• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

"If pot were truly legal, joints would cost only a few cents."

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yet another excellent argument for why non-physically-addictive drugs with no real health side effects but medicinal and therapeutic applications (LSD, MDMA, marijuana) should be illegal and physically addictive drugs with no applications that will inevitably kill you (alcohol, tobacco) should be legal.

Weed should be legal (in fact the whole criminalization of the ingestion of a substance is fucking stupid to be honest). I'm not saying it shouldn't be. But it shouldn't be free.

That's like saying alcohol should be free. Or Cigarettes. There's a reason governments tax the living shit out of them. Aside from paying for everything they break, it keeps it out most peoples hands most of the time.

Weed while it should be legal. Shouldn't be just handed out. It should come at a price.
 

Chuckl3s

Member
A gram? What exactly are you smoking? I can assure you it's not weed.

Not a gram....but 16 ounces. But if what OP stated that joints would be only a few cents, you are smoking crap weed. I had high quality stuff that range from 20 to 30 a gram. And that came from Ralphie May (the comedian), so I'm sure it was good weed.
 

cousins

Member
Not a gram....but 16 ounces. But if what OP stated that joints would be only a few cents, you are smoking crap weed. I had high quality stuff that range from 20 to 30 a gram. And that came from Ralphie May (the comedian), so I'm sure it was good weed.

A pound for $50? The fuck?

I'm beginning to guess that you don't actually smoke weed, but perhaps bits of your neighbors lawn or some shit.
 

Rei_Toei

Fclvat sbe Pnanqn, ru?
LSD would be even cheaper. Just a single 25kg yield could supply one hundred million doses.

In fact most street drugs given proper manufacturing could be just as cheap, if not cheaper than weed.

Shit LSD is easy, MDMA industrially produced would be just as cheap. Don't need to farm, cultivate, harvest and prep most chemical drugs. In fact pretty much all street drugs could be mass produced with ease ... marijuana however has significant hurdles ... you know waiting for it to grow ...

Hence this 'yeah man weeds so cheap is should be legal' is probably the most ridiculous argument I have ever heard in respect to the legalization of marijuana.

Lets not even touch on what would happen to society if they made weed free. Sure crime, depression and boredom would drop. But so would social advance, society and human progress. Yeah that's right, weed generally makes people dull, boring and kills their drive and ambition.

There's a reason all the stoners I knew at uni were retaking years. One a doctor, dropped out, studied tissue engineering, ended up with a bachelors. Computer Scientist, retaking his 3rd year. Dropped out. Wanna be dentist, tried applying for dentistry for 3 years in a row, never got it. Chemist, took 5 years to fail his 2nd year and drop out. Japan students numerous japan students. All failed. All dropped into East Asian Studies, the Japanese reject list. Some lasted it out, most didn't. There's a reason all the stoners I knew generally failed. They were decent guys, it's just their habit killed any push and ambition inside them. They could of all been 5 times what they are now. But they preferred to spend their weekends and evenings getting high.

Weed for them was almost as cheap as Alcohol. For them it wasn't much of a choice, but it was still one they made. Now your telling me you want to hand joints out to them for free? Yeah no. Make it legal. But free? No. That'll screw up so many people.

Funny, most of the people around me that went to uni and smoked weed every now and then finished their programs in time and went on with their careers just fine. One or two lost a year in HS but I think weed was a factor, not the main culprit. Same in uni: someone might've lost a year somewhere along the line, weed probably didn't help, but wasn't the cause.

See, I can do this anecdotal thing too :)
 

tirant

Member
Lets not even touch on what would happen to society if they made weed free. Sure crime, depression and boredom would drop. But so would social advance, society and human progress. Yeah that's right, weed generally makes people dull, boring and kills their drive and ambition.

There's a reason all the stoners I knew at uni were retaking years. One a doctor, dropped out, studied tissue engineering, ended up with a bachelors. Computer Scientist, retaking his 3rd year. Dropped out. Wanna be dentist, tried applying for dentistry for 3 years in a row, never got it. Chemist, took 5 years to fail his 2nd year and drop out. Japan students numerous japan students. All failed. All dropped into East Asian Studies, the Japanese reject list. Some lasted it out, most didn't. There's a reason all the stoners I knew generally failed. They were decent guys, it's just their habit killed any push and ambition inside them. They could of all been 5 times what they are now. But they preferred to spend their weekends and evenings getting high.

Weed for them was almost as cheap as Alcohol. For them it wasn't much of a choice, but it was still one they made. Now your telling me you want to hand joints out to them for free? Yeah no. Make it legal. But free? No. That'll screw up so many people.

Jesus... all this nonsense again?

This needs some Sagan.

marijuana-quote-carl-sagan-e1303943633218.jpg
 

pigeon

Banned
Man I'm lucky if I see a 1/4 oz. for $60.

