Marijuana - Legalise It

[GreatWyrm of Babylon]

Originally posted by RebelWithanAK@Sep 5 2003, 08:49 PM Then explain our continued War on Drugs, the embattled controversies on medical marijuana, and our soaring incarceration records. The fight against pot has probably weakened in the last 30 years, but it's by no means over. Not by a long shot.

#1 I never said it was over, exactly who are you arguing with? I had assumed it was me since you responed to me.

#2 What makes you think it is religion that backs the war against drugs? Sure, they are one of the factions. A second faction would be authoritarians that think that rules solve everything. A third faction would be the drug dealers themselves, they are not hurt when their buyers are caught, they already have the cash, and they can sell that much pruduct again. A forth faction would be politicians that want to get re-elected on the basis of pretending to protect the people. It does not matter if he protects nobody, many people vote by precieved intention not results.

[RebelWithanAK]

#1 I've no clue where you got the problem in Waco into the argument. Your "last stand" statement got me quite confused.
#2 By stating "zealotry" I am not blaming religion; I'm using a strong word to communicate the almost single-minded way certain influential people in the administration in the last 30 years have declared a War on Drugs.

[GreatWyrm of Babylon]

Originally posted by RebelWithanAK@Sep 5 2003, 09:53 PM #1 I've no clue where you got the problem in Waco into the argument. Your "last stand" statement got me quite confused. #2 By stating "zealotry" I am not blaming religion; I'm using a strong word to communicate the almost single-minded way certain influential people in the administration in the last 30 years have declared a War on Drugs.

So, basicly you are confused because I answered what you wrote instead of what you meant.

As my last comp professor taught me, when you are communicating with the written word you are lacking your two greatest tools for getting your meanings across, body language and inflection. Therefore you must find a way to replace them. Please, if you want to alter the definition of a word, tell the audience...

[RebelWithanAK]

but I was applying "zealotry" to the American government ever since Nixon - ie: the lawmakers. I hope that the church/state divide hasn't closed since then...

[GreatWyrm of Babylon]

The church/state seperation has showed improvement, if the next year does not backslide. I also do not see how zealot could apply even in the 'fanatic' sense. The main problem I see is that instead of canceling each other out the left and right has been adding their paticular insanities while leaving the others intact...

[RebelWithanAK]

When I was using "zealotry" in the "fanatic" sense, I had Robert DuPont and the like in mind - those who spearheaded the anti-drug movement and have paved the way for the draconian methods we see now.

[GreatWyrm of Babylon]

Both the left and the right paved this paticular road...

[RebelWithanAK]

I'm not saying they haven't. I'm saying the situation is difficult if not hopeless against these punitive laws on soft drugs.

[GreatWyrm of Babylon]

I do not understand why a government would try to enfirce the impossible, but individuals do it too, and I do not understand that either. (lol)

[RebelWithanAK]

Hence the utter ridiculousness of the War on Drugs, but we still have half a million Americans at $20,000 per head annually on drug convictions. =p

[uitmokum]

Originally posted by indierockboy@Sep 4 2003, 04:57 PM because we need another mind altering substance readily available. it's not like alcohol isn't responsible for enough deaths, we need to add another potentially deadly chemical to the balance.

I thought we were talking about cannabis here, a plant that has been known for it's healing qualities since ancient times. NOT chemical at all.

Here's some facts :

