Marijuana

[Armin]

http://www.mpp.org/site/c.glKZLeMQIsG/b.2284665/k.DC9E/2006_Teen_Marijuana_Use_Study.htm

I'm not sure how accurate those results are, but it's pretty interesting.

[CrAz3D]

Those are the most idiotic "statistics" I've seen.

4000%?
How do you know how many people were using it then?  What about taking into account the population increase?

Use rate in Britain dropped?
How do they know kids use it if they don't arrest them?

Also, you can't straight compare other countries to the US.  Maybe cocaine is easier to get here?  Maybe there is more of a "reason" to use it here (like lower living standards, etc)

[Armin]

Those are the most idiotic "statistics" I've seen.

4000%?
How do you know how many people were using it then?  What about taking into account the population increase?

Use rate in Britain dropped?
How do they know kids use it if they don't arrest them?

Also, you can't straight compare other countries to the US.  Maybe cocaine is easier to get here?  Maybe there is more of a "reason" to use it here (like lower living standards, etc)

Confidential surveys. They give them out every couple years at my school. But, like I said, I'm not sure exactly how accurate it is. And since you've only given assumptions, you're not sure either.

[GameSnake]

WOW Crazed that post was totally batshit. All your "questions" that lead to your conclusion are easily answerd and you should think before posting something so silly..

How do they know kids use it if they don't arrest them?

.............................. Wow.
It's called surveys?!

[iago]

Those are the most idiotic "statistics" I've seen.

4000%?
How do you know how many people were using it then?  What about taking into account the population increase?

Use rate in Britain dropped?
How do they know kids use it if they don't arrest them?

Also, you can't straight compare other countries to the US.  Maybe cocaine is easier to get here?  Maybe there is more of a "reason" to use it here (like lower living standards, etc)

Have you read the "full report", or are you just drawing conclusions based on the highpoints?

[trust]

The statistics make perfect sense in my opinion. Remember Marijuana was made illegal in the early 1900's and since then methods of production, distribution, etc. have obviouly been modernized and expedited. Plus, it's not more than ever accepted by society (still not very much, but through pop culture it isn't AS bad.) It's easier to get than ever so a gain of 4000% in the last 100 or so years isn't too far fetched.

Plus, when something is legalized it loses that "cool" effect.

[Towelie]

The statistics make perfect sense in my opinion. Remember Marijuana was made illegal in the early 1900's and since then methods of production, distribution, etc. have obviouly been modernized and expedited. Plus, it's not more than ever accepted by society (still not very much, but through pop culture it isn't AS bad.) It's easier to get than ever so a gain of 4000% in the last 100 or so years isn't too far fetched.

Plus, when something is legalized it loses that "cool" effect.

I agree.
Legalizing marijuana is the right way to go and this study reinforced what I already believed

[CrAz3D]

full report, silly me...I overlooked that

[ZeroX]

Iam still saying that the only reason Marijunana is outlawed for the soul propuse that the government cant tax it because people can grow it in their backyards. Before you go on the rant of people growing Tobacco too, The 4,000 chemicals that go into cigrattes are not as easy to obtain.

[iago]

Before you go on the rant of people growing Tobacco too, The 4,000 chemicals that go into cigrattes are not as easy to obtain.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the chemicals basically just natural stuff?  I might be wrong, but I don't think that companies add a whole lot to tobacco.

[ZeroX]

Before you go on the rant of people growing Tobacco too, The 4,000 chemicals that go into cigrattes are not as easy to obtain.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the chemicals basically just natural stuff?  I might be wrong, but I don't think that companies add a whole lot to tobacco.

I dont think that any of these are natural.

http://www.quit-smoking-stop.com/harmful-chemicals-in-cigarettes.html

[trust]

Iam still saying that the only reason Marijunana is outlawed for the soul propuse that the government cant tax it because people can grow it in their backyards. Before you go on the rant of people growing Tobacco too, The 4,000 chemicals that go into cigrattes are not as easy to obtain.

People can go tobacco in their backyards too, and people can brew moonshine. Alcohol and tobacco are legal.

Obviously an alternative would be to outlaw the public growing of Marijuana, and make the only legal way to own it  be by getting it through a regular company with government permission to produce it.

