11 ms·

This should be the way everywhere. There is no reason for weed to be illegal when tobacco is legal. I don't smoke either but I support legalisation or at the ve

by jp0d 5y ago

This should be the way everywhere. There is no reason for weed to be illegal when tobacco is legal. I don't smoke either but I support legalisation or at the very least decriminalisation. At least that way the countries can get tax money and also help people who need counselling instead of charging them with unnecessary crimes. They did this in the Australian Capital Territory. Hopefully they'll legalise it in most states.

foxes 5y ago
Because x bad thing is allowed we should also allow y? Ridiculous. I agree it shouldn’t be criminal and having people put into jail over small amounts. But if anything tobacco and alcohol should be restricted too.
- enchiridion 5y ago
  Are people really so inept that they need the government up tell them what they can and cannot do with their own bodies? Study and publicize the risks, the rest should be left to personal decisions.
  - edgyquant 5y ago
    I agree about the use of cannabis but if you’ve ever lived next to a meth den I don’t think you’d see that and think, “we should legalize this.” Pot heads are one thing, and they don’t usually commit crimes just because they are high, but hard drugs are a completely different ball game that are a lot more nuanced than, “what you do with your body,” meth heads kill people all the time due to the paranoia associated with the drug.
    - dragonwriter 5y ago
      > I agree about the use of cannabis but if you’ve ever lived next to a meth den I don’t think you’d see that and think, “we should legalize this.” “Meth dens”, like “crack houses”, are a thing which prohibition may punish, but does not prevent, but instead creates.
      - edgyquant 5y ago
        But how would they punish it if it becomes legal to gather in your front yard and inject methamphetamine?
        gbear605 5y ago
        The same way we already punish people who gather in places they’re not supposed to be in and drink. Legalizing a drug doesn’t mean legalizing all activities relating to it.
        dragonwriter 5y ago
        How do we punish public drunkenness when alcohol is legal?
        edgyquant 5y ago
        We don’t punish people who sit in their house or their yard and get drunk. I’m not talking about public drunkenness I’m talking about meth dens and how they lead to a serious rise in crime in the surrounding neighborhood.
    - rantwasp 5y ago
      if meth was legal and readily available, would you still have this issue? slap a big warning: causes death. Have programs in place to help people with addiction and let things work themselves out
      - edgyquant 5y ago
        The thing is that there are programs in place right now for addiction but people who are hooked on meth don’t want that help. Maybe it’s because I grew up in Meth country and saw more than half of my childhood friends end up in prison or in the streets because they’re hooked on the stuff. Maybe it’s too close to home for me to be reasonable about this but I’ll never agree that meth or heroin should be decriminalized.
        rantwasp 5y ago
        that's your opinion and it's okay to have that opinion. My opinion is that the government should not tell me what I'm allowed to do with my body (or even worst arrest me for doing stuff to my body). If I literally want to kill myself it should be my choice - How ridiculous would it be if we arrested people that attempted suicide? It's at least as ridiculos trying to end up in prison for an addiction. Also, completely tangential. But poverty is the thing that really kills people (including driving them to seeking the thrills of hard drugs). I can almost guarantee that there is a correlation between income level/standard of living and meth zones.
        stjohnswarts 5y ago
        That's fine but that's not what the majority of us believe (that hard/extremely addictive and life destroying drugs should be banned) and you will just have to deal with that or find a libertarian paradise in some far off country. Pot isn't one of those drugs though, it's pretty harmless or at least no more destructive than alcohol.
        rantwasp 5y ago
        we're getting philosophical here. but I believe that your freedom should be YOUR freedom. Does that mean you should do stupid things and ruin your life? Probably not. But this is not about doing stupid things. It's about having the option and the option not being constrained by arbitrary things (ie who gets to decide that A is good and B is bad, A is okay, B is life destroying) also, one thing to consider: It's mostly non-controversial that pot is harmless nowadays. The more you go back in time, the more pot was painted as wrecking your life, a gateway drug, etc. So a lot of what the effect of a drug are can (and is) hearsay + fear-mongering.
  - foxes 5y ago
    What you do with yourself does not always happen in a vacuum. Maybe if you are in the cabin in the wild growing your own pot who cares, but for the rest of society I think we should consider second order effects. Society does already dictate what you can do with your body. You can’t drink and drive. I don’t think we want a society that encourages or turns a blind eye to people to harming themselves.
    - enchiridion 5y ago
