liberals unite!

<p>Rainbow, I agree. There definitely should be an age limit. But there are som many valid reasons to legalize marijuana. Medicinal benefits. It's a natural herb. Plus, it is no more harmful than alcohol or cigarettes. If legal, it does lose appeal for those so-called rebels, resulting in less usage and you wouldn;t need to get it through a dealer. Everything would be better this way.</p>

<p>I disagree. We don't need a country full of stoners. We are already starting to fall behind other countries technologically, the last thing we need is for people to be lazier and lose more brain cells.</p>

<p>This is the biggest reason why it shouldn't be legal: Do you want people driving while high? Well if your answer is no, how do you enforce it? It stays in your system for several weeks. A police officer could never tell if you smoked two weeks ago, or an hour ago as long as you don't smell. And you could make the excuse that your car smells from your friend, or the weed you have in it. Driving while high is almost as bad as driving while drunk, so unless you support drunk driving, it would be pretty stupid to legalize marijuana. Not to mention it smells, and is completely unhealthy.</p>

<p>devils67, while I see your point, I just feel that the benefits of the legalization of marijuana outweight the costs, allthough I do acknowledge that there are costs. If it is made legal, it can be used to treat cancer and other diseases potentially. And part of its appeal to people is that it is forbidden. They want to be cool and rebellious. If it is made legal (with an age limit, of course) it will lose some of its appeal, I guarantee it. And it does impair judgment, but so does alcohol. You say that it remains in your system for up to two weeks. Well, first, I still do not think it will impair your judgment after that much time has passed that you would be dangerous on the road. And if cops suspect usage or marijuana when someone is driving recklessly, they could give them a drug test if they have reasonable suspicion. If it calms and sooths people to smoke a joint, I think it is their business, that is my opinion. So I would have to disagree, I dont think it would be "pretty stupid" to legalize marijuana, sorry</p>

<p>I consider myself very liberal...but legalizing marijuana? STUPID move.</p>

<p>It will create a much larger group of people who choose to waste their lives because getting high is much more "fun."</p>

<p>There are already alcoholics who do the same thing, we don't want another group like them. There are very very few people who would smoke pot responsibly, to deny that is foolish. </p>

<p>The illegality of it IS a detterant for many, many people; much more than the ones that do it illegally.</p>

<p>GreenDayFan, the problem is that marijuana stays in your system anywhere from 7 to 30 days. So, yes a police officer could force a person to subject to a drug test (one question: are there any ways to test for marijuana other than a urine sample?), but the officer would have no way of knowing whether the person smoked it a few hours ago or a few days/weeks ago (assuming you don't smell of marijuana).</p>

<p>I'd love to see Wesley Clark make another run, hopefully more than just a few months before the election though. Waiting so long in 2004 cost him the nomination.</p>

<p>liberals are racists, just like snoop dogg</p>

<p>

Um...sure...:confused:</p>

<p>Greenday, you obviously didn't understand what I said. I know it doesn't impair your judgement a week or two later. My point is there would be no proof to a cop if you were driving after smoking an hour ago, or three weeks ago. Both would make your drug test show up positive. And I'd hope that you wouldn't want anyone on the road who just smoked an hour before, or even worse, while driving. </p>

<p>If anything, you may argue that ingestible marijuana should be legal with a perscription for cancer patients. I don't think however that it should be bought to be smoked like cigarettes.</p>

<p>The presumption that legalization would wildly increase use is wrong. The great example is the Netherlands, where pot use among teenagers actually decreased after legalization.
And this is just a matter of opinion, of course but: "There are very very few people who would smoke pot responsibly, to deny that is foolish." I would differ with this greatly. Sure, there is that occasional kid who smokes up every day and walks around in a daze, but the vast, vast majority of users don't do it that often, develop an emotional dependency, or drive while stoned. The average is maybe once or twice a month. At least, that is what I have observed in high school..</p>

<p>Yes, I agree with gloaming,well put. I feel that legalization would essentially decrease usage, and I simply feel that the benefits outweight the costs. I know of people who smoke merijuana, and they do not drive while under its influence. They do not act irresponsibly. It calms them. Sure there are people who may act recklessly, but that is just some people, and who knows? they would probably smoke it if it were illegal anyway. It's not hard to get ahold of. Also, it is not addicitive, at least not like cigarettes. This is my opinion. I stand by it.</p>

<p>I know plenty of people who do smoke marijuana and drive. If there weren't such severe consequences, I'm sure even more people would do it. I don't think trusting people won't drive while high is a good policy. I certainly wouldn't just trust that people won't drive drunk.</p>

<p>devils, on this issue, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, because I am passionate that marijuana should be legalized for many reasons. I think you are wrong, if it were legalized, it would lose its appeal somewhat with peopel who are trying to be cool and rebellious. And I ma not saying to trust that no one will drive high, mind you, just that most who smoke marijuana are not always high and stoned and do not drive under the influence. Alcohol is legal. It is enjoyed by many, though it can be hazardous if you get drunk and act recklessly. Marijuana is enjoyed by people as well. People expect you to drink responsibly. The same should go for marijuana, it should be legal...with an age limit.</p>

<p>There is bac that can be measured using a breathalizer test however. Yes alcohol is legal and it can be dangerous, but it can be determined who is drunk and who is OK to drive. The same can't be said with marijuana. There is no way of measuring how high you are or whether you are fit to operate a vehicle. Just think, if there were no DUI charges, wouldn't more people drive drunk (even though it is incredibly stupid reguardless)? I think the same would happen with pot.</p>

<p>devils67, as has been said, I stand firm on this issue. Let's agree to disagree. Anyway, I thought I would bring up another issue to liven up this thread a little. How do you feel about?.....
1. Embryonic stem cell research
2. Assisted Suicide</p>

<p>These are just two issues that popped into my head, and I thought I would post before I forget. Be back later.</p>

<p>Stem cell research? In the interests of science, there needs to be as much of it done as possible. And a lot of Bush's restrictions on it need to be overturned.</p>

<p>Assisted suicide? Now I don't know about you... but if I was terminally ill and in unbearable pain, I know I'd want someone to "accidentally" give me a little too much morphine and help me on my way...</p>

<p>rainbow, my sentiments exactly. I could not have put it better myself.</p>

<p>Bump......</p>

<p>I support stem cell research. Imagine how many people could be helped, and live better lives.</p>

<p>For assisted suicide, I think there have to be some measures put into place that ensure that this is truly what the person wants. If a person has written in a living will that he/she would want to die in the event of XYZ, then I don't see why we should force this person to continue to live. I don't think that just anyone can make this choice for a person.</p>

<p>I don't know a whole lot about stem cell research, but I don't think that fertilized embryos should be used from aborted fetuses. However I've heard there have been other means of growing stem cells? If so, I'm all for that.</p>

<p>As far as assisted suicide, I think only if it involves a will and a certain terminal illness where the person says that they don't want to be kept on drugs anymore in that case, so they die naturally. I don't think people should just be able to be basically executed by a doctor by overdosing them, even if they asked for it.</p>