[Armin]

Iam still saying that the only reason Marijunana is outlawed for the soul propuse that the government cant tax it because people can grow it in their backyards.

Wait, why exactly can't the government tax Marijuana?

[iago]

Before you go on the rant of people growing Tobacco too, The 4,000 chemicals that go into cigrattes are not as easy to obtain.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the chemicals basically just natural stuff?  I might be wrong, but I don't think that companies add a whole lot to tobacco.

I dont think that any of these are natural.

http://www.quit-smoking-stop.com/harmful-chemicals-in-cigarettes.html

Then where do they come from?  Do you think somebody sits there adding poison to cigarettes for fun? 

Here's some information on the manufacture of cigarettes:

Modern cigarettes produced after the 1950s, due to technological innovations, are composed mainly of several tobacco leaf-types and their processing by-products. Each cigarette's tobacco blend is made mainly from the leaves of flue-cured brightleaf, burley tobacco, and oriental tobacco. These leaves are selected, processed, and aged prior to blending and filling. The processing of brightleaf and burley tobaccos for tobacco leaf "strips" produces several by-products such as leaf stems, tobacco dust, and tobacco leaf pieces ("small laminate"). To improve the economics of producing cigarettes, these by-products are processed on the side into forms where they can then be added back into the cigarette blend without an apparent or marked change in the cigarette's quality.

[ZeroX]

Iam still saying that the only reason Marijunana is outlawed for the soul propuse that the government cant tax it because people can grow it in their backyards.

Wait, why exactly can't the government tax Marijuana?

How are they going to tax it when you are growing it out of your backyard?

[Armin]

Iam still saying that the only reason Marijunana is outlawed for the soul propuse that the government cant tax it because people can grow it in their backyards.

Wait, why exactly can't the government tax Marijuana?

How are they going to tax it when you are growing it out of your backyard?

If this was an issue, people wouldn't be paying street price for the illegal drug, and would be growing it in the back yard as well. Remember alcohol prohibition? The street price for alcohol was MUCH more expensive than what it had been when it was legal.

[iago]

Iam still saying that the only reason Marijunana is outlawed for the soul propuse that the government cant tax it because people can grow it in their backyards.

Wait, why exactly can't the government tax Marijuana?

How are they going to tax it when you are growing it out of your backyard?

By selling it for cheaper, and throwing illegal sellers/buyers in jail -- basically, make it more worthwhile to buy it legally.

[ZeroX]

Iam still saying that the only reason Marijunana is outlawed for the soul propuse that the government cant tax it because people can grow it in their backyards.

Wait, why exactly can't the government tax Marijuana?

How are they going to tax it when you are growing it out of your backyard?

If this was an issue, people wouldn't be paying street price for the illegal drug, and would be growing it in the back yard as well. Remember alcohol prohibition? The street price for alcohol was MUCH more expensive than what it had been when it was legal.

Its very hard to grow bud. I have tried and Have failed several times. Its much easier and time efficient to just buy it off the streets.

@iago People have been buying and selling Weed for over 40 years and iam sure that not even 90% of drug dealers have even step foot in jail. Plus nor should they, There alot more important things to be protecting and serving then taking someone into an already croward jail cell for selling something illegal.

[Sidoh]

Wait, did you just support his point after he used it to imply your incorrectness? ...

[GameSnake]

Before you go on the rant of people growing Tobacco too, The 4,000 chemicals that go into cigrattes are not as easy to obtain.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the chemicals basically just natural stuff?  I might be wrong, but I don't think that companies add a whole lot to tobacco.

I dont think that any of these are natural.

http://www.quit-smoking-stop.com/harmful-chemicals-in-cigarettes.html

Then where do they come from?  Do you think somebody sits there adding poison to cigarettes for fun? 

