Maine's new Marijuana law (Bangor: houses, bankrupt, store)

[FireFromIce]

Advocates of marijuana use would argue that it is less harmful than two other popular substances, alcohol and tobacco, which, although heavily regulated, are legal to purchase and use. Is that true? I don't know. What I do know is that alcohol and tobacco have killed several people I know including close family members. MJ has killed no one that I know of. Opponents of MJ use sometimes say "more study is needed". I disagree. There have already been a gajillion studies commissioned by proponents and opponents. Science already has a pretty good idea what MJ does to people. How long to you want "study" it for? Until 3016? It's just a delaying tactic. Opponents like to use the "gateway" drug argument. Well that might be partially true but using the same logic, you could argue that energy drinks lead to tobacco use which lead to alcohol use which leads to MJ use which eventually leads to heroin, cocaine, meth, blah, blah, blah. Now I'm sure that opponents have only the most noble reasons for their opposition to MJ use. They do not believe it's a good idea to add MJ to the list of harmful substances anyone over 21 can buy over the counter. In fairness, that argument has some merit. If made legal, MJ is going to cause SOME problems. To prevent this, opponents would like to use the "nanny state" tactic and simply outlaw any use of MJ. OK, I'll support that but only IF we can use the same nanny state to ban alcohol and tobacco. Just think of costs to society we save if we eliminated these KNOWN harmful drugs. I don't smoke and my alcohol consumption is nearly non-existent. I could live without both. Why don't we remove these deadly substances from society? Because there would be rioting in the streets. Because every level of government depends on the revenue from hopelessly addicted people. Because the criminal justice system would have to contend with tens of millions of "new" criminals as alcohol and tobacco go underground. Look, MJ use is already commonplace. I don't think it's legality is going to create THAT many more new users. I mean it's just like cigarettes and alcohol. How many users wait until they're 18 or 21 before using either of these two. Not many. It's naive to think otherwise. I just don't think the consequences of MJ legalization would be all that dire. That of course is only my opinion.

[inthetrees]

Originally Posted by kevin5098

Yes and what I attempted to say is that there is insufficient data to conclude that it is not carcinogenic. Cannabis smoke does contain many of the same carcinogens as tobacco smoke.
Marijuana and Lung Health | American Lung Association

There is actually data that says that it is anti carcinogenic. I would wager a guess that anyone that uses wood heat as their primary source of heat is causing themselves more damage with that, then cannabis smoke causes.

This is just the first result I found when googling, if I spent a bit of time, I could find multiple studies supporting this theory:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1277837/

Originally Posted by FireFromIce

Advocates of marijuana use would argue that it is less harmful than two other popular substances, alcohol and tobacco, which, although heavily regulated, are legal to purchase and use. Is that true? I don't know. What I do know is that alcohol and tobacco have killed several people I know including close family members. MJ has killed no one that I know of. Opponents of MJ use sometimes say "more study is needed". I disagree. There have already been a gajillion studies commissioned by proponents and opponents. Science already has a pretty good idea what MJ does to people. How long to you want "study" it for? Until 3016? It's just a delaying tactic. Opponents like to use the "gateway" drug argument. Well that might be partially true but using the same logic, you could argue that energy drinks lead to tobacco use which lead to alcohol use which leads to MJ use which eventually leads to heroin, cocaine, meth, blah, blah, blah. Now I'm sure that opponents have only the most noble reasons for their opposition to MJ use. They do not believe it's a good idea to add MJ to the list of harmful substances anyone over 21 can buy over the counter. In fairness, that argument has some merit. If made legal, MJ is going to cause SOME problems. To prevent this, opponents would like to use the "nanny state" tactic and simply outlaw any use of MJ. OK, I'll support that but only IF we can use the same nanny state to ban alcohol and tobacco. Just think of costs to society we save if we eliminated these KNOWN harmful drugs. I don't smoke and my alcohol consumption is nearly non-existent. I could live without both. Why don't we remove these deadly substances from society? Because there would be rioting in the streets. Because every level of government depends on the revenue from hopelessly addicted people. Because the criminal justice system would have to contend with tens of millions of "new" criminals as alcohol and tobacco go underground. Look, MJ use is already commonplace. I don't think it's legality is going to create THAT many more new users. I mean it's just like cigarettes and alcohol. How many users wait until they're 18 or 21 before using either of these two. Not many. It's naive to think otherwise. I just don't think the consequences of MJ legalization would be all that dire. That of course is only my opinion.

