Posted by Bippity10:

I haven't been called an idiot, small minded, uneducated, or a conservative right winger in a while, so I guess I will weigh in on the topic. On a personal level, I dont' use pot. I've tried it once and hated it. I also don't drink often because it messes with my game. I took a toke of my grandfather's pipe 25 years ago and will never smoke because of it. I have a few friends that smoke a lot and each one of them struggling in life. They don't function well, no matter how they say they are and in general I find them annoying. That being said, I think that marijuana should be legal. I do follow the logic that it is no worse than alcohol and tobacco and don't understand why one is illegal and the other is not. Make them all illegal or legalize all three if you ask me.

But I also agree with Nalod. The legalization of marijuana is a complicated issue and there is a lot to it. Are there unintended consequences? Probably.

And for the anti-weed heads in this thread, let me ask you this. Has the prohibition of Marijuana stopped people from smoking it? Has it curbed its use in any substantial way, or has it made our streets even that more dangerous?

Posted by BigSm00th:

Posted by nykshaknbake:

That's fantastic Bigsmooth. So because alcohol and tabacco are bad lets encourage marijuana? Why stoop to the lower common denominator? I think you should encourage your kids in the future not to smoke or get blitzed. How about that?

Posted by BigSm00th:

shakenbake, when i have kids i would much rather prefer them to smoke weed than to drink or smoke cigarettes. its not even a question.

here's an article from today
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/norm-stamper/420-thoughts-on-pot-vs-al_b_188627.html


Alcohol-related traffic accidents claim approximately 14,000 lives each year, down significantly from 20 or 30 years ago (attributed to improved education and enforcement). Figures for THC-related traffic fatalities are elusive, especially since alcohol is almost always present in the blood as well, and since the numbers of "marijuana-only" traffic fatalities are so small. But evidence from studies, including laboratory simulations, feeds the stereotype that those under the influence of canniboids tend to (1) be more aware of their impaired psychomotor skills, and (2) drive well below the speed limit. Those under the influence of alcohol are much more likely to be clueless or defiant about their condition, and to speed up and drive recklessly.

Hundreds of alcohol overdose deaths occur annually. There has never been a single recorded marijuana OD fatality.



"if you legalize marijuana, the others are not far behind." cigarettes and booze already are legal. and some would say that if you legalize it, less people will try it b/c it will have less of an exotic, against the law feel. i highly doubt everybody would just start smoking weed because it was legal.

[Edited by - bigsm00th on 04-20-2009 1:13 PM]

i didn't say i'd encourage, i said i'd prefer it as the lesser of evils. whether they do it or not won't depend on the legality of it.

lowest common denominator? how about less people in jail on nonviolent drug charges? it's a $14 billion market that, rather than grow it, regulate it, and tax it, we import it from mexico (and prop up these billionaire druglord gangsters and their militias) and lock up our own citizens when using it. prohibition of marijuana is bad for america's economy, bad for it's people, and good for mexican gangsters. why do those facts get trumped by "it will ruin our moral fabric".

Posted by nykshaknbake:

The reason why some laws are in place is that they prevent self destructive behavior.

Posted by nykshaknbake:

Pot doesn't help society in any way and it certainly can hurt. If you legalize it, I guarntee that you are going to have more(even than now) and younger kids smoking it and that will bring the future of thwe community down.

Posted by sebstar:

Whew...NY shakenbake.

For a minute there I thought American's were being locked up by the boatload and people were being killed for a drug that has been proven to be less deleterious than "legal" drugs, with the only beneficiaries being crooked cops, politicians, and our prison industrial complex.

Glad you cleared it up that nobody in America is smoking weed and that legalization is the only thing Americans are waiting on so we can all get doped up.

Posted by nykshaknbake:

No that is not the natural assumption; if it is it is flawed. That's like saying if you you stand in the rain you get wet but if it's not raining you can't get wet. Having marijuana illegal is the superior one.

We're missing each other a bit, so I'll start over. Has marijuana prohibition really stopped anyone from getting high? Are the resources that we are draining from this nation and the lives that are being destroyed really worth it just so the moral majority can feel better at night?

Not to mention how many auxiliary benefits can come from its legalization.

Posted by nykshaknbake:

Lives being destroyed by not legalizing marijuana? You'll have to substantiate this. I'm not an economicist but I find your claims of economic drain dubious and I feel that is the opposite of what you have stated.

Currently, opposing your stance is the American Academy of Pediatrics

http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi/reprint/pediatrics;113/6/1825.pdf


Additionally it 2 peer reviewed articles, including a meta-analysis say that marijuana is associated with lower economic status and behaviorial problems in neonates.


Marijuana use, adolescent pregnancy, and alteration in newborn behavior: How complex can it get?


