If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   States with legalized medical marijuana have been shown to have lower suicide rates than those that don't. Cool tag gets the munchies, spiffy tag steps in   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 144
    More: Spiffy, suicide rates, American Journal of Public Health, negative relationship, marijuana  
•       •       •

1778 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Feb 2014 at 1:05 AM (46 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



144 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-02-05 03:02:17 AM  

gadian: I wonder what the point of legality has to do with it.  Pot use in Alaska is off the charts, only quasi-legally though, yet the suicide rate is one of the highest (the highest?) in the nation, especially for young men.


When it's dark for 23 hours a day, even the dankest of the dank isn't going to do much for your mood.
 
2014-02-05 03:11:59 AM  

Fecal Conservative: SilverStag: I read the headline as SPLIFFY tag steps in.....

/Second.jpg


Came here to say Fark needs a SPLIFFY tag for these occasions.
 
2014-02-05 03:15:05 AM  

fusillade762: The effect on males was clear

Correlation, causation, etc.


THIS.
 
2014-02-05 03:35:15 AM  

SilverStag: I read the headline as SPLIFFY tag steps in.....


Came here to say that ...
 
2014-02-05 03:40:13 AM  

Salieri_82: gadian: I wonder what the point of legality has to do with it.  Pot use in Alaska is off the charts, only quasi-legally though, yet the suicide rate is one of the highest (the highest?) in the nation, especially for young men.

When it's dark for 23 hours a day, even the dankest of the dank isn't going to do much for your mood.



In addition to that you have quite a bit of poverty.  If I remember right suicides in Alaska aren't actually significantly correllated with the winter(though the prospect of another one might be).

Sun Lamps people, sun lamps.
 
2014-02-05 03:49:02 AM  

gadian: I wonder what the point of legality has to do with it.  Pot use in Alaska is off the charts, only quasi-legally though, yet the suicide rate is one of the highest (the highest?) in the nation, especially for young men.


It is. I checked it, I thought it was Utah at first because I thought I remembered Utah being number 1 in antidepressant prescriptions. The 10 states with the highest suicide rates are Alaska, New Mexico, Wyoming, Montana, Nevada, Colorado, Arizona, West Virginia, Utah and Oregon. I'm actually quite surprised so many western/mountain states are on there, with no other link that jumps out. Places like Arizona and Oregon don't have much else in common besides location and being less densely populated than other states. You've got desert, mountain, forest, fark I'm constantly buried in snow. Except for the urban parts of Oregon, New Mexico and Colorado, I guess conservatism is the only other link they have, but the conservative southern states only have West Virginia represented. It's odd.
 
2014-02-05 03:51:46 AM  

UseLessHuman: So take all the fun out of it and put the remainder in a bottle? Did you consider that fun might have positive medical benefits too, or that the fun may be the medicinal part of the experience?


Not everyone thinks smoking is "fun".
Did you consider that the smoke itself might have medical detriments by itself?  That's especially true for people with asthma or other lung problems.
Did you consider that some people might not want to smoke something  -- especially something that would make them high -- for religious reasons (Mormons come to mind)?

There are many practical reasons for isolating and making non-intoxicating variants of the active ingredients in marijuana, it isn't just because "they" are anti-fun prudes.  I hate the way smoking feels, and if I was going to take a thc-based medicine I'd rather it be in non-intoxicating pill form.
 
2014-02-05 03:54:15 AM  
AverageAmericanGuy:That said, if marijuana has positive medical benefits, then some aspiring scientist at Big Pharma ought to be able to isolate the effective compounds and develop a delivery system of them that doesn't intoxicate the patient and doesn't require them to smoke it.

Doctors have.  I don't know about "Big Pharma".  Something about some child having an exceptionally large amount of seizures and the cannabis helped.  Something in cannabis besides THC did it. So they found a strain that had a large amount of this chemical and then somehow isolated it and gave it to this child.  I believe it stopped all seizures.

No source, find your own or call me a liar.
 
2014-02-05 03:54:22 AM  

fusillade762: ladyfortuna: SilentStrider: AverageAmericanGuy: That said, if marijuana has positive medical benefits, then some aspiring scientist at Big Pharma ought to be able to isolate the effective compounds and develop a delivery system of them that doesn't intoxicate the patient and doesn't require them to smoke it.

while this is certainly possible, it would be a lot easier and more cost effective quite frankly to smoke it.