A sea change in science is slowly turning the tide of the medical marijuana debate. For hundreds of years, marijuana has been used to treat a wide variety of illnesses. But the herb has been illegal throughout the modern era of scientific medical research. Patients swear the drug works to relieve pain, prevent seizures, and counteract the nausea-inducing effects of cancer chemotherapy. But by today's standards, there's no definitive proof that this is so. Why not? Nearly all U.S.-funded marijuana research has looked for harmful effects from using marijuana as a recreational drug. Meanwhile, there's been little money -- and huge regulatory hurdles -- for studies of marijuana's benefits. That's now changing despite the fact that marijuana remains classed as a Schedule I drug -- a dangerous compound with no medical uses. Why now? Evidence is beginning to break down the wall of emotion preventing medical marijuana research. Expert Panels, Breakthrough Findings It was never clear exactly how marijuana -- which scientists call cannabis -- exerted its euphoria-inducing effects on the brain. Then, in the 1980s, a series of breakthrough studies showed that the body actually makes its own cannabis-like compounds -- cannabinoids. Why are they there? That question led to the discovery that the body has an entire system based on cannabinoid signals. The signals seem to calm down overexcited nerve cells, says Igor Grant, MD, professor of psychiatry and director of the Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research (CMCR) at the University of California, San Diego. "It may be the cannabinoid systems -- this is a crude example -- but I think of them as our internal shock absorbers," Grant tells WebMD. "They are circuits that prevent overexcitability, kind of dampers. If that's correct, there are going to be a number of medical applications. For example, I wouldn't be surprised if there were applications for epilepsy and other types of seizures." Grant isn't the only scientist excited by these possibilities. In 1997, a National Institutes of Health expert panel concluded that more needs to be known about possible marijuana benefits. In 1999, the Institute of Medicine agreed. It pointed to several areas crying out for clinical marijuana research, notes CMCR co-director Andrew Mattison, PhD. "There are cannabinoid receptor systems in the brain areas that regulate motion -- and, in retrospect, we know that people with multiple sclerosis and difficulty with spasticity sometimes use medicinal cannabis. That is one of the Institute of Medicine indications for clinical trials," Mattison tells WebMD. "There is a cannabinoid receptor for pain, another site that modulates appetite -- there's going to be a wealth of basic science research that will hopefully have clinical and practical applications to many different medical indications." Early Clinical Findings Support More Research Although funded through 2003 and only at various University of California locations by the California state legislature, the CMCR has, by default, become the national clearinghouse for marijuana research. The CMCR works closely with state and federal regulators - including the FDA, the Drug Enforcement Administration, and the National Institute on Drug Abuse (the only legal source of marijuana in the U.S.). CMCR provides funds for clinical trials of marijuana. It's won national praise for holding its investigators to the highest scientific standards. Even before the CMCR was up and running, one stubborn researcher managed to launch a marijuana clinical trial. Donald Abrams, MD, now chief of hematology/oncology at San Francisco General Hospital, is best known for being one of the first doctors to recognize and treat the illness that came to be known as AIDS. AIDS patients have long used marijuana to fight the terrible wasting the disease causes. It's also been said to help an extremely painful condition known as peripheral neuropathy -- a painful nerve disease that has few effective treatments. Abrams wanted to get federal approval to see whether marijuana really works for this condition. But years of effort proved futile in the face of opposition by federal agencies. Finally, Abrams had a brainstorm. Marijuana affects the immune system. It was just possible that the drug was making patients worse, not better. He submitted a research proposal to look for a harmful effect of marijuana -- and finally won the approval he sought. The results of that trial appear in the August 19 issue of Annals of Internal Medicine. And they contradict previous studies done in the test tube and with lab animals. "Much of the published work on marijuana and the immune system is focused on animals and in vitro studies," Abrams tells WebMD. "And, well, if you flood a lot of petri dishes with THC [the active ingredient in marijuana], the immune-cell cultures are going to do poorly. "In our clinical trial we really didn't see any detriment to the immune system from smoking cannabis. Basically we saw no perturbation of HIV viral load, no detriment to the immune system, and no significant interaction with anti-HIV drugs." With CMCR funds, Abrams is now doing his peripheral neuropathy study. And he's well on the way to launching a study to see whether adding marijuana to other pain drugs can give relief to dying cancer patients. Overall, the CMCR now has five full-fledged clinical trials under way, which will enroll some 450 patients. Doctors' Shifting Attitudes on Medical Marijuana In the last week of July 2003, Medscape -- WebMD's web site for medical professionals -- asked its members what they thought about medical marijuana. It wasn't a scientific poll, although a member's vote is counted only once. Still, the results were surprising. There was a huge response. Three out of four doctors -- and nine out of 10 nurses -- said they favored decriminalization of marijuana for medical uses. Is it a real trend? Abrams thinks so, but warns that long-held attitudes are slow