Since the gun topic and Ukraine have been civilish how about

In reply to QuasiMofo (John Brown) :

I am doubtful of any reefer usuage on its own being the cause of that. Laced with something else, all bets are off though. I have no issues with that and happily would support full scale legalization even though I'll never partake in it. 

I have firmly believed for 20 years now the root cause of the horrible acts committed  is due to people just treating each other like garbage. The rest is all aggravating and mitigating circumstances. 

In reply to Beer Baron :

I see your point.  I'd argue a lot of interactions here aren't innocuous though.  Most have a one sided slant when the topic is not cars and everyone knows it.  Everyone is expected to tiptoe around it too.  I won't do that which is why my reply was more pointed.  Open and honest discussion doesn't require agreement at all.  Requiring it is in fact the exact opposite of open and honest.  
 

People can use all the pot they want.  If your pot use leads to bodily harm of innocent people though, all bets are off.  

In reply to AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) :

Open and honest discussion requires not jumping to conclusions about other people's intentions or assigning motivations and values to them that they don't have.

AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) said:

All you've done is proven that you aren't open to honest discussion and that your highest value is being PC.

^ This is the opposite of how you foster open and honest discussion. This is how you take an interaction that is well meaning and good hearted, and turn it into an antagonistic argument instead.

If you want open and honest discussions, all parties need to assume the others are good intentioned and react as such. You have to assume the other party is acting in good faith whether or not they are.

If you assume the other person is antagonistic and is not engaging in good faith discussion, there is nothing to be gained by getting angry or accusatory. That will not change their behavior. Getting angry and accusatory will shut down the possibility of discussion.

Maybe that person was being antagonistic. If they were, you are not making the situation better. You're better off just leaving. But maybe that person was acting in good faith and you misinterpreted their intentions. In that case, you have now made the conversation unproductive.

AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) said:

In reply to Beer Baron :

People can use all the pot they want.  If your pot use leads to bodily harm of innocent people though, all bets are off. 

There. We agree on that. I challenge you to find anyone in this discussion who disagrees with that. I'd even add psychological harm to other people.

Are you arguing that any people here use pot in a way that leads to bodily or psychological harm of others? Are you arguing that the people in this forum are okay but are not representative of the wider population and that a significant portion of adults who use marijuana do so in a manner that harms others?

I don't think there is anyone here that is arguing that marijuana can't be abused in such a way that it harms relationships. But then, find me something that can't be used that way.

So you know what I *actually* value - I assume a default libertarian (small "L") position. I believe people should be free to self determine so long as it does not harm or place undo burden on others. I believe it is up to people who want to limit an action to demonstrate that it is harmful that it should be controlled or prohibited. As such, the responsibility is not on me to demonstrate that I should be allowed to use marijuana, but should be on the people who want to prohibit it to demonstrate that it causes undo harm.

I have not seen sufficient evidence that marijuana use widely causes harm.

Do you have actual evidence (not isolated anecdotes) to the contrary? The only evidence I've seen presented here thusfar is a correlation between legalized marijuana use in the U.S. and increased incidents of mental health issues being diagnosed. However, that looks like a spurious correlation. Many have pointed out marijuana being legalized far earlier in other places without an increase in mental health issues, and other variables that have changed in the past several years that are far more likely to result in increased incidents of mental health crisis.

I would argue in favor of marijuana being publicly regulated in the same way that other foods and drugs are to ensure it is safe and people know what they are buying. I want to buy marijuana from a legal dispensary where I know it's not going to be laced or blended with anything that can cause me physical harm. I want to know what the concentration of psychoactive chemicals are so I can control how much I consume.

AnthonyGS (Forum Supporter) said:

In reply to Beer Baron :

 

People can use all the pot they want.  If your pot use leads to bodily harm of innocent people though, all bets are off.  

Replace the use of pot here with... own guns/shoot guns, drive a car, refuse to get a vaccine, drink alcohol, smoke tobacco, forgo adequate sleep, drive a diesel vehicle with emission deletes, play contact sports, own a dog...

All of which I would have more concern over for bodily harm to others than somebody using THC.