Why is marijuana illegal?

Dude, how did cannabis get into this equation.
Cannabis is certainly a very harmful product. And my argument is not that because of X is less harmful than Y, Y should be legalised. My argument is that the governments point of view and reasoning is irrelevant. Their reasoning of banning marijuana is due to the nature of marijuana being dangerous compared to smoking and drinking. Which is not true. Therefore their argument and reasoning is irrelevant.

To be fair none of those studies actually showed cannabis to be the cause of the mental health issues, first rule of scientific studies correlation DOES NOT equal causation.

Studies actually suggest it can cure an inability to quickscope


Posted from TSR Mobile

See the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drug's Report on Cannabis, here. Their reasoning is not that it is more harmful than legal drugs, so to claim that to be the case is a strawman argument; it is false.



So then, cigarettes cannot be said to be the cause of multiple cancers, as only a casual link exists between cause and effect [1].

Casual relationships should not be discarded when there is a wealth of evidence to suggest a link.

Because it can kill.

You do realise what you just said right? CAUSAL links, as in CAUSATION not just correlation

Because it can kill.

You do realise what you just said right? CAUSAL links, as in CAUSATION not just correlation

Err, yes. A casual link is where variables X and Y are correlated, but no causal link has been established.

See the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drug's Report on Cannabis, here. Their reasoning is not that it is more harmful than legal drugs, so to claim that to be the case is a strawman argument; it is false.



So then, cigarettes cannot be said to be the cause of multiple cancers, as only a casual link exists between cause and effect [1].

Casual relationships should not be discarded when there is a wealth of evidence to suggest a link.

What is the gov rationale as to why they have illegalised it?
To be fair, it does seem that drug law is based entirely on profit. Laws seem almost arbitrary with relevance to public health and well being (which is I assume the OP's point).

We need to consider cannabis independently. Regular cannabis is linked to a fivefold increase in depression and anxiety rates [1,3,4], can lead to dependence [2], can lead to an increased susceptibility to psychotic disorders [3], significantly elevated risk of mental disorder [5], increased motor accident risk [6], sixfold increase in risk of schizophrenia [7] and can lead to difficulties integrating into society [8].

WALOB, you're well aware that its a load of scaremongering *******s, why you gotta be such a bigot?

While reading government reports is not my preferred bed time reading, I think the main points are outlined in 13.4.1, which is....

"The most worrying individual harms are the effects on mental health
but, since the Council’s previous review the evidence has become more,
rather than less, confused. Although there is a consistent (though weak)
association, from longitudinal studies, between cannabis use and the
development of psychotic illness, this is not reflected in the available
evidence on the incidence of psychotic conditions. The most likely (but
not the only) explanation is that cannabis – in the population as a whole
– plays only a modest role in the development of these conditions. The
possibility that the greater use of cannabis preparations with a higher
THC content might increase the harmfulness of cannabis to mental
health cannot be denied; but the behaviour of cannabis users, in the
face of stronger products – as well as the magnitude of a causal
association with psychotic illnesses – is uncertain."

So essentially the mental health side of things.

There's certainly grounds to say cannabis is less harmful than cigarettes and alcohol.

Again with the bigot card, again I have no idea where you get the idea from that I'm a bigot.

Again I'll say I don't see why thinking cannabis should remain illegal makes me a bigot, let's do this whole argument again....

What is the gov rationale as to why they have illegalised it?
To be fair, it does seem that drug law is based entirely on profit. Laws seem almost arbitrary with relevance to public health and well being (which is I assume the OP's point).

What is the gov rationale as to why they have illegalised it?
To be fair, it does seem that drug law is based entirely on profit. Laws seem almost arbitrary with relevance to public health and well being (which is I assume the OP's point).

evidence? you may as well say the Bible is proof of God, you tripped up at the most fundamental hurdle my little friend.