      Well in many jurisdictions in the US it is only illegal to drink and drive on property the public has ready access to. If someone is driving drink on sufficiently private property, then that's a risk the people who are choosing to be there are willing to take on. Would I personally want to be involved? Definitely not, but it's not up to me to decide for others. And quite literally everything is harmful in one way or another, it's just a matter of degrees, and people should be allowed to make their own decisions.
  - username90 5y ago
    Yes they are. There is a reason we have a law saying people can't be in a car without seatbelts and so on, it is because people are dumbasses who will hurt themselves. So it being legal for you and everyone else means a ton of people will get hurt just by using it themselves. Are you really fine sacrificing others just to get your fix?
    - enchiridion 5y ago
      I wear a seatbelt because I understand what will happen if I don't, not because of a law. That's a strawman, but I'll roll with it. Yep, totally fine with it (although I have not used any illegal drugs). Mostly because there are massive amounts of people currently using prohibited drugs. Why not study and make known the risks instead of hopelessly trying to directly control everyone's actions? At a higher level, I do not believe in any authority's ability to consistently produce a net benefit over long periods of time by deciding what substances are legal. I do however think that the markets will figure it out pretty quickly.
- jp0d 5y ago
  While I agree with you partially, this is a slippery slope. Sugar and processed food are really bad for you too. Should we start banning or restricting access to those too?
  - jborichevskiy 5y ago
    FWIW Mexico does attempt to label sugary snacks with warning labels, more than in the US at least
  - stjohnswarts 5y ago
    Compared to meth, crack, oxy, etc they are relatively safe so no we don't need to ban them.
    - jp0d 5y ago
      That's the problem. Compared to weed these are highly addictive and cause a lot of harm to the users. Oxy is easily prescribed by doctors whereas there is a taboo against cannabis. It should be the opposite.
- cartoonworld 5y ago
  Marijuana certainly shouldn't be legalized because tobacco is legalized. Marijuana should be legalized because it is relatively benign, easily cultivated, useful, interesting and dare I say pretty good.
  - pmoriarty 5y ago
    No, it should be legal because it's no one else's business but the adult who's changing their consciousness as to what they put in to their body, as long as it doesn't harm anyone else. Just like if an adult wants to go skydiving, which is a risky activity, it should be their choice.
- saiojd 5y ago
  You're getting buried because of your political opinion, but I agree that "there is no reason for weed to be illegal when tobacco is legal" makes no sense whatsoever... I thought we were supposed to be nerds that overvalued logical thought here ;)
  - jp0d 5y ago
    Yeah, you're probably correct. I think a lot of people are very liberal about their downvoting privilege! I'm happy for someone to not agree with me but I don't like being flagged or downvoted just because someone doesn't like my opinion. I think downvotes should be for comments that are racist or abusive in nature. A little bit of sarcasm should be okay!
- cgrealy 5y ago
  Tobacco and alcohol are restricted. Almost every country has rules around how old you must be to purchase or consume them, where you can purchase them, where you can consume them, how much you can consume before driving (in the case of alcohol), etc. There's no reason we can't apply the same reasonable controls to cannabis.
  - rantwasp 5y ago
    The same control ARE applied to cannabis. You cannot drive high and claim you're not drunk. The punishment (at least in my neck of the woods) is basically the same.
    - pmoriarty 5y ago
      This is interesting. How would they even know you're high on cannabis while you're driving? As far as I know there's no way to tell. Last I checked the available drug tests could only tell if you've used cannabis in the last 30 days, not if you used it on the day you were driving.. and even if you had that doesn't mean you were high at the time you drove. Drug tests should really be replaced with performance tests. It's none of their business if you're high. What matters is if you can drive safely.
      - rantwasp 5y ago
        huh. so at least in WA the law says >5 nano-grams if THC per milliliter in blood can get you a DUI. Seems that you are right that there is no reliable way of testing for this (and the 5 nanograms might have been pulled out of someone’s a…ttic when the law was written). https://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=46.61.502 https://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=46.61.502
    - cgrealy 5y ago
      You missed my point. Cannabis is way more restricted and controlled than tobacco or alcohol in most places. If you buy cigarettes or alcohol, cops won’t bother you. If you’re caught with cannabis, you are potentially facing criminal charges.
TylerE 5y ago
No, it should be fully legalized, not just decriminalized. Decriminalization is this weird grey area where it's legal(ish) to possess small quantities, but generally not to produce, sell, or distribute.
- austhrow743 5y ago
