they control and regulate it?  Now you know why it is illegal and why if anything, they'll somehow still make growing your own illegal even though it might be legal to grow commercially.  Too many gray areas to be honest and do you think the government will allow something that it doesn't control?  The feds don't give a crap about states rights.

I'll skip the whole hemp section because really, why is hemp illegal considering your point?

As long as the pack of doobies or cigs has the health warnings on the side of the box, buy'em at your own risk.  When you get cancer or some other horrible life altering desease from them,  don't come crying to me about it.  Don't expect me, my goverment, or my insurance to pay for it either.

OK, how about I use a vaporizer?  Or how about I ingest it?  No cancer risk there.  One of the main reasons people smoke it is because it's the most cost effective way to consume a high cost black market item. 

And by the way, I'm not a liberal.  I'm not even actively smoking now because of job/drug testing reasons, but if you're going to make a post about MJ, at least be accurate and don't repeat all of the government brainwashing points that are foolish.

So, the 18 to 29 year old glue sniffers and bath salt smokers are against gun control?  Huh?  That's very interesting

Nope I said the first 2 groups, which would be liberals and democrates. Huh, very interesting.  Yep, it is interesting that those two groups trying to increase their MJ civil liberities are the same ones trying to reduce mine.

 

Oh, so you don't care if it's legalized or not, but you think government should waste even more money on biased studies?  There is no memory loss (long term), impared driving is ridiculous (it doesn't affect everyone the same way like alchohol does), no proof of cancer causing agents, lung problems, well, that's not certain either way. 

No, I don't care one way or the other, but the studies WILL have to be done because someone out there will SUE the government for legalizing MJ because they CLAIM it causes Long term memory loss,  alzhimers, etc, etc.  Look around for some other examples of lawsiuts because there were no studies.  The NFL is getting slowly tied up in legal siuts over brain damage for a sport that has been legal forever!!!!  Impaired driving is ridiculous...great study, because you say you drive the same or better while smoking MJ, the same arguement was and still is made by people who drink and drive.  Now studies showed it to be false, you have to put MJ to the same tests to avoid legal problems.  No proof MJ causes cancer, NO PROOF it doesn't, but if it is found to.... hear come the lawyers, just like cigarettes.  Lung problems, that is not certain either way. No kidding thats because there are no real studies done.  That is the reason the government, Yale, cancer research groups, whoever wants to do it, will have to do indepth, long term studies. 

And the whole argument about taxing it because stoners "need to get high", do you want to know why this isn't going to be an effective strategy?  Becuase it's a plant and it's easily grown at little to no cost.  How will they make money off of taxes if people are growing it for free?  How will they control and regulate it?

Let's see.... this is a hard one.  Oh yeah they already do it with tobacco, man that took a lot of thinking to figure that one out.  They make money off taxes, control, and regulating it.

   

The feds don't give a crap about states rights.

Could not agree more.  I said it SHOULD be a states right to determine what happens in their state.

I'll skip the whole hemp section because really, why is hemp illegal considering your point?

Good cause I have no problem with hemp being legal, as I said it has many industrial uses without the THC content.  So the arguement about it being a "get high" part goes away with its' legalization arguement.  It is already that way in Canada.  It was also my point that Hemp and MJ are two different things to get legalized, so the arguements to legalize hemp shouldn't be mixed with the arguements for MJ.

OK, how about I use a vaporizer?  Or how about I ingest it?  No cancer risk there.  One of the main reasons people smoke it is because it's the most cost effective way to consume a high cost black market item. 

What is cancerous about vaporized water?  If you are talking about some additive put into the vaporizer besides water read the box it came in and see if it has warnings.  Then if it says don't ingest it...... DON'T!  It is just like the kids smoking bath salts, or huffing aerosol paints, etc.  It's not for that purpose.  You can't stop everyone from doing stupid things, just try and warn them to keep the lawyers at bay.

And by the way, I'm not a liberal.  I'm not even actively smoking now because of job/drug testing reasons, but if you're going to make a post about MJ, at least be accurate and don't repeat all of the government brainwashing points that are foolish.
  

Congrats on your non liberal stance, my post was not aimed at you.  Don't care if you smoke MJ or not.  I beleive I was accurate, and I guess I should just go to "High Times" magazine for all my info and brainwahing points.  I don't beleive that the government is always out there telling the truth and not pushing their own agenda.  I also don't beleive that MJ proponents aren't strecthing the truth either.

 

And the whole argument about taxing it because stoners "need to get high", do you want to know why this isn't going to be an effective strategy? Becuase it's a plant and it's easily grown at little to no cost. How will they make money off of taxes if people are growing it for free? How will they control and regulate it?

Let's see.... this is a hard one. Oh yeah they already do it with tobacco, man that took a lot of thinking to figure that one out. They make money off taxes, control, and regulating it.

I'm not going to delve into the whole good/bad health debate because personally I believe that angle to be a false hope scenario. In my personal opinion, and I have stated this numerous times in other debates, is that marijuana should be legal to smoke simply because we should have that freedom to do so. 

It's a strange double standard. I can walk into any liquor store and buy their entire stock of booze if I wanted to and it's totally legal. I can walk into any grocery/convenient store and buy unlimited amounts of tobacco products and it's totally legal. Yet I cannot so much as buy an ounce of marjiuana without facing possible criminal prosecution.

As for the whole "no one is going to buy it since they can grow it for free", that's a load of bull to be honest.

First off, although growing your own may cut out the mark up that a seller tacks on for profit, growing something is never free, ever. Secondly, unless you're growing skunk weed, growing marijuana isn't all that cheap and isn't something that the casual smoker will want to partake in. You need a space to grow it in, the right lighting, fertilizer etc etc. It's not like growing a geranium on a windowsill where you throw a couple of seeds in a flower pot, water it and watch the good buds grow with little to no effort.

You have to factor in the convenience angle. Technically it's perfectly legal to grow your own tobacco and brew your own beer (amounts for both vary by state), but very few people actually do so because it's far easier to simply go out and buy already manufactured products instead of growing/brewing their own. People already buy marijuana illegally from dealers. Legalizing it, or even decriminalizing it, isn't suddenly going to turn those buyers into growers. Just like people buying illegal beer and booze during Prohibition didn't start brewing their own once Prohibition ended. Did some? I'm sure some probably did, but like today it was more so for the hobbyist than for the person trying to save costs. The overwhelming majority went right back to buying it in bars, clubs and stores that bought it from commercial manufacturers.

Like bdaddy360 stated, if it was legalized for commerical production it would be regulated just like tobacco and alcohol already are. The state of California tried legalizing marijuana by ballot not too long ago. Do you know who one of the biggest opponents to said legalization was? Exempted growers for the medical marijuana shops. That's right, people who are technically growing an illegal product, but are exempted because they label it as medical marijuana, were against actually legalizing the very product they're growing because doing so would cut into their profits if and when marijuana started getting commerically grown for mass distribution. It wasn't home growers they were worried about, but companies from Big Tobacco retooling to take a piece of their pie, or pot brownie as the case may be lol.

Think about it. What's easier:

a) Growing your own: You make space to grow it, buy everything you need and then proceed to spend the time, weeks or maybe months, growing your own marijuana in the hopes that what you're growing will actually be a good product in the end. If it is, yay for you, smoke it up. If not, if the plant fails for whatever reason, or is simply garbage, then you're S.O.L. You're out time and money and have no marijuana to show for it.

or

b) Buy it already made: You go down to your local Gas n' Gulp and buy a pack of manufactured marijuana cigarettes. You can know that it's a quality product and will be exactly the same from one pack to the next because you'll have experienced and regulated growers that have already spent the money, time and effort in producing it.

For the majority of people, the answer is always b).

I'm not going to delve into the whole good/bad health debate because personally I believe that angle to be a false hope scenario. In my personal opinion, and I have stated this numerous times in other debates, is that marijuana should be legal to smoke simply because we should have that freedom to do so.

Now that is the most realistic and honest statement about how and why MJ should be legalized.  Forget the hocuspocus about facts from both sides and just say I want it to be legal because I'm an American and can make my own choices.  The problem is we as a country already tell much of the country they can't make their own choices.   If that agrument would work even opium and cocain, which were legal in this counrty at one time, would have to be again, and I'm sure that won't happen. 

  It's a strange double standard. I can walk into any liquor store and buy their entire stock of booze if I wanted to and it's totally legal. I can walk into any grocery/convenient store and buy unlimited amounts of tobacco products and it's totally legal. Yet I cannot so much as buy an ounce of marjiuana without facing possible criminal prosecution.

Yes it is, but over the last decade even the right to use these products has been slowly taxed harder, and limited in how, when, and where you can use them.  Can't smoke in public places or within a certain amount of feet from a doorway in many states.  No more drinking and driving, and in job interviews and applications many companies will inquire specifically about DUI's.  They will ask about any felonies & DUI's.  For Heaven's sake NY is trying to (or may have got it through) ban suger/syrup drinks over 12 oz from being sold anywhere but grocery stores.  Let's face it you can serve your country and get killed in combat before you can legally buy a beer.  MJ legalization is just one of many double standards in this country.

We are a nation of double standards.  If it can be called "unhealthy" or "bad for your health" the government will take it away unless they can make money on it.

Now that is the most realistic and honest statement about how and why MJ should be legalized.  Forget the hocuspocus about facts from both sides and just say I want it to be legal because I'm an American and can make my own choices.  The problem is we as a country already tell much of the country they can't make their own choices.   If that agrument would work even opium and cocain, which were legal in this counrty at one time, would have to be again, and I'm sure that won't happen.

Thank you and while it is true that opiates and cocaine are not technically legal for personal use, they are at least legal for medicinal uses. Marijuana, even though shown to have some medical benefits, can't even get that distinction from the FDA. The federal government has zero interest in determining if marijuana can be beneficial medically.

We are a nation of double standards.  If it can be called "unhealthy" or "bad for your health" the government will take it away unless they can make money on it.

Absolutely and even though other "harmful" products are facing stricter legislation in certain areas, we still at least have the freedom (although restricted) to use them, at least in the privacy of our own homes anyway. You don't even have that freedom with marijuana.

The biggest obstacle for marijuana advocates that I can see is that they do not possess a powerful enough lobby to buy their way to legality. 

The biggest obstacle for marijuana advocates that I can see is that they do not possess a powerful enough lobby to buy their way to legality.

Agreed, any group has to have a small army of lobbiests to make real headway through the polital landscape.  Those have to be well funded or even those will get the door slammed in their faces.

 

It's a strange double standard.

Well, another issue about control that I didn't address is impairment detection.  One of the main reason why alchohol is legal is because intoxication is easily detectable and there are set standards to detect said intoxication (urine tests, blood test, breathalizer etc).

Tobacco is not an "intoxicant".  Nicotine does have some intoxicating effects, but that's minimal and it's a stimulant if anything.

Weed on the other hand, is an intoxicant, and it can not be PROVEN that you are under the influence of it.  The only exception is if a cop physically sees you smoking it, but even then you can still put up an argument in court as to whether you were "under the influence" and to what extent you are under the influence.  They can physically detect metabolites that are a broken down form of THC in blood, urine, hair, etc.  But that only proves that you used it at some recent point.  This is another lack of control issue that the government won't tolerate.

Juicing cannabis miraculously saves lives after physicians declare the battle lost

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/035400_j
uicing_cannabis_remedies.html#ixzz2
7bnvzQVk

59% of All Americans Want Marijuana to Be Legalized

http://blog.norml.org/2012/10/24/59
-of-all-americans-want-marijuana-to
-be-legalized/

End Criminal Sanctions For Growing And Possessing Cannabis, British Study Says

http://blog.norml.org/2012/10/22/en
d-criminal-sanctions-for-growing-an
d-possessing-cannabis-british-study
-says/

Johnny Loves Pot!!!!!  Especially Panama Red & Super Skunk #5  

Cannabis vs Alcohol

so i have to choose between the two?