Play Free War Battle Games Online, Multiplayer Games, Strategy Games, Top MMORPG

rederoin · **Posted:** Sat May 08, 2010 11:17 am

IQ wrote:

Exactly. It can mess up your mind and cause harm to innocent people. THEY could murder us....

IQ....

Those aren't arguments , back them up with facts , proof etc...

Btw , did you even bother to watch the video I posted?

anarchy69 · **Posted:** Sat May 08, 2010 11:55 am

IQ wrote:

Seriously it can mess with your mind and make you depressed.

Weed isn't a downer of any sort it doesn't make you depressed. Have you never read what THC is when you were Googling for that article you copy pasted without the source? Read up on that and it will tell you the side effects of marijuana and the impacts it really has on people.

For one thing I've become a bit slower mentally but I'm still completely functional and it's almost better this way for when I'm driving I don't got road rage like I used to in high school. That's the only bad side effect I've seen from long term smoking it hasn't drawn me to other drugs nor has it made me depressed, if anything when you're depressed you smoke some to make your mood more enlightened.

simmen · **Posted:** Sat May 08, 2010 12:07 pm

even "ungdom mot narkotika" [youths against narcotics] have said weed don't lead to other drugs

i would sat it's more that you get put into a criminal inviroment because weed is illegal. this would be solved by legalizing it

bork9128 · **Posted:** Sat May 08, 2010 3:19 pm

it would also free up more cops to do thing actually helpful

i live in a relativity low crime town small police force but half of that small police force dedicated to weed related crimes yes that is just weed related crimes

simmen · **Posted:** Sat May 08, 2010 3:46 pm

even my little sister knew where to get weed when she were like 10.
once i were there with my friends to because they wanted 2 gram just for some fun, they had no weed then, we got offered heroin instead..

mrducky · **Posted:** Sun May 09, 2010 1:25 am

voted yes but im going to go devils advocate

1. the drug is the most likely to cause psychosis out of the relatively "soft" drugs (moreso then LSD). in other words, im establishing it has a negative side effect, that occurs faster and is more apparent then liver cancer from drinking.

2. the drug is known as a gateway drug, taking it often results in taking harder substances, this is a slippery slope, but it is well documented where people that use "hard" drugs, only did so after taking marijuana, correlation doesnt result in causation but... yeah. the numbers are there

3. overall detrimental to society, also, pretty much no countries have the drug with a traditional value attached (unlike smokes and alcohol)
lets compare to say... cigarettes in australia. these things are taxxed ridiculously... (roughly $15 for 25 cigarettes) due to aggressive government campaigns against them spanning more then a decade.
15% of the cost goes to the manufacturer (suppliers)
15% goes to the retailer (people who sell the cigarettes)
70% goes to tax where i think it was 80% of that gets directly funneled into hospitals.
as you can see, tobacco is taxxed to the extreme.
and it pays itself off due to smokers funding hospitals directly.
this is because
1) tobacco is hard to grow efficiently illegally
2) tobacco is hard to import illegally (but some illegal stuff does get in, cant stop it all)
so there are no dealers undercutting the legal market with cheaper tobacco, hence, no competition and massive taxxed cigs help save lives in hospitals while people are free to enjoy your cancer tubes.

marijuana on the other hand is INCREDIBLY easy to grow.
$500 can set you up with a state of the art hydroponic shed, capable of efficient returns and all the directions are on the internet in legal DETAILED documents showing how to grow hydroponic... strawberries for example.
such illegality would undercut government taxxing on a drug that is obviously negative. hence, no one would buy the legal stuff. hence society suffers and hospitals would have to deal with an influx of emphysema and psychosis and a variety of other problems associated with the drug.

in short, other then the ability for a new way to kill yourself, there is no overall beneficial value to cannabis.

4. again, a slippery slope. but legalising another drug would simply call for the legalisation of others. as a recreational drug, marijuana isnt a whole lot more safer then LSD. are you for LSD?

5. now, my strongest point of argument...

quack quack

IQ · **Posted:** Sun May 09, 2010 3:11 am

After about the 2nd point I never saw any benefits.

A drug is a drug and is addictive. You lose out on money and life. You may feel good after while but in the long term it is not good.

anarchy69 · **Posted:** Sun May 09, 2010 3:33 am

mrducky wrote:

voted yes but im going to go devils advocate

1. the drug is the most likely to cause psychosis out of the relatively "soft" drugs (moreso then LSD). in other words, im establishing it has a negative side effect, that occurs faster and is more apparent then liver cancer from drinking.

