Is Marijuana Decriminalization Overdue?

[mgb_phys]

Quick historical survey :

marijuana

cocaine

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/a/a1/Queen_Victoria_-Golden_Jubilee_-3a_cropped.JPG/210px-Queen_Victoria_-Golden_Jubilee_-3a_cropped.JPG Opium

Alcohol

EVERYTHING

 

[The Dagda]

I was watching a program the other day and they were saying traditional cannabis plants that aren't genetically engineered (like the ones you might buy in a new age shop) actually have more of an anti-psychotic drug in than the super strains you generally get illegally now. Which is interesting, as well as ironic. They actually grow these strains to extract the drug.

Personally considering just how dangerous alcohol and cigarettes are I have no problem with it's legalisation any more or decriminilisation. Your more likely to suffer from psychological problems from heavy drinking than heavy cannabis use, and your certainly much, much, much more likely to die from imbibing either. Also the level of crime due to alcohol is much higher than cannabis, which is associated with it mainly being illegal. I don't smoke it so I don't really care all that much, but it does seem to me to be ridiculously demonized considering how harmful it really is.

 

[mgb_phys]

but it does seem to me to be ridiculously demonized considering how harmful it really is.

Ecstasy is a class A drug in the UK (highest possible classification - automatic jail term etc) total deaths cause = zero.
But there were two photogenic newsworthy young girls that died after taking it.
One died of an undiagnosed heart condition the other died from water poisoning, she had drunk so many bottles of mineral water (because it's healthy) that she died from salt imbalance.

 

[binzing]

I don't really care all that much, but it does seem to me to be ridiculously demonized considering how harmful it really is.

Like the fact that as a Schedule I drug its right next to heroin, I find that absurd.

 

[Monique]

Ecstasy is a class A drug in the UK (highest possible classification - automatic jail term etc) total deaths cause = zero.

XTC is considered a hard drugs in the Netherlands as well and is thus prohibited (although you can legally test pills at parties = control). Use can lead to over-heating/dehydration, depressions. It is risky to use in combination with alcohol and medication, as well as in combination with medical conditions such as heart disease, diabetes and epilepsy. Deaths are known to occur.

http://english.justitie.nl/images/The Netherlands Policy on XTC_tcm35-127570.pdf.

 

[mgb_phys]

Deaths are known to occur.

I wonder if any deaths have been caused by the compound rather than existing conditions?
If you blame deaths from cardiovascular problems, exhaustion or epilepsy then you might as well prohibit most sports.
It's interesting the opposite standards taken, anyone who says a prescription drug is dangerous is sued and hounded out of their post and vilified for creating a panic, as is any doctor who claims an illegal drug is harmless.

 

[Loren Booda]

The marijuana which gave me addictive pleasure at first - for six years - provided me access to harder drugs, including LSD. After the acid I toked six more years, but achieved little pleasant sensation, instead smoking out of habit, only to feel all of the disturbing effects of marijuana. It was not until I quit pot that I finally reached a sense of normalcy. I could well be homeless if I hadn't. Now, 25 years later, the hardest drug I ingest is chocolate.

By the way, I received a diagnosis of paranoid schizophrenia 6 months after my LSD experience. I now have the diagnosis of schizoaffective disorder, bipolar type.

Marijuana has recently been shown in an English study to significantly increase the incidence of psychoses in habitual users. I have seen elsewhere that 20% of users become habitual.

 

[turbo]

Marijuana has recently been shown in an English study to significantly increase the incidence of psychoses in habitual users. I have seen elsewhere that 20% of users become habitual.

Got some references? It can be claimed that some percentage of peanut-butter consumers as kids grow up to be long-term peanut-butter abusers. Peanut-butter sandwiches, Thai sauces, ants on a log... The devastation is extensive.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

It is clear to me that drug laws don't work and they cost the taxpayers billions. The rest is irrelevant.

When we had a family member with a hard-drug problem, we could have had him arrested, which would have cost the taxpayers $40k a year [or whatever it was in California to keep him in jail] and certainly would have ruined his life. Or, we could do nothing but try to handle it. We couldn't afford to send him through a drug treatment program.

 

[Proton Soup]

Thats not going to happen...

As far as the coops, sure for pot, if its legalized but cocaine has no good use, so we don't really need to grow coca plants.

it's a decent anesthetic. it used to be sold over the counter as toothache drops.

the columbians for centuries also chewed the leaves to stave off hunger and as a mild stimulant while they labored.

i'm not sure i'd agree there are many useless drugs, just bad uses. even one OTC product has a form of methamphetamine in it.