I've always heard that smoking it is almost as bad as cigarettes. Any info?

It's not.

Marijuana And Lungs: Study Finds Drug Doesn't Do Same Kind Of Damage As Tobacco

Though that's partially because almost no one smokes 20 joints a day.


Yeah, I doubt it's as bad as ciggs due to lacking quite so much junk like tar, but I would doubt that sucking ANY kind of smokey particulates into your lungs is particularly good for them.
 
2014-02-05 04:01:24 AM  

firefly212: fusillade762: The effect on males was clear

Correlation, causation, etc. That said, this is interesting and could use more study. Where do I volunteer?

You volunteer in the same book where you learn that time-series analysis isn't just correlation

http://www.statlab.uni-heidelberg.de/people/eichler/handbook.pdf


Unless there is an order of one standard deviation difference, no statistical causation can be determined.

Causation is useless without this.
 
2014-02-05 04:04:02 AM  

Benderama: AverageAmericanGuy:That said, if marijuana has positive medical benefits, then some aspiring scientist at Big Pharma ought to be able to isolate the effective compounds and develop a delivery system of them that doesn't intoxicate the patient and doesn't require them to smoke it.

Doctors have.  I don't know about "Big Pharma".  Something about some child having an exceptionally large amount of seizures and the cannabis helped.  Something in cannabis besides THC did it. So they found a strain that had a large amount of this chemical and then somehow isolated it and gave it to this child.  I believe it stopped all seizures.

No source, find your own or call me a liar.


I already addressed this in a previous comment. Please continue reading. You may find yourself agreeing with me.

I am not against medical marijuana as such. I am against the pretense of medical marijuana to provide stoners their drugs as it encourages the prescription of drugs (untested and unproven) for recreational purposes rather than for actual medicinal purposes.
 
2014-02-05 04:07:17 AM  

Gawdzila: UseLessHuman: So take all the fun out of it and put the remainder in a bottle? Did you consider that fun might have positive medical benefits too, or that the fun may be the medicinal part of the experience?

Not everyone thinks smoking is "fun".
Did you consider that the smoke itself might have medical detriments by itself?  That's especially true for people with asthma or other lung problems.
Did you consider that some people might not want to smoke something  -- especially something that would make them high -- for religious reasons (Mormons come to mind)?

There are many practical reasons for isolating and making non-intoxicating variants of the active ingredients in marijuana, it isn't just because "they" are anti-fun prudes.  I hate the way smoking feels, and if I was going to take a thc-based medicine I'd rather it be in non-intoxicating pill form.


Marinol is that pill form and it doesn't work nearly as well medicinally. Weed comes in all forms, Charlottes Web strain comes to mind.
 
2014-02-05 04:09:15 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: Benderama: AverageAmericanGuy:That said, if marijuana has positive medical benefits, then some aspiring scientist at Big Pharma ought to be able to isolate the effective compounds and develop a delivery system of them that doesn't intoxicate the patient and doesn't require them to smoke it.

Doctors have.  I don't know about "Big Pharma".  Something about some child having an exceptionally large amount of seizures and the cannabis helped.  Something in cannabis besides THC did it. So they found a strain that had a large amount of this chemical and then somehow isolated it and gave it to this child.  I believe it stopped all seizures.

No source, find your own or call me a liar.

I already addressed this in a previous comment. Please continue reading. You may find yourself agreeing with me.

I am not against medical marijuana as such. I am against the pretense of medical marijuana to provide stoners their drugs as it encourages the prescription of drugs (untested and unproven) for recreational purposes rather than for actual medicinal purposes.


That pretense is leading to the outright legalization of marijuana in this country, I love it.
 
2014-02-05 04:09:19 AM  
Also, states with liberal cannabis laws are significantly wealthier than the others.

Cannabis leads to suicide = proven false
Cannabis leads to poverty = proven false

what next?
 
2014-02-05 04:09:23 AM  
Where are the peer reviewed studies of Charlotte's Web?
 
2014-02-05 04:14:11 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: Where are the peer reviewed studies of Charlotte's Web?


Ain't that being a bit specific, especially when you think about all the peer reviewed studies on medical marijuana. I thought you were claiming to be for medical marijuana, as long as those "junkies" don't take advantage. Weird change in your argument.
 