I'd like to see some statistics and what article you copy/pasted your facts from because from prior experience and studying of my own this isn't true at all. Alcohol damages the liver at a moderate time frame depending on how much you consume, weed on the other hand is on a much smaller scale it takes large doses and more frequently than the normal amounts to actually damage your liver. Now if you want to sit here and compare statistics I've got some proof and numbers

Quote:

2. the drug is known as a gateway drug, taking it often results in taking harder substances, this is a slippery slope, but it is well documented where people that use "hard" drugs, only did so after taking marijuana, correlation doesnt result in causation but... yeah. the numbers are there

It's not weed that draws them towards other drugs it's the immune system of our body that gets used to the THC high so you go onto something a bit tougher which is typically crystal meth in my state since crack is fairly expensive. By the time your body is immune to the high from meth then you're addicted.. Don't confuse gate-way drug with your bodies intuition to stay high.

Quote:

3. overall detrimental to society, also, pretty much no countries have the drug with a traditional value attached (unlike smokes and alcohol)
lets compare to say... cigarettes in australia. these things are taxxed ridiculously... (roughly $15 for 25 cigarettes) due to aggressive government campaigns against them spanning more then a decade.
15% of the cost goes to the manufacturer (suppliers)
15% goes to the retailer (people who sell the cigarettes)
70% goes to tax where i think it was 80% of that gets directly funneled into hospitals.
as you can see, tobacco is taxxed to the extreme.
and it pays itself off due to smokers funding hospitals directly.
this is because
1) tobacco is hard to grow efficiently illegally
2) tobacco is hard to import illegally (but some illegal stuff does get in, cant stop it all)
so there are no dealers undercutting the legal market with cheaper tobacco, hence, no competition and massive taxxed cigs help save lives in hospitals while people are free to enjoy your cancer tubes.

I've got no knowledge of tobacco or cigarettes but again, I want the article you copy/pasted this from.

Quote:

marijuana on the other hand is INCREDIBLY easy to grow.
$500 can set you up with a state of the art hydroponic shed, capable of efficient returns and all the directions are on the internet in legal DETAILED documents showing how to grow hydroponic... strawberries for example.
such illegality would undercut government taxxing on a drug that is obviously negative. hence, no one would buy the legal stuff. hence society suffers and hospitals would have to deal with an influx of emphysema and psychosis and a variety of other problems associated with the drug.

For a non-smoker I understand you're clueless on how much it costs to make home grown it's about $150 and you can call the plant negative but we can bicker all day long about how the government calls it wrong so you abide by that but statistically it's never caused deaths directly like alcohol or any other drug has.

Quote:

in short, other then the ability for a new way to kill yourself, there is no overall beneficial value to cannabis.

Google how many deaths marijuana has caused in roughly 2,000 years and let me know if it passes 0.

Quote:

4. again, a slippery slope. but legalising another drug would simply call for the legalisation of others. as a recreational drug, marijuana isnt a whole lot more safer then LSD. are you for LSD?

To compare weed to a hallucinogen isn't right at all, people react much much differently to hallucinogens they either feel like they're dying, crazy, losing control, this leads to some times fatal accidents while weed makes you more paranoid and more "in-the-moment" as to speak you're more focused on what's going on around you which makes you paranoid if someone looks at you you might panic but it never makes you want to kill yourself or lose control. It's completely safer, hallucinogens are for fun not for recreational use as marijuana is it's even cheap and non-addictive.

I've yet to read you prove a point.. You ran off-topic a bit in the cigarette and tobacco point but I'll let that slide since you're trying to copy/paste information that isn't entirely true.

mrducky · **Posted:** Mon May 10, 2010 9:08 am

anarchy69 wrote:

mrducky wrote:

voted yes but im going to go devils advocate

1. the drug is the most likely to cause psychosis out of the relatively "soft" drugs (moreso then LSD). in other words, im establishing it has a negative side effect, that occurs faster and is more apparent then liver cancer from drinking.

