Justin Trudeau says marijuana should be legalized

[peter12]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I do like that so many conservative types are so passionate about mental illness. I'm expecting we can count on your votes to go towards politicians that promote more mental health funding, yes?

What a strange statement.

[Cyclops]

[QUOTE=peter12;5758222]I am going to re-post this study. Very few people actually seemed to have read it. It was accepted into The American Journal of Psychiatry in February 2016. This is current research.

http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/....2016.15070878

To reitereate:

Meanwhile, here in Calgary, the DeGrood trial has started. If you recall, he was the young man who, appearing to have a psychotic episode, murdered 5 people. DeGrood was a heavy pot smoker in his teen years.

EDIT: My apologies. I can see past the pay wall as my workplace has a subscription to the journal text.[/QUOTE

I would imagine that it would be tough to get an acurate study completed on psychosis and pot use among teens. Most young people who smoke pot also experiment with many other drugs. So please show me a study which removes these variables and then I'll start to take them seriously.

Your fear mongering around pot use and psychosis is crazy. I need to ask again, are you rallying to have alcohol and tobacco prohibited? Throw gambling in that mix as well. Many violent crimes could be stopped by ridding ourselves of those.......along with psychiatric care and long term mental health issues....much more than Marijuana has ever seen

[peter12]

For a board practically obsessed with material skepticism, there is a stunning lack of willingness to rationally confront evidence when suggested.

[Cyclops]

Originally Posted by peter12

For a board practically obsessed with material skepticism, there is a stunning lack of willingness to rationally confront evidence suggested.

I just question the validity of the evidence. While growing up I don't think I knew a person that smoked weed and that was it. If someone was smoking weed then they were also drinking, taking LSD and Ectasy......

The evidence is clear that it helps many people suffering from various illnesses though, and if your concern is with inhaling it then there are other ways of ingesting it to get the desired benefits.

Are you pushing to ban liquor?

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Cyclops

I just question the validity of the evidence. While growing up I don't think I knew a person that smoked weed and that was it. If someone was smoking weed then they were also drinking, taking LSD and Ectasy......

The evidence is clear that it helps many people suffering from various illnesses though, and if your concern is with inhaling it then there are other ways of ingesting it to get the desired benefits.

Are you pushing to ban liquor?

Liquor could be more strictly controlled, yes.

In your defense of marijuana (why do people care so much about a stupid drug??), you have invoked a real myth - that marijuana is a gate-keeper drug. We know this is not the case. Marijuana on its own is harmful enough.

[Cyclops]

Originally Posted by peter12

Liquor could be more strictly controlled, yes.

In your defense of marijuana (why do people care so much about a stupid drug??), you have invoked a real myth - that marijuana is a gate-keeper drug. We know this is not the case. Marijuana on its own is harmful enough.

Why people care about a stupid drug is because of the benefits that it can have. If you have someone close to you that has tried everything prescribed to control a debilitating disease and nothing worked, then found weedrked really well yet it was illegal to use.....then maybe you might understand.

Marijuana on it's own i's harmful enough? Jesus, take a look around you and tell me that a Marijuana is harmful. What is your basis for this? Is it the studies done in an uncontrolled environment? Imagine If we made everything illegal that MIGHT cause mental health issues down the road. What could we possibly keep legal?

We all know what the real gateway drug is, and it's available for sale on every block and kids can easily get it. So socially acceptable that it's amazing people would ever think about opposing a plant.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by Cyclops

Why people care about a stupid drug is because of the benefits that it can have. If you have someone close to you that has tried everything prescribed to control a debilitating disease and nothing worked, then found weedrked really well yet it was illegal to use.....then maybe you might understand.

I don't smoke pot, but I would say I'm on the legalize side of this debate, I just wish people would stop trotting the medicine angle out like it is THE driving factor behind why people want pot legalized.

It's the loophole that most people are using to get it started, not the fundamental reason for the push to legalize.
For some people, it absolutely is the fundamental reason, but we are all adults here, we can be honest, most people just want to get high every now and then.

Does pot have some medical benefits? Sure.
Is that why the majority of people want it legalized? Of course not.

The sooner people on the legalize side of the debate are just honest that they like getting high, the better off we'll all be, because then we can have an honest discussion on the effects vs the benefits.

There is nothing wrong with one of the benefits being "It's fun", so let's all stop pretending "It's medicine" is the BIGGEST reason people want it legalized. (I'm not saying it's not a reason, it's just not THE reason).

To be clear, this wasn't directed specifically at you Cyclops. It sounds like you know someone who it benefits in a medical sense and for you it very well may be the biggest or only reason you want it legalized. I'm just saying that a lot of people need to grow up, be honest, and just say they want to be able to chill out and get high.

[Cyclops]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

I don't smoke pot, but I would say I'm on the legalize side of this debate, I just wish people would stop trotting the medicine angle out like it is THE driving factor behind why people want pot legalized.

It's the loophole that most people are using to get it started, not the fundamental reason for the push to legalize.
For some people, it absolutely is the fundamental reason, but we are all adults here, we can be honest, most people just want to get high every now and then.

Does pot have some medical benefits? Sure.
Is that why the majority of people want it legalized? Of course not.

The sooner people on the legalize side of the debate are just honest that they like getting high, the better off we'll all be, because then we can have an honest discussion on the effects vs the benefits.

There is nothing wrong with one of the benefits being "It's fun", so let's all stop pretending "It's medicine" is the BIGGEST reason people want it legalized. (I'm not saying it's not a reason, it's just not THE reason).

To be clear, this wasn't directed specifically at you Cyclops. It sounds like you know someone who it benefits in a medical sense and for you it very well may be the biggest or only reason you want it legalized. I'm just saying that a lot of people need to grow up, be honest, and just say they want to be able to chill out and get high.