Here's some information on the manufacture of cigarettes:

Modern cigarettes produced after the 1950s, due to technological innovations, are composed mainly of several tobacco leaf-types and their processing by-products. Each cigarette's tobacco blend is made mainly from the leaves of flue-cured brightleaf, burley tobacco, and oriental tobacco. These leaves are selected, processed, and aged prior to blending and filling. The processing of brightleaf and burley tobaccos for tobacco leaf "strips" produces several by-products such as leaf stems, tobacco dust, and tobacco leaf pieces ("small laminate"). To improve the economics of producing cigarettes, these by-products are processed on the side into forms where they can then be added back into the cigarette blend without an apparent or marked change in the cigarette's quality.

Regardless, Tabacco kills 400,00 a year in USA.

[Armin]

@iago People have been buying and selling Weed for over 40 years and iam sure that not even 90% of drug dealers have even step foot in jail. Plus nor should they, There alot more important things to be protecting and serving then taking someone into an already croward jail cell for selling something illegal.

Drug dealers either directly or indirectly supply money to drug lords and gangs.

[Armin]

Iam still saying that the only reason Marijunana is outlawed for the soul propuse that the government cant tax it because people can grow it in their backyards.

Wait, why exactly can't the government tax Marijuana?

How are they going to tax it when you are growing it out of your backyard?

If this was an issue, people wouldn't be paying street price for the illegal drug, and would be growing it in the back yard as well. Remember alcohol prohibition? The street price for alcohol was MUCH more expensive than what it had been when it was legal.

Its very hard to grow bud. I have tried and Have failed several times. Its much easier and time efficient to just buy it off the streets.

[iago]

Regardless, Tabacco kills 400,00 a year in USA.

.... so?

[d&q]

Before you go on the rant of people growing Tobacco too, The 4,000 chemicals that go into cigrattes are not as easy to obtain.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the chemicals basically just natural stuff?  I might be wrong, but I don't think that companies add a whole lot to tobacco.

I dont think that any of these are natural.

http://www.quit-smoking-stop.com/harmful-chemicals-in-cigarettes.html

What a biased piece of crap. They take /naturally occurring/ chemicals and make them sound completely unnatural.

[GameSnake]

Regardless, Tabacco kills 400,00 a year in USA.

.... so?

I hate tabacco thats all. Horrible drug.

[SNiFFeR]

Regardless, Tabacco kills 400,00 a year in USA.

.... so?

I hate tabacco thats all. Horrible drug.

I think nicotine is the drug you are referring to, not tobacco. That is just my opinion.

[Towelie]

Regardless, Tabacco kills 400,00 a year in USA.

.... so?

I hate tabacco thats all. Horrible drug.

I think nicotine is the drug you are referring to, not tobacco. That is just my opinion.

The only way I know of to get nicotine in a relatively cheap way is tobacco

[iago]

Regardless, Tabacco kills 400,00 a year in USA.

.... so?

I hate tabacco thats all. Horrible drug.

And what's that have to do with the difficulty of manufacturing it (which is what we were talking about)?

[leet_muffin]

The only way I know of to get nicotine in a relatively cheap way is tobacco

Nicotine patches, nicotine gum, etc.

[Towelie]

The only way I know of to get nicotine in a relatively cheap way is tobacco

Nicotine patches, nicotine gum, etc.

... which is why I added "in a relatively cheap way"

[leet_muffin]

The only way I know of to get nicotine in a relatively cheap way is tobacco

Nicotine patches, nicotine gum, etc.

... which is why I added "in a relatively cheap way"

Patches aren't much more expensive than cigs. At least this is true at Cosco, anyway.

[Rule]

I like how Zero said marijuana is illegal because it can't be taxed because it's easy to grow.  Then he says it's hard to grow, and that he's tried and failed -- that's why he buys.  Further, he thinks that cigarettes couldn't be easily manufactured because of the toxic chemicals in them -- as though they purposely put poison in cigarettes before they distribute them.  "OMG WHERE AM I GOING TO FIND THE CYANIDE TO PUT IN MY HOME-GROWN TOBACCO CROP BEFORE I SELL IT?"


Should we take this guys opinion seriously?  That's what I thought too.

[iago]

Patches aren't much more expensive than cigs. At least this is true at Cosco, anyway.

Here, cigarettes are roughly $11/pack, and patches are about $50/box.  But I believe the box of patches lasts longer than a pack of cigarettes, so I don't know.

[leet_muffin]

http://www.drugstore.com/products/prod.asp?pid=73508&catid=9348&trx=PLST-0-SEARCH&trxp1=9348&trxp2=73508&trxp3=1&trxp4=0&btrx=BUY-PLST-0-SEARCH

28$ for 14 patches, 14 days worth.

http://www.cigarettesamerica.com/tcpcart.cgi?action=viewcategory&maincategory=77&category=31&orderid=20085566

~32$ for 1 carton (200 cigs), 7 days worth. (average smoker smokes 30 cigs per day http://nutri.com/smoking/.)

[iago]

Wow, $32 for a carton, it must be nice to smoke in the states.. the price is around $75 here. 

[Towelie]

30 cigs a day? wow

[ZeroX]

I like how Zero said marijuana is illegal because it can't be taxed because it's easy to grow.  Then he says it's hard to grow, and that he's tried and failed -- that's why he buys.  Further, he thinks that cigarettes couldn't be easily manufactured because of the toxic chemicals in them -- as though they purposely put poison in cigarettes before they distribute them.  "OMG WHERE AM I GOING TO FIND THE CYANIDE TO PUT IN MY HOME-GROWN TOBACCO CROP BEFORE I SELL IT?"


Should we take this guys opinion seriously?  That's what I thought too.

I was going somewhere with my point but then it lost its meaning. No need to be an asshole. Futhore more I said I had trouble growing it that dosent mean that others might. Go back and re read please before you make bias comments like that.

[Ender]

Should we take this guys opinion seriously?  That's what I thought too.

No need for that comment in pointing out the flaws in Zerox's argument. What's the point in communicating that? To end the argument because you think the premises are invalid? You can say that in a less pejorative manner.

Here's my opinion about legalizing marijuana. One could say that the objectively correct endeavor is to stop the use of harmful drugs. Many people say marijuana isn't harmful, but it is proven to be harmful in the long term, has emotional effects in the short term, and is a gateway to unhealthy lifestyles and worse drugs. By legalizing marijuana, we may decrease the popularity of the drug, but it will put our progress of reducing the drug-taking population in a stasis, because there is no way to enforce drug prohibition. We'll get the number of people who take drugs down to a certain number, but that number will remain static. One may argue that we educate people instead of enforce by law, but we do that already and it doesn't work. One may also say that if marijuana were legal, discussions in school would be more open and productive. I think that the effects of marketing will outweigh this benefit.

Furthermore, the argument that legalizing marijuana will decrease its popularity is only speculative. You have to take marketing into play. Also, the government will most likely tax marijuana, else the marijuana industry would become the next Microsoft. Or maybe Microsoft will become a marijuana industry. Anyways, we're adding another Sin Tax to our profile, and America already has enough attributes to be ashamed about.

[Armin]

...marijuana... is a gateway to unhealthy lifestyles and worse drugs.

There is a possibility that this is only true because Marijuana is falsely classified with other drugs such as Cocaine. People think, "Oh, Marijuana is illegal and it's not that bad! That must mean the other drugs categorized the same way must not be bad either!"

By legalizing marijuana, we may decrease the popularity of the drug, but it will put our progress of reducing the drug-taking population in a stasis, because there is no way to enforce drug prohibition. We'll get the number of people who take drugs down to a certain number, but that number will remain static.

I believe that is better than fighting a war that is a lost cause, which ironically only causes more people to use marijuana.

One may argue that we educate people instead of enforce by law, but we do that already and it doesn't work.

We really aren't being educated on it; we are being lied to. The government classifies marijuana to be as harmful as other drugs, such as cocaine. The human mind often recognizes these lies.

Anyways, we're adding another Sin Tax to our profile, and America already has enough attributes to be ashamed about.

I believe the legalization of marijuana is progress in society. Britain is doing it, and it's working.

[Rule]

The government classifies marijuana to be as harmful as other drugs, such as cocaine. The human mind often recognizes these lies.

I somehow doubt you actually found a credible source for that information.  Otherwise though, you do make some reasonable points.