2014-02-05 04:18:07 AM  

TheJoe03: AverageAmericanGuy: Where are the peer reviewed studies of Charlotte's Web?

Ain't that being a bit specific, especially when you think about all the peer reviewed studies on medical marijuana. I thought you were claiming to be for medical marijuana, as long as those "junkies" don't take advantage. Weird change in your argument.


Seems appropriate considering its been brought up by name twice in this discussion.
 
2014-02-05 04:19:32 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: I am not against medical marijuana as such. I am against the pretense of medical marijuana to provide stoners their drugs as it encourages the prescription of drugs (untested and unproven) for recreational purposes rather than for actual medicinal purposes.


I can respect that. But the reasonable way around that is to just flat out legalize marijuana.

When the laws against a drug have orders of magnitude negative effect on one's life than the effects of the drug itself, something is seriously farked up. Especially in "the land of the free."
 
2014-02-05 04:19:57 AM  
States with legalized medical marijuana have been shown to have lower suicide rates than those that don't. Cool tag gets the munchies, spiffy spliffy tag steps in.
 
2014-02-05 04:24:21 AM  

TheJoe03: AverageAmericanGuy: Where are the peer reviewed studies of Charlotte's Web?

Ain't that being a bit specific, especially when you think about all the peer reviewed studies on medical marijuana. I thought you were claiming to be for medical marijuana, as long as those "junkies" don't take advantage. Weird change in your argument.


He's for legalization. Against the dangerous precedent medical marijuana might have set.
 
2014-02-05 04:24:35 AM  

WhiskeyBoy: impaler: Gunther: Correlation ≠ causation. I know for a fact liberal states tend to have slightly lower suicide rates than conservative states, it might be that liberal states are more likely to legalize pot. Or it might be that there's another causal factor behind all three.

Like living in a state where you aren't surrounded by authoritarian assholes makes one less likely to of themselves.


"Correlation != causation, but now let's make statements that imply causation!  Yea!"


"Shark attacks increase with the sale of ice cream"

Gunther: Correlation ≠ causation.

Impaler: Like the time of the year when you buy ice cream, you are more likely to go swimming.

WhiskeyBoy: Correlation != causation, but now let's make statements that imply causation!  Yea!

That's what you just said.
 
2014-02-05 04:29:06 AM  

Benderama: TheJoe03: AverageAmericanGuy: Where are the peer reviewed studies of Charlotte's Web?

Ain't that being a bit specific, especially when you think about all the peer reviewed studies on medical marijuana. I thought you were claiming to be for medical marijuana, as long as those "junkies" don't take advantage. Weird change in your argument.

He's for legalization. Against the dangerous precedent medical marijuana might have set.


To quote my self

Marijuana is the only drug I know of that was legalized by the people and not by the FDA.  These are the same people that elected (insert name of politician you hate).
 
2014-02-05 04:30:42 AM  
Also less Jesus (per capita).

Correlation, causation, etc., etc., ad nauseum.
 
2014-02-05 04:31:54 AM  

Benderama: TheJoe03: AverageAmericanGuy: Where are the peer reviewed studies of Charlotte's Web?

Ain't that being a bit specific, especially when you think about all the peer reviewed studies on medical marijuana. I thought you were claiming to be for medical marijuana, as long as those "junkies" don't take advantage. Weird change in your argument.

He's for legalization. Against the dangerous precedent medical marijuana might have set.


The dangerous precedent of making the public more willing to support legalizing weed for recreational purposes? That's what I'm arguing with him about.
 
2014-02-05 04:33:19 AM  

TheJoe03: Benderama: TheJoe03: AverageAmericanGuy: Where are the peer reviewed studies of Charlotte's Web?

Ain't that being a bit specific, especially when you think about all the peer reviewed studies on medical marijuana. I thought you were claiming to be for medical marijuana, as long as those "junkies" don't take advantage. Weird change in your argument.

He's for legalization. Against the dangerous precedent medical marijuana might have set.

The dangerous precedent of making the public more willing to support legalizing weed for recreational purposes? That's what I'm arguing with him about.


Where has he stated he's against legalization?
 
2014-02-05 04:34:03 AM  

Benderama: Benderama: TheJoe03: AverageAmericanGuy: Where are the peer reviewed studies of Charlotte's Web?

