I am personally better at complex tasks when I ingest marijuana, it helps me think of new ways to tackle a problem.

Just don't drive.

As apposed to what? The study shows no correlational statistics.

Once again, no statistics, not a real study >.>

Why would you try to "learn" when high? I use it to really open up m mind to new ideas.

Which are the same affects as being tired.

Most of the studies are biased since they are supported by groups wishing to keep marijuana illegal. What most say are true, but still, they present no other side.

Some of them know what it really does, the others are scared.

I actually support this, but you wont ever catch me using it. ALCHOAL on the other hand, Yummy ;D

I don't even think it matters if they legalize it or not. Jobs will not hire people who are known to do marijuana, especially professional jobs. Some of it is basically social standards. My reason against it is how it changes people. Marijuana is a waste of money and a poor excuse for a temporary "joy". In high school, friends who did marijuana would just sit and lay around after smoking it. What good comes from that?

As far as i've researched on pot use effects, it has does not have any major health concerns if done in moderation. Infact, its said to stimulate your body helping reduce stress; (and on that, a friend of mine took the ACT and scored a 29 the first time, which is respectable, but after he started using pot, his score went up to a 34, which is nearly perfect.)

Also, marijuana has no addictive properties to it, unlike that of nicotine or caffine, which are both highly addicting.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EW6TU2vZe_Y&feature=channel The study they did shows that marijuana actually reduced cancer risk. It hasnt been shown to cause cancer.

As far as gateway drug is concerned, i personally believe that the statistics are very biased on this and not really looking at the drug itself, but the users choices. The fact that it is illegal steers many people such as myself away from doing it. Most of the time, the people who smoke pot constantly also do other things like cocaine or what have you; because they are already willing to do somthing despite the fact that it is illegal. (I hope i explained this right so everyone understands what i mean)

Sometimes i wonder why alchol and cigarettes are legal. They kill a heck of a lot more than pot; and infact, there have been absolutly 0 recorded deaths due to pot smoking alone. Where tobacco kills 435k per year and alchol kills over 85k!
http://drugwarfacts.org/cms/?q=node/30 <--- source of those statistics

However, if pot is as bad as some people say, then thats even MORE of a reason to legalize it, so that it can be safely regulated by the goverment. Theres a lot of people who argue this both ways, weather the other one is right, i think it can be agreed that marijuana is much safer being legal than illegal as long as its regulated

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qd2MsBqzraw&feature=related <-- this video is pretty interesting on this subject

Now putting smoking aside, the plant itself cannabis is one of the most useful plants in the entire world. For the fact that it is a weed, it grows almost EVERYWHERE. They can make cannabis into clothing and food. And scientists have been able to create a plastic with 6x the intregity of steel from cannabis, AND they're developing a new biofuel that burns completely clean however the refining process isnt quite there yet, however the potential is certinally there.

Making this plant legal would most certianly boost our econmy. Instead of mass money going to the black market, it can be taxed and a lot more money will be put into the goverment as a result. Also, there will be all that left over money from drug enforcement that can be applied elsewhere (which could include additional funding for enforcement of cocaine, meth and other dangerous drug laws)

On that note, enforcement has gotton out of hand when it comes to pot. infact it got some innocent person killed : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1JUMerq-W9c&feature=channel

Are you serious? Any inhalement of smoke is harmful to your lungs. Even smoking toliet paper.

Lung damage and cancer are 2 different things. It shows that depsite the "harm" to the lungs, that it has no increased risk of cancer as compared to a nonuser.

And anyways, what doesn't cause cancer nowa days -.-

just to show you, heres a small list of everyday things that are said to cause cancer
-artificial sweeteners
-caffine
-radation from cell phones and magnents
-deodorants linked to breast cancer
-ingesting large quanities of grilled meat
-eatting pure sugar
-enegry drinks
-lipstick

must i go on?