I like to have a smoke once in a while, but for me it doesn't matter if it's legal or not in that regard. In fact it would probably be better in that sense if it werent legal. It's easy to get, no taxes around it to drive up the cost.

My biggest sticking point on this is the fact that everything else is legal and looked up as okay but this is a hangup. It makes zero sense, if we can look at tobacco and say that if you are over 18 then you can make the choice but not for Marijuana...same as alcohol and gambling.

3 things that are far worse than Marijuana are legal and accepted, so what is the problem? If the argument is psychosis then let's compare related mental and physical health issues with legal substances. In my view it's not even close.

Marijuana doesn't drive violent crimes, can we say the same for the comparables?

[Izzle]

Seems like relevant news:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/mariju...ions-1.3584148

The conventions being flouted are ancient - 1961, 1971 and 1988. I dont know International treaties or laws, but is it possible to amend these conventions once new information is made available?

[peter12]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/mariju...arch-1.3559448

Going to leave this here. What a wretched drug.

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by peter12

Meanwhile, here in Calgary, the DeGrood trial has started. If you recall, he was the young man who, appearing to have a psychotic episode, murdered 5 people. DeGrood was a heavy pot smoker in his teen years.

I am assuming from the other thread that you have been following the trial just as closely as myself.

So, where are you getting your evidence that he was a "heavy pot smoker in his teen years" when the media is reporting that ecstasy and cocaine appeared to be his main drug of choice. Furthermore, his historical use of these two drugs are mentioned in the trial by the CP with zero mention of his "heavy pot" use.

What information are you privy to that the rest of us aren't and is there a reason you failed to mention his cocaine and ecstasy use? Are you idly speculating or simply deliberately including unsubstantiated information whilst omitting reported information to further an agenda?

What's your angle here?

[polak]

Originally Posted by peter12

http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/mariju...arch-1.3559448

Going to leave this here. What a wretched drug.

"The pot prohibition effectively stifled studies of the drug. Clinical trials weren't allowed and in all but a few cases, long-term studies on what happens to marijuana users were impossible. As a result, both supporters and detractors have tended to cherry-pick the conclusions that reinforce their existing views."

What a wretched policy.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by polak

"The pot prohibition effectively stifled studies of the drug. Clinical trials weren't allowed and in all but a few cases, long-term studies on what happens to marijuana users were impossible. As a result, both supporters and detractors have tended to cherry-pick the conclusions that reinforce their existing views."

What a wretched policy.

What they do agree on is THC, marijuana's psychoactive ingredient, can play havoc with a developing brain as it tries to reach optimal performance.
Researchers say higher order functions, such as cognition, academic achievement and motivation, can all be compromised. But whether the damage is temporary or reversible is still unknown.

You are right. Let's open up the entire population to be our guinea pigs.

[Major Major]

Originally Posted by peter12

http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/mariju...arch-1.3559448

Going to leave this here. What a wretched drug.

Goodness Gracious, you're right! That is wretched!

The only piece of important information in that entire article is that prohibition has prevented proper research. That is wretched, indeed!

And then trotting out the future golf star who's life was ruined by an addiction to pot. Pretty wretched appeal to my strong sense of who gives a flying sand wedge. Maybe he just sucks? But it was pretty cute when they photo op'd him taking a hit from the bong with his golf clothes on.

Any other anecdotes of life's winners and losers, all of whom swayed by the powerful forces of pot, Peter? Hell, I was golfing with my buddy who was high as a kite the other day and he shot a 74! Imagine that, and all directly attributable to pot! so the story goes.

And if 1 out of 6 pot users experience a lack of motivation and drive, then do the 5 out of 6 go up? Very confusing, unmeasurable, and nonsense figure to trot out. Wretch inducing, one might say.

[longsuffering]

Originally Posted by peter12

http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/mariju...arch-1.3559448

Going to leave this here. What a wretched drug.

Originally Posted by peter12

You are right. Let's open up the entire population to be our guinea pigs.

Considering that this "wretched drug" has been widely consumed (dare I say abused) since the 60s I'm surprised that we don't find ourselves staring at an epidemic of schizophrenia.

It's my understanding that the overall incidence of schizophrenia has remained essentially unchanged during that period.

Seems counter intuitive doesn't it?

[peter12]

Originally Posted by longsuffering

Considering that this "wretched drug" has been widely consumed (dare I say abused) since the 60s I'm surprised that we don't find ourselves staring at an epidemic of schizophrenia.

It's my understanding that the overall incidence of schizophrenia has remained essentially unchanged during that period.

Seems counter intuitive doesn't it?

Do people fact check their nonsense at all?

Prevalence of schizophrenia in Canada has increased over the last 4 decades.

http://bcpsychosis.org/2014/11/19/in...nia-in-canada/

[Major Major]

Originally Posted by peter12

Do people fact check their nonsense at all?

Prevalence of schizophrenia in Canada has increased over the last 4 decades.

http://bcpsychosis.org/2014/11/19/in...nia-in-canada/

Interestingly enough, that article attributes increased rates of schizophrenia to Immigrants, altitude, and Urban living.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Major Major

Interestingly enough, that article attributes increased rates of schizophrenia to Immigrants, altitude, and Urban living.

Which are extraordinarily broad variables.

[Major Major]

Originally Posted by peter12

Which are extraordinarily broad variables.

Well that's rich.

[Izzle]

The intellectually dishonest hoops being generated is fascinating. The one study suggests that schizophrenia is increasing due to immigrants, high altitude and living in cities. No where was weed mentioned.

Alcohol could be tightly controlled - what do you mean by this? What measures would you like to see?