Ain't that being a bit specific, especially when you think about all the peer reviewed studies on medical marijuana. I thought you were claiming to be for medical marijuana, as long as those "junkies" don't take advantage. Weird change in your argument.

He's for legalization. Against the dangerous precedent medical marijuana might have set.

To quote my self

Marijuana is the only drug I know of that was legalized by the people and not by the FDA.  These are the same people that elected (insert name of politician you hate).


Yeah, democracy is totally gay.
 
2014-02-05 04:35:04 AM  

Benderama: TheJoe03: Benderama: TheJoe03: AverageAmericanGuy: Where are the peer reviewed studies of Charlotte's Web?

Ain't that being a bit specific, especially when you think about all the peer reviewed studies on medical marijuana. I thought you were claiming to be for medical marijuana, as long as those "junkies" don't take advantage. Weird change in your argument.

He's for legalization. Against the dangerous precedent medical marijuana might have set.

The dangerous precedent of making the public more willing to support legalizing weed for recreational purposes? That's what I'm arguing with him about.

Where has he stated he's against legalization?


I'm wondering why he cares that medical marijuana has been used to ease us into legal weed, pay attention instead of putting words in my mouth.
 
2014-02-05 04:35:35 AM  

WhiskeyBoy: You know liberal states have more incidents of school shootings?  Since 1996 CO is in the lead with most incidents and highest body count*, CA and FL complete the top 3.


School shooting map:
Link

imgs.xkcd.com
 
2014-02-05 04:42:09 AM  
This is bad news for the "The world is too overpopulated" crowd.

I've come to refer to them as Big Overpopulation. The Bildenergs/illuminati/Rothschilds will neve allow it.
 
2014-02-05 04:43:53 AM  

TheJoe03: Benderama: TheJoe03: AverageAmericanGuy: Where are the peer reviewed studies of Charlotte's Web?

Ain't that being a bit specific, especially when you think about all the peer reviewed studies on medical marijuana. I thought you were claiming to be for medical marijuana, as long as those "junkies" don't take advantage. Weird change in your argument.

He's for legalization. Against the dangerous precedent medical marijuana might have set.

The dangerous precedent of making the public more willing to support legalizing weed for recreational purposes? That's what I'm arguing with him about.


Talk about mistaking correlation with causation.
 
2014-02-05 04:46:13 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: TheJoe03: Benderama: TheJoe03: AverageAmericanGuy: Where are the peer reviewed studies of Charlotte's Web?

Ain't that being a bit specific, especially when you think about all the peer reviewed studies on medical marijuana. I thought you were claiming to be for medical marijuana, as long as those "junkies" don't take advantage. Weird change in your argument.

He's for legalization. Against the dangerous precedent medical marijuana might have set.

The dangerous precedent of making the public more willing to support legalizing weed for recreational purposes? That's what I'm arguing with him about.

Talk about mistaking correlation with causation.


Maybe, but making medical marijuana legal (which Americans have supported for at least a decade) seems to have led to this current environment. Seems you have no argument though, you're just mad at weed junkies I guess.
 
2014-02-05 04:47:54 AM  
It's called baby steps. If we just went for legal weed without that middle step it probably wouldn't have worked out so well.
 
2014-02-05 04:49:57 AM  

TheJoe03: Benderama: Benderama: TheJoe03: AverageAmericanGuy: Where are the peer reviewed studies of Charlotte's Web?

Ain't that being a bit specific, especially when you think about all the peer reviewed studies on medical marijuana. I thought you were claiming to be for medical marijuana, as long as those "junkies" don't take advantage. Weird change in your argument.

He's for legalization. Against the dangerous precedent medical marijuana might have set.

To quote my self

Marijuana is the only drug I know of that was legalized by the people and not by the FDA.  These are the same people that elected (insert name of politician you hate).

Yeah, democracy is totally gay.


Last I checked, the FDA was created by a democracy.

And not to put words into your mouth, I guess you would be OK with people voting into law anti-vaccination efforts because democracy rules and voters are informed and the best choice in making such decisions.

So voters using medical marijuana as a forum for recreational legalization in my opinion are not the good guys nor are they bad. This isn't something that should be on a ballot at all.

I am for recreational marijuana.

I am not a doctor, nor do I play one on TV but I voted for medical marijuana.
 
