Freeing the weed.

[Mr Mystery]

So marijuana is now legal in Washington.

Do you think this is a step in the right direction, or a mistake?

Me, I'm in two minds about it.

First, there is data available that sustained use of cannabis messes up your head. But the question is are the negative impacts any worse than sustained smoking or drinking? There is also data to suggest it has health benefits, such as relieving pain for MS sufferers.

But then comes opinion, and Imma kick off with mine..

Regular cannabis users are boring. It becomes their sole topic of conversation. They are no different in my experience to the sole drunk person at a social event.

Granted some of that behaviour will stem from it's perception as an act of rebellion, and legalising it may strip it of that status.

But how about you? Has Washington state made a good choice?

[Psychosplodge]

I've always said you have the associated costs with use regardless of it's legality, so legalise it, regulate it, and tax it.

It gets used either way, might as well take what benefit you can from it.

[Mr Mystery]

True I guess. And I'll be the first to start on the 'slippery slope' logic.

It's been argued that Weed is the gateway drug to significant subtance abuse. Which is more or less borne out by data. But the data I'm aware of didn't take into account the environment the drugs illegality introduces. For instance, someone selling weed, is likely to be selling other drugs, and to push those on his regulars.

Is this a time bomb waiting to go off?

[Psychosplodge]

It probably makes it more likely for the reason you suggest. But then again it's down to an individual, where's the individual's responsibility in this? legalise the lot, regulate them all, and tax them.

And if you have separate outlets for them all the better. Also make it still illegal to consume them in public, yes you can get stoned off your face, but only at home...

[jgebi]

I think and knowing from being around stoners (as I am 16 so it seems to come with it) that if it was easy to get well easier then they properly wouldn't as it's just not "rebel" enough.
Also it's main start for people so if you make it legal or we killing the head of a much bigger snake? And why the hell not tax it, if their going to get it any way make if safer and make some money for the state to. Also I live in Australia and they are looking at legalizing ecstasy in one way or another so I think you are the test. Now we just wait...

[eldargal]

What Splodge said. Legalise it, regulate it, tax it and do the same to every narcotic out there. Watch organised crime profits and drug related crime disappear. People who want to will find a way to rot their brains regardless, that is their responsibility not the states.

[Tzeentch's Dark Agent]

What Splodge said. Legalise it, regulate it, tax it and do the same to every narcotic out there. Watch organised crime profits and drug related crime disappear. People who want to will find a way to rot their brains regardless, that is their responsibility not the states.

Just because you smoke weed. ¬¬


Disclaimer: That was a joke, eldargal does not smoke weed.

[Wolfshade]

I think there are benefits to legalising it as they've been stated before, it reduces the cost, you can bring in some quality control and you can tax it.
Those who make profits from it currently doing it illegaly will then have to do it legally at a lower price (assuming competition works correctly) and reduce organised crime.
The argument has been made time and time again that alcohol costs more to the healthcare system than pot ever does, if that being the case then surely we should ban alcohol.

The concern is if pot then looses its glamour and something harder and illegal replaces it. Then you have the same probelms with recreational pot usage but with a "harder" drug.
Also, there are the claims that weed is a gateway drug, though no comprehensive research proves/disproves this, if it is the case then it being readily available is a bad thing, if it isn't then there isn't this concern.

[Psychosplodge]

I don't get this gateway drug nonsense, if that was the case why don't they say the same about tobacco as a gateway to weed? Or maybe alcohol is a gateway to LSD?

[Wolfshade]

The trouble is there is no consistency between research. Also, there is the trouble with people with addictive personalities, there are very few of them in reality, they get hooked on anything. Though it's not alway substances, some of the get really hooked on activities and such like.

[Psychosplodge]

I think it probably is far more down to the individual than the substance.

[Wolfshade]

Yeah, that is the trouble with all this sorts of things

[jgebi]

they way the whole gate way drug thing works is much like the eldar, people go seeking near highs of pleasure

[Mr Mystery]

I don't get this gateway drug nonsense, if that was the case why don't they say the same about tobacco as a gateway to weed? Or maybe alcohol is a gateway to LSD?

As I touched on (was typing on my iPhone, hence the former brevity) it does seem largely down to access. Booze doesn't lead to LSD, on account Booze and LSD are rarely sold by the same person (note the rarely..no doubt it does go on!). Ditto baccy and weed.

I'm really in two minds about this. On one hand, I very much see the benefits (reduced crime rates, more revenue for the authorities is defo a double win, as is squeezing out the criminal element involved in the supply) but on the other hand, pretty much every regular user I know is a numbskull (to put it politely...) and I'm not sure society is quite ready.

But thankfully I'm not in a position to legalise or decriminalise it, so my opinion is just that! As an aside, regarding my comment about regular users being numbskulls, is this down to the drug, or the sort of people who are attracted to it, in a chicken and the egg stylee.