Justin Trudeau says marijuana should be legalized

[Matata]

Originally Posted by peter12

If you woke up tomorrow, and penalties against marijuana were strictly enforced, supply was reduced by half, and it all of a sudden became heavily stigmatized to the point where close acquaintances would avoid you/or heavily advice you to stop using the drug, what would you do?

I'd openly weep for the death of freedom and the coming brutality of the police state.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Matata

I'd openly weep for the death of freedom and the coming brutality of the police state.

My last point was the real one. It is more or less a socio-cultural question of morality at this point.

[Major Major]

Originally Posted by peter12

Not that you would care to actually read the evidence that I posted.

The evidence that WesternCanadaKing pretends that weed has no harmful effects? I doubt very much you posted that.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by peter12

I have consistently brought up increased fines and community service for small amount possession, first time and juvenile offenders paired with very heavy prison sentences for distributors - particularly to minors.

If you really think that will actually curb use, and not put a needless strain on our justice system, then we have nothing left to argue about.

It also brings us back to the other question, which is, why is this substance being restricted when worse things aren't?

And the cycle begins again. So I'll just step away from this thread.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by MattyC

If you really think that will actually curb use, and not put a needless strain on our justice system, then we have nothing left to argue about.

It also brings us back to the other question, which is, why is this substance being restricted when worse things aren't?

And the cycle begins again. So I'll just step away from this thread.

So the answer is to legalise all substances and create greater health problems?

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Dion

So the answer is to legalise all substances and create greater health problems?

That's under the assumption that legalization (and regulated distribution) of all products will increase use of those products. For something perceived to be no worse for you than cigarettes or alcohol, sure you might see an increase. For something like Cocaine or Heroin or Meth? I'm not so sure. People who don't use those things, don't not do so because they are illegal. They don't do it because they are scary as f***.

I think it's an interesting conversation to have for sure, but in order to come up with solutions to these problems, you have to have an open mind about the use of the substances and why people end up doing so. And what we can do to make sure, even though we can't stop them from doing, how can we make it as safe as possible. A concrete stance of "all current narcotics should be illegal because they are bad" with no movability on your opinion doesn't leave any room for adjustments to what we currently have outside of "prison!", which could actually exasperate a problem that legalization and treatment investment might help.

If you're not open to trying something new to battle problems we've been trying to fix the same way for decades, the problems will not change.

[peter12]

Marijuana legalization is backed by a multi-billion dollar corporate lobby. Why wouldn't they try to expand their market?

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Major Major

The evidence that WesternCanadaKing pretends that weed has no harmful effects? I doubt very much you posted that.

So you just jumped in? People accuse me of trolling...

[Coach]

Originally Posted by peter12

Marijuana legalization is backed by a multi-billion dollar corporate lobby. Why wouldn't they try to expand their market?

Restrict their advertising, put health warnings on packages, numbers for treatment centers, etc... No different than cigarettes.

Sure the lobby would try to push back against these things, but they have no grounds for not having the same warnings and restrictions on marketing that cigarette companies do.

[IliketoPuck]

Originally Posted by peter12

Marijuana legalization is backed by a multi-billion dollar corporate lobby. Why wouldn't they try to expand their market?

Isn't that an interesting point.

A publicly traded marijuana corporation's goal (like any other publicly traded company) is to increase revenues and profits for shareholders.

Assuming they face competitive pressures in the market (likely resulting in lower prices for their products), how then will they increase revenues for shareholders?

What incentive could such a cabal of companies possibly have to spend millions (billions?) of dollars lobbying for legalization?

Could it be that the ultimate reason is to increase their customer base?

[jammies]

I just don't see throwing people in prison and ruining lives for indulging in a mostly harmless recreational drug as being better than a slight increase (if any) in usage and health care costs. That's what "better enforcement" actually means - let's spend lots of money, imprison people, and stigmatize them.

The relaxation of attitudes and laws pertaining to victimless crimes is, in the main, a good thing. You want to be a puritan, go be one. You don't, don't.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by jammies

I just don't see throwing people in prison and ruining lives for indulging in a mostly harmless recreational drug as being better than a slight increase (if any) in usage and health care costs. That's what "better enforcement" actually means - let's spend lots of money, imprison people, and stigmatize them.

The relaxation of attitudes and laws pertaining to victimless crimes is, in the main, a good thing. You want to be a puritan, go be one. You don't, don't.

Does that occur in Canada anymore...anywhere?

Im genuinely curious as i thought it was pretty much long gone (jail time anyhow) in the 80's.

[Dion]

About half of Canadians who drive while high insist pot doesn’t impair them

In a State Farm survey of 3,000 Canadians of driving age across Canada in March, almost nine out of 10 respondents said they have never driven under the influence of marijuana. However, 44 per cent of those who do drive high think they can drive safely.

Nelson said other research has shown that not only do many motorists believe marijuana “isn’t that unsafe,” some believe it makes people better drivers.

