Marijuana laws- O/T

[glynparson]

many people who use medical cannabis use a vaporizer or edibles. Where is your cancer argument then? When using a vaporizer the thc is ignited prior to the cellulose material. The THC does not contain any carcinogens. They are located in the cellulose of the plant material. Edibles are not smoked no cancer. There are also beverages that contain THC which can then be drunk. Cannabis need not be smoked like a joint or bong things have progressed. There are also oils and waxes that contain no to trace elements of carcinogens. The other statement you made is also highly flawed, I did not use it for chronic pain I had another medical use and it worked for me. I don't care if the fact that it helped me offends you or not. It worked for me and that is was I care about.

[barrysloate]

Heavy smokers who go through say two packs a day will smoke forty cigarettes in that time. Even a chronic pot smoker might only consume one or two joints a day. So there is no actual way for a potsmoker to inhale that many carcinogens. Nobody can smoke forty joints.

Also please keep in mind that pilots, surgeons, workers in chemical plants, and others who do what might be considered dangerous work generally are responsible enough not to consume alcohol while they are working. It's unlikely your cardiologist will have a couple of martinis before he does your open heart surgery. Likewise, a pilot will know not to take out his bong before taking off with a planeload of passengers.

I believe that nearly all resonsible people will figure out that there is a time and place for using marijuana. Legalizing it doesn't give people license to act like jerks.

[glynparson]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1277837/


this part was particularly interesting.

"Recent work by Roth et al. demonstrates that THC treatment of murine hepatoma cells caused a dose dependent increase in CYP1A1 gene transcription, while at the same time directly inhibiting the enzymatic activity of the gene product [23]. Thus, despite potentially higher levels of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons found in cannabis smoke compared to tobacco smoke (dependent on what part of the plant is smoked), the THC present in cannabis smoke should exert a protective effect against pro-carcinogens that require activation. In contrast, nicotine activates some CYP1A1 activities, thus potentially increasing the carcinogenic effects of tobacco smoke [24]."

[mark evans]

Originally Posted by barrysloate

Heavy smokers who go through say two packs a day will smoke forty cigarettes in that time. Even a chronic pot smoker might only consume one or two joints a day. So there is no actual way for a potsmoker to inhale that many carcinogens. Nobody can smoke forty joints.

Also please keep in mind that pilots, surgeons, workers in chemical plants, and others who do what might be considered dangerous work generally are responsible enough not to consume alcohol while they are working. It's unlikely your cardiologist will have a couple of martinis before he does your open heart surgery. Likewise, a pilot will know not to take out his bong before taking off with a planeload of passengers.

I believe that nearly all resonsible people will figure out that there is a time and place for using marijuana. Legalizing it doesn't give people license to act like jerks.

I agree. Plus, folks in these sensitive positions can be tested for impairment. Not a test for THC in one's blood which, as I understand the current state of science, can yield positive results in perfectly sober people due to use days before the test. But, instead perhaps a test of manual dexterity, something akin to field sobriety tests, upon reasonable suspicion of impairment.

I think the two most troubling problems with legalization would be the potential for increased instances of driving under the influence and access by minors. But, I believe these problems can be effectively addressed by appropriate legislation. Will such legislation be perfect? No, but legislation rarely is. I was closely involved in the federal legislative process for more than 10 years and I can attest that all controversial legislation entails compromise and tough line-drawing issues. This is no different.

[the 'stache]

There are people out there, young people, old people, who are suffering needlessly from a variety of afflictions that don't need to be suffering at all. Here's one such example where nothing else helped this child.

Alex Echols, Boy With Autism, Gets Medical Marijuana To Manage Self-Destructive Rages

Heartbroken and desperate, an Oregon family has turned to medical marijuana to help manage their son's self-destructive rages. They say the treatment, which has sparked controversy, has helped their child, described as "severely autistic," like nothing else has.

According to KPTV, 11-year-old Alex Echols suffers from tuberous sclerosis -- a rare genetic disorder that causes the growth of non-malignant tumors in organs. Doctors say Alex has growths in his brain that have led to autism, debilitating seizures and self-directed rages.

Writing in a blog he set up for his son, dad Jeremy Echols explains that Alex often exhibits extreme, self-destructive behavior, such as slamming his head into walls and slapping his face until it bleeds.

Then, in 2009, Alex's mom stumbled upon some articles about medical marijuana treatments for children with autism and rage. Interest piqued, the family decided to try the controversial treatment.

By the following year, a doctor had approved Alex for use of the drug. The boy's transformation following treatment, his family says, was astounding.

[cubsfan-budman]

All this...PLUS it's really fun to be high.

Less non-violent offenders in jail, useful for a number of ailments and it's super fun.

Seems like a win/win/win.

[Kenny Cole]

Originally Posted by cubsfan-budman

All this...PLUS it's really fun to be high.

Less non-violent offenders in jail, useful for a number of ailments and it's super fun.

Seems like a win/win/win.

If this is the biggest problem facing our nation (and its not) we should be OK. It might as well be legal because its about as easy to get as a six pack of beer. I'm with Barry -- tax it, regulate it, reel in the income, recover all the money spent on the "war on drugs" that can't be won and make legal money off it. Seems like a no brainer to me.

[ullmandds]

Originally Posted by Kenny Cole

If this is the biggest problem facing our nation (and its not) we should be OK. It might as well be legal because its about as easy to get as a six pack of beer. I'm with Barry -- tax it, regulate it, reel in the income, recover all the money spent on the "war on drugs" that can't be won and make legal money off it. Seems like a no brainer to me.

Yes mon...legalize it!!!!!