NY Times calls for National Marijuana Legalization

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

NY Times calls for National Marijuana Legalization

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> NY Times calls for National Marijuana Legalization

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

NY Times calls for National Marijuana Legalization - 7/27/2014 1:46:04 AM

Kirata

Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline

Repeal Prohibition, Again

The New York Times editorial board endorsed the repeal of federal law banning marijuana use on Saturday, a landmark moment in the decades-long fight for legalization... “There are no perfect answers to people’s legitimate concerns about marijuana use. But neither are there such answers about tobacco or alcohol, and we believe that on every level — health effects, the impact on society and law-and-order issues — the balance falls squarely on the side of national legalization,” the board wrote. ~Politico

The introduction to the planned six-part editorial series on marijuana is at the top link (excerpt below)

There is honest debate among scientists about the health effects of marijuana, but we believe that the evidence is overwhelming that addiction and dependence are relatively minor problems, especially compared with alcohol and tobacco. Moderate use of marijuana does not appear to pose a risk for otherwise healthy adults. Claims that marijuana is a gateway to more dangerous drugs are as fanciful as the “Reefer Madness” images of murder, rape and suicide.

I'm pleased that they appear to be pulling no punches, but there is still a dollop of slather in the above. For example, while there may be debate about the health benefits of cannabis, it isn't an "honest" debate and the government knows it.

Cannabinoids have been found to have antioxidant properties, unrelated to NMDA receptor antagonism. This new found property makes cannabinoids useful in the treatment and prophylaxis of wide variety of oxidation associated diseases, such as ischemic, age-related, inflammatory and autoimmune diseases. The cannabinoids are found to have particular application as neuroprotectants, for example in limiting neurological damage following ischemic insults, such as stroke and trauma, or in the treatment of neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease and HIV dementia. ~HHS Patent 6,630,507

It will be interesting to see what kind of case they make going forward.

K.

Post #: 1

RE: NY Times calls for National Marijuana Legalization - 7/27/2014 6:33:44 AM

hot4bondage

Posts: 403
Joined: 7/29/2009
Status: offline

Dollop of slather!

Still nice to finally see a relatively bold stance from the NYT, especially after Maureen Dowd's "overdose" hit piece. In case anyone missed it, she went to Colorado, ate too much pot, and spent eight hours curled up on her hotel room floor. ...Probably because she ignored the packaging and the advice of her tour guide.

(in reply to Kirata)

Post #: 2

RE: NY Times calls for National Marijuana Legalization - 7/27/2014 7:38:41 AM

smartsub10

Posts: 865
Joined: 4/23/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: hot4bondage

Dollop of slather!

Still nice to finally see a relatively bold stance from the NYT, especially after Maureen Dowd's "overdose" hit piece. In case anyone missed it, she went to Colorado, ate too much pot, and spent eight hours curled up on her hotel room floor. ...Probably because she ignored the packaging and the advice of her tour guide.

Same thing would have happened if she drank too much booze - which, by the way, is perfectly legal.

_____________________________

Beauty fades...stupid is forever
~ Judge Judith Scheindlin
____________________________________________

“Be that self which one truly is" ~Soren Kierkegaard

(in reply to hot4bondage)

Post #: 3

RE: NY Times calls for National Marijuana Legalization - 7/27/2014 3:19:10 PM

Musicmystery

Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline

And which, by the way, would also be a bad idea.

(in reply to smartsub10)

Post #: 4

RE: NY Times calls for National Marijuana Legalization - 7/27/2014 4:10:42 PM

MrRodgers

Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline

The 'debate' should have long since been over and it has been as honest as any need be.

This country put something like 40,000 doctors in jail for dispensing morphine.

It costs the state(s) somewhere between $30-$40,000 per annum for EACH inmate jailed for any offense including minor marijuana charges.

Health side effects even to the extent there are any at all, are far outweighed by the health care benefits.

The list goes on in this rather one-sided debate. It should be legalized tomorrow.

(in reply to Musicmystery)

Post #: 5

RE: NY Times calls for National Marijuana Legalization - 7/28/2014 2:51:57 AM

SadistDave

Posts: 801
Joined: 3/11/2005
Status: offline

There may be legitimate reasons pot should be legalized for medicinal purposes, although there are problems regulating the actual drug THC in the various strains to make it reliable as medication in plant form. And yes, there are a lot of reasons to legalize hemp for industrial use. I have yet to find anyone with a valid reason to legalize pot for recreational use though.