 

[Loren Booda]

Yesterday I heard that cannabis use increases the incidence of testicular cancer. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=cannabis+"testicular+cancer"&btnG=Search"

 

[binzing]

it's a decent anesthetic. it used to be sold over the counter as toothache drops.

the columbians for centuries also chewed the leaves to stave off hunger and as a mild stimulant while they labored.

i'm not sure i'd agree there are many useless drugs, just bad uses. even one OTC product has a form of methamphetamine in it.

True.

Hell Adderall (sp?) IS meth.

 

[mbisCool]

adderal IS amphetamine but not methamphetamine

I just think its unfortunate. There is so much misinformation regarding the effects and dangers of marijuana. To be honest no argument againsts marijuana seems justified when we have perscription drugs, alcohol, and tobacco which account for unprecedented hardships.

 

[Monique]

Yesterday I heard that cannabis use increases the incidence of testicular cancer. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=cannabis+"testicular+cancer"&btnG=Search"

At this point that is still a hypothesis. Smoking tobacco increases the incidence of lung cancer and it very addictive, but apparently that is socially accepted.

 

[mbisCool]

Hempfest in Seattle, Washington drew a crowd of around 150,000 this last August over A weekend.

 

[The Dagda]

Like the fact that as a Schedule I drug its right next to heroin, I find that absurd.

I believe it's right next to opium in the US, which let's face it is unrefined heroin anyway. I find that absurd.

I also think ecstasy is a little too high on the scale and it most certainly shouldn't be in the same class as acid and crack. Cannabis should and is really a class C drug along with steroids. Ecstasy probably deserves a class B and hard drugs should be in the class A. That said the knee jerk right wing caused ecstasy to be miscategorised in the same way they caused cannabis to be miscategorised. You have to also take into account the level of criminality invovled with a drug, which means smoking should be a class A, and alcohol a class A (mainly because of how dangerous it is, plus both are associated with smuggling on a massive level in the UK due to the high tax).

 

[binzing]

At this point that is still a hypothesis. Smoking tobacco increases the incidence of lung cancer and it very addictive, but apparently that is socially accepted.

Thats what makes this crazy. Its legal to sell something so addictive and deadly, but pot is illegal while it has roughly the same effects impairment wise, as alcohol.

 

[gravenewworld]

The marijuana which gave me addictive pleasure at first - for six years - provided me access to harder drugs, including LSD. After the acid I toked six more years, but achieved little pleasant sensation, instead smoking out of habit, only to feel all of the disturbing effects of marijuana. It was not until I quit pot that I finally reached a sense of normalcy. I could well be homeless if I hadn't. Now, 25 years later, the hardest drug I ingest is chocolate.

By the way, I received a diagnosis of paranoid schizophrenia 6 months after my LSD experience. I now have the diagnosis of schizoaffective disorder, bipolar type.

Marijuana has recently been shown in an English study to significantly increase the incidence of psychoses in habitual users. I have seen elsewhere that 20% of users become habitual.

NMDA antagonists have severe side effects on the CNS and can cause hallucinations, motor impairment, and memory loss. So why does the FDA allow things on the market like Diazepam?

Yesterday I heard that cannabis use increases the incidence of testicular cancer. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q...22&btnG=Search

It is already pretty much a well established fact that opioid use promotes cancer progression and metastases, so should morphine, codeine, etc. be illegal now?



Physcians and the FDA recognize that both NMDA antagonists and opioids still have beneficial therapeutic use. The pros outweigh the cons. Everything is a poison, you just have to administer the right dose. There is absolutely 0 good reasons why marijuana is illegal at least for medicinal purposes.

 

[mgb_phys]

David Nutt of the University of Bristol wrote an opinion piece for the Journal of Psychopharmacology which compared society's perceptions of risk of taking ecstacy with other activities. The light-hearted piece compared "equasy" or Equine Addiction Syndrome with perceived risks of drugs.

The piece found equasy, or horse riding, caused acute harm to a person once in 350 episodes while ecstacy caused acute harm once in 10,000 episodes.

Nutt asked: "So why are harmful sporting activities allowed, whereas relatively less harmful drugs are not? I believe this reflects a societal approach which does not adequately balance the relative risks of drugs against their harms... The general public, especially the younger generation, are disillusioned with the lack of balanced political debate about drugs."

http://jop.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/23/1/3

 

[ThomasT]

What evidence is this claim based on? What facts are being used? How are the facts being evaluated?

Good question. I don't know. But a quick survey of drug-related cases in Connecticut between 2002 and 2007 revealed a rather large (more than 10,000) number of drug-related arrests. About 1/3 were dismissed, about 1/3 were 'nolled'. A few thousand resulted in convictions and various penalties.
I'm probably a bit off in my recollection here. The point is that it uses a lot of resources (police and court time, jail time, parole time, probation time, etc.). The problem of drug abuse is better dealt with in other ways. And decriminalizing and regulating and taxing the production and sale of these substances puts a vast criminal subculture out of business.