Henrietta S. Bada, MD, MPH ⁎
Eric W. Reynolds, MD
Wendy F. Hansen, MD

Departments of Pediatrics and Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Kentucky College of MedicineLexington, Kentucky

* Reprint requests: Henrietta S. Bada, MD, University of Kentucky Medical Center, 800 Rose St, Room MS 477, Lexington, KY 40536

Prenatal marijuana use has effects on fetal physical growth and neurobehavior. In a meta-analysis,[10] prenatal marijuana use <1 times per week did not result in a significant decrease in birth weight, but use >4 times per week was associated with an average of a 131-gram decrease in weight. Other investigators also found a decrease in birth length,[11] but with no decrement in ponderal index.[12] Marijuana use during pregnancy, especially in the first trimester, was associated with shortened gestation. [13] , [14] An average use of marijuana ¡Ý6 times per week was associated with 0.8-week reduction in length of gestation.[13] First trimester use of marijuana also increased the odds of minor physical abnormalities in the newborn.[14]
Prenatal marijuana exposure has been associated with irritability, an increase in body motility, tremors, startles, poor habituation to visual stimuli, abnormal reflexes, and symptoms similar to mild withdrawal. [15] , [16] These findings differed from those of Dreher et al,[17] who found neonates born to marijuana users with higher socioeconomic class had no evident neurobehavioral alterations. Barros et al,[1] in this issue of The Journal, examined newborn infants born to adolescent mothers who used marijuana during pregnancy and compared their findings with non-exposed infants. They found alteration in neurobehavior with the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit Network Neurobehavioral Scale (NNNS),[18] an assessment similar to Brazelton¡¯s[19] Neonatal Behavioral Assessment Scale. The NNNS has been modified to assess neurobehavioral performance of high-risk infants, including those born after in utero drug exposure. Infants exposed to marijuana in utero had higher scores in arousal, lower scores in regulation, and higher scores in excitability than non-exposed infants. After in utero exposure to biological risks from marijuana, the needs of the infant with altered neurobehavior can easily add to the stresses of a substance-using adolescent parent. Furthermore, the neurobehavioral alterations, whether manifestations of withdrawal or toxic effects, may be predictors of long-term effects.[20]

1: Can J Public Health. 2008 May-Jun;99(3):172-7. Links
A meta-analysis of marijuana and alcohol use by socio-economic status in adolescents aged 10-15 years.
Lemstra M, Bennett NR, Neudorf C, Kunst A, Nannapaneni U, Warren LM, Kershaw T, Scott CR.
Population Health Research Unit, Saskatoon Health Region, Saskatoon, SK. mark.lemstra@saskatoonhealthregion.ca
OBJECTIVES: A majority of population-based studies suggest prevalence of drug and alcohol risk behaviour increases during late adolescence to early adulthood. The purpose of this systematic literature review is to clarify if socio-economic status (SES) is a determinant of marijuana and alcohol risk behaviour in adolescents between the ages of 10-15 years. METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis to identify published or unpublished papers between January 1, 1980 and February 9, 2007 that reviewed marijuana and alcohol risk behaviour by SES in adolescents aged 10-15 years. SYNTHESIS: We found nine studies that fulfilled our inclusion criteria and passed the methodological quality review. The prevalence of marijuana and alcohol risk behaviour was 22% higher (RR = 1.22; 95% CI 1.14-1.31) in adolescents with low SES in comparison to adolescents with higher SES. Stratification by country of origin revealed that American and New Zealand studies had statistically significant variability in the reported effects as compared to European and UK studies. DISCUSSION: The evidence suggests that low SES has an inverse association with the prevalence of marijuana and alcohol risk behaviour in adolescents between the ages of 10-15 years. Higher rates of marijuana and alcohol risk behaviour among lower SES adolescents may impact emotional development, limit future educational and occupational achievement, and increase the likelihood for adult marijuana and alcohol addiction. CONCLUSION: Lower SES adolescents have higher rates of marijuana and alcohol risk behaviour than higher SES adolescents

Posted by sebstar:

Posted by nykshaknbake:

No that is not the natural assumption; if it is it is flawed. That's like saying if you you stand in the rain you get wet but if it's not raining you can't get wet. Having marijuana illegal is the superior one.

We're missing each other a bit, so I'll start over. Has marijuana prohibition really stopped anyone from getting high? Are the resources that we are draining from this nation and the lives that are being destroyed really worth it just so the moral majority can feel better at night?

Not to mention how many auxiliary benefits can come from its legalization.

Are you kidding me! I'm sorry but who in the hell ever advocated for pregnant women or children to smoke Marijuana? Oh it affects the fetus if the mother smokes Marijuana no shyt! Of course the American Academy of Pediatrics would oppose Marijuana use among children LOL

Posted by bitty41:

Posted by nykshaknbake:

Lives being destroyed by not legalizing marijuana? You'll have to substantiate this. I'm not an economicist but I find your claims of economic drain dubious and I feel that is the opposite of what you have stated.

Currently, opposing your stance is the American Academy of Pediatrics

http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi/reprint/pediatrics;113/6/1825.pdf


Additionally it 2 peer reviewed articles, including a meta-analysis say that marijuana is associated with lower economic status and behaviorial problems in neonates.