$50 for a lb. must be the snicklefritz.

$50 was an eighth when I was in college. See, there's another benefit of legalization -- standardized prices and grades, so we would all know what the hell everybody else is actually talking about.
 

Not a Jellyfish

but I am a sheep
LSD would be even cheaper. Just a single 25kg yield could supply one hundred million doses.

In fact most street drugs given proper manufacturing could be just as cheap, if not cheaper than weed.

Shit LSD is easy, MDMA industrially produced would be just as cheap. Don't need to farm, cultivate, harvest and prep most chemical drugs. In fact pretty much all street drugs could be mass produced with ease ... marijuana however has significant hurdles ... you know waiting for it to grow ...

Hence this 'yeah man weeds so cheap is should be legal' is probably the most ridiculous argument I have ever heard in respect to the legalization of marijuana.

Lets not even touch on what would happen to society if they made weed free. Sure crime, depression and boredom would drop. But so would social advance, society and human progress. Yeah that's right, weed generally makes people dull, boring and kills their drive and ambition.

There's a reason all the stoners I knew at uni were retaking years. One a doctor, dropped out, studied tissue engineering, ended up with a bachelors. Computer Scientist, retaking his 3rd year. Dropped out. Wanna be dentist, tried applying for dentistry for 3 years in a row, never got it. Chemist, took 5 years to fail his 2nd year and drop out. Japan students numerous japan students. All failed. All dropped into East Asian Studies, the Japanese reject list. Some lasted it out, most didn't. There's a reason all the stoners I knew generally failed. They were decent guys, it's just their habit killed any push and ambition inside them. They could of all been 5 times what they are now. But they preferred to spend their weekends and evenings getting high.

Weed for them was almost as cheap as Alcohol. For them it wasn't much of a choice, but it was still one they made. Now your telling me you want to hand joints out to them for free? Yeah no. Make it legal. But free? No. That'll screw up so many people.

Way to generalize there, just because a handful of people out of a group of millions had poor study habits and could not prioritize their lives does not mean the same would happen to every pot smoker. Just the same way that not everyone who drinks is an uncontrollable alcoholic.

Weed will never be handed out for free, even with mass production and it being so cheap to produce it will still run the same general price you see in dispensaries today.
 
Funny, most of the people around me that went to uni and smoked weed every now and then finished their programs in time and went on with their careers just fine. One or two lost a year in HS but I think weed was a factor, not the main culprit. Same in uni: someone might've lost a year somewhere along the line, weed probably didn't help, but wasn't the cause.

See, I can do this anecdotal thing too :)

There are numerous other factors. However weed is quite a powerful sedative and depressant. There has been numerous research into the matter and there is a clear correlation that marijuana use negatively impacts students.

Now arguably I'd also argue alcohol does too. However this is not free. People do not have unlimited access to it. etc etc.



Jesus... all this nonsense again?

This needs some Sagan.


Sagan would tell you to learn to read the fuck up, so next time you argue for legalization with a person also in favor of legalization. You wouldn't look like an twerp.

Of course you might find it strange that I would argue for the legalization of something I dislike, well that's just me, get use to it and learn to read.

Way to generalize there, just because a handful of people out of a group of millions had poor study habits and could not prioritize their lives does not mean the same would happen to every pot smoker. Just the same way that not everyone who drinks is an uncontrollable alcoholic.

Alcoholics are addicts. Someone arguing in favor of weed should know weed isn't addictive.

Just because a drug is not inherently toxic, does not mean it is safe to use. Shit one could argue the use of LSD is perfectly healthy. Yet if the user starts cutting his face off or starts believing he can fly, the question of it's safety is thrown into question.

Marijuana is not a harmless drug. You've heard that before by numerous bitchy moms and politicians etc etc. They're however bullshitting you about it's brain damaging and gate way effects etc etc.

When I say it. I'm talking about the sociological implications of the mass use of the drug. Marijuana's equivalent to LSD's 'I think I can fly' problem. It makes it's users lazy. Thats the simplest way of explaining it without going into the basic chemical reactions. Now what's wrong with that?

Well if your in school for one thing. If your out of work another. If your stuck in a dead end job. If your lonely. If your unhealthy and out of shape. Marijuana will deaden your resolve to push yourself. Now of course it people who smoke get girls etc, however LSD users tend not to jump out of windows ... most of the time. But the risk is still there and probably more prevalent.

Now of course I still think the criminalization of it is stupid. However while it should be legalized it should not be seen as a 'harmless' drug. It does have effects and they should be acknowledged. Sure they're not as bad as heroine use or tobacco smoking. But marijuana use is not harmless.

Weed will never be handed out for free, even with mass production and it being so cheap to produce it will still run the same general price you see in dispensaries today.

Which is why I'm ridiculing the very thought of making it free.
 

M-PG71C

Member
Anything can be turned into an addiction and that addiction can have profound consequences in your daily life. Weed, better or worse, is one of them. There is cannabis dependency, which can have a multitude of mental issues, but that dependency and its related issues are not exactly exclusive to cannabis use, but more along the lines of general issues related to addiction. Worse, there are few independent studies that follow negative use of cannabis in terms of exclusivity.

There is also the issue of it is a "smoke" and that can lead into COPD. It contains a number of respiratory irritants and it would be logical to assume that it can lead into a similar condition.

I'm ranting now but the bottom line is this: In concerns to health, cannabis offers both positive and negative effects and when used sparingly, much like the consumption of alcohol, the positive effects can be overwhelming. But I digress.
 

Kentpaul

When keepin it real goes wrong. Very, very wrong.
People don't think they can fly after dropping acid. Wtf I'm I reading in this thread.
 

Kabouter

Member
If that's the biggest worry, put massive excise taxes on the stuff. Nothing wrong with wanting to discourage people from using recreational drugs, but there's no legitimate reason to continue with the ban, and the war on drugs is costly both financially and in its impact on society. Taking softdrugs out of the war on drugs would be a sensible step.
 

Kentpaul

When keepin it real goes wrong. Very, very wrong.
A guy who has clearly never done drugs but knows lots of people who were "obviously stoners."

People like that should just stay clear from these threads. spouting nonsense.

Waiting on the people turning into a glass of orange juice after smoking a joint posts coming in.
 
If it were legal, the US would tax the motherfucking hell out of it like they do with cigarettes, right?

Yeah, but it would still come out cheaper than today's black market prices.

Quality pot is about 50 times as expensive name brand tobacco.

A cigarette sized joint of good weed costs $20. Compared to like 40 cents or less for a Camel or Marlboro.
 

darthbob

Member
$50 was an eighth when I was in college. See, there's another benefit of legalization -- standardized prices and grades, so we would all know what the hell everybody else is actually talking about.

$40 is an eighth here, just two dubs really.

Then again, all the stuff in my area is homegrown 'dro.
 

eastmen

Banned
Taxation on weed is a good thing , its another source of revenue for the country and one we really need.

Legalising weed would have ripples of savings through the country aside from the tax increase.
 
If you were replying to me, that's a non-sequitur. But to respond to your question, in theory, i think pot smoke is supposed to be even worse since it has more tar, but pot smokers, even heavy ones, inhale far less actual plant substance than cigarette smokers. I mean a pack of cigarettes is the equivalent to about an ounce of weed. I don't know anybody that smokes an ounce of weed a day, there are probably a few, but that's not common. But there are millions of people that smoke a pack a day.

There was a huge research study in Jamaica. It tracked something like a couple thousand self reporting "heavy" MJ smokers for over a decade. Interestingly enough, there is no evidence pot smoking causes lung cancer, even among heavy users. And the lack of evidence is not due to a lack of effort. The govt has been trying to demonize it for decades.

If I were a tobacco smoker, I would smoke natural tobacco. Not the adulterated stuff in commercial blends. Look up C. Everett Koop. He was a former surgeon general of the US.
He thinks the main cause of cancer from smoking tobacco is due to the radioactive polonium-210 that is in the tobacco as a byproduct of the agricultural practices of the leading tobacco industry manufacturers.

They don't do it to give people cancer on purpose, it's just a lot cheaper to use the fertilizer that comes from a rock salt that naturally contains the polonium. It's a very small amout, but when you directly inhale it into your lungs, it does a lot of damage over time, due to beta decay of the polonium you're exposed to in each drag.
 
If you were replying to me, that's a non-sequitur. But to respond to your question, in theory, i think pot smoke is supposed to be even worse since it has more tar, but pot smokers, even heavy ones, inhale far less actual plant substance than cigarette smokers. I mean a pack of cigarettes is the equivalent to about an ounce of weed. I don't know anybody that smokes an ounce of weed a day, but there are millions of people that smoke a pack a day.

There was a huge research study in Jamaica. It tracked something like a couple thousand self reporting "heavy" MJ smokers for over a decade. Interestingly enough, there is no evidence pot smoking causes lung cancer, even among heavy users. And the lack of evidence is not due to a lack of effort. The govt has been trying to demonize it for decades.

If I were a tobacco smoker, I would smoke natural tobacco. Not the adulterated stuff in commercial blends. Look up C. Everett Koop. He was a former surgeon general of the US.
He thinks the main cause of cancer from smoking tobacco is due to the radioactive polonium-210 that is in the tobacco as a byproduct of the agricultural practices of the leading tobacco industry manufacturers.

Even if it doesn't cause cancer, it could cause other diseases, though I'd have to look this up.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom