This is topic The defensiveness of the pro-pot crowd in forum General Comments at The Ornery American Forum.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
http://www.ornery.org/cgi-bin/ubbcgi/ultimatebb.cgi/topic/6/16883.html

Posted by Sa'eed (Member # 6889) on :
 
Pro-legalization advocates only argue what benefits legalization would have for government and society, like tax revenue, not sending so many people to jail and marring their future chances of employment, etc. These are reasonably good outcomes for public policy pundits to mull over, but there's a more pressing reason why cannabis should be legalized and made available to the public on an industrial scale: Marijuana is a good thing.

It's a cheap and relatively harmless way to alter your consciousness. Adults having the option to purchase cannabis and cannabis goods will mean more human happiness.

Humans have always sought a way to escape the tyranny of consciousness, and using cannabis for that purpose is one of the best options with the fewest downsides.

Emphasizing the problems of the war on drugs as a way to argue for legalized cannabis leaves many people cold -- national legalization will happen quicker when cannabis users proudly state how the plant makes their lives better.
 
Posted by Pete at Home (Member # 429) on :
 
Well if just the plant, there's superior paper, cheap cloth, and reduced deforestation to make paper. [Smile]

But if you mean the.derivative drugs, then I have a different angle: I have already laid out how commercialized hashish could help win the war on the Taliban
 
Posted by Sa'eed (Member # 6889) on :
 
The desire of the masses to consume cannabis is quite frankly more important than the effect legalization would have on the Taliban or any other group.
 
Posted by Pete at Home (Member # 429) on :
 
I am always amused when someone used the word "important" or "relevant" as if the word held an absolute meaning. As if something could be important without paying important to somebody in particular
 
Posted by Pete at Home (Member # 429) on :
 
The question here is what is important to the American voter, and to whatever other powers move the US electoral machines
 
Posted by scifibum (Member # 945) on :
 
The lack of terrible consequences in Colorado and Washington and Oregon will probably help get us there within a decade or two.
 
Posted by Pete at Home (Member # 429) on :
 
Or did I misunderstand your IP question? Were you not comparing pro pot arguments for their capacity to persuade folks who currently oppose legality?
 
Posted by Sa'eed (Member # 6889) on :
 
Pete I wasn't asking a question but just stating a position. I recently became interested in the marijuana legalization movement and started paying attention to the arguments put forth by the pro-legalization crowd and it struck me that none of them were a defense of marijuana use in and of itself (with the exception of medicinal uses.)
 
Posted by Sa'eed (Member # 6889) on :
 
Basically pro-pot crowd accedes to the stigma attached to marijuana use rather than being defiant that marijuana use for recreational purposes is a good thing (if not abused...but then what can't be abused?)
 
Posted by Sa'eed (Member # 6889) on :
 
The only exception is marijuana INDUSTRY figures like former New Mexico governor Gary Johnson who argues that marijuana use can be good and harmless.

[ December 05, 2015, 09:23 PM: Message edited by: Sa'eed ]
 
Posted by cherrypoptart (Member # 3942) on :
 
Does smoking marijuana cause cancer like smoking tobacco?
 
Posted by Pete at Home (Member # 429) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sa'eed:
Pete I wasn't asking a question but just stating a position. I recently became interested in the marijuana legalization movement and started paying attention to the arguments put forth by the pro-legalization crowd and it struck me that none of them were a defense of marijuana use in and of itself (with the exception of medicinal uses.)

if the pro pot crowd was trying to persuade pot users to make it legal, than a recreational use for itself argument would be quite persuasive.
 
Posted by scifibum (Member # 945) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by cherrypoptart:
Does smoking marijuana cause cancer like smoking tobacco?

Smoke inhalation is like that. But people don't smoke weed as incessantly as some people smoke tobacco.
 
Posted by Sa'eed (Member # 6889) on :
 
Smoking marijuana is popular (among cannabis consumers) only because it's the easiest and cheapest way to consume the substance.

It's also a popular way to consume it because it's more social, as in a bunch of friends sharing joints. Smoking the stuff also has the benefit of the THC immediately going into effect for a shorter duration.

An alternative is edibles. Edibles offer a way longer high because you're feeling the effect for a substantial portion of the period in which the food containing the THC is in your system. The downside to edibles is that it's harder to control the dosage. This has led to an issue in Colorado where people consume edible marijuana, don't immediately feel the effect, and continue to consume more, only to feel the cumulative effect of all that cannabis simultaneously. This is the sort of thing that will be overcome by cultural change and education.

[ December 07, 2015, 01:46 AM: Message edited by: Sa'eed ]
 
Posted by Pyrtolin (Member # 2638) on :
 
There are also vaporizers that can be used. Either ones like ecigs taht require some processing, or ones that apply indirect heat to the plant itself below the smoke point so that the active chemicals can be inhaled without the tar and smoke from burning.
 


Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1