2014-02-05 04:54:15 AM  

Benderama: TheJoe03: Benderama: Benderama: TheJoe03: AverageAmericanGuy: Where are the peer reviewed studies of Charlotte's Web?

Ain't that being a bit specific, especially when you think about all the peer reviewed studies on medical marijuana. I thought you were claiming to be for medical marijuana, as long as those "junkies" don't take advantage. Weird change in your argument.

He's for legalization. Against the dangerous precedent medical marijuana might have set.

To quote my self

Marijuana is the only drug I know of that was legalized by the people and not by the FDA.  These are the same people that elected (insert name of politician you hate).

Yeah, democracy is totally gay.

Last I checked, the FDA was created by a democracy.

And not to put words into your mouth, I guess you would be OK with people voting into law anti-vaccination efforts because democracy rules and voters are informed and the best choice in making such decisions.

So voters using medical marijuana as a forum for recreational legalization in my opinion are not the good guys nor are they bad. This isn't something that should be on a ballot at all.

I am for recreational marijuana.

I am not a doctor, nor do I play one on TV but I voted for medical marijuana.


Why shouldn't it be on the ballot? Gambling is on the ballot, why not weed? You really compared weed with anti vaccination? Do you even have a real argument? If you're for making weed legal, why would you care that voters do as well? Very strange argument on your part. This whole legal weed initiative is the only thing that has even sparked a discussion with our out of touch politicians. What are you fighting against exactly? Is this a semantic argument about the role of direct democracy?
 
2014-02-05 04:55:32 AM  
Do you think the FDA actually has a kosher reason to claim weed is so evil?
 
2014-02-05 04:58:47 AM  

TheJoe03: Why shouldn't it be on the ballot? Gambling is on the ballot, why not weed? You really compared weed with anti vaccination? Do you even have a real argument? If you're for making weed legal, why would you care that voters do as well?


Calm down Francis. He's just saying don't trust democracy to do the right thing. And if enough idiots become anti vaccination, he would be right.
 
2014-02-05 04:59:48 AM  

TheJoe03: Do you think the FDA actually has a kosher reason to claim weed is so evil?


It's not the FDA that cares, it's the DEA.
 
2014-02-05 04:59:52 AM  

TheJoe03: AverageAmericanGuy: TheJoe03: Benderama: TheJoe03: AverageAmericanGuy: Where are the peer reviewed studies of Charlotte's Web?

Ain't that being a bit specific, especially when you think about all the peer reviewed studies on medical marijuana. I thought you were claiming to be for medical marijuana, as long as those "junkies" don't take advantage. Weird change in your argument.

He's for legalization. Against the dangerous precedent medical marijuana might have set.

The dangerous precedent of making the public more willing to support legalizing weed for recreational purposes? That's what I'm arguing with him about.

Talk about mistaking correlation with causation.

Maybe, but making medical marijuana legal (which Americans have supported for at least a decade) seems to have led to this current environment. Seems you have no argument though, you're just mad at weed junkies I guess.


Since we're just making shiat up, how about assuming that the cultural shift capable of putting a pro-cannabis initiative up for a vote and succeeding was already underway and that legalization would have occurred in those two states regardless of the existence of medical marijuana laws in them. And since we're just throwing ideas around, perhaps we can also assume that medical marijuana foes were empowered by their backers to take a harder line thus making more difficult the passage of outright legalization.

Since we aren't doing anything but bullshiatting here.
 
2014-02-05 05:01:23 AM  

impaler: TheJoe03: Why shouldn't it be on the ballot? Gambling is on the ballot, why not weed? You really compared weed with anti vaccination? Do you even have a real argument? If you're for making weed legal, why would you care that voters do as well?

Calm down Francis. He's just saying don't trust democracy to do the right thing. And if enough idiots become anti vaccination, he would be right.


You can say that about any issue, so what is it about weed that prevents it from being voted in through a ballot? I've voted here in CA on various issues, that's our system, we still have vaccines. Bad argument, Francis.
 
2014-02-05 05:01:30 AM  
Empowered, emboldened. Whatever.
 
2014-02-05 05:02:13 AM  

impaler: TheJoe03: Do you think the FDA actually has a kosher reason to claim weed is so evil?

It's not the FDA that cares, it's the DEA.


He said FDA, trying to be on topic here.
 
