Why isn't Pot used as a weapon?

Question

Think about it, a gas weapon based on pot. You nail the enemy military and they completely lose their motivation and ability to concentrate. Then they get the munchies, which eats into their food supplies.

To make it even better, because it isn't designed to kill or maim, there might be some Geneva Convention loopholes that would make it legal under international law.

Why hasn't the military researched and developed such a weapon?

Answer 1

The type of weapon you are describing is called an incapacitant. this means the weapon would be used to render the enemy useless to fighting, but essentially unharmed.

And yes, quite a few things were tested as incapacitants in the 1950 by the US Chemical Corp. marijuana was one of them: LSD and several other derivative of LSD were tested in the early 1960s. Some were frighteningly successful.

Marijuana wasn't as successful. the essential material, THC, was what was actually tested: it proved to be a bit stronger in its aerosol form (as a inhalable vapor or droplets) than what you could get from just smoking it. Made it a lot more incapacitating than what they preferred. Plus, our own soldiers were just itching to get at some of it. So the plan was abandoned.

Not a bad question though.

Answer 2

It is not used simply because it is illegal. Any such tranquiliser would be classified as a "chemical weapon" and therefore banned.
FYI there are lawyers who also argue that using tear gas is illegal in battle. Just imagine- shooting someone dead is OK, but incapacitating them with tear gas (or pot) is a war crime.

Just another example how having too many lawyers is the source of all the evil in the world... ;-))

Answer 3

You all do understand that a lot of those weapons (missiles, jet airplane) weren't invented only via Nazi Germany after which used later via the positive powers, yet that they have been being developed on the comparable time via the Allies and the Germans only surpassed off to get there first or perhaps only the main famously? Robert Goddard, the american rocket scientist, replaced into engaged on rockets years earlier the V-2. He only did not have government help or get right of entry to to slave exertions. The British have been arising jet airplane on the comparable time because of the fact the Germans. they did not introduce jets particularly as immediately, because of the fact via 1944 they weren't desperate.

Answer 4

History of the World (the Mel Brooks movie)
Gregory Hines used the "Wonderjoint" (or "Superjoint"???) to keep the Roman troops back.

If we're not going to legalize it, we should at least do that (what you wrote) with the confiscated stuff.

Answer 5

I think thats a tight idea, although I dont know hwo you actually weaponize it effectively but think about how much of these would be stolen from stockrooms lol.

Answer 6

Good idea. But we'd have a hard time keeping the troops from inhaling all the bombs before we get a chance to launch them.

Answer 7

As stupid as this question is (no offense)... it makes total sense. But I am not sure if it'd work out so easily, but yeah... I mean... makes sense. *In a perfect world :) * Why not tranqulizers? what would we do with them when they woke up though? I'm going with the pot thing, sounds like a better idea, if it was permanent.

Answer 8

It is used a weapon.

When it's laced with chemicals like formaldehyde and sold to school children.

Its just like a slow bullet through the head.

Answer 9

If we did that then every country in the world would declare war on the US just to get high.....

Answer 10

Beacuse pot empowers people... We would be fighting flying insurgents and jesus waterwalkers if we gave them pot. So it could be used as a weapon if we gave it to our guys.... I dont know about you but i would not wanna be fighting guys with unmatched courage.....