Which is more dangerous in the hands of an otherwise law-abiding citizen?

[Jacobtm]

I'm sure this has come up before, but I just find marijuana laws in general ridiculous. You can smoke cigarettes, drink alcohol, and own weapons, what is so bad about marijuana?

Blah

[adam]

Neither, both are wonderful things that we should be thankful for.

[Jacobtm]

Neither, both are wonderful things that we should be thankful for.

"Which is more dangerous:, not "is either dangerous?". Certianly both have their dangers. Marijuana can definately make you do stupid things that can have adverse side effects, and guns can accidentally kill people.

[Nym90]

Neither is dangerous in the hands of a law abiding citizen. A gun is more likely to kill someone else, so I'd vote for that, as it could accidentally go off through carelessness and kill someone, I suppose. Marijuana is far less likely to directly result in someone else's death.

But both, when used properly, are good things, not bad things.

[Jacobtm]

Neither is dangerous in the hands of a law abiding citizen. A gun is more likely to kill someone else, so I'd vote for that, as it could accidentally go off through carelessness and kill someone, I suppose. Marijuana is far less likely to directly result in someone else's death.

But both, when used properly, are good things, not bad things.

It's funny. Even though I'm obviously in favor of legalizing Marijuana, I would actually argue that marijuana is bad for you. I've done it, and know first hand it's negative side effects, and I know many people who abuse it and really are worse for the wear.

But that's what happens in a free society; people should be free to do what they like, even if it's bad for them.

[Jake]

Neither are, as a law abiding citizen would drop the joint and would use the gun illegally.

[Jacobtm]

Neither are, as a law abiding citizen would drop the joint and would use the gun illegally.

otherwise law abiding citizen.

I'm sure you meant to write "use the gun legally" instead of "illegally". But even if you don't do anything illegal, you can still be stupid. Using a gun in self defense, I could miss and shoot someone else. Plus, the gun could have a mechanical malfunction, which could lead to someone getting shot totally unintentionally.

[opebo]

Obviously the joint is totally free from any 'dangerous' aspect at all, while the gun is inherently dangerous, and in fact far more likely to result in undesireable outcomes such as killing of a family member in a fit of rage, accidental shooting, suicide, or being stolen and used in a crime than it is to actually be used for 'self defense'.

[Jacobtm]

Obviously the joint is totally free from any 'dangerous' aspect at all

You should see some of my friends drive high.

[opebo]

Obviously the joint is totally free from any 'dangerous' aspect at all

You should see my friends drive high.

In that case it is the car that is the dangerous element.

[Lunar]

Obviously the joint is totally free from any 'dangerous' aspect at all

You should see some of my friends drive high.

I doubt they can drive sober, so obviously intoxication doesn't help.

I think both marijuana (and heroin, but that's another story) and assault guns should be legal, but not for medical or safety reasons.  However, a moderate dose of tetrahydrocannabinol (marijuana) has almost no chance to result in serious injury unless one simultaneously engages in extremely risky behavior that would be dangerous without it, say, flying stunt aircraft or driving recklessly.

If anyone wants to argue that marijuana is a dangerous substance, I'll answer every point you throw, haha.  You can follow the link from my last thread started (profile - Jail thread) and read me and Dazzleman debating drug legalization if anyone's curious.

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

Neither, both are wonderful things that we should be thankful for.

[Jacobtm]

Obviously the joint is totally free from any 'dangerous' aspect at all

You should see my friends drive high.

In that case it is the car that is the dangerous element.

Well, yeah, a joint itself isn't going to cause anyone harm unless they burn themselves with it.

Which, mind you, I've seen happen many times.

"Dude, why didn't you tell me this was the lit end?"
"I thought you knew!"
"How was I supposed to know?"
"I dunno, look at it man!"
"Man..."

But by that logic, a handgun isn't dangerous unless you smack someone with it or drop it on your toes. Only the bullet is dangerous, and then only when travelling at high speeds.

[Nym90]

Obviously the joint is totally free from any 'dangerous' aspect at all

You should see my friends drive high.