“It’s the notion that, ‘Oh, people who are high drive slower, and they’re more cautious because they don’t want to get caught,’ which may or may not be true. But it certainly is also true that when you’re impaired by marijuana, your reaction time isn’t what it needs to be and you’re less able to manage complex, or divided attention tasks,” he said. “The safety concern is lost on a majority of people.”

Beirness worries that setting a legal THC limit could send a message to users that it’s safe, within limits, to drive high. While the effects of booze are “profoundly physical” — slurred speech, lost balance, warped motor co-ordination — the effects of cannabis are cognitively based. “They’re in your head,” he said.

When you’re driving, you have to concentrate on a million different things at once

“And you can see effects on things like concentration. When you’re driving, you have to concentrate on a million different things at once, but you can’t switch your attention as easily” when high on pot.

When governments introduced the 0.08 blood limit for alcohol, “we probably made a mistake,” added Beirness, a senior research associate for the Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse.

“What we did essentially was tell people it was OK to drive after drinking” as long as they didn’t exceed the limit.

http://www.calgaryherald.com/health/...936/story.html

[Caged Great]

I don't smoke or have ever. That said, this is a free society. If someone wants to smoke up, they should be able to and they should get stuff that is certified to be good.

Legalize it, regulate it, tax it. People are going to do it regardless, might as well control it and make sure that programs are available for those that need assistance with quitting.

It is better that the money goes into the economy instead of the drug cartels.

[Caged Great]

Also, certain countries have legalized everything. In those countries, usage on the whole went down in those places.

With better access to treatment and care, less people will OD, and it will reduce the usage of those drugs overall. Additionally, it would allow for research into the medical benefits of all of these drugs as well. We already know about heroin and pain management, but there is also some indication that mushrooms help fight off clinical depression and marijuana has a whole host of benefits to people that are ill.

Stigmatizing people or concepts is never the ideal way to deal with a situation. Finding a solution that helps to improve things for the society as a whole should be paramount, even if those solutions are not exactly palatable.

[jammies]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Does that occur in Canada anymore...anywhere?

No, but that is the position being advocated by peter12 and his ilk. Let's definitely cause large problems to potentially avoid small problems, because, "morals".

PS: hahaha "ilk". Both condescending and fun to say!

[peter12]

Originally Posted by jammies

No, but that is the position being advocated by peter12 and his ilk. Let's definitely cause large problems to potentially avoid small problems, because, "morals".

PS: hahaha "ilk". Both condescending and fun to say!

It is absolutely not what we are proposing. Lazy heuristics like this are very common from you and your "ilk," however.

[jammies]

Originally Posted by peter12

It is absolutely not what we are proposing. Lazy heuristics like this are very common from you and your "ilk," however.

Originally Posted by peter12

I have consistently brought up increased fines and community service for small amount possession, first time and juvenile offenders paired with very heavy prison sentences for distributors - particularly to minors.

One can assume that punishment for larger amounts possessed and repeat offences will not be lenient, else what is the point of singling these scenarios out for specifics? Prison sentences for distributors sounds very "save the children!" till you think about what happens to someone who buys some as a favour for a friend in addition to his own buy and ends up over some arbitraty limit that puts him in jail for a few years.

You are indeed proposing exactly what I said. You want to punish people for reasons of morality, that's no surprise, that's your general outlook on life really: let's all feel guilty and assuage that original sin by flogging ourselves, or, even better, other people.

[Drak]

Interesting current new study - on physical health though, not mental health. Posted as of June 2nd 2016.

Long-term marijuana use is not associated with a raft of physical health problems, according to a new study, with one surprising exception: gum disease.

Researchers led by Madeline H. Meier of Arizona State University tracked the marijuana habits of 1,037 New Zealanders from birth to middle age to see what effect those habits have on some common measures of physical health, including lung function, systemic inflammation, cholesterol levels, blood pressure, body weight, blood sugar and dental health.

What they found was surprising: After controlling for other factors known to affect health, especially tobacco use and socioeconomic status, marijuana use had no negative effect on any measure of health, except for dental health. People who smoked more weed had a higher incidence of gum disease...

...But Meier's research is unique in that it uses longitudinal data, tracing the health of the same individuals from birth in the early 1970s to age 38. Many other studies on the physical health effects of marijuana use rely on observations at a single point in time, which is useful but less reliable for tracking effects over a lifetime. Many of these other studies also use respondents' self-assessments of health, which can sometimes be unreliable. But in Meier's data, the study participants had their health assessed by trained professionals in a laboratory setting every few years.

It's also worth pointing out that this particular study looked at the impact of long-term marijuana use on physical health, but not on mental health. Meier has in fact used this same data set to explore questions of mental health effects, famously finding evidence of declining IQ among persistent marijuana users. But a number of follow-up studies by other researchers found no similar evidence of cognitive decline related to marijuana use.

Get out your floss.





https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...earchers-find/

[Azure]

Originally Posted by peter12

Marijuana legalization is backed by a multi-billion dollar corporate lobby. Why wouldn't they try to expand their market?

So? At this point the benefits of legalization far outweigh the negatives from creating another multi billion dollar industry that we probably won't regulate properly from the start.

Why? Because we won't be making criminals out of a large part of the population.