I'd like to see some statistics and what article you copy/pasted your facts from because from prior experience and studying of my own this isn't true at all. Alcohol damages the liver at a moderate time frame depending on how much you consume, weed on the other hand is on a much smaller scale it takes large doses and more frequently than the normal amounts to actually damage your liver. Now if you want to sit here and compare statistics I've got some proof and numbers

im talking emphysema from the smoke. breathing in any large amount of particles at a constant rate leads to emphysema and various lung cancers. liver cancer is gradual, emphysema can set in rapidly in smokers. (tobacco, weed or otherwise)

Quote:

2. the drug is known as a gateway drug, taking it often results in taking harder substances, this is a slippery slope, but it is well documented where people that use "hard" drugs, only did so after taking marijuana, correlation doesnt result in causation but... yeah. the numbers are there

It's not weed that draws them towards other drugs it's the immune system of our body that gets used to the THC high so you go onto something a bit tougher which is typically crystal meth in my state since crack is fairly expensive. By the time your body is immune to the high from meth then you're addicted.. Don't confuse gate-way drug with your bodies intuition to stay high.

fine, addiction. addiction to a high that isnt obtained from legal substances like cigs/alcohol. argument is still that this drug is inherently negative.

Quote:

3. overall detrimental to society, also, pretty much no countries have the drug with a traditional value attached (unlike smokes and alcohol)
lets compare to say... cigarettes in australia. these things are taxxed ridiculously... (roughly $15 for 25 cigarettes) due to aggressive government campaigns against them spanning more then a decade.
15% of the cost goes to the manufacturer (suppliers)
15% goes to the retailer (people who sell the cigarettes)
70% goes to tax where i think it was 80% of that gets directly funneled into hospitals.
as you can see, tobacco is taxxed to the extreme.
and it pays itself off due to smokers funding hospitals directly.
this is because
1) tobacco is hard to grow efficiently illegally
2) tobacco is hard to import illegally (but some illegal stuff does get in, cant stop it all)
so there are no dealers undercutting the legal market with cheaper tobacco, hence, no competition and massive taxxed cigs help save lives in hospitals while people are free to enjoy your cancer tubes.

I've got no knowledge of tobacco or cigarettes but again, I want the article you copy/pasted this from.
i dont copy paste and when i do, i supply a link. (note the lack of grammar)

Quote:

marijuana on the other hand is INCREDIBLY easy to grow.
$500 can set you up with a state of the art hydroponic shed, capable of efficient returns and all the directions are on the internet in legal DETAILED documents showing how to grow hydroponic... strawberries for example.
such illegality would undercut government taxxing on a drug that is obviously negative. hence, no one would buy the legal stuff. hence society suffers and hospitals would have to deal with an influx of emphysema and psychosis and a variety of other problems associated with the drug.

For a non-smoker I understand you're clueless on how much it costs to make home grown it's about $150 and you can call the plant negative but we can bicker all day long about how the government calls it wrong so you abide by that but statistically it's never caused deaths directly like alcohol or any other drug has.
marijuana has adverse effects right?
please just agree to this one before i lecture you on what a "drug" is. if the recreational drug takes from society, it should also give something back, other then stoned workers working inefficiently, i dont see any positive other then another drug on the streets. btw, i never mentioned how big the shed was. you tried to sidetrack it away from the point.

Quote:

in short, other then the ability for a new way to kill yourself, there is no overall beneficial value to cannabis.

Google how many deaths marijuana has caused in roughly 2,000 years and let me know if it passes 0.

well you cant OD on it. but accidents can occur, and just like when people drink and drive, people can be under the influence of weed. especially around heavy machinery. accidents wont be directly attributed to weed, it would be attributed to the fork lift inserting itself inside your intestine.

Quote:

4. again, a slippery slope. but legalising another drug would simply call for the legalisation of others. as a recreational drug, marijuana isnt a whole lot more safer then LSD. are you for LSD?

To compare weed to a hallucinogen isn't right at all, people react much much differently to hallucinogens they either feel like they're dying, crazy, losing control, this leads to some times fatal accidents while weed makes you more paranoid and more "in-the-moment" as to speak you're more focused on what's going on around you which makes you paranoid if someone looks at you you might panic but it never makes you want to kill yourself or lose control. It's completely safer, hallucinogens are for fun not for recreational use as marijuana is it's even cheap and non-addictive.
you stated earlier you are addicted to the high. get your story straight before you lie openly. you know whats cheaper then sitting alone and smoking? getting friends and hanging out, maybe even the amazingly cheap recreational drug THAT IS LEGAL which we call alcohol. just a thought... its a psychoactive drug, if it affects the mind and thus behaviour, mood and ultimately, the reality of the user, then obviously i can class it alongside LSD despite the differences. my point remains. you legalise this drug, who is to say you cannot legalise more, is it bias because you dont use the others?
or is there a legitimate reason to legalise one illegal drug and not another.

