Rummy Posted January 9, 2007 Share Posted January 9, 2007 No, it's not.In 25 years of smoking weed, and mixing with like minded people, I have not once thought anything like that would be a good idea. Hell, I've taken mountains of hallucinogenics without that entering my mind, I've taken uppers till Ive had psychosis so bad I couldn''t tell what was real or not, still didn't think I could fly. All this crap about people thinking they can fly is just that, crap. On the monumentally infinitesimal occasion things along those lines do happen it's not the drug that puts the idea in their head, but the people around them. Drunk people are far more likely to fall from tall buildings, than someone stoned jump off. Some people handle things better than others, it's like those rare few people who play GTA or watch a super violent film and then go on some mental killing spree. Some people are just more likely to react bad, you don't and that's fine, but some people apparently do. EDIT:I'm still quite torn on the matter. Whilst I did vote Yes, because I think it no worse than alcohol, and in some circumstances better, I do think alcohol and tobacco should both be illegal/heavily controlled. However having said that, if alcohol were made illegal now, it'd kill me. It simply won't be possibly to criminilise alcohol in this country, and the biggest problem here is that weed will be exactly the same, it's a one way decision with no going back. Is it worth taking the risk? It is going to cause more problems for the NHS probably too, both general and psychiatric sides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fanman Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 Drunk people are far more likely to fall from tall buildings, than someone stoned jump off. I think that is what Fanman was trying to say. Yeah, that's what I was pointing out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McPhee Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 I voted no by accident, weed should be legalized. There's no reason not to legalize weed, all those that want to smoke it do so regardless of it being illegal. Legalizing will allow weed to be regulated (less shite mixed in with it) and therefore reduce the ill effects it can have. Legalizing will make a lot of money for the government through taxes Its wont be made legal in order to keep the average Daily Mail reading voter happy. For some reason they get annoyed about the stupidest of things (most of which have no ill effect on there own lives) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rokhed00 Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 Legalizing will allow weed to be regulated (less shite mixed in with it) and therefore reduce the ill effects it can have. Can't see the government selling the good stuff though, because it is so 'dangerous'. I'd rather have it illegal and quality merchandise available than legal and only crap available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haden Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 I voted no by accident, weed should be legalized. There's no reason not to legalize weed, all those that want to smoke it do so regardless of it being illegal. Legalizing will allow weed to be regulated (less shite mixed in with it) and therefore reduce the ill effects it can have. Legalizing will make a lot of money for the government through taxes Its wont be made legal in order to keep the average Daily Mail reading voter happy. For some reason they get annoyed about the stupidest of things (most of which have no ill effect on there own lives) Not able to click the right button are we! Damn Pothead :wink: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fanman Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 Can't see the government selling the good stuff though, because it is so 'dangerous'.I'd rather have it illegal and quality merchandise available than legal and only crap available. If it was legal, it would probably end up like alchohol and tobacco. After a while, the whole "excitement" of it's legalisation would have calmed down (like in the netherlands) and it would be more socially acceptable, allowing for stronger stuff, like spirits for alchohol and cigars for tobacco. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McPhee Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 Not able to click the right button are we! Damn Pothead :wink: lol :p you tried using MouseKeys to navigate a web page? (i lost my mouse attempting to fly when high) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twozzok Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 Can't see the government selling the good stuff though, because it is so 'dangerous'.I'd rather have it illegal and quality merchandise available than legal and only crap available. Then it'd be a good excuse for a trip to Amsterdam :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martinist Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 no, you evil people, don't legalize this "weed" i had a friend who smoked it and he turned out a right ass hole, hes a right norb now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Bard Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 Weed is a plant from the ground, not some chunk of shit with a peice of lego in it. That shit must fuck you up big time. Oh my fucking god, I've never laughed so hard, man I'm such a dumbass. Anyway, I'm all for legalising it, hundreds of Carcinogens in the form of cigarettes are legal, and so is Alcohol, arguably more harmful drugs. Shit, even Covonia with active ingredients is legal. I'm