to change. "I was pretty much the Lone Ranger of medical marijuana research a few years ago. But not now," he says. "Still, researchers are wary of marijuana research. They feel their reputation may be tainted. And they may be right. For several years I've been invited to do grand rounds at a local hospital in the Bay area. Last year they disinvited me, and I hear it was because of my marijuana research. I've been disinvited from other speaking engagements, too." "I think these attitudes will change over time -- but it will be slow-going," Mattison says. "Dr. Abrams' comment is typical. People in the medical profession may chuckle at marijuana research and think it is not a bona fide area for scientific investigation. But that will change as the science becomes more clear and more understandable and there are, at some point, some practical applications." One surprising source of support is moral encouragement from conservative politicians. "We get a number of stories from elected officials who say, 'Look, I am not for legalization of marijuana. But my sick mother, relative, son, is using it and doing so much better, -- there must be something in it,'" Mattison says. "A number of people have friends where medical therapies aren't working, and cannabis provided relief from spasticity, pain, nausea, or vomiting. That is turning some opinions and helping people let go of the stereotypical notion that medical marijuana is for potheads." The CMCR has put aside enough money to complete all its currently approved clinical trials. But the California budget crisis means no more money this year -- at least. Does this mean that clinical research into medical marijuana is over? Grant doesn't think so. "I think that even if our center runs on hard times, the ball has started rolling," he says. "Clinicians and neuroscientists have an interest in this. There is gong to be more research, and more clinical work, whether we do it or not. Eventually, I foresee NIH [National Institutes of Health] clinical trials. That's my hunch." A Final Warning What's changing is the attitude toward investigating possible marijuana benefits. This means more and more doctors are keeping an open mind -- not jumping to the conclusion that the drug will be all things to all people. "I don't know what the answers will be," Grant says. "The data that are out there suggest there will be some positive applications for marijuana. If I had to bet, I'd say there will be some applications useful for patients in the future." But, he warns, the opposite could easily be true. The one sure thing about medical research is that it doesn't always provide the answers people expect. "The caution is that, in the movement toward making marijuana available to patients with no other treatment options, there is the assumption that it is in fact useful. We have to be careful about that," Grant says. "It may be useful for some things, but not useful for others. And if patients take things that are not useful, they may be harming themselves. I urge them to be cautious instead of jumping on the bandwagon and maybe hurting themselves." SOURCES: Annals of Internal Medicine, August 19, 2003; vol 139: pp 258-266. Vastag, B. Journal of the American Medical Association, August 20, 2003; vol 290: pp 877-879. Workshop on the Medical Utility of Marijuana, National Institutes of Health, 1997. Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base, Institute of Medicine, 1999. Igor Grant, MD, professor of psychiatry and director, Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research, University of California, San Diego. Andrew Mattison, PhD, co-director of the Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research, University of California, San Diego. Donald Abrams, MD, professor of clinical medicine, University of California, San Francisco, and chief of hematology/oncology, San Francisco General Hospital. Note: Clinical Studies Begin to Replace Emotion with Evidence. Reviewed By Michael Smith, MD Medical Marijuana Slowly Gains Ground http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread17239.shtml Source: WebMD Author: Daniel DeNoon, WebMD Medical News Published: Friday, August 29, 2003 Contact: Sswint@webmd.net Website: http://www.webmd.com Opinion http://boards.marihemp.com/boards/cu...dia/4/4199.gif CMCR http://cmcr.ucsd.edu Medical Marijuana Information Links http://freedomtoexhale.com/medical.htm HIV and Cannabis May Mix After All http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread17112.shtml UCSF Study Finds No Harm to HIV+ Patients http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread17093.shtml Marijuana Use Does Not Accelerate HIV Infection http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread17092.shtml Long-Term Pot-Use Study: No Ill Health Effects http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread10533.shtml Patients Out of Time http://www.medicalcannabis.com FARMaceuticals http://www.mikuriya.com http://www.cannabinoid.com/boards/po...a/37/37435.gif Missoula Chronic Cannabis Use Research Study http://www.maps.org/mmj/russo.4-2001.html Journal of Cannabis Therapeutics http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread8466.shtml Herbal Answers http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread8337.shtml Prohibition Inc. http://boards.marihemp.com/boards/po...a/37/37825.gif CannabisNews Search - Ethan Russo M.D. http://cannabisnews.com/thcgi/search.pl?K=ethan+russo Marijuana Doesn't Cause Lung Cancer http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread10025.shtml Prenatal Cannabis Exposure and Neonatal Outcomes in Jamaica: An Ethnographic Study http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/...can-babies.htm Dr. Grinspoon: To Smoke Or Not To Smoke http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread9431.shtml "One of marijuana's greatest advantages as a medicine is its remarkable safety" Jefferson v Waldo http://boards.marihemp.com/boards/cu...dia/4/4200.gif

