Marijuana legal in the USA in 2010???

It should be legal and accessible from clean sources for those who are chronically diseases now. Also medical marijuana should be nice strains of weed that give the user a pleasant feeling, not swag or harsh strains.

Smoking isnt the only way you can ingest it and those with MM should have access to less harmful ways of delivering their doses.

Originally posted by Zodiac
I hope not- I hate potheads.

And for what reason? Regardless of the stereotypes people have of "pot heads" being stupid, lazy and what ever else is said it�s completely not true. Marijuana has nothing to do with the choices people make with their lives.

I have an IQ over genius, have been in the "gifted" program in school since I was grade 1, started my own business when I was 15, have played football which could be considered at a semi pro level along with multiple different teams and seasons a year since I was 15 and I was captain of the team for most of them and I smoke marijuana.

Marijuana calms my mind down to the point where it�s easier for me to clearly think, concentrate and just plain relax. I would much rather smoke marijuana then smoke cigarettes, drink beer or drink alcohol (I do not smoke cigarettes or drink beer).

People whom say they hate "pot heads" hate them for personal reasons which really has nothing to do with marijuana.

[Edited on 2-6-2004 by d1k]

Maybe this will cause many to realize the truth behind criminalisation of marijuana. Millions of acres of forests could be spared, fuels and textiles created, the list goes on and on...the benefits of using hemp for paper-making processes are to each of our advantage, as the manufacturing process requires no sulphuric acid- ever wonder where all those railroad tanker cars with "Sulphuric Acid" on the DOT tag is going? to your local paper mill, and then into your river- By Journey

you're right, but there were also other implications at the time.
one is that Dupont was developing their great new product "nylon",
along with the fact that the Cotton industry had a big place in lobbying against marijuana.
after all, cotton is a "renewable resource", providing products that don't last.
How long do your cotton t-shirts last?
However, with hemp, you could have a shirt most of your life.
BTW, bibles are still printed on hemp paper, and rope is still made of hemp.
Naval ships use rope made of hemp.
And, i'm not sure if it's happened yet, but Canada was supposed to legalize the growth of hemp; not marijuana, hemp.
Hemp provides a product that is durable, and long lasting.

======================================

Originally posted by DarkRain
Hemp provides a product that is durable, and long lasting.

And a threat to big business, which is exactly why we're all discussing the legalities of marijuana. It's all about money. Period.

I cannot believe you removed my post about information I was trying to get to our southern American neighbours.



[Edited on 2-6-2004 by Banshee]

www.abovetopsecret.com...
9.) You will not advertise or promote other discussion boards or websites on ATS without prior written permission from me (Simon Gray).
16.) Discussion of illegal activities such as drug use, drug paraphernalia, hacking, etc. are strictly forbidden.

Originally posted by sftprez
i would really hate that. even people who would never try it illegally, would maybe try it then. that would just be a bad idea in my opinion.

Perhaps you should look at the Dutch statistics. When they legalized, there was indeed a surge in marijuana use, followed rapidly by a sharp decline in use due to the novelty of it wearing off. It's just not that great. Sure, it can be used successfully for stress management, appetite stimulation, and a few other medicinal purposes, but, generally speaking, the people that have wanted to try it usually find a way to try it, legality notwithstanding. So, then, I have to disagree, in that I think, while there probably will be an initial surge in use, after the novelty wears off, it will go back to the status quo of users using, and non-users not using.

For the record, I'm pro-legalization, but a non-user.

All I know is this: When my Dad was sick with cancer, the only thing that made is life bearable, was legally, medically prescribed marijuana (it was in a liquid). He was rapidly losing weight but when he began the "medicine" he (not too surprisingly ) had a ravenous appetite. Although it may not have significantly prolonged his life, it made his final days peaceful, happy, and w/o fear. BTW, he had always been anti-pot.
I don't believe in basing your whole lifestyle on the stuff, but I don't believe in basing your whole lifestyle on obtaining the latest designer purse either etc etc. And, in my single days, having done my share of dating, I would much rather have dated a guy who took the occasional toke than a drinker. To cite the old adage: drinking makes you mean and pot makes you mellow. I'm not advocating illegal usage , but I think it should be taken out of the hands of the shadowy suppliers and regulated just like drinking. Just my 2 cents.
joey

If they did legalize pot, I'd be mad. Not because of that, but the arbitrary decision. I'd want coc aine and opium bars too. I'm dead serious.

No offence, but I think its safe to say that weed is a much safer drug than coke or heroin, and is far less addicting. (if addicting at all) Its the only drug I believe should be legalized/decriminalized. That is why you dont see coc aine and opium bars in Amsterdam, only weed, shrooms, and acid is tolerated. Tho im not quite certain about that, I could be mistaken. For anyone that thinks acid is to terrible just ask yourselves this, how many ppl have you heard of that overdosed on acid? But then again nothing is drasticly harmfull to you as long as it is used in moderation.

As for marijuana becoming legal, as much as i would like to see it happen I dont think its going to, and here is why. Call me a left wing nutcase if you will, but i believe that our government is making too much money off of drugs to legalize them anytime soon. Ive come across a few web sites that are very interesting.

www.parascope.com...

among many others, if you are interested in learning more just do a search on it. Thats how i stumbled upon it. There is allot of information out there.

However even if all these alligations turn out to be false there is still the question of, What happens to the contraband that is taken in a big drug bust? I know that it is suposed to be burned, and im sure it is. Some of it.
But our gov't is not in the dark when it comes to drugs. They know what that is worth out on the streets, and thats where i think most of it goes. Back out on the street to make profits. I know ppl are going to bash me for questioning our gov't like that but its just somthing for you to think of. The war on drugs has faild miserably, there are more drugs available now today (stronger drugs) than ever before. Just somthing to ponder.

I would like to know where u have heard about marijuana becoming legal in 2010. Sounds interesting.

For the record, I'm pro-legalization, but a non-user.

Id just like to say that you are F*****G awesome and we need more ppl like that in the world.( and more ppl like, prity much anyone on this site who take the time to read up on things and expand their minds ) Someone who "deny's ignorance" and actually looks up the facts instead of just saying that somthing is bad either cuz they do not like it or do not understand it.

Originally posted by DiRtYDeViL
Is there something for pot similar to the breathalyzer for alcohol? When or IF there is they will or should legalize it. You still have to be able to throw your own people in jail for something you know.

The flash light test is what cops use...When ya stoned ya eyes don't undilte.

Only in Canada, this is a good read for the cannaphile.

NDP TO SUE

Connecting The Cannabis Community

Depends on who the next few presidents are, but i believe that it will be legal in some states by 2010. Completely feaseble.

Well, I've always thought that one possible negative outcome for smokers of marijuana after legalization would be:

If they legalize marijuana, it then becomes subject to other laws. Who will sell it? Will it be like in those weird states where you can only buy liquor from a state liquor shop? This would mean a rise in the price, surely. Also, if the state needs to control the quality of it to avoid any legal holes that uncontrolled drugs could open they would have to grow it themselves. There would be no super-weed, it would all become very boring, I should think. People would still be buying and selling it illegally because of this.

Also, if there was trade in it, is would become subject to tax laws. I don't know how much the government would put on weed, but you know they would try to make a good profit on it, as they do with fuel in the UK (bastards).

So, either way, there's going to be some pretty high increases in the price of weed when the government take control of it. The only hope would be a decriminalization, rather than a legalization of marijuana. This would leave the situation as it is in Holland.

Well, that's one possible outcome. It would mean less people would be sitting in jail because of it, which could only be a positive step.

Can you imagine the huge number of people who would have to be released from our jails/prisons if it was legalized?

Imagine the impact on the job markets in many urban areas. Would we see a potential increase in crime due to the lack of work for all those released.

Now personally I don't think they should be in jail anyway, as I don't see why it is still illegal but I still have questions about the influx of people into society.

Here we go again....

U.S. Dumbed down citizens think daddy government knows best. It is not anybodys business what I put or do not put into my body. The fact U.S. citizens have abdicated their individual rights allowing government to test us for alcohol, drugs or anything else means we are property just a like a farmers cattle. Government testing people is clearly a violation of the 5th ammendment no matter what the whores in the supreme court say. This issue is not about drugs, its about whether you are owned or not.

Here we have the government dictating whether a mans son takes ritlain or not. Fortunately this father has guts and told them to stick it. abcnews.go.com...

Next we have a fella charged with shaken baby syndrome when all the evidence indicates that the baby died because of the government required immunizations the child was required to take. www.rense.com...

Glaxo faces criminal prosecution in the UK over Paxil (teen suicides where Glaxo and the FDA covered up the test data) which has been blessed by our FDA. www.rense.com... (Note: A civil action was filed in the US this week over Paxil.)

Government blessed sweetener aspartame connected to MS. www.rense.com...

And these links are just from today.

Anyone that believes the government is the best judge of what I put into my body is a total idiot. I'd leave the country, but their is no place to hide from our GD government.

I never believed the Aussie Bloke story, but I damn well prayed it was true.

As long as the CIA uses the selling of illegal drugs to fund their wars and special ops you will not see anything legal about marijuana in the continental USA. It is simply too lucrative for them to give up.

That along with all the coke coming out of South America, the heroin they are now pumping out of Afghanistan....no way!

Just my opinion.

Originally posted by RANT
Decriminaliztion keeps it black market, un advertised, un corporate, etc.... just not 'illegal' to posess. You still can't make a 'legal' living selling it.

Legalization, which is what Tobacco companies seek (quietly, though I know this for a fact) would mean high concentrate pot sold in cigarette form in liquor stores. HUGE marketing effort and taxes out the yin/yang.

The government makes no money off decriminalizing POt...in fact, they lose money on fines, siezed boats, cars and homes. You only make money off LEGAL industries like Cigs and Alcohol.

For that precise reason I feel that it should be decriminalised, rather than legalised. Decriminalisation would allow individuals to grow mint dope for themselves/friends, and leave the current structure largely in place, which is a good thing, price wise. Ten years ago, 3.5 grams of low quality resin would have cost me �20, while now I can get it for �10, or get the same amount of really nice skunk for �20. It is totally free from that whole inflation scam, which can only be a good thing.

But the government does still earn a revenue from decriminalisation. This comes from the massive amounts of money saved by not having to police it, the court costs, the cost of imprisoning users. An article in the Guardian some time ago suggested that this saving would amount to hundreds of millions (I forget the precise figure). In the US, I'm sure that this would be magnified.

Originally posted by Banshee
www.abovetopsecret.com...
16.) Discussion of illegal activities such as drug use, drug paraphernalia, hacking, etc. are strictly forbidden.

May I have some clarification on item 16? Would I be in violation of ATS policy if I were to post detailed instructions on how to obtain discounted prescription drugs off-shore in violation of US laws?

Originally posted by df1
May I have some clarification on item 16? Would I be in violation of ATS policy if I were to post detailed instructions on how to obtain discounted prescription drugs off-shore in violation of US laws?

Yeah, that probably wouldn't be a good idea.
Let's not post anything like that, please.

-B.