The Atlasian Society for Personal Liberty

[Kingpoleon]

Sure, marijuana can be bad for you. Personally, I wouldn't consider using it. But just because something is bad for you doesn't mean it should necessarily be illegal, which is why tobacco, alcohol, and McDonald's are all legal. I think people have the right to do what they will in this regard, especially since marijuana is not very addictive (relative to most drugs) and people can use it a number of times without getting hooked (or even experiencing significant negative effects). I believe that those issues should be left to the regions, but I would definitely legalize if a bill were put in front of me as Governor.

As would I.

I do not intend to stand for Director of this Organization. However, I would suggest we invite Goldwater to join.

[Lincoln Republican]

Other effects include:

altered senses (for example, seeing brighter colors)
altered sense of time
changes in mood
impaired body movement
difficulty with thinking and problem-solving
impaired memory

Don't like the sounds of this at all.

Hallucinating, don't know what day it is, violent mood swings, can't walk straight, can't do schoolwork or can't do their job, therefore can't pay their bills or feed their family, can't remember where home is.

I don't want people with these symptoms driving around on our streets, endangering the lives of everybody else, just because they have a desire to experience a high, thinking only of themselves and their own gratification.

[Leinad]

Should we also ban alcohol? What about sharp pencils? What about plastic bags? And cars literally kill people every single day, far more than marijuana could ever do, shouldn't we ban those?

My point, of course, is that just because something is dangerous doesn't mean it should be illegal--it is not the job of the government to make these types of decisions for people. Your version of government makes  my strict parents seem downright laissez-faire.

[Kingpoleon]

It's a lot easier to regulate legal consumption/purchases than illegal consumption/purchases.

[Mike Thick]

It's a lot easier to regulate legal consumption/purchases than illegal consumption/purchases.

Exactly this also

[Lincoln Republican]

Should we also ban alcohol? What about sharp pencils? What about plastic bags? And cars literally kill people every single day, far more than marijuana could ever do, shouldn't we ban those?

My point, of course, is that just because something is dangerous doesn't mean it should be illegal--it is not the job of the government to make these types of decisions for people. Your version of government makes  my strict parents seem downright laissez-faire.

But Leinad, by legalizing this harmful drug, you are only adding to all the dangerous and harmful substances that are already legal.  There is no point in making life even more dangerous and harmful by legalizing marijuana.

I have very well known views on alcohol and tobacco as well, which I will not go into here.

[Leinad]

Should we also ban alcohol? What about sharp pencils? What about plastic bags? And cars literally kill people every single day, far more than marijuana could ever do, shouldn't we ban those?

My point, of course, is that just because something is dangerous doesn't mean it should be illegal--it is not the job of the government to make these types of decisions for people. Your version of government makes  my strict parents seem downright laissez-faire.

But Leinad, by legalizing this harmful drug, you are only adding to all the dangerous and harmful substances that are already legal.  There is no point in making life even more dangerous and harmful by legalizing marijuana.

I have very well known views on alcohol and tobacco as well, which I will not go into here.

I hate paper cuts. The government should make a law against paper cuts, then there will be no more paper cuts.

My point, of course, is that a law against something does not literally stop that thing from existing. Many people use marijuana illegally in this country--this is a fact.

Besides, if you're saying the government needs to put taxpayer dollars into this, wouldn't it make more sense to fund rehabilitation programs instead of putting non-violent people in jail--often breaking up families--for simple possession?

And I still don't see the rationale that government has any legitimate right to keep people from doing something that doesn't hurt anyone but themselves. I view rights as derived from consent of the governed--although I guess you may disagree. And if you use the rationale that marijuana usage harms others due to "brain dead pot heads" or whatever running around in the streets, I don't see how that rationale doesn't also force us to abolish cars due to the fact that over thirty-thousand people a year die in motor vehicle accidents in Atlasia (about thirty-thousand more than marijuana kills).

[Blair]

Should we also ban alcohol? What about sharp pencils? What about plastic bags? And cars literally kill people every single day, far more than marijuana could ever do, shouldn't we ban those?

My point, of course, is that just because something is dangerous doesn't mean it should be illegal--it is not the job of the government to make these types of decisions for people. Your version of government makes  my strict parents seem downright laissez-faire.