I've yet to read you prove a point.. You ran off-topic a bit in the cigarette and tobacco point but I'll let that slide since you're trying to copy/paste information that isn't entirely true.

FFS. i dont copy paste and if i do, its usually from a news article to get a thread started for discussion. btw, im always off topic.

ducky out.
(till wednesday or thursday~~)

simmen · **Posted:** Mon May 10, 2010 9:31 am

I'll do this in pink (oh and i love ur statement of being the devils advocate when being against drugs xD

IQ wrote:

After about the 2nd point I never saw any benefits.

A drug is a drug and is addictive. You lose out on money and life. You may feel good after while but in the long term it is not good.

sorry but i hate people saying "a drug is a drug", it's quite ignorant, cuz most people know like nothing about weed at all.
yes it's illegal, but lets take a example that might go a bit to far, but it got a point.
in germany under second world war it were illegal to be a jew, even if the law say so don't mean it should be

mrducky wrote:

voted yes but im going to go devils advocate

1. the drug is the most likely to cause psychosis out of the relatively "soft" drugs (moreso then LSD). in other words, im establishing it has a negative side effect, that occurs faster and is more apparent then liver cancer from drinking.

i will have problem finding sources from the cuz it were on a norwegian tv show, but he sai df you have a group of people who smoke weed and a group who don't there is about twice as much chance of those smoking weed getting a psychosis then those who didn't smoke. BUT this is because those smoking weed often start with it because of depression in the firstplace, or other psycolotical damage which is why they need the releaf. which mean that those 2 groups can't really be compared because they don't start of equal in this case.

2. the drug is known as a gateway drug, taking it often results in taking harder substances, this is a slippery slope, but it is well documented where people that use "hard" drugs, only did so after taking marijuana, correlation doesnt result in causation but... yeah. the numbers are there
Even ungdom mot narkotika [youths against drugs] have said that it's not a gateway to stronger drugs.
did you know about 100% of all who have done stronger drugs have eaten chocolate?!
the numbers are there, yuo will find what you are lookign for.
i would more blame that people get into a criminal inviroment because the weed is illegal, i and friends haev been offered heroin because they didn't have weed, they were jsut gone have some fun, so ofcoarse they said no, but think of those who are addicted but don't dare to try to get clean because it's illegal. they might say yes, so in some sence yes it lead on, but much because of the lews that make it illegal

3. overall detrimental to society, also, pretty much no countries have the drug with a traditional value attached (unlike smokes and alcohol)
lets compare to say... cigarettes in australia. these things are taxxed ridiculously... (roughly $15 for 25 cigarettes) due to aggressive government campaigns against them spanning more then a decade.
15% of the cost goes to the manufacturer (suppliers)
15% goes to the retailer (people who sell the cigarettes)
70% goes to tax where i think it was 80% of that gets directly funneled into hospitals.
as you can see, tobacco is taxxed to the extreme.
and it pays itself off due to smokers funding hospitals directly.
this is because
1) tobacco is hard to grow efficiently illegally
2) tobacco is hard to import illegally (but some illegal stuff does get in, cant stop it all)
so there are no dealers undercutting the legal market with cheaper tobacco, hence, no competition and massive taxxed cigs help save lives in hospitals while people are free to enjoy your cancer tubes.

marijuana on the other hand is INCREDIBLY easy to grow.
$500 can set you up with a state of the art hydroponic shed, capable of efficient returns and all the directions are on the internet in legal DETAILED documents showing how to grow hydroponic... strawberries for example.
such illegality would undercut government taxxing on a drug that is obviously negative. hence, no one would buy the legal stuff. hence society suffers and hospitals would have to deal with an influx of emphysema and psychosis and a variety of other problems associated with the drug.

in short, other then the ability for a new way to kill yourself, there is no overall beneficial value to cannabis.
the thing is, people can still get the weed, and finanse crime while they buy it. so the goverment still have to pay for it, so any income would be better then all the money they use now to get police to look after people smoking weed. also if it were legal and it were sold in real stores i would hope they had standars, as for the stuff you get on the street you have no idea if someone have done anything with it to make it weigh more to get more money, so actualy less medical bills would need to be payd. and people could actualy be thaught how to do it more safely and in a better way if it were legal since the goverment won't teach people about things that are illegal.

4. again, a slippery slope. but legalising another drug would simply call for the legalisation of others. as a recreational drug, marijuana isnt a whole lot more safer then LSD. are you for LSD?
Weed don't kill, easy as that

5. now, my strongest point of argument...
are you sure your not high?

quack quack

Legalizing weed.