Actually there have been VERY few studies about cannabis in the Unites States, as it is still scheduled 1, and has NO ACCEPTED USES (Federally).

[kevin5098]

Originally Posted by inthetrees

There is actually data that says that it is anti carcinogenic. I would wager a guess that anyone that uses wood heat as their primary source of heat is causing themselves more damage with that, then cannabis smoke causes.

This is just the first result I found when googling, if I spent a bit of time, I could find multiple studies supporting this theory:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1277837/




Actually there have been VERY few studies about cannabis in the Unites States, as it is still scheduled 1, and has NO ACCEPTED USES (Federally).

Specific canabinoids may have anti-carcinogenic effects as cited in the article, however cannibis smoke, which contains a plethora of potentially toxic and carcinogenic substances, may be another matter entirely. As you have stated, there are few studies. I don't make it a habit to inhale the oxidation products of my wood stove so I'm not terribly concerned with the risk.

I don't care if adults use cannabis, alcohol, tobacco or any other poison (mine is alcohol in concentrations of 4-9%) so long as the risks are recognized.

[DeanGuitarist]

Originally Posted by ground_pounder

great with all of these state passing marijuana laws. not only will we have idiots texting and driving now they will be stoned off there asses as well

Ignorance is bliss I guess. I never once came upon a wreck whereas the driver was stoned. Went to many a fatality involving drivers that reeked of alcohol and some drivers with an unfinished text on their phone...

[kevin5098]

Originally Posted by Ddhanks

Ignorance is bliss I guess. I never once came upon a wreck whereas the driver was stoned. Went to many a fatality involving drivers that reeked of alcohol and some drivers with an unfinished text on their phone...

Fatal Road Crashes Involving Marijuana Double After State Legalizes Drug | AAA NewsRoom

[Submariner]

Originally Posted by kevin5098

Fatal Road Crashes Involving Marijuana Double After State Legalizes Drug | AAA NewsRoom

The article says:

... Four states, including Alaska, Colorado, Oregon, Washington and Washington, D.C., have legalized the recreational use of marijuana, and 20 states have legalized it for therapeutic and medicinal use.

So out of 24 states they present data from only one state.

I wonder why they cherry-picked their data?

[DeanGuitarist]

Originally Posted by kevin5098

Fatal Road Crashes Involving Marijuana Double After State Legalizes Drug | AAA NewsRoom

I think you need to read closer on your link, as they discuss higher stats on BAC. Also, I'm quite sure if you read about same fatality statistics concerning drinking and driving, those numbers are far greater. Also coming from a state like Colorado, there's some treacherous roads and highways that run through the Rocky Mountains. Yet...stone cold sober drivers tend to drive reckless around those steep curves and over high elevation roads with minimal visibility. Give you an A for effort, good try.

[kevin5098]

Originally Posted by Submariner

The article says:



So out of 24 states they present data from only one state.

I wonder why they cherry-picked their data?

I stand corrected. Marijuana use is harmless. It will not cause any problems. It's sorta like chewing gum and life savers. No worries folks. It actually impoves driving skills and cognitive abilities. Smoke away folks...

[DeanGuitarist]

Originally Posted by kevin5098

I stand corrected. Marijuana use is harmless. It will not cause any problems. It's sorta like chewing gum and life savers. No worries folks. It actually impoves driving skills and cognitive abilities. Smoke away folks...

Harmless? Maybe, even though it's been used to treat medical problems. Even the low content THC oil that won't get a person "high", that's been used as a medicine to treat children for seizures, when medication either costs too much or simply will not work. Been used by cancer patients with greater results than chemotherapy.

Improves driving skills? Yes, for me actually. And for many others. Although I don't advocate driving under the influence.

Smoke away? Mehh....I rather consume edibles. Tastes better and.....tadaaa!!! Not breathing in any smoke.

[Submariner]

There are many medicines that impair driving. This is not a new concept.