It seems to me that the large drug cartels which now supply American users derive their power from the illegality of their product(s). That, and the street violence associated with the retail black market here in the US, and the rather large numbers of people doing time or awaiting prosecution for drug use and/or sales seems to me to be enough reason to at least seriously consider some sort of state-run program. It's been done with gambling, and alcolhol, and tobacco. Why not control drugs in a similar way? Why create an underground market and then leave it to that?

 

[Alfi]

To the OP first.
Decriminalize yes. Legalize, is a bit harder for me to just jump on a band wagon and say go for it.
Many issues about sales, quality controls, liabilities, etc. need to be addressed first.

I guess I'm one of the few here that will admit to smoking pot fairly regularly for 35+ years now. I have no intention of stopping. I also feel I am not 'addicted' to it. I often go for months without for one reason or another and really feel no withdrawal symptoms or any of that stuff.
I am 54 now and semi-retired. In all those years I have never committed any crimes to get it. I have never put myself in debt to get it and I have never sold it.
I have a small crop I tend ( 6-8 plants ) and grow at home in a back room. Someone mentioned earlier in this thread that you can't grow-at-home the 'good' stuff. I beg to differ. Mine is very, very good. I make it a hobby of sorts in my little garden to find and cross breed strains to get some very smooth smoke.

I guess my main issue is the private vs public aspect. I disagree with letting it out into public. Certainly not on the roads. In part I feel it should be treated the same as alcohol.
But, because of the ease of growing it would be impossible to control the 'approved' sources, and therefore the quality or traceability if a diseased batch was released.
If used in private, grown for personal use, I feel there should be no criminal charges.

I started another thread about the memory effects of THC but as the OP stated it is very difficult to keep discussions within rules. If I have over stepped any rules with my opinions please accept my apologies.

 

[WhoWee]

Quick historical survey :

marijuana

cocaine

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/a/a1/Queen_Victoria_-Golden_Jubilee_-3a_cropped.JPG/210px-Queen_Victoria_-Golden_Jubilee_-3a_cropped.JPG Opium

Alcohol

EVERYTHING

2009-01-14-obamaofficialfull.jpg

reportedly "dabbled"

 

[turbo]

2009-01-14-obamaofficialfull.jpg

reportedly "dabbled"

The honors go to...Keef!

If there is a nuclear holocaust, there'll still be cockroaches and Keith Richards.

 

[Evo]

I guess one of the major differentiators between the majority of people that drink alcohol and people that smoke marijuana is that the majority of people drink alcohol, not to get drunk, but for the pleasure of a few tasteful sips. I might have a tiny glass of sherry, a glass of good wine, a finger of exquiste brandy, etc... People that smoke pot do it to get stoned. Who takes one puff of marijuana for the taste experience and then stops?

Seriously, who here that smokes marijuana would do it without the sole intent to get high? That's the whole point, isn't it?

 

[dlgoff]

I might have a tiny glass of sherry, a glass of good wine, a finger of exquiste brandy, etc...

Makes me go back to the New Years Eve party on chat. Sherry

 

[binzing]

I guess one of the major differentiators between the majority of people that drink alcohol and people that smoke marijuana is that the majority of people drink alcohol, not to get drunk, but for the pleasure of a few tasteful sips. I might have a tiny glass of sherry, a glass of good wine, a finger of exquiste brandy, etc... People that smoke pot do it to get stoned. Who takes one puff of marijuana for the taste experience and then stops?

Seriously, who here that smokes marijuana would do it without the sole intent to get high? That's the whole point, isn't it?

Obviously, but there's different levels of high, and sometimes (or a lot of times, depending upon the persons preferences) all you want is a little buzz to relax, etc. Its the same as alcohol in that respect, IMO.

 

[turbo]

Seriously, who here that smokes marijuana would do it without the sole intent to get high? That's the whole point, isn't it?

Apart from relief of neurological pain that cannot be relieved by opiates, relief from nausea induced by chemotherapy, relief from pulmonary spasms, etc, etc, etc,... Gee not a single reason I can think of.

Maine's legislature legalized medical uses for marijuana after extensive review, and against very vigorous opposition by church groups and some legal corners. It is a modest program, and even now, some DA's are trying to scuttle it. They cannot reverse the will of the people, so they nibble around the edges trying to criminalize the behaviors of people who supply marijuana to try to help get patients get some relief from their afflictions.

BTW, I know people who buy and drink expensive single-malt scotches and pricey wines for the "flavor" and they end up hammered every time they drink. There is not a border at addictive behavior between drinkers and smokers. I'm sure that you and I both know people who have to get wasted whenever they drink - beer, wine, vodka, scotch,... If you can afford the best, does that excuse the personal irresponsibility that might result in you passing out on the couch or having to be helped to bed by a loved one?

