Schwarzenegger: "No one cares if you smoke a joint"

Don't get me wrong, everyone is entitled to their own options on the matter. It's just the issue of weed it's illegality and it being the "cool" thing because of it that touches a nerve with me.

No offense to anyone who may hold the opinion, but we're not little kids, something shouldn't be cool because it's illegal.

The fact of the matter is that innocent people go to jail for years because they use a plant. There's nothing cool about that.

A society where people are free to choose to use whatever they like, I.E. alcohol, cigarettes, "energy" drinks, cannabis, etc. That would be cool.

But cannabis use is no cooler than eating bananas. It's just a plant.

 

You do know that was heaped in sarcasm, right? My grandmother doesn't even like hard boiled sweets.

 

It's the damned should beez that sting. No one wants to be guilty but moralizing
seeks to make everyone liable.

 

arnold is the man!

 

Unfortunately we're all held liable to the morality of a few people with deep pockets. Guilty as charged.

 

Nah weed will kill you. Not weed itself, but mixed in with all the blunt paper you have smoked over the years and whatever else could have been in the weed over the years. Plus i dont care what anyone says smoke in your lungs is not good no matter if its cannabis or not

 

Combusted plant material is not great for your lungs no. But weed will not kill you. There's been no real evidence to suggest that smoking cannabis causes cancer.

In fact the human brain and most of our organs have receptors on them specifically made and shaped for cannadinoids. I won't go into detail about all of this in this thread, but it can basically suggest two things; either human beings we "made" to consume cannabis. Or human beings have had such a close relationship with cannabis over thousands of years that our bodies have developed these receptors and artificial cannadinoids over the thousands of years through evolution, suggesting that for whatever reason we need it/them.

So, combusted paper material and potentially laced ingredients will kill you. Not cannabis. It doesn't kill people. Bottom line.

 

It is our own metabolism that we are responsible to. Liability is the author of the ability to lie, and this ability is only enabling to the extent that we are able to fashion temporary conditions for ourselves. The temporary is self limiting.

 

There can often be a price to pay when we try to fashion anything for ourselves; morality, living conditions, etc. In this case, people are sent to jail because they fashion their own morality regarding the use of a plant.

 

I forgot about that.

That could be, but if that were the case why would so many animals have cannabinoid receptors as well?

I like this theory though.

Interesting thought. But again, why would animals be included in the picture?

 

My point is that this is an issue that transcends marijuana laws and the problem is endemic to culture. No one is taught in self sufficiency when demanding systemic compliance, it is not just the government that intrudes in this way,
but the neighbor on neighborhood watch. We are taught to make accusations to be full functioning citizens and any heterodox thinking or appearance is subject to state intrusion in the guise of "protecting" society from criminal elements. There is no requirement from nature that we confront human behavior
this way. We made it all up and thus far it has produced no solutions to seemingly intractable problems, because it assumes knowledge and seeks compliance rather than understanding.
From my perspective no one is less able to any virtue and it is the lesson, or past learning that is suspect.

 

Lunarverse covered all my points except one.. (not that you need any more anyway)

you`re aware that there are ways to consume cannibas without smoking it, right?

I only plan to smoke for a few more years, but herb will be in my life till I die..

 

Good point. Unfortunately we're not a society that looks back on our behaviour and says, "did that really work, could it be changed for the better?" Hence there was a World War II. No said after WW I, "was that really necessary?"

We're taught to shoot first, ask questions later. A criminal will be understood in the courtroom or in jail, the addict will sober up when he's in jail, cannabis laws will be looked at after we lock up users and dealers.

Only now are people looking at the war on drugs and asking, "did that really work?"

It's this behaviour, which I think is what you suggested, that needs to change. But we're a society that thinks we can only fix what has been broken, not fix what doesn't necessarily work.

 

Excerpt from a book I'm currently reading;

I do like that theory though, that perhaps the psychoactive property of cannabis is produced as incentive for other species to aid in the survival of the plant species.

Are there any other plants that potentially use this means? Besides shrooms.

As for cannabis and shrooms, perhaps their psychoactive properties are partly responsible for the psychological evolution of man. That could be why mankind has developed such a close and spiritual relationship with them both over thousands of years.

 

Any three people are society.

The sentient impression is that this is a brutal outlook.

Society is made of citizens. It is the contributions of citizens that keep these things in place. I advocate tuning in, turning on, and dropping out as they say. Live a guerrilla life.

 

From natures perspective we make it all up and does not respect our choices.
Having the nerve mind you, of destroying our beachfront properties.

 

It is, but it's also a realistic outlook. People individually can be good, but modern society as a whole is brutal in my opinion. There's a lot of grey area here, because society is made up of thousands of individual people, many of whom are good people. Yet society is run by some very crooked, bad people. So perhaps it wouldn't be right of me to paint such a negative picture of society (individuals), but would be more appropriate of me to do so about the people who run society. There is a large disconnect between the two and that's the greatest contributing factor to society's problems.

I agree.

 

i just want to add, that one legitimate draw back from proposition 19 would be that all businesses in california would not be able to qualify for a few federal tax credits (as with school grants). you can say that tax will be revenued, but for someone that doesn't like that redirecting of money from business to government, and would care less about marijuana, they have legitimate reasons to vote no. with legalization, there are many different entities to oppose, and the fed is one.

as for everything else against prop 19, it's all based on ignorance.

how was the proposition written badly though? i havent read the document itself on how drugged driving will be dealt, and i only see that as an issue.