But Leinad, by legalizing this harmful drug, you are only adding to all the dangerous and harmful substances that are already legal.  There is no point in making life even more dangerous and harmful by legalizing marijuana.

I have very well known views on alcohol and tobacco as well, which I will not go into here.

I hate paper cuts. The government should make a law against paper cuts, then there will be no more paper cuts.

I'm sorry, even as someone who's both smokes Marijuana ( A grand total of two times) and supports decriminalization this is frankly a rather drawn out point. I don't understand why people can't see that Government has a role in regulating harmful toxins (we all agree that Government should ban lead paint)

[Enduro]

I like this idea of a president of the organization.

I'm going to give everyone a little bit of time to think on what they want the position to be than we'll vote on the creation of it.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Should we also ban alcohol? What about sharp pencils? What about plastic bags? And cars literally kill people every single day, far more than marijuana could ever do, shouldn't we ban those?

My point, of course, is that just because something is dangerous doesn't mean it should be illegal--it is not the job of the government to make these types of decisions for people. Your version of government makes  my strict parents seem downright laissez-faire.

But Leinad, by legalizing this harmful drug, you are only adding to all the dangerous and harmful substances that are already legal.  There is no point in making life even more dangerous and harmful by legalizing marijuana.

I have very well known views on alcohol and tobacco as well, which I will not go into here.

I hate paper cuts. The government should make a law against paper cuts, then there will be no more paper cuts.

I'm sorry, even as someone who's both smokes Marijuana ( A grand total of two times) and supports decriminalization this is frankly a rather drawn out point. I don't understand why people can't see that Government has a role in regulating harmful toxins (we all agree that Government should ban lead paint)

     True, but there are also differing levels of danger inherent to any item. I would posit that the dangers of marijuana are closer to those of a paper cut (minor damage, more of an annoyance really) than of lead paint (potential for permanent, debilitating brain damage).

[Lincoln Republican]

Should we also ban alcohol? What about sharp pencils? What about plastic bags? And cars literally kill people every single day, far more than marijuana could ever do, shouldn't we ban those?

My point, of course, is that just because something is dangerous doesn't mean it should be illegal--it is not the job of the government to make these types of decisions for people. Your version of government makes  my strict parents seem downright laissez-faire.

But Leinad, by legalizing this harmful drug, you are only adding to all the dangerous and harmful substances that are already legal.  There is no point in making life even more dangerous and harmful by legalizing marijuana.

I have very well known views on alcohol and tobacco as well, which I will not go into here.

I hate paper cuts. The government should make a law against paper cuts, then there will be no more paper cuts.

I'm sorry, even as someone who's both smokes Marijuana ( A grand total of two times) and supports decriminalization this is frankly a rather drawn out point. I don't understand why people can't see that Government has a role in regulating harmful toxins (we all agree that Government should ban lead paint)

     True, but there are also differing levels of danger inherent to any item. I would posit that the dangers of marijuana are closer to those of a paper cut (minor damage, more of an annoyance really) than of lead paint (potential for permanent, debilitating brain damage).

Mr. PiT, it is so nice to see that you compare the effects of marijuana to a paper cut.

I am sure that all concerned are relieved that you did not take up medicine as a profession.

Effects on the Brain

The active ingredient in marijuana, delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol or THC, acts on cannabinoid receptors on nerve cells and influences the activity of those cells.

Effects on the Heart

Within a few minutes after smoking marijuana, the heart begins beating more rapidly and the blood pressure drops.

Marijuana can cause the heart beat to increase by 20 to 50 beats per minute, and can increase even more if other drugs are used at the same time.

Because of the lower blood pressure and higher heart rate, researchers found that users' risk for a heart attack is four times higher within the first hour after smoking marijuana, compared to their general risk of heart attack when not smoking.

Effects on the Lungs

Daily cough and phlegm production
More frequent acute chest illnesses
Increased risk of lung infections
Obstructed airways

https://www.verywell.com/the-health-effects-of-marijuana-67788

So it is so nice of you, Mr. PiT, to point out to all of us that the life threatening effects of marijuana use are nothing more than like having a paper cut.