 

[Evo]

Apart from relief of neurological pain that cannot be relieved by opiates, relief from nausea induced by chemotherapy, relief from pulmonary spasms, etc, etc, etc,... Gee not a single reason I can think of.

The number of people that would use marijuana "medicinally" are a negligible fraction of users. And a pill with the active ingredients would be much more effective than actually smoking it.

BTW, I know people who buy and drink expensive single-malt scotches and pricey wines for the "flavor" and they end up hammered every time they drink. There is not a border at addictive behavior between drinkers and smokers. I'm sure that you and I both know people who have to get wasted whenever they drink - beer, wine, vodka, scotch,... If you can afford the best, does that excuse the personal irresponsibility that might result in you passing out on the couch or having to be helped to bed by a loved one?

Honestly, I know no one personally that drinks to excess. Most of my friends don't drink, or only drink a couple of times a year. The majority of people that drink don't drink to get wasted.

 

[turbo]

The number of people that would use marijuana "medicinally" are a negligible fraction of users. And a pill with the active ingredients would be much more effective than actually smoking it.

The pill form (Marinol) did not help my brother in law, and in fact caused undesirable side-effects including disorientation, paranoia, and nightmares. Being in the terminal stages of pancreatic cancer may have made him more sensitive to that refined version, but he responded quite well to the natural forms. My sister was beside herself all this time, since she was very sensitive to his needs. One cancer death is not a study - it's only apocryphal, but I have learned from it.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

And a pill with the active ingredients would be much more effective than actually smoking it.

I don't think that's true. Smoking is a very effective method of delivering drugs.

 

[Evo]

I don't think that's true. Smoking is a very effective method of delivering drugs.

But a pill can be very concentrated and the correct amount controlled. Which is probably why we don't smoke medications.

 

[turbo]

But a pill can be very concentrated and the correct amount controlled. Which is probably why we don't smoke medications.

Some of us have to use inhaled medications every day. If you have asthma, you will rely on preventive medications and "attack" medications that you resort to if you are in trouble.

Guess what? When your lung capacity is impaired, and you need to rely on drugs that need to be delivered to your lungs, and thus to your circulatory system, you're pretty much screwed. It is not possible to calibrate drug doses when the drug is designed to improve pulmonary function and the drug is intended to be used by people in danger. It is not possible to take a pill to stave of an on-going asthma attack.

 

[Evo]

Some of us have to use inhaled medications every day. If you have asthma, you will rely on preventive medications and "attack" medications that you resort to if you are in trouble.

Guess what? When your lung capacity is impaired, and you need to rely on drugs that need to be delivered to your lungs, and thus to your circulatory system, you're pretty much screwed. It is not possible to calibrate drug doses when the drug is designed to improve pulmonary function and the drug is intended to be used by people in danger. It is not possible to take a pill to stave of an on-going asthma attack.

Inhalers are calibrated to administer a rather precise dose of medication with each pump. I was asthmatic as a child and used an inhaler for years.

 

[Evo]

To the OP first.
Decriminalize yes. Legalize, is a bit harder for me to just jump on a band wagon and say go for it.
Many issues about sales, quality controls, liabilities, etc. need to be addressed first.

I guess I'm one of the few here that will admit to smoking pot fairly regularly for 35+ years now. I have no intention of stopping. I also feel I am not 'addicted' to it. I often go for months without for one reason or another and really feel no withdrawal symptoms or any of that stuff.
I am 54 now and semi-retired. In all those years I have never committed any crimes to get it. I have never put myself in debt to get it and I have never sold it.
I have a small crop I tend ( 6-8 plants ) and grow at home in a back room. Someone mentioned earlier in this thread that you can't grow-at-home the 'good' stuff. I beg to differ. Mine is very, very good. I make it a hobby of sorts in my little garden to find and cross breed strains to get some very smooth smoke.

I guess my main issue is the private vs public aspect. I disagree with letting it out into public. Certainly not on the roads. In part I feel it should be treated the same as alcohol.
But, because of the ease of growing it would be impossible to control the 'approved' sources, and therefore the quality or traceability if a diseased batch was released.
If used in private, grown for personal use, I feel there should be no criminal charges.

I started another thread about the memory effects of THC but as the OP stated it is very difficult to keep discussions within rules. If I have over stepped any rules with my opinions please accept my apologies.

I'd have to say that I pretty much agree with your assessments. How do you control it?

 

[wildman]

What evidence is this claim based on? What facts are being used? How are the facts being evaluated?

It is based on the fact that chasing pot heads around and charging them with crimes cost A LOT of money. Maybe you think that we have infinite money but I don't and I would like to see the money spent else where. Legalize and tax it.