I have put a lot of thought into this never-ending debate, and I'm still undecided.  My gut instinct is that marijuana should be illegal, and that the government should strictly enforce its prohibition.  From what I've observed, marijuana is a very dangerous drug -- more so than alcohol or tobacco, (though cumulatively tobacco is more likely to lead to fatality).  I think rather than going back and forth in an argument full of platitudes and passion between the pro-legalisation advocates (who, I wish to emphasize, are almost solely marijuana users) and the rest of us, it would be enlightening to really investigate what effect the recent legalisation of marijuana in a first-world country has had.  Does anyone have any meaningful data or knowledge about this?

Also, my gut instinct is that if it is right to legalize marijuana, it is also right to legalize any drug.  Which again sways me towards the anti-legalisation position.

[Newby]

Also, my gut instinct is that if it is right to legalize marijuana, it is also right to legalize any drug.  Which again sways me towards the anti-legalisation position.

It'd be opening up a can of worms. I completely agree.

"What's the problem with cocaine? it's natural! it came from a plant! it's harmless if used right!"

[Armin]

The government classifies marijuana to be as harmful as other drugs, such as cocaine. The human mind often recognizes these lies.

I somehow doubt you actually found a credible source for that information.  Otherwise though, you do make some reasonable points.

My bad. It's actually listed as a Schedule I narcotic, along side heroine. The government is actually saying it's worse than cocaine. http://www.dea.gov/pubs/scheduling.html

I think rather than going back and forth in an argument full of platitudes and passion between the pro-legalisation advocates (who, I wish to emphasize, are almost solely marijuana users) and the rest of us, it would be enlightening to really investigate what effect the recent legalisation of marijuana in a first-world country has had.  Does anyone have any meaningful data or knowledge about this?

I haven't used marijuana in about 6 months, and before that, another 6 months.

Check out google for Britain. They've dropped marijuana to a Class B drug, which from what I understand is a lot less severe than what it was before, and that it might even be legal to possess small amounts.

[disco]

http://www.ehponline.org/docs/2000/108-10/correspondence.html#thc

Don't feel like reading all that?  Here's the jist:

Until further studies are accomplished, these reductions in tumor incidences in six organs should be considered caused by or associated with administration of THC.

[Ender]

The government classifies marijuana to be as harmful as other drugs, such as cocaine. The human mind often recognizes these lies.

I somehow doubt you actually found a credible source for that information.  Otherwise though, you do make some reasonable points.

My bad. It's actually listed as a Schedule I narcotic, along side heroine. The government is actually saying it's worse than cocaine. http://www.dea.gov/pubs/scheduling.html

I think rather than going back and forth in an argument full of platitudes and passion between the pro-legalisation advocates (who, I wish to emphasize, are almost solely marijuana users) and the rest of us, it would be enlightening to really investigate what effect the recent legalisation of marijuana in a first-world country has had.  Does anyone have any meaningful data or knowledge about this?

I haven't used marijuana in about 6 months, and before that, another 6 months.

Check out google for Britain. They've dropped marijuana to a Class B drug, which from what I understand is a lot less severe than what it was before, and that it might even be legal to possess small amounts.

Why do you squander your money on drugs for short-lived, fleeting pleasure that is unquestionably detrimental to your health?

[Armin]

The government classifies marijuana to be as harmful as other drugs, such as cocaine. The human mind often recognizes these lies.

I somehow doubt you actually found a credible source for that information.  Otherwise though, you do make some reasonable points.

My bad. It's actually listed as a Schedule I narcotic, along side heroine. The government is actually saying it's worse than cocaine. http://www.dea.gov/pubs/scheduling.html

I think rather than going back and forth in an argument full of platitudes and passion between the pro-legalisation advocates (who, I wish to emphasize, are almost solely marijuana users) and the rest of us, it would be enlightening to really investigate what effect the recent legalisation of marijuana in a first-world country has had.  Does anyone have any meaningful data or knowledge about this?

I haven't used marijuana in about 6 months, and before that, another 6 months.

Check out google for Britain. They've dropped marijuana to a Class B drug, which from what I understand is a lot less severe than what it was before, and that it might even be legal to possess small amounts.

Why do you squander your money on drugs for short-lived, fleeting pleasure that is unquestionably detrimental to your health?

