Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
Turn on thread page Beta
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I mean in the long term it's nowhere near as harmful as cigarettes and is less addictive than caffeine.

    I guess you could argue that being high can make you commit crimes without full control but high alcohol dosage does the same (which happens).

    Last reason I can think of is how people can grow it in their homes and sell it, but surely you could just illegalise the distribution of cannabis but allow people to take it from approved shops/organisations?

    Curious.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    It isn't today, so go nuts!
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by champ_mc99)
    I mean in the long term it's nowhere near as harmful as cigarettes and is less addictive than caffeine.

    I guess you could argue that being high can make you commit crimes without full control but high alcohol dosage does the same (which happens).

    Last reason I can think of is how people can grow it in their homes and sell it, but surely you could just illegalise the distribution of cannabis but allow people to take it from approved shops/organisations?

    Curious.
    Google "the history of"
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ODES_PDES)
    Google "the history of"
    Was hoping one of you could give me a quick summary.

    (Original post by BristolFresher15)
    It isn't today, so go nuts!
    It is
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by champ_mc99)
    Was hoping one of you could give me a quick summary.



    It is
    Not where I'm from :P
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by champ_mc99)
    "I guess you could argue that being high can make you commit crimes without full control..."
    When I'm high I can barely get off the couch, let alone muster up the effort to leave the house and commit a crime. At worst I'd waddle out of a convenience store and forget to pay for the bag of Cheetos I'm holding...
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Because our laws are based on the thoughts and fears of uneducated, uninformed dinosaurs instead of being based on fact and evidence.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by champ_mc99)
    I mean in the long term it's nowhere near as harmful as cigarettes and is less addictive than caffeine.

    I guess you could argue that being high can make you commit crimes without full control but high alcohol dosage does the same (which happens).

    Last reason I can think of is how people can grow it in their homes and sell it, but surely you could just illegalise the distribution of cannabis but allow people to take it from approved shops/organisations?

    Curious.
    Thing is things like alcohol and cigarettes aren't banned and made illegal because they came from a long time ago and were tradition(<-- hate using this word) etc etc so thus it has not been banned however if alcohol and cigarettes were to be found/made today i'm sure they would be made illegal

    this is one of the arguments to legalise cannabis but personally i would legalise it, providing it doesn't affect anyone else who doesn't want to be affected then i see no problem with it
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    you know that situation where a law has been a law via scientific ignorance for so long to the point where the justification for its existence becomes cultural? yeahhh. that's why
    it's the same reason people support first past the post, or the EU, or the monarchy, or the dissatisfaction towards the idea of polygamy - it's purely a law that got its legitimacy not via science but via culture/tradition. a legal tradition. a status quo bias effect. people love preserving what they know and hate the unknown. especially when so much propaganda is surrounding its existence

    as for me, I smoke weed pretty often, and I pay no tax on it. so I don't really care. the only problem is not being able to buy it from a shop. the real place to worry about weed is america where people are being arrested *so* much for a harmless substance, and to the point where cartels are killing both each other and citizens on the US-mexican border.

    sadly, it's 4/20 today and my weed is late :/ that's making me grieve more about weed's illegality.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Historical precedence.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    something about it being a 'gateway drug'? lol idk
    Spoiler:
    Show
    amazing GCSE biology knowledge coming into play here
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JordanL_)
    Because our laws are based on the thoughts and fears of uneducated, uninformed dinosaurs instead of being based on fact and evidence.

    (Original post by thefatone)
    Thing is things like alcohol and cigarettes aren't banned and made illegal because they came from a long time ago and were tradition(<-- hate using this word) etc etc so thus it has not been banned however if alcohol and cigarettes were to be found/made today i'm sure they would be made illegal

    this is one of the arguments to legalise cannabis but personally i would legalise it, providing it doesn't affect anyone else who doesn't want to be affected then i see no problem with it
    (Original post by BubbleBoobies)
    you know that situation where a law has been a law via scientific ignorance for so long to the point where the justification for its existence becomes cultural? yeahhh. that's why
    it's the same reason people support first past the post, or the EU, or the monarchy, or the dissatisfaction towards the idea of polygamy - it's purely a law that got its legitimacy not via science but via culture/tradition. a legal tradition.

    as for me, I smoke weed pretty often, and I pay no tax on it. so I don't really care. the only problem is not being able to buy it from a shop. the real place to worry about weed is america where people are being arrested *so* much for a harmless substance, and to the point where cartels are killing both each other and citizens on the US-mexican border.

    sadly, it's 4/20 today and my weed is late :/ that's making me grieve more about weed's illegality.
    So if I were to ask the government they would give me this reason? Alright, so cannabis is banned because it was forbidden in the past (still makes no sense). Why was it forbidden in the past? If cannabis arose later on, then you can't really apply cultural reasons right?