Yes, thank you Mr. PiT for your tremendous insight and outstanding observations and for straightening out the entire medical community on the harmful effects of marijuana.  The medical community thanks you and is relieved to learn that smoking marijuana is simply like getting a paper cut.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Study: Long-Term Pot Smoking Doesn’t Seem to Harm Health

Study commissioned by AAA's safety foundation said it's not possible to set a blood-test threshold for THC that can reliably determine driving impairment

Twins study finds no evidence that marijuana lowers IQ in teens

Marijuana could prevent heart disease (Immediate effects on the heart are also temporary)

Marijuana smokers have healthier lungs than tobacco smokers and non-smokers, according to the largest and longest study ever to consider the issue

Study funded by National Institute on Drug Abuse found that even heavy marijuana smokers did not have an increased risk of developing lung cancer

Smoking Weed Doesn't Harm Lungs If It's A Joint A Day, Even After 20 Years

So, indeed, the medical community has a lot to say on the matter.  And the evidence we have suggests that marijuana, while by no means a risk-free substance, does not pose a significant risk to people's health.  If anything, it is state-sanctioned violence against marijuana dealers and users which has negatively affected people for the long term.

[Lincoln Republican]

There are various findings on this issue, and the harmful effects of marijuana use cannot be dismissed simply because of conflicting findings.

Perhaps you would like to try smoking marijuana for a few months on a regular basis and see what it does in your body.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Should we also ban alcohol? What about sharp pencils? What about plastic bags? And cars literally kill people every single day, far more than marijuana could ever do, shouldn't we ban those?

My point, of course, is that just because something is dangerous doesn't mean it should be illegal--it is not the job of the government to make these types of decisions for people. Your version of government makes  my strict parents seem downright laissez-faire.

But Leinad, by legalizing this harmful drug, you are only adding to all the dangerous and harmful substances that are already legal.  There is no point in making life even more dangerous and harmful by legalizing marijuana.

I have very well known views on alcohol and tobacco as well, which I will not go into here.

I hate paper cuts. The government should make a law against paper cuts, then there will be no more paper cuts.

I'm sorry, even as someone who's both smokes Marijuana ( A grand total of two times) and supports decriminalization this is frankly a rather drawn out point. I don't understand why people can't see that Government has a role in regulating harmful toxins (we all agree that Government should ban lead paint)

     True, but there are also differing levels of danger inherent to any item. I would posit that the dangers of marijuana are closer to those of a paper cut (minor damage, more of an annoyance really) than of lead paint (potential for permanent, debilitating brain damage).

Mr. PiT, it is so nice to see that you compare the effects of marijuana to a paper cut.

I am sure that all concerned are relieved that you did not take up medicine as a profession.

Effects on the Brain

The active ingredient in marijuana, delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol or THC, acts on cannabinoid receptors on nerve cells and influences the activity of those cells.

Effects on the Heart

Within a few minutes after smoking marijuana, the heart begins beating more rapidly and the blood pressure drops.

Marijuana can cause the heart beat to increase by 20 to 50 beats per minute, and can increase even more if other drugs are used at the same time.

Because of the lower blood pressure and higher heart rate, researchers found that users' risk for a heart attack is four times higher within the first hour after smoking marijuana, compared to their general risk of heart attack when not smoking.

Effects on the Lungs

Daily cough and phlegm production
More frequent acute chest illnesses
Increased risk of lung infections
Obstructed airways

https://www.verywell.com/the-health-effects-of-marijuana-67788

So it is so nice of you, Mr. PiT, to point out to all of us that the life threatening effects of marijuana use are nothing more than like having a paper cut.

Yes, thank you Mr. PiT for your tremendous insight and outstanding observations and for straightening out the entire medical community on the harmful effects of marijuana.  The medical community thanks you and is relieved to learn that smoking marijuana is simply like getting a paper cut.

     Mr. Winfield, I do not deny that smoking marijuana is worse than getting a paper cut. Rather, I am suggesting that the dangers are far less than those of lead paint exposure. Lead paint has put kids in special ed due to the severe brain damage they suffered. While there is conflicting evidence on the dangers of marijuana, it is not likely that it is capable of that level of damage (supposing you don't crash a car and kill someone while under the influence).

[Lincoln Republican]

Mr. PiT, I certainly do not deny the effects that exposure to lead paint can have. 

As a matter of fact, thank you for bringing up that issue.

But I did find your comparison of marijuana use to a paper cut odd, so thank you for clarifying what you meant.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Mr. PiT, I certainly do not deny the effects that exposure to lead paint can have. 