I don't spend my money on it, and using it twice in 1 year isn't detrimental to your health. Just for the sake of argument, it wouldn't even be detrimental to your health if you used it once every 2 weeks.

Why do people squander their money on carnivals for short-lived, fleeting pleasure?

[Super_X]

The government classifies marijuana to be as harmful as other drugs, such as cocaine. The human mind often recognizes these lies.

I somehow doubt you actually found a credible source for that information.  Otherwise though, you do make some reasonable points.

My bad. It's actually listed as a Schedule I narcotic, along side heroine. The government is actually saying it's worse than cocaine. http://www.dea.gov/pubs/scheduling.html

I think rather than going back and forth in an argument full of platitudes and passion between the pro-legalisation advocates (who, I wish to emphasize, are almost solely marijuana users) and the rest of us, it would be enlightening to really investigate what effect the recent legalisation of marijuana in a first-world country has had.  Does anyone have any meaningful data or knowledge about this?

I haven't used marijuana in about 6 months, and before that, another 6 months.

Check out google for Britain. They've dropped marijuana to a Class B drug, which from what I understand is a lot less severe than what it was before, and that it might even be legal to possess small amounts.

Why do you squander your money on drugs for short-lived, fleeting pleasure that is unquestionably detrimental to your health?

Why squander your money on anything? Almost any activity could be called "detrimental to your health."

[Ender]

When you buy a new computer, you don't say "wow, I could have given that money to charity". When you spend your money on drugs, you do realize that you're wasting your money and throwing money into corrupt circulations where it should not be. Some people may say that it's their right to buy drugs with their money (setting the legalities aside). I say: bullshit. You should have given that money to charity.

[Armin]

When you buy a new computer, you don't say "wow, I could have given that money to charity". When you spend your money on drugs, you do realize that you're wasting your money and throwing money into corrupt circulations where it should not be. Some people may say that it's their right to buy drugs with their money (setting the legalities aside). I say: bullshit. You should have given that money to charity.

Did you miss what I said? I don't spend money on it.

[Eric]

When you spend your money on drugs, you do realize that you're wasting your money and throwing money into corrupt circulations where it should not be.

I realize the same when I spend money on gas for my car.

[Ender]

When you buy a new computer, you don't say "wow, I could have given that money to charity". When you spend your money on drugs, you do realize that you're wasting your money and throwing money into corrupt circulations where it should not be. Some people may say that it's their right to buy drugs with their money (setting the legalities aside). I say: bullshit. You should have given that money to charity.

Did you miss what I said? I don't spend money on it.

My last post (relative to this) never said you did. I said that it was a bad idea to squander one's money on drugs. You tried to debase that assertion. I defended it.

In my second to last post (relative to this) I did say you squander your money. Okay, I should have used the past tense.

[Armin]

When you buy a new computer, you don't say "wow, I could have given that money to charity". When you spend your money on drugs, you do realize that you're wasting your money and throwing money into corrupt circulations where it should not be. Some people may say that it's their right to buy drugs with their money (setting the legalities aside). I say: bullshit. You should have given that money to charity.

Did you miss what I said? I don't spend money on it.

I never said you did. I said that it was a bad idea to squander one's money on drugs. You tried to debase that assertion. I defended it.

The government classifies marijuana to be as harmful as other drugs, such as cocaine. The human mind often recognizes these lies.

I somehow doubt you actually found a credible source for that information.  Otherwise though, you do make some reasonable points.

My bad. It's actually listed as a Schedule I narcotic, along side heroine. The government is actually saying it's worse than cocaine. http://www.dea.gov/pubs/scheduling.html

I think rather than going back and forth in an argument full of platitudes and passion between the pro-legalisation advocates (who, I wish to emphasize, are almost solely marijuana users) and the rest of us, it would be enlightening to really investigate what effect the recent legalisation of marijuana in a first-world country has had.  Does anyone have any meaningful data or knowledge about this?

I haven't used marijuana in about 6 months, and before that, another 6 months.

Check out google for Britain. They've dropped marijuana to a Class B drug, which from what I understand is a lot less severe than what it was before, and that it might even be legal to possess small amounts.