Marijuana use, adolescent pregnancy, and alteration in newborn behavior: How complex can it get?


Henrietta S. Bada, MD, MPH ⁎
Eric W. Reynolds, MD
Wendy F. Hansen, MD

Departments of Pediatrics and Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Kentucky College of MedicineLexington, Kentucky

* Reprint requests: Henrietta S. Bada, MD, University of Kentucky Medical Center, 800 Rose St, Room MS 477, Lexington, KY 40536

Prenatal marijuana use has effects on fetal physical growth and neurobehavior. In a meta-analysis,[10] prenatal marijuana use <1 times per week did not result in a significant decrease in birth weight, but use >4 times per week was associated with an average of a 131-gram decrease in weight. Other investigators also found a decrease in birth length,[11] but with no decrement in ponderal index.[12] Marijuana use during pregnancy, especially in the first trimester, was associated with shortened gestation. [13] , [14] An average use of marijuana ¡Ý6 times per week was associated with 0.8-week reduction in length of gestation.[13] First trimester use of marijuana also increased the odds of minor physical abnormalities in the newborn.[14]
Prenatal marijuana exposure has been associated with irritability, an increase in body motility, tremors, startles, poor habituation to visual stimuli, abnormal reflexes, and symptoms similar to mild withdrawal. [15] , [16] These findings differed from those of Dreher et al,[17] who found neonates born to marijuana users with higher socioeconomic class had no evident neurobehavioral alterations. Barros et al,[1] in this issue of The Journal, examined newborn infants born to adolescent mothers who used marijuana during pregnancy and compared their findings with non-exposed infants. They found alteration in neurobehavior with the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit Network Neurobehavioral Scale (NNNS),[18] an assessment similar to Brazelton¡¯s[19] Neonatal Behavioral Assessment Scale. The NNNS has been modified to assess neurobehavioral performance of high-risk infants, including those born after in utero drug exposure. Infants exposed to marijuana in utero had higher scores in arousal, lower scores in regulation, and higher scores in excitability than non-exposed infants. After in utero exposure to biological risks from marijuana, the needs of the infant with altered neurobehavior can easily add to the stresses of a substance-using adolescent parent. Furthermore, the neurobehavioral alterations, whether manifestations of withdrawal or toxic effects, may be predictors of long-term effects.[20]

1: Can J Public Health. 2008 May-Jun;99(3):172-7. Links
A meta-analysis of marijuana and alcohol use by socio-economic status in adolescents aged 10-15 years.
Lemstra M, Bennett NR, Neudorf C, Kunst A, Nannapaneni U, Warren LM, Kershaw T, Scott CR.
Population Health Research Unit, Saskatoon Health Region, Saskatoon, SK. mark.lemstra@saskatoonhealthregion.ca
OBJECTIVES: A majority of population-based studies suggest prevalence of drug and alcohol risk behaviour increases during late adolescence to early adulthood. The purpose of this systematic literature review is to clarify if socio-economic status (SES) is a determinant of marijuana and alcohol risk behaviour in adolescents between the ages of 10-15 years. METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis to identify published or unpublished papers between January 1, 1980 and February 9, 2007 that reviewed marijuana and alcohol risk behaviour by SES in adolescents aged 10-15 years. SYNTHESIS: We found nine studies that fulfilled our inclusion criteria and passed the methodological quality review. The prevalence of marijuana and alcohol risk behaviour was 22% higher (RR = 1.22; 95% CI 1.14-1.31) in adolescents with low SES in comparison to adolescents with higher SES. Stratification by country of origin revealed that American and New Zealand studies had statistically significant variability in the reported effects as compared to European and UK studies. DISCUSSION: The evidence suggests that low SES has an inverse association with the prevalence of marijuana and alcohol risk behaviour in adolescents between the ages of 10-15 years. Higher rates of marijuana and alcohol risk behaviour among lower SES adolescents may impact emotional development, limit future educational and occupational achievement, and increase the likelihood for adult marijuana and alcohol addiction. CONCLUSION: Lower SES adolescents have higher rates of marijuana and alcohol risk behaviour than higher SES adolescents

Posted by sebstar:

Posted by nykshaknbake:

No that is not the natural assumption; if it is it is flawed. That's like saying if you you stand in the rain you get wet but if it's not raining you can't get wet. Having marijuana illegal is the superior one.

We're missing each other a bit, so I'll start over. Has marijuana prohibition really stopped anyone from getting high? Are the resources that we are draining from this nation and the lives that are being destroyed really worth it just so the moral majority can feel better at night?

Not to mention how many auxiliary benefits can come from its legalization.

Are you kidding me! I'm sorry but who in the hell ever advocated for pregnant women or children to smoke Marijuana? Oh it affects the fetus if the mother smokes Marijuana no shyt! Of course the American Academy of Pediatrics would oppose Marijuana use among children LOL