    (Original post by Dandaman1)
    When I'm high I can barely get off the couch, let alone muster up the effort to leave the house and commit a crime. At worst I'd waddle out of a convenience store and forget to pay for the bag of Cheetos I'm holding...
    Lol. Thanks for improving my point.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I guess we have to weigh the secular morals with the cultural/social morals. Something is bad because it just is. I don't know. :dontknow:
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by champ_mc99)
    So if I were to ask the government they would give me this reason? Alright, so cannabis is banned because it was forbidden in the past (still makes no sense). Why was it forbidden in the past? If cannabis arose later on, then you can't really apply cultural reasons right?
    no, of course the government wouldn't cite culture as their reason. their reason would be the same reason (that has now been disproven across the entire global epistemic community concerning medicine/drugs) as before: "certain kinds of drugs are so bad that we must ban them to protect people from themselves" (and they believe this still because of how powerful the indoctrination of an entire culture has been, or that they believe they'll lose votes if they say anything else)- not only are drugs not as dangerous as this (and there's now evidence of their medicinal properties, especially cannabis) but the idea that you can effectively prohibit drugs is invalid when somebody like me (a student) can get them without any kind of problems (except, like I said, whether they get to me on time). I know *so* many people my age without any kind of knowledge of organised crime that can get drugs no problem. isn't that concerning for the state? the state is meant to specialise in making people like me obey their law, but I am able, like so many others, to avoid the law entirely.
    Offline

    14
    I would legalise - just saying
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by champ_mc99)
    So if I were to ask the government they would give me this reason? Alright, so cannabis is banned because it was forbidden in the past (still makes no sense). Why was it forbidden in the past? If cannabis arose later on, then you can't really apply cultural reasons right?



    Lol. Thanks for improving my point.
    The government would tell you "because cannabis is dangerous". Even though it's factually, unequivocally safer than the vast majority of drugs. Not that it's relevant, because the evidence shows that banning drugs doesn't stop people from using them.

    So again, our laws are based on myths perpetuated by idiots.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BubbleBoobies)
    no, of course the government wouldn't cite culture as their reason. their reason would be the same reason (that has now been disproven across the entire global epistemic community concerning medicine/drugs) as before: "certain kinds of drugs are so bad that we must ban them to protect people from themselves" (and they believe this still because of how powerful the indoctrination of an entire culture has been, or that they believe they'll lose votes if they say anything else)- not only are drugs not as dangerous as this (and there's now evidence of their medicinal properties, especially cannabis) but the idea that you can effectively prohibit drugs is invalid when somebody like me (a student) can get them without any kind of problems (except, like I said, whether they get to me on time). I know *so* many people my age without any kind of knowledge of organised crime that can get drugs no problem. isn't that concerning for the state? the state is meant to specialise in making people like me obey their law, but I am able, like so many others, to avoid the law entirely.
    Lol. I never understood that either. They either just take the stuff away from you or give you a max of £100 fine. I'm guessing it's about a delusion of the masses, so governments keep this lie going to please the citizens and get votes.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by champ_mc99)
    Lol. I never understood that either. They either just take the stuff away from you or give you a max of £100 fine. I'm guessing it's about a delusion of the masses, so governments keep this lie going to please the citizens and get votes.
    pretty much - but eventually those that were given the lie will die out and those like me and others my age will think it's better to simply legalise such relatively harmless substances
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BubbleBoobies)
    pretty much - but eventually those that were given the lie will die out and those like me and others my age will think it's better to simply legalise such relatively harmless substances
    Hmmm... will the economy benefit or suffer? Imagine all that tax from cannabis industries...
 
 
 
Poll
“Yanny” or “Laurel”
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.