(10-07-2014 11:14 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 11:10 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 10:20 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(10-06-2014 10:19 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  If you want marijuana legal ...... fine. But then don't turn around and say you also want tobacco and alcohol kept legal. Both are demonstrably more harmful and addictive[1].

PUUUUH-LEASE.


How the hell can you sit there and say that tobacco is more harmful than weed? How many DUIs have been given for smoking tobacco and driving?

How many people have died from lung cancer caused by smoking cigarettes? Its A LOT less than any amount of cancer associated with tobacco.

Smoking weed causes lung cancer. What is your point?

At much lower rates than tobacco, yes.

(10-07-2014 11:15 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 11:14 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 11:10 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 10:20 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(10-06-2014 10:19 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  If you want marijuana legal ...... fine. But then don't turn around and say you also want tobacco and alcohol kept legal. Both are demonstrably more harmful and addictive[1].

PUUUUH-LEASE.


How the hell can you sit there and say that tobacco is more harmful than weed? How many DUIs have been given for smoking tobacco and driving?

How many people have died from lung cancer caused by smoking cigarettes? Its A LOT less than any amount of cancer associated with tobacco.

Smoking weed causes lung cancer. What is your point?

At much lower rates than tobacco, yes.

Proof?

(10-07-2014 11:14 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 11:13 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 11:10 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 10:20 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(10-06-2014 10:19 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  If you want marijuana legal ...... fine. But then don't turn around and say you also want tobacco and alcohol kept legal. Both are demonstrably more harmful and addictive[1].

PUUUUH-LEASE.


How the hell can you sit there and say that tobacco is more harmful than weed? How many DUIs have been given for smoking tobacco and driving?

How many people have died from lung cancer caused by smoking cigarettes? Its A LOT less than any amount of cancer associated with tobacco.

That didn't even make any sense.

Your right, I typed it wrong.

"How many people have died from lung cancer caused by smoking cigarettes? Its A LOT less than any amount of cancer associated with marijuana"

I hate trying to type on my phone.

Gotcha, but someone getting lung cancer from smoking has no effect on you. Someone getting high and driving or going to work might.

(10-07-2014 11:15 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 11:14 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 11:13 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 11:10 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 10:20 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  PUUUUH-LEASE.


How the hell can you sit there and say that tobacco is more harmful than weed? How many DUIs have been given for smoking tobacco and driving?

How many people have died from lung cancer caused by smoking cigarettes? Its A LOT less than any amount of cancer associated with tobacco.

That didn't even make any sense.

Your right, I typed it wrong.

"How many people have died from lung cancer caused by smoking cigarettes? Its A LOT less than any amount of cancer associated with marijuana"

I hate trying to type on my phone.

Proof?

http://www.scientificamerican.com/articl...s-no-link/

(10-07-2014 11:17 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 11:14 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 11:13 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 11:10 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 10:20 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  PUUUUH-LEASE.


How the hell can you sit there and say that tobacco is more harmful than weed? How many DUIs have been given for smoking tobacco and driving?

How many people have died from lung cancer caused by smoking cigarettes? Its A LOT less than any amount of cancer associated with tobacco.

That didn't even make any sense.

Your right, I typed it wrong.

"How many people have died from lung cancer caused by smoking cigarettes? Its A LOT less than any amount of cancer associated with marijuana"

I hate trying to type on my phone.

Gotcha, but someone getting lung cancer from smoking has no effect on you. Someone getting high and driving or going to work might.

Who has suggested making driving high legal? That's currently a DUI.

Weed should be treated like booze...must be 21, no driving high, no buying for minors

(10-07-2014 07:40 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 05:44 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  Who is advocating that Cannabis be used by teens?

The study...while having merit is useless in any argument about legalization. Id submit that it actually bolsters the case for it. Removing Cannabis from the black market would limit access to teens..not increase it. As it stands now? The marketplace targets them. That would not be the case in a controlled market.

You might right if controlled correctly. The way Colorado did it makes it as easy as getting beer. A system where adults can buy it cheaply in limited quantities for personal use would probably limit access. It would create a black market for the teens, but would likely increase prices in the black market to the point that long-term abuse would not be possible for the average teen.

I have maintained all along that Colorado went too far...too fast with this.

(10-07-2014 11:21 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 07:40 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 05:44 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  Who is advocating that Cannabis be used by teens?

The study...while having merit is useless in any argument about legalization. Id submit that it actually bolsters the case for it. Removing Cannabis from the black market would limit access to teens..not increase it. As it stands now? The marketplace targets them. That would not be the case in a controlled market.

