Colorado and the public sale of Cannabis

[Geezah]

Hmmm......Guns and now drugs. Best kept well apart in my opinion.

You are more likely to be assaulted by a drunk than someone high on cannabis

It's not like people were not doing it before, however it can now be regulated and taxed, I do wonder if people actually have an informed opinion and not one regurgitated from the hysterical press.[/quote]

My informed opinion comes from the school of thought which sees pot as a starting point for further investigation into 'better and bigger' highs once pot no longer does it for you. Also, it would appear that the pot of today is much stronger than that of yesteryear. Anyone shed any light on this?

But of course, not everyone who smokes pot will go down that road, just like not all who drink go on to be violent alcoholics, but some will and if you have free access to firearms, I stand by my opinion that it is not a good idea. The fundamental issue in my mind is that those on drugs over here or the Netherlands etc don't have free access to guns like in Colorado, what with the issues they've had there over the shootings in schools of all places, I fail to be convinced that this is a good idea.

 

[markeg]

. Also, it would appear that the pot of today is much stronger than that of yesteryear. Anyone shed any light on this?

The active ingredient in cannabis is THC. Today's strains have up to 7 times the level of THC compared to cannabis used in the 1970's.

 

[Anonymous]

Sorry, I don't agree with it being legalised at all. In some users I have known over the years it has turned their brain to mush.

I acknowledge the arguments when comparing it to alcohol etc but another wrong does not make it right if you understand what I mean.

Its also another thing like smoking and drinking that the young and weak minded will use to show their peers that they are an "adult" if it becomes easily available. The bad effects of pot on young brains is well documented and sad.

http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/healthadvice/problemsdisorders/cannabismentalhealthkey.aspx

Good post, but I'm afraid those that have used/still do on here won't agree

But I suppose at least we can agree to disagree, and I think that's my last word on the subject

 

[Geezah]

. Also, it would appear that the pot of today is much stronger than that of yesteryear. Anyone shed any light on this?

The active ingredient in cannabis is THC. Today's strains have up to 7 times the level of THC compared to cannabis used in the 1970's.

There you go, thanks for that, just makes me more entrenched in my own opinion.

 

[fixit man]

. Also, it would appear that the pot of today is much stronger than that of yesteryear. Anyone shed any light on this?

The active ingredient in cannabis is THC. Today's strains have up to 7 times the level of THC compared to cannabis used in the 1970's.

There you go, thanks for that, just makes me more entrenched in my own opinion.

seven times more potent just means you have to smoke less to get the same effect so therefore healthier

 

[chris g]

you would think that pioneering / marketing less unhealthy means of ingestion than mixing it with tobacco would make sense too - smoking / hot knives / bongs cant be the way to go in a modern world.

I wonder how rebellious people would feel going for a fairy cake evening

 

[bigdog]

This subject also applies to so many other things as well. How about fast cars, They say speed kills. So in the interest of saving folks from themselves or other irresponsible operators. Well, Maybe a ban on cars is in order. There should only be public transport. Motorcycles? Those things are killers. The whole subject of faceless bureaucrats pronouncing that you can't do something because they say it's dangerous to you or others. Or the electorate making statements about how there ought to be a law because they think that others shouldn't be allowed to do that. Yet we on this forum think it's fine to own a car that can do 155MPH. More than double the national limit. Are we then hypocrites?
It's like asking a person to define the point at which someone should be paying higher taxes. They will always point to the person making more than they do.

Can you tell I have a mildly libertarian mind set. :lol:

 

[fixit man]

This subject also applies to so many other things as well. How about fast cars, They say speed kills. So in the interest of saving folks from themselves or other irresponsible operators. Well, Maybe a ban on cars is in order. There should only be public transport. Motorcycles? Those things are killers. The whole subject of faceless bureaucrats pronouncing that you can't do something because they say it's dangerous to you or others. Or the electorate making statements about how there ought to be a law because they think that others shouldn't be allowed to do that. Yet we on this forum think it's fine to own a car that can do 155MPH. More than double the national limit. Are we then hypocrites?
It's like asking a person to define the point at which someone should be paying higher taxes. They will always point to the person making more than they do.

Can you tell I have a mildly libertarian mind set. :lol:

I agree

 

[Adamski]

Bigdog - I salute your post.

So to all the speed junkies who have bigger faster better cars. Slow down ya crack heeds..... It's nay gid fir ye :lol: You bunch of addicts


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[GuidoK]

Death from Guns? A drop in the bucket. http://who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs310/en/

Just accept the fact that life can be a bitch, And you can't save everyone from everything that might harm them.

I don't think this is a sensible way of thinking.
Death from guns are mostly crime related. So we shouldn't fight crime anymore? If the deaths resulting from that are neglectable it isn't important?

What is statistically the biggest risk doesn't have to dictate what people feel what is right or wrong.

As for the sale of cannabis: I've lived my whole live surrounded by it (living in several big cities in the netherlands). At one point there were maybe 5 coffeeshops in a 500m radius from my house....
I'm glad that in the netherlands the policy regarding selling cannabis is getting a bit more strickt. Now the policy is that a coffeeshop cant locate itself in a 500m radius from a school.
But what is better: stricktly illegal or some tolerance... I honestly don't know. What I do know is that the effects of cannabis are underestimated. The direct health effects are known and not that serious, but long and excessive exposure (what mostly men do in their early 20's) has bad effects on cognitive and behavoural skills. I've seen plenty of smart students turn into potheads and they just stopped to care about their life and career. That happened more than that I saw students turn into alcoholics and drop out (to set an often made comparison).
And face it: a coffeeshop and its clientele is mostly a collection of low lives.