Marijuana illegal but not tobacco

what kind of cigarettes do you smoke? or have you smoked?

 

I don't smoke a whole lot, just socially, but I've smoked a lot of different types.

 

Everyone i know who smokes marijuana grows their own. You can't grow your own tobacco, or at least not where i live. How can you tax something that you grow in your own back yard?
I dunno, that's just repeating what i've heard people who smoke say. I don't smoke it personally.

 

He's saying that you can't tax something you don't condone, how can you tax something that isn't sold in any store?

 

your city.. state.. and federal government are constantly taxing your for stuff you may not even own or have anything to remotely do with.. but they still tax you for it... next time you get a chance.. look at where your tax dollars go and see how much of it relates to you

 

Why is Marijuana Illegal?
12/22/03
A brief history of the criminalization of cannabis

http://blogs.salon.com/0002762/stories/2003/12/22/whyIsMarijuanaIllegal.html

 

If the government has no control over the sale of marijuana, they can't tax it, its simple.

 

Weed is natural, better than tobacco, for a good chilling out time a small chubbie is always a nice way to relax the body. I can live with out it for sure but why not just legalize it in America?

It should be legalized and sold with the only condition of a donation ( a pre-set percentage ) that will be used to subsdize and pay for part of the cost of health and education. Let's say 50 dollars for a pack of 15 smokes, from this amount, half will go split between health and education. What do you think of this?

 

because since the Anslinger era, gov't has allowed a very big industry to be created around the suppresion of marijuana, from the marihuana stamp tax, to these ridiculously absurd "above-the-influence" commercials. If it were legalized, not only would that make the gov't look stupid, it would take away all those jobs the anti-marijuana legislation had created, and they'd stand to lose billions of dollars; forget the fact that both hemp and cannabis can address several environmental and medicinal issues, and create new jobs; traditionalists view it as a menace to youth, just like back in the days of "reefer madness".

I think it should at least be rescheduled from the very strict C-I control, to maybe C-III. sure it has possible habit-forming tendencies, but it certainly can be implimented in medical applications as well.

but can't expect anything like that to happen, with idiotic/stagnant-minded republicans in office

 

cannabis oil can be converted into combustible material, compounded with other hydrocarbons, and even have an octane rating. the modern combustion engine can run on this fuel, without any modification.

 

this is not a valid argument. Datura fucks with your brain, but is not illegal.

huffing nitrous from whipped cream cans fucks with your brain more than marijuana, so would air duster; and before you make the argument that these have other applications, so does marijuana. There are a number of medicinal and industrial applications marijuana can serve.

 

Well, first, nitrous from whipped cream doesn't effect you for that long, and I'm not saying marijuana shouldn't be used for legitimate purposes, but i can see why its illegal as a recreational drug.

 

yeah? and why's that?
I can tell you, it has nothing to do with its psychoactive effects, otherwise spirits would be regulated under Cat. I scheduling (no medical utility, high potential for abuse)

Jimson weed has a history of usage, with curious kids landing themselves in the emergency room, yet it's not scheduled; and it's widely available, kids still do it, and it lasts for a LONG time.

so tell me then, why was it made illegal in 1937 (erroneously labeled a
narcotic), then later placed on Cat-I schedulling in the Drug Act of 1970?
I know why it was made illegal, and it has nothing to do with being "dangerous", or an intoxicant.

 

I don't know why it would be classified that if it weren't dangerous, but it is dangerous, everytime I've used it, I see shit, I can't tell where I am, or if I'm moving, so, yea, it is dangerous.

 

riiight.

it was classified that because Anslinger was a puppet for a) the paper industry, b) the tobacco industry, and c) the brewers association

he vowed that if they financed his campaign to office, he would serve their interests, so they all financially sponsored his plight to eradicate the competive threat to those respective industries, by what was viewed as a "foreign practice"

I could tell you the pharmacological reasons why it isn't dangerous, but rather, I'll just post this link which reflects why "reefer madness" is alive and well today, with the obscenely ignorant right http://www.houstonpress.com/Issues/2004-09-30/news/feature.html

'Dr. Alan Robison, who chaired the pharmacology department at the University of Texas Health Science Center in Houston before retiring, conducted some of the earliest research on marijuana's toxicity level.

"That was the first and only drug I ever studied in my career that was so nontoxic that no matter how much of it you gave to a mouse or a rat, you couldn't kill the damn thing," says Robison, the founder of the Drug Policy Forum of Texas. "As an industrial chemical, it's a real loser, because you can't even kill a cockroach with it." '

accident rates with marijuana usage are inconclusive, so good luck trying to find a credible study on that

 

I never said that it was harmful to the body, even though it is, I do say that it affects you, it distorts your perception.

This study:

http://www.drugabuse.gov/Infofacts/marijuana.html

says that,

"The short-term effects of marijuana can include problems with memory and learning; distorted perception; difficulty in thinking and problem solving; loss of coordination; and increased heart rate."

"One study has indicated that a user’s risk of heart attack more than quadruples in the first hour after smoking marijuana"

"A study of 450 individuals found that people who smoke marijuana frequently but do not smoke tobacco have more health problems and miss more days of work than nonsmokers(9). Many of the extra sick days among the marijuana smokers in the study were for respiratory illnesses."

"marijuana smoking doubled or tripled the risk of these cancers."

But, of course you're going to dismiss that research because the government did it.

 

"marijuana smoking doubled or tripled the risk of these cancers."
bullshit.

http://www.rednova.com/news/general/285052/smoking_pot_not_a_major_cancer_risk_report/index.html?source=r_general

i'm going to dismiss it on the account of misleading information.

perceptual distortions? Benadryls will give you perceptual distortions, but it's not a C-I controlled substance. what about Jack Daniels? Alcohol turns off neurons, puts them to sleep by modulating GABA...do you think that doesn't inhibit thinking?

 

Well, if you read the article, instead of my brief quotes, you'd see that in your article it only talks about lung cancer, but in mine, it talks of head, and neck cancer.

 

well, if you read your own link, you'd also find

"
Marijuana use also has the potential to promote cancer of the lungs and other parts of the respiratory tract because it contains irritants and carcinogens(12, 13). In fact, marijuana smoke contains 50 to 70 percent more carcinogenic hydrocarbons than does tobacco smoke(14). It also produces high levels of an enzyme that converts certain hydrocarbons into their carcinogenic form—levels that may accelerate the changes that ultimately produce malignant cells(15)."

already refuted.

holding an umbrella out in a t-storm, may get you struck by lightning

 

alright, fine then, we'll bypass the cancer, it seems you are right about it, but what about the rest of the problems ive found associated with marijuana.