The legalization of weed

Discussion in 'Legalization Of Marijuana' started by Anthony95, Apr 1, 2017.


    Anthony95 New Member

    We need to show weed in a different form.
    You have to understand that there are alot of old school people in office so we need to explain it to them in a way they can see and understand. And get weed legalized everywhere so everyone can get the benefits from weed.

    To legalize weed you have to explain it like medicine,like any other medicine. Each person is affected by the medicine differently not just weed but any form of medicine. Hydrocodone, sleep aid, you name it. So if we look at weed on a medicine base and treat it like any other medicine. Look what will happen so a normal person can take one pill of hydrocodone and their side effects are gone, meaning pain or whatever the taking hydrocodone for but the next guy has to take two hydrocodones to get the same effect, meaning not being in pain or whatever they're taking medicine for so the same goes for weed so let's say you're smoking a joint with your friends where it takes you 10 hits to feel good and have your pain and whatever else was bothering go away you but your friend over there smoke the same amount you can tell he is going crazy and paranoid and freaking out it's because he smoked too much it only takes him half the amount that you smoke to get where you are, so technically he smoked twice as much as you so he's acting crazy and paranoid and freaking out which would happen if you give the guy who only needed one hydrocodone the same amount as the other guy who needed two hydrocodones he would act out maby crazy, paranoid or some other side effects so you need a doctor to test you just see how much it would take to affect you so you're not getting overdosed or taking too much same goes for weed so you'd have to get tested to see how much weed to take for you, so you go into the study with your doctor you would smoke a small amount of marijuana and he would ask you a range of questions like is your pain gone so forth and if it does not then you need to smoke a little bit more and hill ask you the same questions and then when they do go away that is the amount you need you have a controlled environment where you could see if it affects someone different in a bad way then you would know not to prescribe this person weed. out of a hundred people someone's going to have a bad reputation with marijuana and have bad increase effects of pain or other things and you could go from there and see what other form of medicine would help him or her as a doctor
    combatant likes this.

    BobCajun Well-Known Member

    Yeah, so million dollar corporations can take over the industry like they did with alcohol and tobacco. Great idea, just stellar. If you can't get and use weed without getting fucking caught, whose fault is that? Like driving around with weed in the car, huh? Or you like walking around with a bag in your pocket, getting drunk and causing a disturbance or doing some vandalism for cheap kicks so the cops are called on your ass? Because how the fuck else would you be getting caught?
    Trichometry101 likes this.

    combatant Member

    Just send them a copy of the Emporer Wears No Clothes by Jack Herer.

    Icemud420 Well-Known Member

    Do we need to show coffee as a pill? do we need peer reviewed double blind tests and stage 3 trials for recommended does every morning? NO! we know we drink coffee and we feel better...

    Why should cannabis be any different?

    The whole (we need accurate dosing and clinical trials) crap is just the pharmaceutical's attempt to push legalization into their favor with extreme vetting and regulation. If you look into the financials of most of the public and some of the private cannabis companies, the investment companies dumping millions in are all pharmaceutical and banking companies. hmmmmm...

    I don't agree that we need to focus on cannabis as a drug in a pill/pharmaceutical delivery method. That only opens the doors to big pharma making billions, restrictions on normal citizens and selling our freedoms away in the form of "permits".

    We know cannabis works for peoples ailments, we know its virtually harmless... so why all the fuss, restrictions, permits and crap... let us just grow our beloved plant....

    Now with that being said, do I think that there should be a market for pharmaceuticals derived from cannabis... well its a tough question but I think there are people that do deserve a pure, sterile dosed method of using cannabis, especially children, elderly and those with compromised immune systems but do I think that in order to allow us freedom this is the only way cannabis should be used.. no.. I do see a need or void to fill in this area which I hope happens, as cannabis is a wonder plant with many applications and some do need dosing and a Pharma based product...however... that doesn't mean that we need to herd all cannabis users under this description or format either... we need to just be strait resistant to the government and tell them enough is enough with taking our rights and selling them back to us as permits... that is bull!
    combatant and GroErr like this.