2014-02-05 05:03:18 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: Since we're just making shiat up, how about assuming that the cultural shift capable of putting a pro-cannabis initiative up for a vote and succeeding was already underway and that legalization would have occurred in those two states regardless of the existence of medical marijuana laws in them. And since we're just throwing ideas around, perhaps we can also assume that medical marijuana foes were empowered by their backers to take a harder line thus making more difficult the passage of outright legalization.

Since we aren't doing anything but bullshiatting here.


Well, if you ignore the fact that Colorado and Washington were some of the first states to legalize medicinal marijuana, that argument may make sense. Otherwise it seems moronic.
 
2014-02-05 05:04:13 AM  

AverageAmericanGuy: TheJoe03: AverageAmericanGuy: TheJoe03: Benderama: TheJoe03: AverageAmericanGuy: Where are the peer reviewed studies of Charlotte's Web?

Ain't that being a bit specific, especially when you think about all the peer reviewed studies on medical marijuana. I thought you were claiming to be for medical marijuana, as long as those "junkies" don't take advantage. Weird change in your argument.

He's for legalization. Against the dangerous precedent medical marijuana might have set.

The dangerous precedent of making the public more willing to support legalizing weed for recreational purposes? That's what I'm arguing with him about.

Talk about mistaking correlation with causation.

Maybe, but making medical marijuana legal (which Americans have supported for at least a decade) seems to have led to this current environment. Seems you have no argument though, you're just mad at weed junkies I guess.

Since we're just making shiat up, how about assuming that the cultural shift capable of putting a pro-cannabis initiative up for a vote and succeeding was already underway and that legalization would have occurred in those two states regardless of the existence of medical marijuana laws in them. And since we're just throwing ideas around, perhaps we can also assume that medical marijuana foes were empowered by their backers to take a harder line thus making more difficult the passage of outright legalization.

Since we aren't doing anything but bullshiatting here.


Perhaps, but I think medical marijuana is a great transition. The two states they legalized had a medical program already in place. Just makes the transition easier. If anti weed people didn't exist these half measures wouldn't be necessary.
 
2014-02-05 05:05:29 AM  

TheJoe03: Benderama: TheJoe03: Benderama: Benderama: TheJoe03: AverageAmericanGuy: Where are the peer reviewed studies of Charlotte's Web?

Ain't that being a bit specific, especially when you think about all the peer reviewed studies on medical marijuana. I thought you were claiming to be for medical marijuana, as long as those "junkies" don't take advantage. Weird change in your argument.

He's for legalization. Against the dangerous precedent medical marijuana might have set.

To quote my self

Marijuana is the only drug I know of that was legalized by the people and not by the FDA.  These are the same people that elected (insert name of politician you hate).

Yeah, democracy is totally gay.

Last I checked, the FDA was created by a democracy.

And not to put words into your mouth, I guess you would be OK with people voting into law anti-vaccination efforts because democracy rules and voters are informed and the best choice in making such decisions.

So voters using medical marijuana as a forum for recreational legalization in my opinion are not the good guys nor are they bad. This isn't something that should be on a ballot at all.

I am for recreational marijuana.

I am not a doctor, nor do I play one on TV but I voted for medical marijuana.

Why shouldn't it be on the ballot? Gambling is on the ballot, why not weed? You really compared weed with anti vaccination? Do you even have a real argument? If you're for making weed legal, why would you care that voters do as well? Very strange argument on your part. This whole legal weed initiative is the only thing that has even sparked a discussion with our out of touch politicians. What are you fighting against exactly? Is this a semantic argument about the role of direct democracy?


You sir brought up democracy.

I just think it's sketchy that "medical treatments" can be allowed by vote without proper (scientific) vetting.  Granted marijuana was made illegal with no scientific vetting, but that. without science, was obviously not on any medical basis.
 
2014-02-05 05:07:24 AM  

TheJoe03: AverageAmericanGuy: TheJoe03: AverageAmericanGuy: TheJoe03: Benderama: TheJoe03: AverageAmericanGuy: Where are the peer reviewed studies of Charlotte's Web?

Ain't that being a bit specific, especially when you think about all the peer reviewed studies on medical marijuana. I thought you were claiming to be for medical marijuana, as long as those "junkies" don't take advantage. Weird change in your argument.