In that case it is the car that is the dangerous element.

Well, yeah, a joint itself isn't going to cause anyone harm unless they burn themselves with it.

Which, mind you, I've seen happen many times.

"Dude, why didn't you tell me this was the lit end?"
"I thought you knew!"
"How was I supposed to know?"
"I dunno, look at it man!"
"Man..."

But by that logic, a handgun isn't dangerous unless you smack someone with it or drop it on your toes. Only the bullet is dangerous, and then only when travelling at high speeds.

And one could argue that a high speed bullet isn't dangerous; having your heart or brain or whatever torn to pieces is dangerous, but not the bullet itself.

Obviously that line of logic can go on forever.

[Jacobtm]

Obviously the joint is totally free from any 'dangerous' aspect at all

You should see my friends drive high.

In that case it is the car that is the dangerous element.

Well, yeah, a joint itself isn't going to cause anyone harm unless they burn themselves with it.

Which, mind you, I've seen happen many times.

"Dude, why didn't you tell me this was the lit end?"
"I thought you knew!"
"How was I supposed to know?"
"I dunno, look at it man!"
"Man..."

But by that logic, a handgun isn't dangerous unless you smack someone with it or drop it on your toes. Only the bullet is dangerous, and then only when travelling at high speeds.

And one could argue that a high speed bullet isn't dangerous; having your heart or brain or whatever torn to pieces is dangerous, but not the bullet itself.

Obviously that line of logic can go on forever.

Really, the problem is just with being solid. If you shoot a bullet into water, the water is fine.

[Rin-chan]

I say marijuana because although you may be a lawabiding citizen, being high can make you do crazy stuff you would never have done because of your now lowered inhibitions.  If a lawabiding citizen was just carrying a gun, I would feel much safer because I would trust they wouldn't kill someone, as that is against the law.

Now, if someone was high AND carrying a gun, then I'd be VERY concerned...

Rin-chan

[MODU]

Both a dangerous, but a handgun is slightly more so.

[ATFFL]

A handgun is mostly harmless.  I mean, you can brain someone with it.  But it needs bullets to be truly dangerous.

Now, my friend who got high, wandered into traffic and cause an accident killing three people (himself included) had no such thing.

[Lunar]

I say marijuana because although you may be a lawabiding citizen, being high can make you do crazy stuff you would never have done because of your now lowered inhibitions. 

"A" joint means that we're not talking about intensive amounts of marijuana or any amount that would place even an inexperienced user out of control.  Even if it was extremely potent, the user would probably feel more slothful than anything afterwards.

[??????????]

Option 2 for the sheer fact that a very high person is more prone to do something illogical. A sober and law abiding citizen is very unlikely to just go out and randomnly shoot someone.

[Republican Michigander]

Neither.

[Republican Michigander]

Obviously the joint is totally free from any 'dangerous' aspect at all, while the gun is inherently dangerous, and in fact far more likely to result in undesireable outcomes such as killing of a family member in a fit of rage, accidental shooting, suicide, or being stolen and used in a crime than it is to actually be used for 'self defense'.

Not true.

[jokerman]

Option 2 for the sheer fact that a very high person is more prone to do something illogical. A sober and law abiding citizen is very unlikely to just go out and randomnly shoot someone.

I agree with this.

[Dr. Cynic]

This is a tough one for me, as I am Pro-Gun, but am also Pro-Marijuana Legalization. I would only say a gun, because one joint doesn't have the potential to harm as many people as a handgun. Now, I'm only basing my answer on a gut instinct. I do see StatesRights point, but it depends on how high the person is, but it also depends if you say guns, on who owns the gun. Just a quagmire of a question for me.

[John Dibble]

Option 2 for the sheer fact that a very high person is more prone to do something illogical. A sober and law abiding citizen is very unlikely to just go out and randomnly shoot someone.

I agree with this.

Ditto. I doubt the law abiding citizen will just go waving the gun around in a dangerous manner. If he or she just puts the gun in a lock box or something little harm is likely to come of it.