    BobCajun Well-Known Member

    What will obviously happen if corporations can get into it is that the market will quickly be oversupplied, just like with corn right now. Farming is so advanced now that it's not even difficult to produce huge surpluses of any crop. As with corn, the price will go so low that you'd need about 1000 acres to make it worthwhile, if you could sell it at all. It'll basically be about the same price as hemp, which is not even worth the extra work involved in growing and harvesting it. That what I read about hemp farming, a bit higher price per acre for the crop but a whole lot more work involved, because hemp jams up harvesters with its fibers. Do you see a big rush of people wanting to farm hemp, in countries where it's already legal, like Canada? No, just not that attractive a proposition.

    combatant Member

    This is what happens when greedy barons lobby to keep their businesses "successful" while hemp was legislated out. There are over 50,000 products that can be made from hemp including 8 different types of fuel including hemp seed oil as biodiesel. The bi-product of this usage creates a food product that is second in protein only to the soybean. All oil. wood, and coal industries could be REPLACED by hemp. This would keep the market value up as we should be using it the way we should. You can even make cement out of it. Henry Ford built a car from it which was stronger than steel. This is what we have been missing out on for over 100 years due to lies and deceit perpetrated by people with serious character flaws, including our elected officials.

    Big pharma is too busy using "opiods", (I love that word), to even care about using anything safer. They have many people addicted to their scam. The major problem most Amerikkans have is that when you show them something good, they run away. That is why our sporting events are all sponsored by unhealthy products. I watch as they feed their children soda pop, cakes, candy, cookies, ice cream, and many other sugar based products and then preach about how all the children will be on marijuana if it becomes legal. Just look around you at all the unhealthy people. Their medical society is more than happy to turn their patients into invalids which creates the revolving door. This all starts at childhood and is inbred through the generations. I really feel that most legislators have stock in big pharma. This is why Obamacare does not cover anything holistic. They drove cannabis/hemp laws all the way into NATO. They want to be sure they are locked in on both fronts. However, you only can fool all of the people some of the time. This is the reason for the progress made in the past 12 years.

    By the way Bob, google the letter to the Secretary of Agriculture on how to make money by not raising hogs, etc. Be sure to check out Monsanto also.

    BobCajun Well-Known Member

    Sounds too obscure to search but I assume it's like they pay farmers not to grow corn. Maybe they should pay people not to grow weed. Probably work a lot better than what they've tried so far.

    Trichometry101 Active Member

    Legal weed is corporate weed. Its already here. Mmj was the corporations getting their foot in the door and testing the market.

    Most if not all of the local dispensaries work together behind the scenes, and are owned by foreign management firms. Grow rights are vanishing. What else do we need to observe about legality? I can't grow legally, but I can purchase bullshit from a Monsanto owned dispensary? Im not even kidding.

    Icemud420 likes this.

    BobCajun Well-Known Member

    Have another vote and this time vote no. Meaning those who live where it was voted on. In Canada, there wasn't even a public vote. It was simply imposed arbitrarily by the Govt. Have you heard that Canada is a 3rd world dictatorship now? True story. There were polls that showed a majority in favor, but nobody ever bothered to clear the actual bill with the public. They just asked the general question "are you in favor of Cannabis legalization?" The average person would take that to mean ACTUAL legalization, like as legal as corn. They didn't ask "are you in favor of US investment firms taking over the Canadian Cannabis industry?" That's how they tricked the nation into a shit deal.
    Last edited: Jun 7, 2017
    Egzoset likes this.
    lucy daniels

    lucy daniels New Member

    The government will change its attitude as soon as the public start to readjust their view of cannabis from being a "dangerous" drug to a life changing substance with an ability to heal people's lives.
    This will obviously take time. But the good thing is that people around the world are starting to realize marijuana's therapeutic and medicinal benefits. So, win-win for everybody, i guess.