As a matter of fact, thank you for bringing up that issue.

But I did find your comparison of marijuana use to a paper cut odd, so thank you for clarifying what you meant.

     I am glad that I was able to clarify my post for you. I was following up on posts by Mr. Leinad and Mr. Blair, which is where the comparison came from. I do not think that either a paper cut or lead paint provides a truly proper comparison to marijuana.

[Enduro]

Sorry for the delay, does anyone want to propose a set of rules for us to vote on?

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

There are various findings on this issue, and the harmful effects of marijuana use cannot be dismissed simply because of conflicting findings.

Perhaps you would like to try smoking marijuana for a few months on a regular basis and see what it does in your body.

Hook me up.

[Goldwater]

I support the mission statement of this organisation.

X Goldwater

[Leinad]

Let me just clear this up, since Winfield seems confused: I was the one who made the paper cut analogy, not PiT.

There are various findings on this issue, and the harmful effects of marijuana use cannot be dismissed simply because of conflicting findings.

Nor should we ban things (or, in this case, continue to ban something) if there are conflicting findings.

What if I conducted a study that found that yogurt caused cancer? Should we outlaw yogurt? Or will you dismiss the harmful effects of yogurt simply because of conflicting findings? Or will you let people make their own decisions whether they want to risk eating yogurt or not?

[Blair]

Let me just clear this up, since Winfield seems confused: I was the one who made the paper cut analogy, not PiT.

There are various findings on this issue, and the harmful effects of marijuana use cannot be dismissed simply because of conflicting findings.

Nor should we ban things (or, in this case, continue to ban something) if there are conflicting findings.

What if I conducted a study that found that yogurt caused cancer? Should we outlaw yogurt? Or will you dismiss the harmful effects of yogurt simply because of conflicting findings? Or will you let people make their own decisions whether they want to risk eating yogurt or not?

Again, Leinad you can't keep using this argument when the case is specifically about Marijuana- a drug that clearly has very high short term effects on the brain, and thus should face at the least the same regulation as alcohol

[Lincoln Republican]

     True, but there are also differing levels of danger inherent to any item. I would posit that the dangers of marijuana are closer to those of a paper cut (minor damage, more of an annoyance really) than of lead paint (potential for permanent, debilitating brain damage).

Ah, Mr. Leinad, I am not confused.  As you can see from the above quote, Mr. PiT clearly stated the dangers of marijuana are closer to those of a paper cut.  You may have made the original ridiculous statement, but Mr. PiT said it as well. 

[Leinad]

Again, Leinad you can't keep using this argument when the case is specifically about Marijuana- a drug that clearly has very high short term effects on the brain, and thus should face at the least the same regulation as alcohol

Have it regulated the same as alcohol--that's okay! But Winfield is not arguing that point! He wants to continue this disastrous plan of complete prohibition! I have no idea why you're making Winfield's argument seem more rational (based on the context of this site, at least) so that mine seems more extreme--it seems, to me at least, to be basically the reverse of a straw-man argument: instead of mischaracterizing my point in an argument against me you're mischaracterizing his.

Also, what argument can I not "keep using?" I only used the paper cut analogy and yogurt analogies once each time (my second mention of the paper cut analogy was not me making it again, but clarifying it's origin), the main argument that I have used throughout this thread is that government is not there to make people's decisions for them. Surely you agree with that basic sentiment, Senator?

Ah, Mr. Leinad, I am not confused.  As you can see from the above quote, Mr. PiT clearly stated the dangers of marijuana are closer to those of a paper cut.  You may have made the original ridiculous statement, but Mr. PiT said it as well.  

I was not trying to compare marijuana to a paper cut, per se, I was trying to make the point that it is absurd to say that making a law against something deemed as bad will keep that thing from happening. Yes, it was a weak analogy, but it does not make my point (which I just clarified) any less valid.

I think my best analogy (which isn't saying much, but still) was the first post I made in response to your question, that if we continue the prohibition of marijuana we must prohibit various other possibly dangerous things--such as knives, bags, alcohol, automobiles, etc.--or we're simply being arbitrary.

Where, Winfield, do we draw the line between what is the role of government to regulate, and what is not? Is it based on the whims of the moment? Or some well-thought-out philosophy? Is this merely a few things to keep people safer? Or will the extent of unrestrained statism make George Orwell appear an optimist?