The National Institute on Drug Abuse seems to believe that this is absolutely not a one sided debate and cites a wide array of health risks associated with long term and heavy use. Even PBS, that leftist bastion of liberal wackoism, acknowledges that there are some rather serious side effects and health risks.

This notion that we should legalize it for recreational use because it costs tax payers money is patently ridiculous, though. The health risks are actually quite serious, and unfortunately the data from both sides of the political spectrum indicate that moderate to heavy users are stupider, less productive, less coordinated, at higher risk for lung and heart issues, and probably less likely to be able to pay for their treatment of the various issues they are exposing themselves to by getting stoned daily daily.

Marijuana is a contributing factor in 12% of all fatal car accidents compared to 40% for alcohol. Combined it's even worse...

quote:

“If a driver is under the influence of alcohol, their risk of a fatal crash is 13 times higher than the risk of the driver who is not under the influence of alcohol,” Li said. “But if the driver is under the influence of both alcohol and marijuana, their risk increased to 24 times that of a sober person.”

Getting stoned and wiping out a bus load of nuns is no different than getting drunk and wiping out a bus load of nuns. The effect is exactly the same, and wiping out a bus load of nuns because someone is drunk, stoned or both is not a victimless crime.

Having said all that....

I know there are people here who smoke dope responsibly. I have friends that partake responsibly. It would be really awesome if everyone who wanted to get stoned did it responsibly. It would be even more awesome if marijuana had the same effects on the human body as faerie dust and unicorn farts. We all know that's wishful thinking...

-SD-

_____________________________

To whom it may concern: Just because someone is in a position of authority they do not get to make up their own facts. In spite of what some people here (who shall remain nameless) want to claim, someone over the age of 18 is NOT a fucking minor!

(in reply to MrRodgers)

Post #: 6

RE: NY Times calls for National Marijuana Legalization - 7/28/2014 6:57:23 AM

cloudboy

Posts: 7306
Joined: 12/14/2005
Status: offline

The prohibition of Marijuana combines the worst elements of the police, regulatory, and nanny state. It's also a testament to the Right's love of war: (1) war on drugs; (2) war on terrorism; (3) Afghan and Iraq Wars; (4) the Cold War (5) militarizing the border; (6) military spending. All these were wildly popular on the right -- as if you can eliminate things you don't like or fear.

< Message edited by cloudboy -- 7/28/2014 7:00:01 AM >

(in reply to Kirata)

Post #: 7

RE: NY Times calls for National Marijuana Legalization - 7/28/2014 7:38:10 AM

hot4bondage

Posts: 403
Joined: 7/29/2009
Status: offline

Your argument assumes that adults don't own their own bodies. That's a paternalistic, collectivist assumption that has no place in a free society. Also, I've noticed that arguments for pot prohibition often include examples like yours. "Getting stoned AND wiping out a busload of nuns..." or some other heinous crime. It's already illegal to wipe out busloads of nuns, but your argument wouldn't be as persuasive if you just said "getting stoned," which is what we're actually debating.

(in reply to SadistDave)

Post #: 8

RE: NY Times calls for National Marijuana Legalization - 7/28/2014 8:32:23 AM

Musicmystery

Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline

His argument is also accurate.

Should it be legal? I don't know. But I do know the "pot is a harmless herb" hippie-crap is, well . . . hippie crap.

And that gives the "debate" the problem of one party's side being either naive, silly, or irresponsible. It makes the discussion harder.

(in reply to hot4bondage)

Post #: 9

RE: NY Times calls for National Marijuana Legalization - 7/28/2014 10:50:08 AM

MrRodgers

Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline

One could argue the good and bad effects of pot until they are exhausted. The issue is whether society is to continue to deal with the astronomical costs of the black market created by criminal law, i.e. law enforcement, imprisoning millions of people, lives ruined by law not by the drug. It has been proven BTW that drivers high on pot drive many, many times safer than those under the influence of alcohol.

When you add up the countless billion$...the argument for a restricted, taxed, regulated market...becomes obvious. The very fact that this country allows the sale and consumption of tobacco, with its completely obvious destructive effects and its real and powerful addiction make the case...prima facie.

The political power of the profit motive and money thrown at govt. is made obvious by alcohol and tobacco production and sale in the US and all western nations.

(in reply to Musicmystery)

Post #: 10

RE: NY Times calls for National Marijuana Legalization - 7/28/2014 11:01:53 AM

KYsissy

Posts: 781
Joined: 5/12/2005
Status: offline

Legalize. There really is no logical argument against it.

_____________________________

"If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went."
Will Rogers, 1897-1935

(in reply to MrRodgers)

Post #: 11

RE: NY Times calls for National Marijuana Legalization - 7/28/2014 11:31:25 AM

CreativeDominant

Posts: 11032
Joined: 3/11/2006
Status: offline

Yes, there is. Just as there are logical arguments for it...

(in reply to KYsissy)

Post #: 12

RE: NY Times calls for National Marijuana Legalization - 7/28/2014 11:35:50 AM

KYsissy

Posts: 781
Joined: 5/12/2005
Status: offline

As long as tobacco and alcohol are legal, i cannot think of a logical reason. Can you?

_____________________________

"If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went."
Will Rogers, 1897-1935

(in reply to CreativeDominant)

Post #: 13

RE: NY Times calls for National Marijuana Legalization - 7/28/2014 11:43:08 AM

Zonie63

Posts: 2826
Joined: 4/25/2011
From: The Old Pueblo
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

His argument is also accurate.

Should it be legal? I don't know. But I do know the "pot is a harmless herb" hippie-crap is, well . . . hippie crap.

And that gives the "debate" the problem of one party's side being either naive, silly, or irresponsible. It makes the discussion harder.

I agree that pot is not harmless, although it's still a fair question whether the harm is so great that it would warrant prohibition. I get that we don't want anyone out there driving while stoned or drunk or on legally-prescribed pain meds. That's an ongoing problem that we'll have to deal with no matter if marijuana is legalized or not.

The problem that I've always had with the debate is the "Sgt. Stadanko"/"this is your brain on drugs" approach I've seen for much of my life. Their arguments for prohibition have never been very strong, but what I could never understand is all the zeal behind it. Why is it such a huge deal to some people what other people smoke? Why should anyone care? Why would anyone seriously want to spend any amount of time, energy, or money opposing the legalization of marijuana? Some people make it sound like the whole world would come to an end if marijuana was legalized. That's what makes the discussion harder, because the prohibition side is so utterly riddled with "reefer madness" fanaticism that a reasonable debate is practically impossible.

(in reply to Musicmystery)

Post #: 14

RE: NY Times calls for National Marijuana Legalization - 7/28/2014 2:04:13 PM

CreativeDominant

Posts: 11032
Joined: 3/11/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: KYsissy

As long as tobacco and alcohol are legal, i cannot think of a logical reason. Can you?

Myself? No, not with anything other than my opinion. I can cite you the typical, researched ones...effect of the smoke, damage to the brain. The others are a bit more...iffy.

(in reply to KYsissy)

Post #: 15

RE: NY Times calls for National Marijuana Legalization - 7/28/2014 2:09:49 PM

DesideriScuri

Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
His argument is also accurate.
Should it be legal? I don't know. But I do know the "pot is a harmless herb" hippie-crap is, well . . . hippie crap.
And that gives the "debate" the problem of one party's side being either naive, silly, or irresponsible. It makes the discussion harder.

Regardless of whether it's harmless or harmful, shouldn't a person be allowed to choose for him/herself what to do?

_____________________________

What I support:

A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
Personal Responsibility
Help for the truly needy
Limited Government
Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to Musicmystery)

Post #: 16

RE: NY Times calls for National Marijuana Legalization - 7/28/2014 2:31:09 PM

KYsissy

Posts: 781
Joined: 5/12/2005
Status: offline

Yup. And health hazards apply to tobacco and alcohol. So why are those legal and the other is not? Logically, it does not make sense.

_____________________________

"If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went."
Will Rogers, 1897-1935

(in reply to CreativeDominant)

Post #: 17

RE: NY Times calls for National Marijuana Legalization - 7/28/2014 3:36:11 PM

KYsissy

Posts: 781
Joined: 5/12/2005
Status: offline

FR,
If you have not done so, google William F Buckley on this issue. 20 some odd years later, his reasoning is still difficult to refute.

_____________________________

"If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went."
Will Rogers, 1897-1935

(in reply to KYsissy)

Post #: 18

RE: NY Times calls for National Marijuana Legalization - 7/28/2014 3:47:12 PM

thompsonx

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

ORIGINAL: SadistDave

There may be legitimate reasons pot should be legalized for medicinal purposes, although there are problems regulating the actual drug THC in the various strains to make it reliable as medication in plant form.

What an absolute plate of turds. Where did you get such a phoquing stupid idea? Out of your ass???
Substantiate that usless drivel or pull it down.

And yes, there are a lot of reasons to legalize hemp for industrial use. I have yet to find anyone with a valid reason to legalize pot for recreational use though.

Well there is the thought that it is none of your phoquing business what an adult does with their own body. Do you want to make masturbation illegal?

The National Institute on Drug Abuse seems to believe that this is absolutely not a one sided debate and cites a wide array of health risks associated with long term and heavy use.

Long term heavy use???how bout you give us some data reflecting the majority of pot users instead of the single digit percentage that you seek to make us believe is the majority.

pbs that leftist bastion of liberal wackoism,

Perhaps you could substantiate this mindless piece of puerile nonsense?

acknowledges that there are some rather serious side effects and health risks.

Another of your plate of turds?
When those "serious side effects" begin to affect something other than a single digit percentage of the demographic in question why don't you get back to us...other wise you are just posting background radiation

This notion that we should legalize it for recreational use because it costs tax payers money is patently ridiculous, though.

Another so called right winger who is in favor of wasting taxpayers money enforcing the nanny state.

The health risks are actually quite serious,

If they were, you would be able to post them. They are not, so you cant.

and unfortunately the data from both sides of the political spectrum indicate that moderate to heavy users are stupider, less productive, less coordinated, at higher risk for lung and heart issues, and probably less likely to be able to pay for their treatment of the various issues they are exposing themselves to by getting stoned daily daily.

This would be nothing less than your ignorant unsubstantiated opinion.

Marijuana is a contributing factor in 12% of all fatal car accidents compared to 40% for alcohol. Combined it's even worse...

So your link says that it is about four times safer to drive when stoned than when drinking? Now tell us once again why you are agaist this?

quote:

“If a driver is under the influence of alcohol, their risk of a fatal crash is 13 times higher than the risk of the driver who is not under the influence of alcohol,” Li said. “But if the driver is under the influence of both alcohol and marijuana, their risk increased to 24 times that of a sober person.

I would sugest that you go back and do the math

Getting stoned and wiping out a bus load of nuns is no different than getting drunk and wiping out a bus load of nuns.

Just so long as the penguins get tagged I am happy

The effect is exactly the same, and wiping out a bus load of nuns because someone is drunk, stoned or both is not a victimless crime.

So far only you has considered vehicular manslaughter to be a victimless crime. Oh wait you want us to somehow equate the victimess crime of m/j with the crime with a victim as in manslaughter....how many people on this board do you think are that stupid?

I know there are people here who smoke dope responsibly. I have friends that partake responsibly. It would be really awesome if everyone who wanted to get stoned did it responsibly.

Isn't that the same arguement that the anti gun people use?

It would be even more awesome if marijuana had the same effects on the human body as faerie dust and unicorn farts.

Why the phoque would you or anyone else believe that idiotic shit. Do you want burbon that wont get you drunk? Why would anyone want pot that had the punch of a unicorn fart.

We all know that's wishful thinking...

You must have a turd in your pocket

(in reply to SadistDave)

Post #: 19

RE: NY Times calls for National Marijuana Legalization - 7/28/2014 6:58:04 PM

SadistDave

Posts: 801
Joined: 3/11/2005
Status: offline

Since all of the answers to your idiotic questions are provided in the links, perhaps you should find an actual thinking person to read the articles to you. Make sure they read it to you really slow so some of it sinks in. The only shit here is your pathetic excuse for a brain.

Why don't you try something other than your trademark intellectual cowardice and try to form a reasonable argument for your ridiculous opinions? I've provided links for my opinion that you are apparently incapable of comprehending. All you do here is piggyback your stupidity on other peoples posts, and lack both the intelligence to do any of your own research and the balls to back up your nonsense in these forums by posting any citations of your own. If you disagree with my links, try posting the evidence of your own that backs your moronic asshattery.

-SD-

_____________________________

To whom it may concern: Just because someone is in a position of authority they do not get to make up their own facts. In spite of what some people here (who shall remain nameless) want to claim, someone over the age of 18 is NOT a fucking minor!

(in reply to thompsonx)

Post #: 20

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> NY Times calls for National Marijuana Legalization

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.109