  It’s weird as fuck to me that decriminalisation is even considered because one of the (or just the?) largest negative effects of people doing illegal drugs is the large crime organisations built to provide them. As well as the then poor quality control resulting in people overdosing because they didn’t know what they were using, although not really a problem with weed specifically. Decriminalisation keeps the organised crime and dodgy product while removing any sort of demand reducing effect keeping it illegal had.
  - nine_k 5y ago
    At least it decreases the number of people sent to prisons for possession and consumption. This is not a sufficient step, but a likely first step in normalizing the use of weed in the eyes of the public. Abrupt changes scare people (and for a good reason).
    - rantwasp 5y ago
      when this is selectively enforced and only people of a certain color or ethnic group have to pay the heavy price of possession I call bullshit on the "war on drugs". this is not and has not been about drugs from day one.
      - nine_k 5y ago
        It was an anti-Left and anti-Black plot from the beginning, according to some. Unfortunately, hard proofs of that are absent. In any case, were it about health and well-being, it likely won't look like a war.
  - Gustomaximus 5y ago
LinuxBender 5y ago
It has been decriminalized then re-criminalized [1] before. To end this loop, lets just legalize anything that doesn't hurt others and let people decide what is good or bad for themselves, given we follow this logic on substances and habits such as alcohol, sugar, sun bathing, throwing darts, parachuting, hang-gliding, replying to emails whilst drunk. I would wager that driving a car is a higher risk to others than inhaling or ingesting a drug though I don't have statistics to back that up. [1] - https://theconversation.com/re-criminalizing-cannabis-is-worse-than-1930s-reefer-madness-89821 https://theconversation.com/re-criminalizing-cannabis-is-wor...
- jimbob45 5y ago
  Addiction hurts others though. You can’t get physically addicted to most of the things you listed.
  - LinuxBender 5y ago
    True, mostly. People do get addicted to sugar and alcohol. Though it appears about 30% of people get addicted to MJ use [1] which makes them moody or restless. Does that really hurt others, more so than someone not getting their coffee in the morning? I get moody without my coffee. The other issues they list appear to only affect the person with the dependency. I suppose if we go down the rabbit hole, if a person is so moody they lose their job and they have children dependent on them, that's a problem. I would put that in the same category as drinking on the job though. [1] - https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/research-reports/marijuana/marijuana-addictive https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/research-reports/mari...
    - petre 5y ago
      Except some people would go home from the job and do it in front of their kids.
- umvi 5y ago
  > To end this loop, lets just legalize anything that doesn't hurt others Everything hurts others. People and their actions don't exist in a vacuum - we are all players on a team called "society"; the actions of people, even if done privately, can end up affecting the performance of the team. Cars, alcohol, and tobacco are all legal, and all of those things end up harming others directly or through second/third order effects. I'm not necessarily against decriminalizing or even legalizing marijuana, but I don't think the reason for doing so should be because it "doesn't hurt others", but rather because governments should infringe on liberties as little as possible even if it means bad consequences could emerge from abuse of said liberties.
rayiner 5y ago
I’m not super up to date on medical literature, but are the mental effects of cannabis the same as tobacco? Nicotine is a stimulant. I know a few potheads that whittled their lives away high, but tobacco doesn’t seem to have that effect.
- pmoriarty 5y ago
  Tobacco is a sacred plant in some contexts, like in Native American ceremonies, where it's not used for its stimulant effects. Cannabis too can be used sacramentally, spiritually, recreationally, or medicinally. It can be an appetite stimulant or a sex enhancer. Some can get insight through it, while others prefer to get so stoned they can't think. It's helped me to reconnect with my feelings and motivated me to seek therapy. It can be a wise teacher if you listen. Or you can watch cartoons on it and eat snacks.. The many uses of it are not mutually exclusive, but how you use it and what you get out of it is your choice.
  - rayiner 5y ago
    What’s the effect in the aggregate on the average person? It seems to me that many (most?) don’t have the willpower to really make smart choices with it, and default to watching cartoons and eating snacks. We’re watching this happen to a friend of my BIL now and it’s hard to watch. To be fair the kid’s problems started with his parents exercising “choice” to pursue serial marriages instead of raising their kid, but smoking pot (with a blow torch apparently?) isn’t helping.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
- rantwasp 5y ago
  is this causation or correlation? do you know potheads that are wildly successful? because I do. And it does not seem to be linked to weed
  - rayiner 5y ago

by jp0d 5y ago

foxes 5y ago

Because x bad thing is allowed we should also allow y? Ridiculous. I agree it shouldn’t be criminal and having people put into jail over small amounts. But if anything tobacco and alcohol should be restricted too.

enchiridion 5y ago
Are people really so inept that they need the government up tell them what they can and cannot do with their own bodies? Study and publicize the risks, the rest should be left to personal decisions.
- edgyquant 5y ago
  I agree about the use of cannabis but if you’ve ever lived next to a meth den I don’t think you’d see that and think, “we should legalize this.” Pot heads are one thing, and they don’t usually commit crimes just because they are high, but hard drugs are a completely different ball game that are a lot more nuanced than, “what you do with your body,” meth heads kill people all the time due to the paranoia associated with the drug.
  - dragonwriter 5y ago
    > I agree about the use of cannabis but if you’ve ever lived next to a meth den I don’t think you’d see that and think, “we should legalize this.” “Meth dens”, like “crack houses”, are a thing which prohibition may punish, but does not prevent, but instead creates.
    - edgyquant 5y ago
      But how would they punish it if it becomes legal to gather in your front yard and inject methamphetamine?
      - gbear605 5y ago
        The same way we already punish people who gather in places they’re not supposed to be in and drink. Legalizing a drug doesn’t mean legalizing all activities relating to it.
      - dragonwriter 5y ago
        How do we punish public drunkenness when alcohol is legal?
        edgyquant 5y ago
        We don’t punish people who sit in their house or their yard and get drunk. I’m not talking about public drunkenness I’m talking about meth dens and how they lead to a serious rise in crime in the surrounding neighborhood.
  - rantwasp 5y ago
    if meth was legal and readily available, would you still have this issue? slap a big warning: causes death. Have programs in place to help people with addiction and let things work themselves out
    - edgyquant 5y ago
      The thing is that there are programs in place right now for addiction but people who are hooked on meth don’t want that help. Maybe it’s because I grew up in Meth country and saw more than half of my childhood friends end up in prison or in the streets because they’re hooked on the stuff. Maybe it’s too close to home for me to be reasonable about this but I’ll never agree that meth or heroin should be decriminalized.
      - rantwasp 5y ago
        that's your opinion and it's okay to have that opinion. My opinion is that the government should not tell me what I'm allowed to do with my body (or even worst arrest me for doing stuff to my body). If I literally want to kill myself it should be my choice - How ridiculous would it be if we arrested people that attempted suicide? It's at least as ridiculos trying to end up in prison for an addiction. Also, completely tangential. But poverty is the thing that really kills people (including driving them to seeking the thrills of hard drugs). I can almost guarantee that there is a correlation between income level/standard of living and meth zones.
        stjohnswarts 5y ago
        That's fine but that's not what the majority of us believe (that hard/extremely addictive and life destroying drugs should be banned) and you will just have to deal with that or find a libertarian paradise in some far off country. Pot isn't one of those drugs though, it's pretty harmless or at least no more destructive than alcohol.
        rantwasp 5y ago
        we're getting philosophical here. but I believe that your freedom should be YOUR freedom. Does that mean you should do stupid things and ruin your life? Probably not. But this is not about doing stupid things. It's about having the option and the option not being constrained by arbitrary things (ie who gets to decide that A is good and B is bad, A is okay, B is life destroying) also, one thing to consider: It's mostly non-controversial that pot is harmless nowadays. The more you go back in time, the more pot was painted as wrecking your life, a gateway drug, etc. So a lot of what the effect of a drug are can (and is) hearsay + fear-mongering.
- foxes 5y ago
  What you do with yourself does not always happen in a vacuum. Maybe if you are in the cabin in the wild growing your own pot who cares, but for the rest of society I think we should consider second order effects. Society does already dictate what you can do with your body. You can’t drink and drive. I don’t think we want a society that encourages or turns a blind eye to people to harming themselves.
  - enchiridion 5y ago