for free choice in this sort of thing. I wouldn't take it though. I like to think I've earned my right to be happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Laguna| Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 Honestly though, cannabis is not addictive. I did it quite a lot of times in my mid-teens and then just stopped because I wanted to work a bit more and I fell out of a certain circle of friends. I never felt any urge to continue at all, never even thought the oh-so-deadly "just one more won't hurt" thought. While maybe not for you, there are people such as the guy martinist mentions who "turn out a right ass hole, and a right norb now." But then that's the same with everything I suppose. Some people have strong addictive reaction to cigarettes, where as some only smoke casually. However,thinking about it, I've changed my mind on the issue, and if I could. I would vote no. My reasons? Well, if it was legalised then money generated from it would go to a more worthwhile cause, instead of the shady things it goes onto fund. Plus, if it is legalised, then nobody is forcing those who don't want it to have the drug. Me, I'd say these people are fools to smoke it, but hey, that's just my opinion, and I'm not one to stop being people doing or smoking what they want. If it fudges them "upside the head" I don't care, the onus and repercussions are on them. However, that said and done, the NHS is the one who ultimately pays the price, which in turn, as a taxpayer, I'd be paying for. So... legalise all drugs and privatise the National Health Service? Let fools do what they want with their drugs and if they end up dead, then well it's their fault. However, that is taking the view that people who are taking the drugs, want to take them. Of course with issues like peer pressure, and mis-education then I would feel bad for those people who took the drugs and screwed themselves up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shorty Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 While maybe not for you, there are people such as the guy martinist mentions who "turn out a right ass hole, and a right norb now." There's a difference between being addicted, as in you couldn't stop even if you knew you should, and doing it all the time because you like it. If you never played sports, but you play football one day and realise you love it, and end up rejecting your old circle of friends and playing football every day, it's not because football is addictive. The only actual, definitive addiction related to cannabis would be if you smoke it in joints, with tobacco. Then you could wind up addicted to smoking. But factually, cannabis itself is a relatively unaddictive substance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garden_Pigeon Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 I'm just 100% against weed or drugs because my best friend died from weed. Go figure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 However, that said and done, the NHS is the one who ultimately pays the price, which in turn, as a taxpayer, I'd be paying for. So... legalise all drugs and privatise the National Health Service? Let fools do what they want with their drugs and if they end up dead, then well it's their fault. If they tax it heavily enough then it would actually make money and in the words of Sir Humphrey (from Yes Minister) the people who smoke it would be voluntarily giving up their lives for the good of the country. But having said that, and after what's happened to someone I know, no, it shouldn't be legalised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twozzok Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 I'm just 100% against weed or drugs because my best friend died from weed. Go figure. As mentioned before, you can't OD/Die directly from weed. It's physically impossible. The LD50 (lethal dose of 50% of rats tested) is so rediculously high (lolpun) that to even become close to ODI'ing from too much THC (the drug that affects you) you'd have to smoke all the THC in 21 1-gram extra-high potent (15% THC, aka, strongest of the strong) pure weed rolls at once. Now, seeing as inhaling is hardly an efficient way of consuming THC. A lot of that THC is going to be lost through burning, lungs not fully absorbing the THC etc. With all these things included, to OD you'd have to smoke around 2pounds of weed in 10 minutes (roughly). This, in case you haven't guessed is impossible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Bard Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 Yeah, it can't have been a direct cause, you'd need to smoke like 3 trash cans full of bud before you kicked it. But it does contain a shitload of carcinogens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 As mentioned before, you can't OD/Die directly from weed. It's physically impossible. The LD50 (lethal dose of 50% of rats tested) is so rediculously high (lolpun) that to even become close to ODI'ing from too much THC (the drug that affects you) you'd have to smoke all the THC in 21 1-gram extra-high potent (15% THC, aka, strongest of the strong) pure weed rolls at once. Now, seeing as inhaling is hardly an efficient way of consuming THC. A lot of that THC is going to be lost through burning, lungs not fully absorbing the THC etc. With all these things included, to OD you'd have to smoke around 2pounds of weed in 10 minutes (roughly). This, in case you haven't guessed is impossible. It couldn't been from other non-direct effects. Cancer. Choking on his vomit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McPhee Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 