We use these things WAY more frequently than pot, i'd be more worried of getting cancer from my cell phone than smoking pot to be honest

Post has been edited 2 time(s), last time on Feb 26 2009, 12:41 am by Toothfariy.

You don't have to just smoke it. Paraphernalia would make the whole "reduce cancer" thing make sense.

Marijuana is only a "gateway drug" because the people who sell MJ probly sell other things. MJ it self is in no way a gateway drug. I could really care less what research or statistics say about it being addictive and it being a gateway drug, from the perspective of someone who has done it before (not just once) that is complete bullshit.

Or you're a drug dealer and you're trying to turn us. I'm on to you.

Overall, I'm against this. I think Marijuana and smoking should be illegal. Alcohol is fine, I like alcohol. Any kind of smoking could cause health problems in you and those around you, so... yeah. Maybe let smoking noobs smoke in enclosed spaces with no bystanders if they're forced to rinse multiple times afterwards with mouthwash.

Marijuana is worse than most drugs, because THC fucks up your nerves.
But, smoking and alcohol are "legal" and thus abused and overused, so they are actually "more dangerous" because more people die from them.

And yes, I live in Ontario as well.

Funny thing about these kind of Subjects, 95% of the time, the people defending there "Uses" are people who use it themselves, Same for the other way around, One of my Favorite claims to Justify Its use, is the good old "Its not as bad as OTHER stuff, So its fine!" You hear that god dam excuse so many times, Alot of the time just worded differently. I'm fully against any kind of use for alcohol,Smoking,Mj/ETC, If you want to fuck up your body, go on ahead, just leave me the hell out, I've lost so many friends from MJ its not even funny, They start off just "Rarely" using it, Slowly use it more, and more.
But I really love how people that use it, And other things, Make up any excuse, I love the ones that are like "I do better at shit when I use it!!" And you could do the same thing, even better WITHOUT it. The only reason your doing better on a test, is because your clearing your mind of all that stress and shit in your head. But you know, you can do that WITHOUT using drugs if you just learn how to cope with it, and Clear your mind without drugs.

<Insert Flames Here>

i disagree. im a strong advocate for legalization because of many of its useful propteries and realtivily low danger level. However i dont use it myself for the fact that its illegal right now and that i know if i got caught then i'd be in a heap of trouble.

You are one isolated case however, and unless you can prove that this is the typical response for some large percentage of marijuana users, it's rather useless as an argument.

The real question is: why do you need marijuana to open your mind?

It seems likely that there were some other factors in relation to your friend's ACT score. Perhaps he did some additional studying?

This doesn't quite make sense. If pot is very bad, wouldn't the smarter thing be to keep it away from people, rather than allow them to use this very bad thing? And it already is regulated by the government: it is banned.

Can you link us to this please? That's rather interesting. I googled it but couldn't find what you are talking about.

I must agree.

What about from the perspective of one who has witnessed friends beginning with marijuana go on into heavier drug use? Much like A_of-s_t's claim, yours is also an isolated event, and you need to prove that it is the case for some large percentage of marijuana users, not just yourself.

So things you like are allowed, but things you don't like aren't? Who made you the pope of this dump? That's one odd basis for determining legal questions .

Either you have some obscure definition of "worse than most drugs" or you are wrong about this. There are less marijuana-related deaths than alcohol, for instance. In this case alcohol is worse than marijuana, unless you mean only on the scale of "fucking up nerves"

I completely agree, however, that isn't going to happen, so I feel that you might as well not add to the trouble by legalizing another one.


He's obviously going to score better on his second test, as he now knows what the test is like and most likely picked up more knowledge over time.


If you're allowed to just buy it there are going to be a lot more abuse, if it's legalized it becomes open for anyone, and any amount, and good luck regulating what people do in their own homes.


Sure, you have the self-control, and so do most people who use alcohol, however, is it worth it so you can have your little pleasure if every once in a while someone decides to drive and kills themselves or others?


Once again, I feel that they also should be illegal, and that's recorded deaths, most likely it just makes a small effect, possibly making them die sooner, even if they still die naturally.

How was Marijuana illegal in the first place.
Also what if this legalizing of Marijuana actually helps the economy? Will the rest of the country do the same?

Him? not a freakin chance. he is generally pretty lazy and laid back and never studies. infact he does more pot than anyone i know. banning somthing isnt really regulation. its intollerance. If we made it legal to do, just as cigarettes are legal, then we can do the same, tax it, sell it, put health codes on commerical sales of it. it could be openly regulated by the goverment because the people can have legal possession of it, instead of cops hunting down possessers with it, that doesnt seem to stop people from doing it. the link i had to it is dead, im guessing the website got removed for whatever reason, ill try to find a similar site with that information on it however, this site breifly talks about some of the uses of cannabis: http://hempevolution.org/history/summary.htm such as alternative fuels, plastics, medecine. etc. there is also this site http://westonaprice.org/farming/hempandkenaf.html also this : LINK i invite everyone to take some time to read through this website here as well : http://www.illuminati-news.com/marijuana-conspiracy.htm agreed

Post has been edited 5 time(s), last time on Feb 26 2009, 5:09 am by A_of-s_t.

some say that it was accoiated with african americans, in which racisim took over and it passed in congress

apparently the bible cites it in there that pot is bad, though the bible says a lot of things that are often misconstrued

some argue that its because of the end of the prohibitation of alcohol, and they needed something to takes its place and serve as the scape goat for societys problems (which i think still rings true today; that pot is a scapegoat)

Umm... Vreal, you never responded to the rest of my arguement. I'll admit, mine may be a special case, but non-backed propositions can't be used as evidence. The statement "marijuana users are more sexually active" is pointless unless the say what they are comparing it to. More sexually active compared to Mormons, Christians, teens, gays, non-marijuana users? How were these statistics obtained? Surverys, lab experiements, longitudal studies? Where are their statistics? And furthermore, what was their hypothesis? Was the Hawthorne Effect invovled? Who sponsored them?

The report you posted has a lot of explaining to do that it lacks. Their website would get a failing grade if I turned it in as a lab report at my school.

if you've ever taken the test, you would know that the test is completely different every single time you take it. he's very smart, and it seems like hes become much wiser and overall more intellegant since he started doing pot.


maybe they could make a law that includes that its illegal to drive while high, or be high in public. just like alcohol

obviously its acceptable to have alcohol legal when for a long time people have abused it and died from liver poisoning or what ever alcohol related death you like, idk why congress doesnt look at that -.-

seeing as there been 0 recorded deaths from pot, and that it relaxes you, i think that its much safer to do than to drink. I've never seen an abusive pot head ever. Now i've seen violent withdrawls from other drugs, but never just pot.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Feb 26 2009, 5:27 am by Toothfariy.

Actually, calories from alcohol CAN be burned. (The runners diet is beer & waffles.)

No, not really, as marijuana has positive effects on circulation.


Firstly, that's obviously biased to the governments illogical "War on Drugs". Secondly, marijuana is 100% non-addictive, cannot be overdosed on, and causes users to be more caution, not reckless.

Because parents are stupid, and buy into government fear mongering.


Fear mongering from lobbiest groups + public support because it sounded foreign (Marijuana is only used as it's name in the US because it sounds Mexican), and therefore dangerous (historically, America has been very xenophobic.)

Just in case someone proposes this in the future:

Why don't we just conduct a study of intellegence with people taking and not taking pot?

There are a lot of problems with testing this question. For one, in order to have a completely ethical experiment, you cannot give your participants anything to ingest/inhale. They would have to willingly be high as you asked them if they wished to participate. Second, a random distribution sample of intellegence forms a bell curve, and if you tested your control group (non-pot smokers) and your sample group, you would get similar bell curves, proving nothing.

You simply cannot show which things impact intellegence except my using lognitudal studies and case studies, whose results still cannot be generalized over the entire population.

Good game