You might right if controlled correctly. The way Colorado did it makes it as easy as getting beer. A system where adults can buy it cheaply in limited quantities for personal use would probably limit access. It would create a black market for the teens, but would likely increase prices in the black market to the point that long-term abuse would not be possible for the average teen.

I have maintained all along that Colorado went too far...too fast with this.

Did you forget Washington?

(10-07-2014 11:21 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 11:17 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 11:14 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 11:13 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 11:10 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  How many people have died from lung cancer caused by smoking cigarettes? Its A LOT less than any amount of cancer associated with tobacco.

That didn't even make any sense.

Your right, I typed it wrong.

"How many people have died from lung cancer caused by smoking cigarettes? Its A LOT less than any amount of cancer associated with marijuana"

I hate trying to type on my phone.

Gotcha, but someone getting lung cancer from smoking has no effect on you. Someone getting high and driving or going to work might.

Who has suggested making driving high legal? That's currently a DUI.

Weed should be treated like booze...must be 21, no driving high, no buying for minors

Perhaps, but I was addressing your assertion that tobacco is more harmful than marijuana. I have stated in the past that I am open to legalization in my state depending on exactly what is proposed.

(10-07-2014 10:20 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(10-06-2014 10:19 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  If you want marijuana legal ...... fine. But then don't turn around and say you also want tobacco and alcohol kept legal. Both are demonstrably more harmful and addictive[1].

PUUUUH-LEASE.


How the hell can you sit there and say that tobacco is more harmful than weed? How many DUIs have been given for smoking tobacco and driving?

Lung cancer and the associated health problems alone make tobacco one of the most dangerous substances on the planet to use.

(10-07-2014 11:25 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 10:20 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(10-06-2014 10:19 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  If you want marijuana legal ...... fine. But then don't turn around and say you also want tobacco and alcohol kept legal. Both are demonstrably more harmful and addictive[1].

PUUUUH-LEASE.


How the hell can you sit there and say that tobacco is more harmful than weed? How many DUIs have been given for smoking tobacco and driving?

Lung cancer and the associated health problems alone make tobacco one of the most dangerous substances on the planet to use.

Except the vast majority of smokers never get lung cancer. It increases your odds, but by no means is it likely.

(10-07-2014 11:20 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 11:15 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 11:14 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 11:13 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 11:10 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  How many people have died from lung cancer caused by smoking cigarettes? Its A LOT less than any amount of cancer associated with tobacco.

That didn't even make any sense.

Your right, I typed it wrong.

"How many people have died from lung cancer caused by smoking cigarettes? Its A LOT less than any amount of cancer associated with marijuana"

I hate trying to type on my phone.

Proof?

http://www.scientificamerican.com/articl...s-no-link/

That's not proof. That bs paid propaganda.

Here is an actual study
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23846283

and here is real data
http://www.lung.org/associations/states/...juana.html

(10-07-2014 11:17 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 11:14 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 11:13 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 11:10 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 10:20 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  PUUUUH-LEASE.


How the hell can you sit there and say that tobacco is more harmful than weed? How many DUIs have been given for smoking tobacco and driving?

How many people have died from lung cancer caused by smoking cigarettes? Its A LOT less than any amount of cancer associated with tobacco.

That didn't even make any sense.

Your right, I typed it wrong.

"How many people have died from lung cancer caused by smoking cigarettes? Its A LOT less than any amount of cancer associated with marijuana"

I hate trying to type on my phone.

Gotcha, but someone getting lung cancer from smoking has no effect on you. Someone getting high and driving or going to work might.

I see it as a simple issue of freedom. I have the freedom to smoke tobacco as an adult and kill myself. I should have the same freedom to smoke Cannabis. I do not however have the freedom to endanger others with my actions. We have laws now to cover this behavior.

(10-07-2014 11:25 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 10:20 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(10-06-2014 10:19 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  If you want marijuana legal ...... fine. But then don't turn around and say you also want tobacco and alcohol kept legal. Both are demonstrably more harmful and addictive[1].

PUUUUH-LEASE.


How the hell can you sit there and say that tobacco is more harmful than weed? How many DUIs have been given for smoking tobacco and driving?

Lung cancer and the associated health problems alone make tobacco one of the most dangerous substances on the planet to use.

This is not an argument. The act of smoking causes lung cancer. Whether that be pot or tobacco. The added danger is that being stoned leads to an increased in traffic fatalities, injuries and accidental death.

(10-07-2014 11:28 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 11:25 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 10:20 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(10-06-2014 10:19 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  If you want marijuana legal ...... fine. But then don't turn around and say you also want tobacco and alcohol kept legal. Both are demonstrably more harmful and addictive[1].

PUUUUH-LEASE.


How the hell can you sit there and say that tobacco is more harmful than weed? How many DUIs have been given for smoking tobacco and driving?

Lung cancer and the associated health problems alone make tobacco one of the most dangerous substances on the planet to use.

Except the vast majority of smokers never get lung cancer. It increases your odds, but by no means is it likely.

I don't have statistics..but...I'd submit without finding them that a vastly larger number of people have died from the associated dangers of tobacco use than the associated dangers of Cannabis. Yet...one is legal and one is not. Fcking mind boggling.

I maintain that there is much more at work keeping Cannabis illegal than its associated health risks. There are vested industries involved in this that do not want Cannabis as a competitor in their marketplace. The fact that industrial Hemp is illegal should tell people what may be going on.

(10-07-2014 11:32 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 11:25 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 10:20 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(10-06-2014 10:19 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  If you want marijuana legal ...... fine. But then don't turn around and say you also want tobacco and alcohol kept legal. Both are demonstrably more harmful and addictive[1].

PUUUUH-LEASE.


How the hell can you sit there and say that tobacco is more harmful than weed? How many DUIs have been given for smoking tobacco and driving?

Lung cancer and the associated health problems alone make tobacco one of the most dangerous substances on the planet to use.

This is not an argument. The act of smoking causes lung cancer. Whether that be pot or tobacco. The added danger is that being stoned leads to an increased in traffic fatalities, injuries and accidental death.

Making an assertion...not an argument.

(10-07-2014 11:30 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 11:20 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 11:15 AM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 11:14 AM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 11:13 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  That didn't even make any sense.

Your right, I typed it wrong.

"How many people have died from lung cancer caused by smoking cigarettes? Its A LOT less than any amount of cancer associated with marijuana"

I hate trying to type on my phone.

Proof?

http://www.scientificamerican.com/articl...s-no-link/

That's not proof. That bs paid propaganda.

Here is an actual study
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23846283

and here is real data
http://www.lung.org/associations/states/...juana.html

lol, Dr's from UCLA must be in bed with scientific american...

(10-07-2014 11:37 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 11:28 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 11:25 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(10-07-2014 10:20 AM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(10-06-2014 10:19 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  If you want marijuana legal ...... fine. But then don't turn around and say you also want tobacco and alcohol kept legal. Both are demonstrably more harmful and addictive[1].

PUUUUH-LEASE.


How the hell can you sit there and say that tobacco is more harmful than weed? How many DUIs have been given for smoking tobacco and driving?

Lung cancer and the associated health problems alone make tobacco one of the most dangerous substances on the planet to use.

Except the vast majority of smokers never get lung cancer. It increases your odds, but by no means is it likely.

I don't have statistics..but...I'd submit without finding them that a vastly larger number of people have died from the associated dangers of tobacco use than the associated dangers of Cannabis. Yet...one is legal and one is not. Fcking mind boggling.

I maintain that there is much more at work keeping Cannabis illegal than its associated health risks. There are vested industries involved in this that do not want Cannabis as a competitor in their marketplace. The fact that industrial Hemp is illegal should tell people what may be going on.

Tobacco is not a mind altering drug. Cannabis is. That is the difference. I would hypothesize that cannibis causes mental illness at a higher rate than tobacco physical illness. A lot of people can't handle it as well as others.

You possibly make valid points in the 2nd paragraph.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

CONCLUSION:
Our primary finding provides initial longitudinal evidence that cannabis use might elevate the risk of lung cancer. In light of the widespread use of marijuana, especially among adolescents and young adults, our study provides important data for informing the risk-benefit calculus of marijuana smoking in medical, public-health, and drug-policy settings.

Might doesn't sound very conclusive, and again, who is suggesting giving marijuana to adolescents? lol

(10-07-2014 12:12 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  Tobacco is not a mind altering drug. Cannabis is. That is the difference. I would hypothesize that cannibis causes mental illness at a higher rate than tobacco physical illness. A lot of people can't handle it as well as others.

Same thing with alcohol.

Its just not a good argument for keeping it illegal unless you want alcohol pulled from the shelves as well.

Also, people can drink too much alcohol and DIE from poisoning.

No such thing is possible with cannabis.

(10-07-2014 12:13 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  CONCLUSION:
Our primary finding provides initial longitudinal evidence that cannabis use might elevate the risk of lung cancer. In light of the widespread use of marijuana, especially among adolescents and young adults, our study provides important data for informing the risk-benefit calculus of marijuana smoking in medical, public-health, and drug-policy settings.

Might doesn't sound very conclusive, and again, who is suggesting giving marijuana to adolescents? lol

People who smoke pot dies of lung related diseases all the time. Fact.