If they tax it heavily enough then it would actually make money and in the words of Sir Humphrey (from Yes Minister) the people who smoke it would be voluntarily giving up their lives for the good of the country. Same thing with smokers, alcoholics etc. If anyone wants to point fingers then point it at people who lead healthy lives and then end up with cancer As mentioned before, you can't OD/Die directly from weed. It's physically impossible. The LD50 (lethal dose of 50% of rats tested) is so rediculously high (lolpun) that to even become close to ODI'ing from too much THC (the drug that affects you) you'd have to smoke all the THC in 21 1-gram extra-high potent (15% THC, aka, strongest of the strong) pure weed rolls at once. Now, seeing as inhaling is hardly an efficient way of consuming THC. A lot of that THC is going to be lost through burning, lungs not fully absorbing the THC etc. With all these things included, to OD you'd have to smoke around 2pounds of weed in 10 minutes (roughly). This, in case you haven't guessed is impossible. best. post. ever. just imagine it in a 'brick head' (from snatch) sort of voice (when he's talking about the pigs) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caris Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 Everything is fine in duration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GigaPlay Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 Everybody I know who's ever smoked weed is now a nutjob or an INCREDIBLY dull person who believes that weed (maybe drink) is the only way to relax and have 'fun'. I'm not for it being legal. I wish alcohol, tobacco, cannabis et cetera was all done away with. I wouldn't so much mind alcohol if people were not all about getting drunk and having crazy smashed adventures. There's not a damn thing I can do about it but wish for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rokhed00 Posted January 10, 2007 Share Posted January 10, 2007 mis-education Sounds like you've taken a few of her classes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackfox Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 This is a bit of a tricky subject, I'm against it but it does seem a trifle wierd when alcohol and cigarettes are legal. Well, alcohol and cigarettes would be illegal if they were recently introduced - but they haven't. Alcohol has been around since the BC times, and cigarettes werent seen as harmful when the government started banning other types of drugs (amphetamines, opium etc) in the early 20th century. I'm all for its use if there is some medical properties. I'm not sure if the trials showed that much help though, and I'm too lazy to look through BMJ... As for everyday use, I think the government has to draw a line somewhere. We may like to, but cannot, live in a society when people get high a lot of the time. Imagine the increased amount of lost hours that would arise, and the more referals to A&E due to accidents? I know alcohol causes this, but you have to draw the line somewhere... Gets a no from me then.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thirtynine. Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 Cigarettes would not be illigal. ^^ Alcohol is not legal, its a controlled substance. Marajuana would have to be a controlled substance to, it will not be legal its not legal in amsterdam. Its a controlled substance so basicly it will never be legal never ever, so the question is should it become a controlled substance on par with booze. Would stop ROCKY/SOAPBAR woteva you want to call it, the chunk of brown shit thats often sold as "weed" but is infact a chunk of shite, with anything in it, that gives you a very slight high, its a load of wank and MANY people are buying it. Weed is a plant from the ground, not some chunk of shit with a peice of lego in it. That shit must fuck you up big time. Your a retard. Thats because you get sold crap. Its Hashish. Its made from the resin on plants. But generally its ruber plastic a bit of hash and some petrol. Find a good dealer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rummy Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 When somebody says that someone has died due to an alcohol related incident, do you immediately start spouting off the facts and percentages of alcohol and how it can only kill you should you have a certain amount at a certain per cent in a certain time frame? Probably not. I know that the lethal dose to OD on weed is very extremely high, and pretty impossible to do, but that doesn't mean people can't die due to the fact they have been high from weed, just like it doesn't mean people can't die when they're drunk. Like I said before, I'm torn between both options, but I just get annoyed with how some people are trying to make their points in such a blindly biased way(some of you, not all of you). Thirtynine also raises the good point of it not actually being legal in amsterdam, which it isn't(i actually only learned this recently) but it is decriminalized(think thats the right term?) and controlled to an extent. I'd say yes to it being decriminalized and ending up like it is in amsterdam maybe, I dunno. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueStar Posted January 11, 2007 Share Posted January 11, 2007 but that doesn't mean people can't die due to the fact they have been high from weed, just like it doesn't mean people can't die when they're drunk. What do you mean by that? You can die from ODing on alcohol, you can't die from ODing on weed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts