OP, please change the title to make it less vague what the question is about without having to open it.
@oyzmo@lemmy.world
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
OP, please change the title to make it less vague what the question is about without having to open it.
@oyzmo@lemmy.world
I don't care about health benefits/dangers of any vice, but I hate how ingrained vices are in our daily lives. I'm sick of beer ads, I hate online sports betting sponsoring every event (and rapidly turning a lot of friends into gamblers), my recently weed-legal state is already flooded with local ads and shitty shops.
I dream of a utopia where no vices are sold in a store or advertised. If you want to indulge you go to the equivalent of a Native American casino on steroids. It's a massive temple to hedonism, zoning for it is very restricted. You can do any drug you want there, everything carefully dosed and tested. There's complimentary trip-sitters and emergency services on call.
Things that aren't an immediate threat to yourself/others (mushrooms, lsd, mj, low abv drinks, etc...) can be sold for private personal consumption off-prem with a reasonable limit per person. You can't partake in public and can be asked for proof of purchase during transit.
There's no perverse vice tax that leeches money from addicts who can't afford it, the government's best financial interest is to keep people clean and spending money elsewhere. If you need something to routinely "take the edge off" you get easy access to medical services (mental/physical/otherwise) and a prescription from a real doctor.
Any time I hear arguments for full legalization of anything in the USA I just have nightmares of inane Budweiser-style weed/cocaine/heroin commercials.
Legalise it, regulate the growing and selling of it and kill the green market.
It costs more to police it. It is profitable otherwise. No one genuinely cares. I haven't smoked since college. It eventually gets boring. It's a business. That's it. Sorry there isn't a mystical description for it. It's money.
It doesn’t matter. I’ll still smoke it.
It's sad to see a lot of the misinformation here that says there are no downsides to weed. In fact, weed has a ton of downsides that need to be considered in how marijuana is handled in a society.
If you are a visual/ audio learner, here's a well researched video on the downsides of weed, from a source that acknowledges their staffs personal biases lean towards legalization.
Kurzgesagt, "We Have to Talk About Weed
Basically, we need to recognize that due to having criminalized weed for so long, we are only now getting the research into the negative effects of weed, but as it's coming out we are seeing how weed is not all sunshine and rainbows.
THC potency has increased dramatically since the 60s, and that has led to increased risks of paranoia, psychosis, and panic attacks. It also increases the risk of Cannabinoid Hypermesis Syndrome, where ingesting weed will make you vomit, nauseous, and have horrible abdominal pain.
My roommate just got this and she is not having fun. Her doctor told her this may be a 6 month T-break, but it's also possible this is permanent, and best to avoid weed altogether.
I also am sad to see "weed is not addictive" being thrown around. Cannabis Use Disorder (weed addiction) is very real and a quick look up says 10% of users become addicted. Personally I consider myself stuck on a habit since I can control my use to keeping it after 8pm, but I still have trouble not getting high daily. I have a friend who is now 100 days sober, but when he had a relapse last year, it ruined his life.
That's not to say it's bad, I have another friend who needs weed to help him get through the day with his PTSD. We just need to recognize one person's medicine is another person's poison.
Most all of the major issues with weed tend to show up with people who began smoking in adolescence. I think a reason I'm somewhat I'm control and my other friend is not is that I started smoking at 22 in college, and he started at 16. I imagine if I waited until I was 25 I'd have no problem making it a weekend thing.
That said
My experience and the pain many have dealing with the health issues associated to weed are no where near comparable to the damage that criminalized weed has had on marginalized communities as weed has historically been used to target and oppress minorities by our US government. I also agree to the points that having a black market is FAR worse than having legal weed that needs regulation.
Personally I'm pro-legalization, but I think we need to be careful at how we are messaging weed to the youths and handling the negative consequences, as the myths of weed just being an innocent plant are super harmful.
I think that this is a very balanced and thoughtful take that I agree with. As someone who has been smoking daily for the better part of 4 years now, weed has helped a lot but it has also hurt me a lot. At my peak i could easily kill a quad a day, although now I'm down to a gram a day if that. I would've been in a much better position financially if I never started smoking, and I'm sure my health would've been a lot better. That being said, smoking has helped me through some very difficult times and has given me community. I started smoking in highschool but stopped until I graduated and started again right before college. I've stopped having my own supply at points (not stopped smoking altogether but gone mostly sober), but especially in this day and age it's very helpful to have it. It doesn't help that where I am, a lottttttt of people are cali sober (me included).
++
If you think weed should not be legalized, then you should be consistent and apply the same to alcohol and tobacco. Both of these substances do far more harm than weed with far fewer medical properties.
Legalization has only positives
People who need something, to get through the day, will always seek for some kind of crutch.
When the legal range of available products (sorry, just learned, that the word "Sortiment" doesn't have a nice English equivalent) aren't helping ones issue, they'll look for other sources.
But unregulated sources can bring multiple problems with it.
First off, and the thing, I care about most:
we'd/we do hurt people looking for some kind of help.
Either by directly reducing their sources of crutches to untrustable and dangerous ones, with a product that's very probably not clean and could damage the user in unintended ways, they aren't aware about.
We need to provide a safety net for people with problems, and not stigmatize those who try to help themselves.
And I've never met an addict, that was just an addict for the sake of it, or the feeling of the first time was so great - ok, maybe once I did.
But in every other case, the only ones getting hooked are the ones, that finally felt good with themselves for once in their life, when they somehow introduced some drug into their system.
And that's why many of them say, it was that feeling of the first time, they always try to reproduce.
For a normal happy person, heroin wouldn't make much of a difference.
But if you're feeling unloved and alone, hurt and abused, when you're feeling lost and don't know what to do, than end yourself.
Well then, then heroin (or whatever helps your cause) will give you a new perspective of life.
This escape from overwhelming, oppressive, suffocation problems is it, why people get hooked on drugs.
There is just nothing wrong with recreational use, as long as it's just about boosting a good time or even better, use mind altering drugs in a ritual setting, to change your perspective on things and learn (again) that love and your lives ones are the center of your life - or discover, that there was always one thing, that you wanted to do.
Doesn't matter, if it gives you more options and happiness in life, it wasn't bad.
Bad it is for the people who cling to it, because only on it, they feel like functioning normal.
Those people have actual drug problems, and even with crystal meth the statistics say, that only a few percent (we're talking 1-2%) get addicted.
(At least that's, what I saw and remember - proof me wrong)
And we have to keep in mind what social stigma fucking crystal meth has!
The group of people doing it (and show up on those statistics) are mostly people, that are already looking for such experiences and have stepped over the border of social tolerance, but look for their own thing (either enjoyment or escape/help)
And there is pretty much no one, who ever just started with meth (or other hard drugs, like heroin) . In the most cases there was at least alcohol and probably cigarettes/nicotine involved - there are absolutely always exceptions, but that doesn't change much, what needs to change in our social system.
As tragic, as those exceptions are, those usually happen in groups, where people with problematic drug use already gather.
So, solving the problem of the mass, should also help to reduce those sad exceptions.
Ok, I've started a bigger second point, but the only thing left I have are those few words, trying to start describing an idea:
"Then we need to look into the individual"
Well,... I hope the first point is sufficient, and if I ever remember what I wanted to say else, I'll come back here ;-)
So kids, you see, don't abuse drugs, else you won't remember shit... - although my mother has the same problem, and never in her live did anything illicit.
So I can't say with confidence, that we can talk about causation.
But, what hurt my mind most, were social traumata (e.g. a Burnout), and drugs (and many exercises like meditation) exceptionally helped my mental state and ability to handle life and work despite my handicap.
As I said, as long as I work actively work a problem and use drugs in a ritual state, they are helping me.
As soon as I need them just to get through the day, then I'm having a problem, I'm trying to avoid.
I know, this is mostly about me, but talking with other users, I've mostly seen the same mindset.
Prohibition of vice does not work and only empowers organized crime.
End of argument.
There are no negatives.
Scientifically speaking, the pros outweigh the cons everytime.
Public Safety should not be done with the assumption that the public is made up of stupid children that would kill themselves at every possible opportunity (though some people are like that) rather it should come with the assumption that adults are smart enough and have the right to make decisions about them selves.
The government should work towards education so that the public can be better informed and only restrict extreme situations where a reasonable mistake can lead to unreasonable consequences or harm to others. And "Gateway drugs" is as stupid as saying that teaching people how to use a knife would lead them to seek out sharper and bigger knives until they stab themselves and die.
I love that rhetoric but it reminds me of reddit discussion about mother suing the zoo after she dopped her children into...I think it was hyena pen?
People got pissed that it was ZOO that was at fault, not her. There was a barrier if I recall correctly, waist-level one, and the pen was lower than the walk to separate animals from humans, but parents liked to held their small children over the barrier for...reasons. Well, she lost hers.
And people absolutely blamed ZOO for not idiot proofing more. As if it was us that should be kept in pens xD
Pros:
Cons:
I'm not a regular smoker, I think we are better off having it legal though.
Legalize all drugs. Move 100% of the enforcement funds into drug treatment programs. And then tax them and put that towards treatment programs.
I have a hard time imagining making an argument where alcohol and cigarettes are legal and weed is not. In terms of harm it does to people acutely and over time. I understand the position of "nothing like that should be legal" and "everything should be legal" even though I disagree. But I think if you choose one, weed might be the least problematic?
No, it's not easy to test for driving. But alcohol is and TONS of drunk driving incidents happen still. I think that's more a function of not having non-driving options to socialize over alcohol.
I don't partake, but it's been legal in my area for a couple years now and I haven't seen any negative effects on society. More gaudy smoke shops is about it. They remind me of the payday loan places. I'm sure some people have a dependency on it, it can form a habit like anything else.
Having lived in both, absolutely legalize.
I don't personally care for it and I get annoyed by the public smells, the tacky and run-down stores that make neighborhoods feel trashy. But that's all personal preference.
The one legitimate issue is that it is very difficult to regulate and enforce impairment. Someone driving or operating machinery high is just as dangerous as someone driving drunk. With alcohol, there are a number of different tests and impairment is well correlated with BAC. For marijuana, there is no quick and accurate way to assess how high someone is at a given time.
Someone driving or operating machinery high is just as dangerous as someone driving drunk
You have a source or anything to back this idea up?
I delivered pizzas in downtown Seattle for a couple years, and most of my coworkers were constantly stoned. Many weren't just hitting pens or joints, they would hit a fat dab with a torch lighter and then hop in their vehicle and make a delivery.
Both years I worked there, our delivery team got an annual award for having 0 vehicle accidents.
Obviously this is anecdotal, but if you run this same situation back with alcohol instead of weed, I am confident there would have been many accidents.
I probably overstated by saying it is equally dangerous with somebody driving drunk. However, there are lots of studies that show it causes serious impairment.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapsychiatry/fullarticle/2788264
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9940647/
https://jcannabisresearch.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s42238-023-00202-y
I certainly don't advocate people driving under the influence of any mind altering substances, and I believe if someone is found impaired at the time of an accident, the law should account for that.
However, and this is anecdotal, I grew up in a house where I knew from a very young age that my parents were smokers. There were far fewer days that my parents were not high. They performed all necessary driving without issues. They maintained focus and followed all (other) driving law and never got into accidents. I don't partake at all now, but when I did, I drove regularly and never felt unsafe. There were instances where quick reaction time was necessary (swerving to miss an unexpected obstacle on a dark windy road in the rain, accidents involving other vehicles in front of me, etc.) and my conscious effort to focus on the task was way more important than whether or not I was high.
Now I ride a motorcycle and am much more aware of what is going on with drivers around me. The amount of people I see in their cars on their cell phones or busy talking to their friends or just generally not paying attention, I want to say that is the bigger issue. Alcohol disables your ability to choose that focus, and at least for me or the people I've been in a car with, cannabis does not. I've ridden in cars with friends that touch their phones while behind the wheel and it has always made me feel much less safe.
But this is just my experience, and I wanted to share. You aren't wrong and I know it makes more sense advocating driving without influence, but to say it is just as dangerous as alcohol seems a stretch in my eyes.
Impairment is impairment and being tired or distracted by phones/technology is often even worse than being intoxicated or high but we tend to love using BAC because it is easy to measure. Locations that legalized weed didn't have an increase in impaired driving last time I checked, because most people don't go out driving when they are high while people often drive intoxicated after drinking at bars.
Legalize it
Tax it
Regulate it
Is this still a discussion on 2025? I always thought this was a no brainer, just blocked by demonization and the lack of examples of places that legalized and nothing bad happened. We should be discussing how to deal with other drugs. Marijuana is pretty much solved
The widespread legalization, overwhelmingly positive reception, and complete lack of any of the dangerous consequences we were warned about makes you wonder what else "They" were wrong about.