Only that the ailments at times are more harmful than smoking weed. And more expensive, especially in countries where medical treatment is not available cheaply for anybody. hehe though the same. Also not sure if Einstein ever touched a joint tbh, let alone consumed it regularly. And under that impression, we would have to say that cocaine should be legalised too, which I don't agree with.
Better for who? Certainly not for me or many others. I would say it would be better for it to continues existing and even to expose more people to it. Will make them less salty for sure. You should try it, come to think of it
Considering Einstein's views, and certain statements he made, I'd say there's a fair chance he did smoke weed at some point in his life. There's absolutely no hard evidence to support that, though. As for the legality of weed, as far as I'm concerned it should be legal. Banning a plant that's considerably less harmful than many readily available legal substances is ridiculous.
Not sure if I'm missing something here, but how can a pre-existing condition that is treated with approved pharmaceuticals be 'more harmful' that subjecting your lungs to proven harmful toxins? I'll tell you what is expensive: lung cancer treatment. And that's just from the inhalation of the fumes. Lest we not forget the other costs to your health, or the cost to the rest of society. Your body is writing checks the human race can't cash.
As I remarked earlier in the thread, using that poor logic, is ridiculous. If someone wants to do something, they will do it - but legalising that 'something' legitimises it. That's very dangerous ground, as you are forcing other people to accept a society where toxins are legal - which is taking steps backwards, not forwards. I know you are not actually forcing it, but by being an advocate of any 'something' to the point of pushing its legality, you are changing society at the point of a gun. My inference is this: I cannot call the cops on you if you are partaking in whatever the 'something' is, and if I try and remove it from your person: I will be arrested. Toxins are bad. The tests have been done. It's a fact. Human beings can jump up and down all they want, but they cannot change the laws of physics, pathology, chemistry or anything else. But human beings can change the law...and yet, I am surely allowed to debate such a contentious issue like this with centuries of documented facts behind me? We could be faced with something in the future and if enough people jump up and down, regardless of the logic of the permanent, detrimental damage it would do to the human race; we should just do it? No.
You can claim other peoples logic is faulty all you want, the fact is your opinion is just that. It's clear that your idea of an ideal society is rather Orwellian, I'm glad that others are generally more reasonable. Frankly, I've experience of you in multiple other threads and I simply do not intend to engage with you at any length. On my final note, I'll simply point out that you're being disingenuous regarding the "treating your lungs with harmful toxins" statement when you know fine well that there are other ways to take weed.
fantaskarsef said "smoking", so I was relying in kind. And, regardless of how it enters your body, it is still a toxin. The pharmaceutical companies out there like Bayer have done the extraction of the medicinally beneficial elements and have gotten that rubber-stamped through years, if not decades, of research. To ignore that research for "the medicinal argument" is ignorant. My opinion on the validity of logic? Y'lost the argument right there 'sir. Here's the classic fallacious logic: "As X and Y are bad for you and are legal, we should allow Z to be made legal". Hence my clunky, awkward, reductive response regarding nuclear weapons. It's that bad. Do you really want me to provide a list of laws around the world which make some things legal, which would (if debated) invoke me and anyone who decides to debate with me, being banned from the forums? That's the problem, because when you make something (regardless) legal, you do and will legitimise it. In 100 years from now, our descendants are laughing at us in utter disbelief for some of the things that are legal now, yet are medically toxic to human beings. And remember, I did not start this thread - I replied to it in accordance with the rules of the forums. I'm not yelling, I am engaging - I only hope you can do the same without being dismissive and ignorant of scientific fact.
You say toxin. I say fun! But hey don't eat, drink or breathe because a toxin WILL enter your body. And there isn't a damn thing you can do to stop it.
Sort of, but easily twice as strong. Less earthy tasting. The consistency is a bit like Molasses. "Dabs" (shatter, hash oil, wax, butter, etc) are made by chemically extracting the THC from the flower so it's fairly pure by comparison. Pricing locally is typically (includes tax): Flower - $6-12/gram Hash - $15-25/gram Dab - $25-45/gram
Really....so you don't eat any processed foods or pretty much anything else produced commercially because of the toxins used in their manufacturing, right? It's all relative. Using marijuana may be LESS TOXIC than other CHEMICALS someone may take to ease their nausea while being treated for cancer. But YOU believe YOU have all the facts. Your objective assertions of fact based on your subjective opinions are hilarious. This is a character flaw that is extremely toxic to discussion.
if you believe in companys like Bayer you have lost already. Long ago but today they hide it better: http://www.businessinsider.com/yes-...n-here-are-the-ads-that-prove-it-2011-11?IR=T
who believes in bayer? aspirin kills more then a few hundred a year. I don't know who mentioned them in the first place but they brought Monsanto last year so you know its a total suck balls event with them having everyone in their pockets all over the place. like who don't have aspirin Tylenol or advil in there house and 8 out of ten times you could smoke a jay and be just as good. man my Chamomile tea would be better for minor aliments it grows like weeds just dry and make a tea better then that crap in a bottle
The obvious answer would be to legalise or decriminalize weed/hash and to give the local tax it creates for each town/village/state to their local police force to use the extra money for combating hard drugs and the violent crime that hard drugs bring to each town\village\state and extra police on the streets, also maybe give the local councils a cut to help improve their towns/village/state. My question is why not at least give it try, see how things go, like a test trial run? Rather than the arm chair experts saying no no no it won't work.
The ATF will cave under the pressure of all the big money people in the alcohol and tobacco industry just like when there was numerous threats against the gasoline big spenders: http://fuel-efficient-vehicles.org/energy-news/?page_id=785 It is not the product you have to worry about, it is the competition!!!
first thing I thought of when i read your post, "tell me your name horse master and I shall tell you mine," Gimli son of Gloin, LOTR. Weed should be legal for recreational use and medical research.