He's for legalization. Against the dangerous precedent medical marijuana might have set.

The dangerous precedent of making the public more willing to support legalizing weed for recreational purposes? That's what I'm arguing with him about.

Talk about mistaking correlation with causation.

Maybe, but making medical marijuana legal (which Americans have supported for at least a decade) seems to have led to this current environment. Seems you have no argument though, you're just mad at weed junkies I guess.

Since we're just making shiat up, how about assuming that the cultural shift capable of putting a pro-cannabis initiative up for a vote and succeeding was already underway and that legalization would have occurred in those two states regardless of the existence of medical marijuana laws in them. And since we're just throwing ideas around, perhaps we can also assume that medical marijuana foes were empowered by their backers to take a harder line thus making more difficult the passage of outright legalization.

Since we aren't doing anything but bullshiatting here.

Perhaps, but I think medical marijuana is a great transition. The two states they legalized had a medical program already in place. Just makes the transition easier. If anti weed people didn't exist these half measures wouldn't be necessary.


I will tell you what, though. I am at least glad the hemp heads have finally gotten their weed, because that shiat was even more duplicitous than the MMJ people.
 
2014-02-05 05:08:15 AM  

Benderama: TheJoe03: Benderama: TheJoe03: Benderama: Benderama: TheJoe03: AverageAmericanGuy: Where are the peer reviewed studies of Charlotte's Web?

Ain't that being a bit specific, especially when you think about all the peer reviewed studies on medical marijuana. I thought you were claiming to be for medical marijuana, as long as those "junkies" don't take advantage. Weird change in your argument.

He's for legalization. Against the dangerous precedent medical marijuana might have set.

To quote my self

Marijuana is the only drug I know of that was legalized by the people and not by the FDA.  These are the same people that elected (insert name of politician you hate).

Yeah, democracy is totally gay.

Last I checked, the FDA was created by a democracy.

And not to put words into your mouth, I guess you would be OK with people voting into law anti-vaccination efforts because democracy rules and voters are informed and the best choice in making such decisions.

So voters using medical marijuana as a forum for recreational legalization in my opinion are not the good guys nor are they bad. This isn't something that should be on a ballot at all.

I am for recreational marijuana.

I am not a doctor, nor do I play one on TV but I voted for medical marijuana.

Why shouldn't it be on the ballot? Gambling is on the ballot, why not weed? You really compared weed with anti vaccination? Do you even have a real argument? If you're for making weed legal, why would you care that voters do as well? Very strange argument on your part. This whole legal weed initiative is the only thing that has even sparked a discussion with our out of touch politicians. What are you fighting against exactly? Is this a semantic argument about the role of direct democracy?

You sir brought up democracy.

I just think it's sketchy that "medical treatments" can be allowed by vote without proper (scientific) vetting.  Granted marijuana was made illegal with no scientific vetting, but that. without science, was obviously not on any medical basis.


I know it's sketchy but I don't care, it's working. It's not like it's hurting anyone, patients get their medicine and stoners can get legal weed with no bullshiat. Fight fire with fire, the govt has been full of shiat about it since the 30s and the only way shiat changed was through the medical Trojan horse.
 
2014-02-05 05:08:43 AM  

Benderama: I just think it's sketchy that "medical treatments" can be allowed by vote without proper (scientific) vetting.   Granted For instance, marijuana was made illegal with no scientific vetting


FTFY. Stronger argument IMO.
 
2014-02-05 05:10:33 AM  
BTW, other than fed scientists, how has medical weed not been vetted. It's taken advantage if by healthy people but the science is there.
 
2014-02-05 05:12:52 AM  

TheJoe03: I know it's sketchy but I don't care,


No arguments here.

FYI I hate getting high. Bugs the piss out of me. But my friends and I smoked in high-school/college, and the thought how my life would be different if I was caught, scares the piss out me.
 
2014-02-05 05:15:31 AM  

impaler: TheJoe03: I know it's sketchy but I don't care,

No arguments here.

FYI I hate getting high. Bugs the piss out of me. But my friends and I smoked in high-school/college, and the thought how my life would be different if I was caught, scares the piss out me.


I do wonder how many states have decriminalized it at this point, it might be the most important step toward full legalization. No one should go to jail for weed, it's almost unbelievable it happens in 2014.
 
Displayed 50 of 144 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report