Why do you squander your money on drugs for short-lived, fleeting pleasure that is unquestionably detrimental to your health?

You told me specifically that it was a bad idea. If you changed who you were talking to, you should've been more clear about it.

[Super_X]

When you buy a new computer, you don't say "wow, I could have given that money to charity". When you spend your money on drugs, you do realize that you're wasting your money and throwing money into corrupt circulations where it should not be. Some people may say that it's their right to buy drugs with their money (setting the legalities aside). I say: bullshit. You should have given that money to charity.

Did you miss what I said? I don't spend money on it.

I never said you did. I said that it was a bad idea to squander one's money on drugs. You tried to debase that assertion. I defended it.

The government classifies marijuana to be as harmful as other drugs, such as cocaine. The human mind often recognizes these lies.

I somehow doubt you actually found a credible source for that information.  Otherwise though, you do make some reasonable points.

My bad. It's actually listed as a Schedule I narcotic, along side heroine. The government is actually saying it's worse than cocaine. http://www.dea.gov/pubs/scheduling.html

I think rather than going back and forth in an argument full of platitudes and passion between the pro-legalisation advocates (who, I wish to emphasize, are almost solely marijuana users) and the rest of us, it would be enlightening to really investigate what effect the recent legalisation of marijuana in a first-world country has had.  Does anyone have any meaningful data or knowledge about this?

I haven't used marijuana in about 6 months, and before that, another 6 months.

Check out google for Britain. They've dropped marijuana to a Class B drug, which from what I understand is a lot less severe than what it was before, and that it might even be legal to possess small amounts.

Why do you squander your money on drugs for short-lived, fleeting pleasure that is unquestionably detrimental to your health?

You told me specifically that it was a bad idea. If you changed who you were talking to, you should've been more clear about it.

I belive he meant "you" in the collective "you all" as in the drug users.

[Armin]

Then he shouldn't have quoted me specifically.

[Rule]

When you buy a new computer, you don't say "wow, I could have given that money to charity". When you spend your money on drugs, you do realize that you're wasting your money and throwing money into corrupt circulations where it should not be. Some people may say that it's their right to buy drugs with their money (setting the legalities aside). I say: bullshit. You should have given that money to charity.

So you don't believe that it's one's right to spend his money how he pleases within the confines of the law?

(Here I am interpreting "drugs" to include alcohol, tobacco, and any other such legal substance).

[Ender]

In more primitive times of our history there was a popular philosophy that if a nation could take another nation by force then the stronger nation has the right to occupy the weaker. I think this is analogous to the contemporary sentiment "if I can buy it I can get it". If you have the power to do something you're not necessarily justified in doing it.

NB: When I say "can" I mean that one can do something without any moral repercussions.

[Rule]

In more primitive times of our history there was a popular philosophy that if a nation could take another nation by force then the stronger nation has the right to occupy the weaker. I think this is analogous to the contemporary sentiment "if I can buy it I can get it". If you have the power to do something you're not necessarily justified in doing it.

NB: When I say "can" I mean that one can do something without any moral repercussions.

There is surely a difference between invading a country and choosing to use a legal drug on yourself.  And further, morality is an incredibly subjective and individual thing.  Whether or not one faces "moral repurcussions" solely depends on that individual.  No doubt there are cogent arguments that money is better spent on alcohol than charity.  Does that mean every time you wish to send money to charity you should instead be forced to spend it on alcohol? Of course not!

My question is, even though you believe it is a waste for someone to spend money on drugs, should he still be allowed to do it within the confines of the law? I think we can both agree that forcing this person to spend it on something like charity would be utterly ridiculous.

[Ender]

We don't force it on them, we just allow for lesser mortals, and try to improve people without imposing. The word impose, of course, carries a tentative definition. You could say I was imposing my values on others with my responses. I think of impose as impeding one's life choices.

[iago]

We actually talked about this issue a lot last year in my Ethics class (minus the part specifically about marijuana): how can you feel good having a big house and a nice car and a big screen tv, and not give to charity?  Wouldn't it be better to have average stuff and give the rest of your money to a good cause?  Does buying stuff you don't really need and not giving to charity make you a bad person? 

It's an interesting question