• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

San Francisco bans smoking inside apartments; pot smoking OK

Checkerboard Strangler said:
The issue is, that whole "medical" thing was just a means of keeping users in second class citizen status.

If you're prescribed Percoset for pain, do they seize your professional licenses, teaching credentials, firearms and firearm permits, or fire you from a job?

All of that AND MORE has been done to "medical marijuana users."
Click to expand...

Unless an employee tells people, "I take Percoset for pain," nobody at work would know it.

If you are taking an addictive drug that causes psychiatric damage, the last thing you should own is a firearm.
 
Visbek said:
Marijuana smoke is far, far safer than tobacco smoke, unless you are operating a vehicle or heavy machinery while under the influence.

It isn't carcinogenic, it doesn't cause emphysema, it doesn't cause cardiac issues, it doesn't even cause or exacerbate asthma.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but it makes your babies come out naked and toothless.
 
aociswundumho said:
How do you progressives come up with such asinine arguments? Do you really believe there's a connection between the efficacy of certain drugs and the will of the voters?
Click to expand...

Safety to society, not efficacy for the patient.

Progressives are the ones who want smoking marijuana to be legal for recreational use. They never say why people who have no medical need for pot should be allowed to smoke it.
 
Blue Donkey said:
Unless an employee tells people, "I take Percoset for pain," nobody at work would know it.

If you are taking an addictive drug that causes psychiatric damage, the last thing you should own is a firearm.
Click to expand...

And now you're claiming psychiatric damage. Anything to back that up?
 
Blue Donkey said:
Unless an employee tells people, "I take Percoset for pain," nobody at work would know it.

If you are taking an addictive drug that causes psychiatric damage, the last thing you should own is a firearm.
Click to expand...

But what about alcohol? It is more addictive than marijuana, causes greater impairment when used in excess, and causes more physical damage to your body.
 
Blue Donkey said:
I was not implying it does. Marijuana is dangerous in other ways. If it wasn't, why would doctors need voters to approve marijuana as an option for their patients?
Click to expand...
It's mostly because of past moral panics.

Mexican immigrants imported recreational marijuana use to the US in the early 20th century. During the Great Depression, cannabis was vilified as an "evil weed," got lumped in with the temperance movement, and all sorts of inaccurate myths spread about it. It didn't help when the 60s counterculture started smoking cannabis.

A lot more research needs to be done, but most of the claims about the harms of cannabis are vastly overhyped. It is significantly less dangerous than alcohol, which is an actual toxin, and you don't need a prescription to buy a 6-pack.
 
I was considering moving to SanFran but now I'm not so sure. I like my canned salmon and exotic strains of weed. Could they smell me out and eventually evict me?
 
lwf said:
But what about alcohol? It is more addictive than marijuana, causes greater impairment when used in excess, and causes more physical damage to your body.
Click to expand...

My opinions about drinking alcohol are legally irrelevant thanks to the 21st Amendment.
 
TheDoctorWasIn said:
That's not how this all works.

Drugs are a symptom of addiction, not a cause.

Marijuana has no physical dependency.
Click to expand...

Try explaining to a doctor why opiates are not addictive and should be available without prescriptions.
 
Blue Donkey said:
My opinions about drinking alcohol are legally irrelevant thanks to the 21st Amendment.
Click to expand...

The country could always repeal it if we think that all addictive substances that could cause physical and mental impairment when abused should be outlawed. Would you agree that it should be repealed?
 
Blue Donkey said:
My opinions about drinking alcohol are legally irrelevant thanks to the 21st Amendment.
Click to expand...

That's just a cop out so you don't have to discuss the dangers of alcohol vs weed.
 
TheDoctorWasIn said:
There is a distinction between *addiction* and *physical dependency.*

We're not talking about opiates.
Click to expand...

I mentioned opiates to point out the flaw in your claim that drug addiction is not caused by marijuana itself.
 
lwf said:
The country could always repeal it if we think that all addictive substances that could cause physical and mental impairment when abused should be outlawed. Would you agree that it should be repealed?
Click to expand...

You are hopeless. Anything about alcohol that has no effect on the legality of cannibis (which would be everything) is a strawman. If you can't keep your argument strictly on the merits of recreational marijuana use, you have no argument in favor of it.
 
Blue Donkey said:
I mentioned opiates to point out the flaw in your claim that drug addiction is not caused by marijuana itself.
Click to expand...

And as I said, addiction and dependence are different things.

Opiates cause a physical drug dependency. Marijuana does not.

Both can be the subject of addictions - as can sex, food, gambling - and anything else that can cause releases of dopamine.
 
Blue Donkey said:
You are hopeless. Anything about alcohol that has no effect on the legality of cannibis (which would be everything) is a strawman.
Click to expand...

The point is that cannabis is less dangerous than alcohol. It should therefore be less regulated and more easily obtained than alcohol.
 
lwf said:
The point is that cannabis is less dangerous than alcohol. It should therefore be less regulated and more easily obtained than alcohol.
Click to expand...

My argument is only about what are the actual dangers of smoking marijuana and why is it illegal in most places, which has nothing to do with alcohol.
 
Blue Donkey said:
My argument is only about what are the actual dangers of smoking marijuana and why is it illegal in most places, which has nothing to do with alcohol.
Click to expand...

My counter argument is that those actual dangers are not sufficient to make it illegal.
 
Checkerboard Strangler said:
Most counties in California banned smoking inside apartments a while ago.
As for pot, pot does not contain the ingredients found in tobacco, because it isn't tobacco.
Click to expand...

Smoking pot involves burning dried plant matter, which can start fires just as easily as with tobacco. 'Vaping' pot by forcing heated air through ground pot volatilizes the THC & other cannabinoids & seems safer than smoking it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom