I live in the bay area in California and weed is already legal here. So yes I do agree with it and so do the hundreds of thousands of cancer n AIDS patients that are pain-free cuz of it. Prop. 215!
****Lisa- you need to come to Cali girl. It's so kick-back here. You can actually grow weed and sell it back to the State so they can make edibles with it. Unbelievable....
2007-02-01 16:19:12
·
answer #1
·
answered by ? 3
·
6⤊
1⤋
(pro cannabis) 1. Legalization in this day and age probably means monopolization. Monopolization may not be the worst part of it though; it is the unethical practices that accompany the regulation of a plant which is severely misconceived. Something like prop 19 would mean a natural occurring substance which is safer, more effective, and beneficial compared to pills would be patented by big corporations. 2. Too many people do not understand what cannabis is and is not. We have too many bigots, too many stereotypes and too much misleading information to simply legalize cannabis instantly. My first point involved how regulating the plant is wrong and implies unethical actions. Here I'm stressing that too many people do not know how to regulate themselves (both users, non-users, merchants, etc.) For example, you wouldn't gulp down half a bottle of Tylenol because you have a head-ache right? (that would actually kill you, something cannabis cannot do.) My point is moderation is what people don't understand, partially because we are not educated properly on such things ( under-age binge drinking for example.) 3. Capitalism- making money is what matters to the key players. This kind of involves my first point but I'll spare you from a long essay. 4. We will make legalization far more complicated than it needs to be. In states like California, medicinal weed is more legal now than it would be under something like prop 19. That does not mean we have it perfect, but its better than what has been proposed. 5. There could be unforeseeable consequences. A good example could be the amount of disillusionment and resent towards the government for maintaining lies and misconceptions about weed and other banned substances. Marijuana is labeled a Schedule I drug (the worst of the worst along with heroin and what not.) When most people get high off cannabis for the first time, it is a life-changing experience because a realization is made that you cannot understand without first-hand experience. For some people, it could be a change for the best. For others, it is a downhill ride for many reasons that I cannot get into without having a full conversation
2016-03-29 01:01:31
·
answer #2
·
answered by Rebecca 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Cannabis has been known throughout the ages as a very useful plant. It was a staple herb in many a country garden and has thousands of uses.
As to legalising it, that would free up a lot of prison places for those crimnals who do vile things, not for some victimless crime such as having a pull on a bong. It is legal in California, and I have not heard of any disintegration of their society as yet.
It has been proven since proper scientific studies began that the moderate long term use of weed has no harmful effects at all. I do think that it was the first world war that first started the institutionalised paranoia about it. When the Brit lads were called up to serve, the army was horrified to see the awful health of most of the men. Laws were bought in to make it a imprisonable offence to give any soldier drink or drugs, there then followed a big governmental battle between the home office and the ministry of health as to who would control drugs. Is it a health problem of a Laura Norder one? As we know, the home office came out on top of this one and lots of punitive laws were paased, all of them leading to illegal drug use and all the drug crime we have now. Punitive measures lead to more crime.
I do not see why Cannabis cannot be prescribed for analgesia, we prescribe Heroin, Morphine and Cocaine, why not weed?
2007-02-02 02:25:57
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Some people debate about cannabis, the same way that they do about space aliens ; that space aliens exist, and it is the biggest cover-up. Some people say that cannabis has important health benefits, and this too is a big cover.If proven that it can be used for medical usage,it can be legalised, i.e, in so far that one would have to have a medical prescription in order to obtain it at a pharmacy.
2007-02-01 17:24:04
·
answer #4
·
answered by skeetejacquelinelightersnumber7 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
As with anything and everything there are always advantages and disadvantages to legalising cannabis.
I'm against it myself because my experience of what it does to people put me off it. Others are obviously for it because their experience lead them to other conclusions and I respect that.
One advantage of legalising cannabis is obviously that it'll create jobs and revenue because farmers will be able to farm it openly and I think anyone could get pretty rich from selling the stuff.
But I know there would be accidents with people stealing and defending this property and there's no way we won't avoid some dimwit taking it into his head to light up a field of the stuff. Imagine what that would do to the drivers off whichever highway this motorway would be on.
Who would put it out? Can you really run a fire engine when you're high? or aim water properly while balanced on an aeroplane run by a high pilot when you're high yourself?
Obviously as a notion, mass intoxication can be quite funny but you've got to think of the implication to drivers, farmers and whatnot.
The major benefit of legalising cannabis, however, would be the permission that the government would either tacitly or outright deliver to scientists to deliver safer brands of the stuff.
But who would sell it? Who would the money go to? The NHS?
Offlicences? What would be the minimum age to smoke it?
Would public service people like teachers and nurses also be allowed to smoke? When?
This leads on to the biggest disadvantage I see about legalising cannabis: more people would smoke it. Like cigarettes and alcohol it would be another bane on our health service and like those and other addictive substances, it would hamstring a proportion of our society and cost the taxpayer.
Given these considerations I don't think it would be a clever thing to do, but it certainly might happen; when it comes to what politicians might do for votes, you never know.
2007-02-01 18:41:53
·
answer #5
·
answered by Beazle 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
Just think of all money the government could make legalizing it, think of all the bombs it would buy. Now you smoke a joint and go to jail our prisons are overcrowded already. This law is
outdated and stupid, cannabis is a good pain killer it's good for a lot of things, but no rapist are let go to jail so some poor dude smoking some weed can go to the slammer.
2007-02-01 16:29:01
·
answer #6
·
answered by lonetraveler 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
If people need it for medicinal reasons than it should be available on precription.It is intresting that it is legal in part of Califonia when a long term study by the UCLA showed more people presented chest problems after long term use of cannabis than similar use of tobacco
2007-02-01 17:47:15
·
answer #7
·
answered by frankturk50 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
Smoling and using tobacco is dangerous--------but it's legal
drinking leads to dangerous decisions(or lack therof)--it's legal
abortion kills a baby and has long term effects on the mother--------it's legal
people who smoke cannabis are probably less harmful to themselves and others around them then those who drink
if the Government and the citizens would wake up-----there is alot of potential revenue in it
2007-02-01 16:26:48
·
answer #8
·
answered by Da_Bears70 3
·
3⤊
2⤋
yes because you can still be arested for suply & possetion
transport of cannabis = punishment
with it legalised the price of it will also drop & it will be easyer to buy & in a more pure state instead of being cut with plastic. or rubber.
2007-02-01 16:26:33
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
1⤋
It makes a difference to those who it affects. There are other laws too which seem meaningless but they have an effect on a handful of peoople who appreciate it.
2007-02-01 16:12:55
·
answer #10
·
answered by Claude 6
·
5⤊
0⤋