    Drowning-Man Well-Known Member

    "Money..." hmmmm "MONEY!" Oh, ok we gotta legalize that.- politicians -

    Egzoset Well-Known Member

    Salutations Anthony95,

    1st of all i'm located in Québec/Canada and if you've followed the actuality around here it turns out we're about to face a 3-level barrier should senenate let it pass as is, because Trudeau's "légaleezation" is just more VILIFICATION, because Québec's sinister of "healthy ways" is an absolute bigot anti-cannabic prohibitionist who actually announced she wouldn't allow self-cultivation as policing would cost too much, so it's more convenient just to ban that anyway... Then there's the municipalities with landlords on top...

    All of this because cannabis still remains on the schedule imposed by yet a 4th level: the United Nations which, quite ironically, appears to have had a serious revision of their positions, simultaneously with the WHO, essentially re-centering the "problem" as a health issue rather than something for law enforcement.

    Stop calling it weed, that would be a start.

    It's even older than you may be ready to expect. There are many types of "old school", i belong to the pro-cannabic type opposed to bigot anti-cannabic prohibition and hence progress cannot be imposed: it has to occur through seduction instead of being coerced.

    Another type of elders is those who are clueless just as my mother who thinks it's a matter of personal preference, instead of constitutional rights, etc. Prone to believe every piece of blatant propaganda presently aired on Canuck TV, a mari usque ad mare!

    Yet in my province the most important type i can think of actually looks like these radio/TV warriors/celebrities:

    (Marie-Ève Morin, Didier Jutras-Aswad)



    Those on top were seen just last month in hotel Marriott Mtl./Qc as resource persons actively contributing to a semi-secret symposium on "ADDICTION", simultaneously in Niaga-Falls as weel and for 2 more days over there, in English. The middle one instanly captures the moral support of vulnerable gullible citizens saying it's too strong so we should go back to SMOKING '70s leaves anyway. As for the 3rd/last one he's not only a famous TV comedian, actor, etc.: he was also senator and still founder of a "re-hab" center, actively supporting Trudeau's masquerade, though possibly clueless just like his fans perhaps - i honestly got to wonder because i can't believe he's got all the cards in doing so!!

    In any case it's not about young vs old but simply establishment taken over by socio-toxic self-serving individuals blind to all aspects of reality instead.

    Too bad but i'm afraid you've lost my sympathy right there.

    The so-called "medical" vs "criminal" bipolar discrimination system is totally artificial, it's function is to support the enemy's strategies, one being to "divide to conquer" and that worked great for Justin: French against English for starters (see his confusion trick via the Liberals electoral platform falsely translating "incidental possession" as "possession" alone when it should have read "possession simple", a big legal difference!)... Canadian federalists against Québec's nationalists, by systematically isolating my province to the point we've got only 2 LPs over 67 overall and counting! For example, etc., etc...

    In any case i consider the medical patient's problem was having their constitutional rights respected while these are still challenged instead, so a succession of governments could coerce vulnerable desperate patients into supporting the Trojan Horse with their legal signature. Which i find absolutely abject coming from supposedly "elite" educated people!

    Treatment of cannabis vs alcohol and tobacco, prescription pills, lottery & gambling... even soft drinks and more, euh... Just doesn't make sense as there's no such dichotomy between good and evil for so many other "dangers" to Canuck youth. Only cannabis seems worth of such obsession and panic it's got to be put on a schedule, for starters.

    So, to put it short, while we battle to undo all of the institutional harm the enemy has both its hands free to generate more, re-directing the spotlights wherever they like - convenient removing attention that might focuss on THEIR own societal failures, the worst of all by many orders of magnitude.

    My problem with such approach is that it turns decent cannabis consumers into self-vilifying automatons working against their own kind. For example it makes no sense for H. C. (under Hilary Geller pulling string in the background...) to answer the mother of a young child that he should SMOKE his prescription when his condition requires oil and not even any THC-centric kind there may be.

