2011 overview of peer-reviewed research on the impact of MJ on different types of short and long term cognitive functions:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3037578/
2011 overview of peer-reviewed research on the impact of MJ on different types of short and long term cognitive functions:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3037578/
Somebody please explain to me how the current trend to legalize weed in a society in which chemical dependency is rampant is of any benefit to said society.
In reply to 1988RedT2 :
Aside from it should have never been made illegal in the first place and is considerably safer than any of the high profit manufactured chemicals everyone depends on?
Better for people, better for the environment, better for the economy.
Really the only group it would hurt is for profit prisons, and berkeley everyone involved in those.
1988RedT2 said:Somebody please explain to me how the current trend to legalize weed in a society in which chemical dependency is rampant is of any benefit to said society.
The most compelling public policy argument I've seen: It's based on the position that the negative impact on individuals and society from putting people in jail for weed and related constraints on weed-adjacent medical efforts is worse than the impact from weed itself.
Generally, doctors say you shouldn't pop a pimple. It's not that they think pimples are good, just that the popping is worse.
1988RedT2 said:Somebody please explain to me how the current trend to legalize weed in a society in which chemical dependency is rampant is of any benefit to said society.
Making things illegal doesn't make them go away, it just makes them expensive and dangerous. See Al Capone and 1930s prohibition.
1988RedT2 said:Somebody please explain to me how the current trend to legalize weed in a society in which chemical dependency is rampant is of any benefit to said society.
Because whether something is deemed "good for society" or not should have minimal bearing on whether it is legal or not. The primary criteria for legality should be how likely it is that individual use would directly harm others beside the individual.
In all seriousness, if you set some government arbiter of "what is good for society", who gets to decide what everybody is or is not permitted to do?
If weed is deemed bad for the public health, why stop there? Why not ban rare steak? Red meat can be proven to be harmful to your health. Why should you be allowed to eat it?
CrustyRedXpress (Forum Supporter) said:2011 overview of peer-reviewed research on the impact of MJ on different types of short and long term cognitive functions:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3037578/
Wow hadn't seen that before today, very interesting. Crazy that risk taking and decision making is still impaired more than 21 days after last use.
The only first hand evidence I have is my
little bro. I've never touched the stuff, I'm sharp as a tack. My little bro... whole 'nother story. And I grew up with him so I know how he used to be, and can see a definitive change in him now. He's a burnout.
codrus (Forum Supporter) said:1988RedT2 said:Somebody please explain to me how the current trend to legalize weed in a society in which chemical dependency is rampant is of any benefit to said society.
Making things illegal doesn't make them go away, it just makes them expensive and dangerous. See Al Capone and 1930s prohibition.
Have you seen the gun market lately? Mass shootings and new gun laws have everyone panicking.
Making it legal denies drug cartels of revenue which is a really good thing given the horrible things they do to people when they've got money.
In reply to 1988RedT2 :
RX Reven' said:Making it legal denies drug cartels of revenue which is a really good thing given the horrible things they do to people when they've got money.
When was the last time somebody shot up the beer distributor's truck while it was making a delivery?
I can tell you that the black market has been decimated here.
There are gray market stores, and websites that are not legal, but do business like the legal stores do. Where they get their product, I can only guess, but the last I heard the government wasn't going to do anything about them until all the legal stores had been set up. In the city nearest me there were a few popular gray market stores but since all the legal ones have opened, I believe all the gray markets have been closed.
Well! It appears that the consensus is in favor of legalization by one or two percentage points. 
I guess time will tell if a stoner society is a better society.
In reply to Mr. Peabody :
Not here. There are all legal stores, but apparently the weed is dry, and expensive, and not of a high enough quality, so the guys I know that buy it get it from the same friendly neighborhood mail order service they have used for years.
Trust the government to berkeley up selling weed.
One of the issues is they tend to tax it so much so it's more economical to buy the illegal stuff. Putting people in prison for weed is stupid though.
The cartels will be fine. I believe they have a reduced their roll in weed, but meth and fentanyl are not only more profitable they are MUCH easier to transport.
In reply to Streetwiseguy :
Yes, I don't know anybody that's bought from the legal stores, and the online gray market guys seem to be beating them with both price and quality. I live on the border of a reserve and I think they have 9 stores now. They're much like the online's with price and quality, and being on the rez, don't really have to answer to anybody
When legalization first happened my prediction was that the government would make it both too expensive and not high enough quality, pushing the black market quality up and prices way down. Well, I was dead wrong about the black market, but didn't account for the gray market stores, and the local growers. Everybody I know grows their own at this point, and way more than they need.
In reply to carguy123 :
I have never seen a stoned person get violent to others. Sit in the corner and rub E36 M3 in their hair? Yeah, maybe, but violence seems to be a non starter.
Financially, here in Canada it is expensive but legal. Up to you to manage your $$$. The Ontario casinos adverstise endlesly to steal your money, pot is not advertised.
I am addicted to car parts and tools.
Recreational weed use is legal in MI. That doesn't make it smell any better. I always know when my neighbors are home because I have to close my windows so I don't think I'm living with Cheech and Chong. berkeley I hate that smell.
I'm on the fence on this. The libertarian in me agrees that the government should not be telling people what you can and cannot do if they are not harming others. But that only applies when I'm not expected to be the safety net for others when they make poor choices and fail. I'm more than a bit apprehensive about a society that already disincentivizes many to work and then gives them easier access to drugs that limit ambition.
If NOHOME wants to spend all of his money on car parts and stops going to his job so he can work on his project car, that's his decision. But if my taxes get raised to support that behavior, I'm not okay with it.
Boost_Crazy said:I'm more than a bit apprehensive about a society that already disincentivizes many to work and then gives them easier access to drugs that limit ambition.
I respectfully submit that legalizing recreational drugs is not the problem in that equation.
And then I respectfully decline to elaborate further.
1988RedT2 said:Somebody please explain to me how the current trend to legalize weed in a society in which chemical dependency is rampant is of any benefit to said society.
So its treated as a public heath issue and not a law enforcement issue. Like alcohol abuse. Its out there, its legal, some people can't handle it, most can. We tried outlawing alcohol in the 1920's and we all know the massive failure that was.
A LOT of people have felony convictions on their record because they were caught with weed years ago. Not to mention the effect of "The War on Drugs" on law enforcement interactions with people. ( I don't want to go political here)
In reply to Duke :
Boost_Crazy said:I'm more than a bit apprehensive about a society that already disincentivizes many to work and then gives them easier access to drugs that limit ambition.
I respectfully submit that legalizing recreational drugs is not the problem in that equation.
And then I respectfully decline to elaborate further.
Agreed, it is not THE problem but it is most definitely A problem. It is kind of like holding AA meetings in a bar.
Curious how many here are aware of William Randolph Hearst. Basically convinced our government 100 years ago about dangers of weed just to ban hemp from entering the market so he could monopolize on the paper industry..
On the addiction side... I've been around a lot of weed smokers, 98% are very successful people, the other 2% I feel have much more underlying issues. I'd venture to say out of 100 people I've only seen one freak out when they didn't have any..
You'll need to log in to post.
