Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Except, of course, for the people for whom it does work.
Now, I haven't been privy to any *gasp* proprietary, non-public studies. What I have been privy to, however, are the testimonials of cancer patients who swear by it. I also just heard from someone who is using it in lieu of muscle relaxers after a back injury to really good effect.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rescue3
If you want to approve it as a recreational intoxicant, I have no argument. Just be prepared for the societal consequences.
It's been legal here in Washington state for a couple of years now. Have yet to see the "societal consequences". Actually, aside from seeing stores selling pot and pot products, the average person would have absolutely no idea that pot was legal here.
But you might want to check with our good friends in Colorado who are learning all sorts of things about a society that has ready access to two legal intoxicants.
Ok, I'm one. I live in Colorado. We are doing just fine here, thanks. Check back with me anytime you want.
You are deliberately trying to mislead.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rescue3
But marijuana as a treatment or cure for something? No one has ever provided study results that show marijuana is safe and effective for treating... anything.
Again, you are just making things up. This is just one of many:
Spasticity VAS scores were significantly reduced by CBME (Sativex) in comparison with placebo (P- 0.001). There were no significant adverse effects on cognition or mood and intoxication was generally mild.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rescue3
That is the only reason marijuana has never been approved at the federal level as a drug. No one can show that it works.
Wow, are you misguided or what? All you have to do to find that you are absolutely wrong about that is FOLLOW THE MONEY.
I have a feeling that in reality you are not misguided, it's just that you have an agenda (as in, you work you law enforcement or the prison industry).
Except, of course, for the people for whom it does work.
Now, I haven't been privy to any *gasp* proprietary, non-public studies. What I have been privy to, however, are the testimonials of cancer patients who swear by it. I also just heard from someone who is using it in lieu of muscle relaxers after a back injury to really good effect.
It's been legal here in Washington state for a couple of years now. Have yet to see the "societal consequences". Actually, aside from seeing stores selling pot and pot products, the average person would have absolutely no idea that pot was legal here.
I'm curious, our government will be bringing in legislation next spring. Is it heavily regulated there?
Because there are none, have never been any, and never will be any. It's a harmless drug, isn't a gateway anymore than alcohol is and without the violent component. What a waste of more than a TRILLION DOLLARS and millions of ruined lives this war on drugs has been... just as they planned it to be.
I want to amend one thing here. Marijuana CAN be safe to use, but I wouldn't say it's harmless. As with, well, most things, there is such a thing as excess. What constitutes as excess depends on the substance and the person using it. There are plenty of ways to consumer marijuana without interfering with a healthy lifestyle. Same with alcohol. Same with food. To say it's harmless isn't necessarily the whole story, but to say it's possible to use responsible is. It's a minor thing, but I feel it's worth noting.
And agreed, it's not a gate way drug. Not for most people anyway. I gauruntee most crack users have smoked pot, but they had their first beer long before their first joint.
I was told in Fl. It's about amount - Feds only get involved when it goes over a threshold, or some other fed crime is broken. The rest falls on the state n locals. In orl and several cities it's s fine only for certain amount. No jail time or charge
When drug dealers figured out how to increase bioavailability of cocaine in the mid-1980s, crime of all sorts skyrocketed. (Nowadays we call it 'crack cocaine.') By hundreds and hundreds of percent. I was there, running a narcotics unit in Miami in the mid-1980s.
In the mid-1990s, when Bill Clinton signed the law that increased penalties for people dealing in [crack cocaine], the crime rates dropped like a stone. Fewer people died, and fewer people were robbed and fewer people got burglarized. Best proof extant that a few offenders commit the majority of offenses. Incapacitate them from offending and society wins.
The Obama administration has reversed the Clinton administration and has started releasing these same offenders back into society. Crime rates of all sorts have since skyrocketed (again).
You want to pare back law enforcement? Incapacitate the small percentage of people who commit the majority of the offenses and the crime rates will drop again. Then you can pare back LE.
You're a real expert at being wrong
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