    The "harm" of cannabis is based on decades of contaminated statistics trying to associate/juxtapose the noble molecules with vilifying aspects such as toxic self-poisoning combustion, THC-centric genetic selection boosted a thousand fold by prohibition, not to mention BANNED pesticides even found in so-called "medical" products from actual LPs, starting with Hydropothecary which published its findings after defining the non-detection threshold level for myclobutanil, dispatching it all over the place for "organize crime" to be inspired... Now keep in mind there were 200+ pesticides on the Washington list, which opens the door to a vast array of possible undetectable synergies where 1 single item will escape detection though a soup of these shall still work well enough in mercantile terms. Not in the interest of medical patients anyway.

    James Albert Bonsack invented a rolling-paper machine which caused a SMOKER consumption method to spread around the globe and become a planetary public health issue, the patent dates back to 1881 and it generated great financial success a couple years later. This was in no way meant to address any health-wise concerns, the inventor's purpose was purely mercantile.

    Long after the Victorian age was over successive governments managed to over-tax his victims instead of just trying to fix it, today it's quite systematically associated to cannabis in the public eye and this served the enemy all to conveniently so far, with support from the United Nations, avoiding due criticism outside democratic space as in the COP6/FCTC 2014 event held in Russia which Québec's minister Charlebois used to import the worse socio-toxic content of all: to render self-poisoning toxic combustion legally equal to much healthier alternatives as e-Cigs and VAPORIZERS...

    Lucie Charlebois having some obvious nose blushing - Seen on BNN (2017-June-7) [400x300] .PNG
    Take note her father died of cancer while she struggled with a tobacco dependency herself, as she put it on parliamentary TV! Just find the error picking Lucie despite her blatant lack of objectivity, it's no surprise then when we finally hear from that very bigot self-serving politician imposing a provincial ban for all self-cultivation. Bye bye "bio" pesticide-free THC/CBD/CBN well-balanced medecine!...

    Her proposal is to eradicate all forms of inhalations/expirations via Cultural Genocide, by erasing us from reality, In The Name Of Children! E.G. total abstainance or police + double-level over-taxing.


    It took me decades to move apart from such sick self-vilifying scenarios but i managed to explore micro-dosage instead and now i feel FREE like never in my younger life as a hashich SMOKER. No thanks to anyone, not even dedicated vaporization website which only caused me to make circles around fancy/expensive "Hot Air Air Ovenizers", acutally.


    Sorry but i cannot play the games of mortal enemies, as i can't forgive Trudeau for the HOMICIDE by POLICE of a French-speaking dark-skin son of immigrants in Montréal "Noir", over 8 oz not even his own while Bill G20 Blair was most likely pulling the string in his ergonomic office chair... The cost of a distinction between "medical" and "criminal" (soon "légaleezed"...) is just too high for me.

    For example before Trudeau ceased control:

    Trichomes - Clear vs Amber (2015-Nov-28) [400x300] .PNG


    Trichomes - Good vs Evil (2017-Oct-11) [400x300] .PNG

    As far as i'm concerned that's over-priced "organized crime" schwagg that was prematurely harvested (immature), "shaved" using excessive "trimming" and/or compressed to prevent visual inspection. Not to mention i know for a fact it was also pesticide-laced... Thanks to an artificial contraption of the mind while there's no such thing in the form of "medical" SMOKING, for example! Etc., etc.

    Good day, have fun!! :peace:
    John Levy

    John Levy Member

    Yes I truly agree that marijuana has a lot of benefits, if it can be used in a proper way and with the doctors consultation, its a natural herb used for treating cronic pain, depression and for treating cancer. But people are using it for smoking and get addicted to this. this is a major loss to our economy. It is legalised under the state law but can be taken only if you are a registered patient. The case her is that the patients get addicted to this after using it as a medicine for some time. So i think there is a need regulate and check that patents are using it in a proper way so that it would not affect themin the long term.

    brewbeer Well-Known Member

    Alcohol is far, far worse, and you don't need a doctor's prescription to buy a case of beer.

    FredyJohnSmith Member

    Agreed, after all, much medical research is still required in order to support the marijuana legalization drive.

Share This Page