Here in the netherlands cannabis is legal.
Do we have more people using it than other countries? NO
Do we have more people addictive on other drugs. NO
Do we have problems related to cannabis use? NO
In fact we have one of the lowest stats in the world according to drug use.
"Fear" and a corrupt government is the only thing that keeps the herb from being legal. NOT common sense.

[uitmokum]

Originally posted by RebelWithanAK@Sep 5 2003, 10:59 PM Hence the utter ridiculousness of the War on Drugs, but we still have half a million Americans at $20,000 per head annually on drug convictions. =p

Half a million people who WORK while in jail, who's possesions are confiscated and sold and the only costs are to keep them locked up and feed them. That $20,000 costs per head is one of those gigantic lies your government is pulling on the people. THEY HAVE TO WORK! I would love to get me half a million slaves whom I only need to guard and feed.
In my opinion those drug laws are designed not only to protect the chemical industry but also to supply cheap labor.

[indierockboy]

I thought we were talking about cannabis here, a plant that has been known for it's healing qualities since ancient times. NOT chemical at all.

thc, the active ingredient in canabais, is indeed a chemical. and whether cannabais is a chemical is completely irrelevant, since it is still a mind altering substance. being "natural" does not by any stretch of the imagination negate that fact.

Here in the netherlands cannabis is legal. Do we have more people using it than other countries? NO Do we have more people addictive on other drugs. NO Do we have problems related to cannabis use? NO In fact we have one of the lowest stats in the world according to drug use. "Fear" and a corrupt government is the only thing that keeps the herb from being legal. NOT common sense.

you also fail to realize america is not the netherlands. the statistics you provide are completely and fully irrelevant because american culture is inherently different in it's values and beliefs. neither fear nor a corrupt government keep the herb from being legal, and common sense doesn't factor into the equation at all. it's common sense not to have your higher thinking processes diluted because you have a mind full of chemicals (wait, i'm sorry, it's common sense not to to have your higher thinking processes diluted because you have a mind full of a harmless herb). marijuana isn't illegal to "keep you down". if you're going to argue for it's legalization, i suggest coming up with something better than "it's working for the netherlands!" because that simply doesn't hold any water.

[indierockboy]

Originally posted by uitmokum@Sep 7 2003, 05:07 AM Half a million people who WORK while in jail, who's possesions are confiscated and sold and the only costs are to keep them locked up and feed them. That $20,000 costs per head is one of those gigantic lies your government is pulling on the people. THEY HAVE TO WORK! I would love to get me half a million slaves whom I only need to guard and feed. In my opinion those drug laws are designed not only to protect the chemical industry but also to supply cheap labor.

"cheap labour" is much more easily provided by third world countries, since they don't even need to be clothed, fed or guarded. putting the consumers of said labour behind bars for "cheap labour" is a rediculous concept.

[cheech_f]

man if you were only in canada already before u got pulled over with pot. my friend got busted in the states. the police there said he would have to go to juvy or something like that. well since he was a canadian citizen they had to let the canadian gov't decide his case. he got off with a record that will be erased when he turns 18. now with the decriminalization of pot in canada you can carry up to an ounce on you without goin to jail if youre caught. they can only give you a fine.

if you drink alcohol then y r u against pot? alcohol makes not even able to walk and see straight. pot doesnt do this to u. you can drive while high fine. if ur drunk and driving then good luck. pot gives you a burn out where you get tired for a little while. alcohol can give you a hang over and make you feel like shit.

also to whoever said it was expensive, where are u from? pot isn't expensive, well at least not in canada.

[dalin]

Marijuana certainly isn't as bad as the anti-drug campaign has made it out to be, but it definitely has adverse affects. For example, smoking anything will give you lung cancer and other things after a number of years.

You really can't put alcohol and marijuana on the same level though. Alcohol can have far more drastic effects than marijuana, in the short and long term. Alcohol has caused many deaths over the years, while there have been no cases of someone dying from ODing on pot.

Also, if you guys remember from high school history class, prohibition of alcohol wasn't very effective. People will continue to smoke, whether or not it's legalized. Only one problem though, drugs in general sometimes have links to other sorts of criminal activities (e.g. mobs and gangsters trafficking narcotics and the like). That's where government regulation of production would help.

[indierockboy]

speaking of alcohol's effects, a guest at work tonight got very drunk, fell down, and then vomitted on my face.

[RebelWithanAK]

That just means he loves you. =P

[Fallen Angel]

Originally posted by indierockboy@Sep 8 2003, 09:26 PM speaking of alcohol's effects, a guest at work tonight got very drunk, fell down, and then vomitted on my face.

Har har har, did you swallow any chunky bits?

[Eddie]

I wonder what happened to the original poster to begin with. Maybe his life truly is over and is probably hanging out in juvi? Heh..

The law is the law, and that's all I have to say about that. He chose to carry an illegal substance, and yet he shifts the blame on the system. He made a choice, and now he has to live with it. He knew the rules and regulations this country had in the first place, if he felt it was so fucked up after getting caught, then maybe he shouldn't have come at all, knowing it's been this way the entire time.

And to those who said that marijuana doesn't have any lasting effects on a person who uses it on a day to day basis, then I can acquire some photographic evidence to prove you wrong. I could go on and on about my brothers situation, but I wont even mention it.