    Well in many jurisdictions in the US it is only illegal to drink and drive on property the public has ready access to. If someone is driving drink on sufficiently private property, then that's a risk the people who are choosing to be there are willing to take on. Would I personally want to be involved? Definitely not, but it's not up to me to decide for others. And quite literally everything is harmful in one way or another, it's just a matter of degrees, and people should be allowed to make their own decisions.
- username90 5y ago
  Yes they are. There is a reason we have a law saying people can't be in a car without seatbelts and so on, it is because people are dumbasses who will hurt themselves. So it being legal for you and everyone else means a ton of people will get hurt just by using it themselves. Are you really fine sacrificing others just to get your fix?
  - enchiridion 5y ago
    I wear a seatbelt because I understand what will happen if I don't, not because of a law. That's a strawman, but I'll roll with it. Yep, totally fine with it (although I have not used any illegal drugs). Mostly because there are massive amounts of people currently using prohibited drugs. Why not study and make known the risks instead of hopelessly trying to directly control everyone's actions? At a higher level, I do not believe in any authority's ability to consistently produce a net benefit over long periods of time by deciding what substances are legal. I do however think that the markets will figure it out pretty quickly.
jp0d 5y ago
While I agree with you partially, this is a slippery slope. Sugar and processed food are really bad for you too. Should we start banning or restricting access to those too?
- jborichevskiy 5y ago
  FWIW Mexico does attempt to label sugary snacks with warning labels, more than in the US at least
- stjohnswarts 5y ago
  Compared to meth, crack, oxy, etc they are relatively safe so no we don't need to ban them.
  - jp0d 5y ago
    That's the problem. Compared to weed these are highly addictive and cause a lot of harm to the users. Oxy is easily prescribed by doctors whereas there is a taboo against cannabis. It should be the opposite.
cartoonworld 5y ago
Marijuana certainly shouldn't be legalized because tobacco is legalized. Marijuana should be legalized because it is relatively benign, easily cultivated, useful, interesting and dare I say pretty good.
- pmoriarty 5y ago
  No, it should be legal because it's no one else's business but the adult who's changing their consciousness as to what they put in to their body, as long as it doesn't harm anyone else. Just like if an adult wants to go skydiving, which is a risky activity, it should be their choice.
saiojd 5y ago
You're getting buried because of your political opinion, but I agree that "there is no reason for weed to be illegal when tobacco is legal" makes no sense whatsoever... I thought we were supposed to be nerds that overvalued logical thought here ;)
- jp0d 5y ago
  Yeah, you're probably correct. I think a lot of people are very liberal about their downvoting privilege! I'm happy for someone to not agree with me but I don't like being flagged or downvoted just because someone doesn't like my opinion. I think downvotes should be for comments that are racist or abusive in nature. A little bit of sarcasm should be okay!
cgrealy 5y ago
Tobacco and alcohol are restricted. Almost every country has rules around how old you must be to purchase or consume them, where you can purchase them, where you can consume them, how much you can consume before driving (in the case of alcohol), etc. There's no reason we can't apply the same reasonable controls to cannabis.
- rantwasp 5y ago
  The same control ARE applied to cannabis. You cannot drive high and claim you're not drunk. The punishment (at least in my neck of the woods) is basically the same.
  - pmoriarty 5y ago
    This is interesting. How would they even know you're high on cannabis while you're driving? As far as I know there's no way to tell. Last I checked the available drug tests could only tell if you've used cannabis in the last 30 days, not if you used it on the day you were driving.. and even if you had that doesn't mean you were high at the time you drove. Drug tests should really be replaced with performance tests. It's none of their business if you're high. What matters is if you can drive safely.
    - rantwasp 5y ago
      huh. so at least in WA the law says >5 nano-grams if THC per milliliter in blood can get you a DUI. Seems that you are right that there is no reliable way of testing for this (and the 5 nanograms might have been pulled out of someone’s a…ttic when the law was written). https://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=46.61.502 https://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=46.61.502
  - cgrealy 5y ago
    You missed my point. Cannabis is way more restricted and controlled than tobacco or alcohol in most places. If you buy cigarettes or alcohol, cops won’t bother you. If you’re caught with cannabis, you are potentially facing criminal charges.

TylerE 5y ago

No, it should be fully legalized, not just decriminalized. Decriminalization is this weird grey area where it's legal(ish) to possess small quantities, but generally not to produce, sell, or distribute.

austhrow743 5y ago
It’s weird as fuck to me that decriminalisation is even considered because one of the (or just the?) largest negative effects of people doing illegal drugs is the large crime organisations built to provide them. As well as the then poor quality control resulting in people overdosing because they didn’t know what they were using, although not really a problem with weed specifically. Decriminalisation keeps the organised crime and dodgy product while removing any sort of demand reducing effect keeping it illegal had.
- nine_k 5y ago
  At least it decreases the number of people sent to prisons for possession and consumption. This is not a sufficient step, but a likely first step in normalizing the use of weed in the eyes of the public. Abrupt changes scare people (and for a good reason).
  - rantwasp 5y ago
    when this is selectively enforced and only people of a certain color or ethnic group have to pay the heavy price of possession I call bullshit on the "war on drugs". this is not and has not been about drugs from day one.
    - nine_k 5y ago
      It was an anti-Left and anti-Black plot from the beginning, according to some. Unfortunately, hard proofs of that are absent. In any case, were it about health and well-being, it likely won't look like a war.
- Gustomaximus 5y ago

LinuxBender 5y ago

It has been decriminalized then re-criminalized [1] before. To end this loop, lets just legalize anything that doesn't hurt others and let people decide what is good or bad for themselves, given we follow this logic on substances and habits such as alcohol, sugar, sun bathing, throwing darts, parachuting, hang-gliding, replying to emails whilst drunk. I would wager that driving a car is a higher risk to others than inhaling or ingesting a drug though I don't have statistics to back that up. [1] - https://theconversation.com/re-criminalizing-cannabis-is-worse-than-1930s-reefer-madness-89821 https://theconversation.com/re-criminalizing-cannabis-is-wor...

jimbob45 5y ago
Addiction hurts others though. You can’t get physically addicted to most of the things you listed.
- LinuxBender 5y ago
  True, mostly. People do get addicted to sugar and alcohol. Though it appears about 30% of people get addicted to MJ use [1] which makes them moody or restless. Does that really hurt others, more so than someone not getting their coffee in the morning? I get moody without my coffee. The other issues they list appear to only affect the person with the dependency. I suppose if we go down the rabbit hole, if a person is so moody they lose their job and they have children dependent on them, that's a problem. I would put that in the same category as drinking on the job though. [1] - https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/research-reports/marijuana/marijuana-addictive https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/research-reports/mari...
  - petre 5y ago
    Except some people would go home from the job and do it in front of their kids.
umvi 5y ago
> To end this loop, lets just legalize anything that doesn't hurt others Everything hurts others. People and their actions don't exist in a vacuum - we are all players on a team called "society"; the actions of people, even if done privately, can end up affecting the performance of the team. Cars, alcohol, and tobacco are all legal, and all of those things end up harming others directly or through second/third order effects. I'm not necessarily against decriminalizing or even legalizing marijuana, but I don't think the reason for doing so should be because it "doesn't hurt others", but rather because governments should infringe on liberties as little as possible even if it means bad consequences could emerge from abuse of said liberties.

rayiner 5y ago

I’m not super up to date on medical literature, but are the mental effects of cannabis the same as tobacco? Nicotine is a stimulant. I know a few potheads that whittled their lives away high, but tobacco doesn’t seem to have that effect.

pmoriarty 5y ago
Tobacco is a sacred plant in some contexts, like in Native American ceremonies, where it's not used for its stimulant effects. Cannabis too can be used sacramentally, spiritually, recreationally, or medicinally. It can be an appetite stimulant or a sex enhancer. Some can get insight through it, while others prefer to get so stoned they can't think. It's helped me to reconnect with my feelings and motivated me to seek therapy. It can be a wise teacher if you listen. Or you can watch cartoons on it and eat snacks.. The many uses of it are not mutually exclusive, but how you use it and what you get out of it is your choice.
- rayiner 5y ago
  What’s the effect in the aggregate on the average person? It seems to me that many (most?) don’t have the willpower to really make smart choices with it, and default to watching cartoons and eating snacks. We’re watching this happen to a friend of my BIL now and it’s hard to watch. To be fair the kid’s problems started with his parents exercising “choice” to pursue serial marriages instead of raising their kid, but smoking pot (with a blow torch apparently?) isn’t helping.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
rantwasp 5y ago
is this causation or correlation? do you know potheads that are wildly successful? because I do. And it does not seem to be linked to weed
- rayiner 5y ago