most smokers that do it for a longer time do not use it for the effect but for the taste.
Analogmunky said what I would say. You may like the taste, but the main reason people use weed is for the effects.
if so then it will most likely fail.
Why? Look at how huge the pharmaceutical industry is right now. Look at how many pills people are taking right now. Pills are drugs, they just don't have the same bad image that the others have. If you were to put THC in a pill and buy it from a drug store, they would make insane profit off of that.
If you were to put THC in a pill and buy it from a drug store, they would make insane profit off of that.
I think that most people would bend over to that, but I hope that they would not.
However, a quick glance at human history shows that with a bit of time and pressure, people will convert to anything, even popping THC pills to get high instead of smoking.
Why? Look at how huge the pharmaceutical industry is right now. Look at how many pills people are taking right now. Pills are drugs, they just don't have the same bad image that the others have. If you were to put THC in a pill and buy it from a drug store, they would make insane profit off of that.
then why are people still smoking sigarets? why are they not all on nicotine pills? because smoking gives a extra feeling. the same go's for marijuana. the smoking gives something extra that a pill will never be able to give. pills are prety lame. you eat 1 and thats all done. smoking whit friends gives a nice atmosphere. and it gives a great taste. a pill will maybe give the taste for a small amount of time. but probably not at all.
i guess it will fail because pill are lame compared to smoking. (see sigarets)
i guess it will fail because pill are lame compared to smoking. (see sigarets)
And, tbh, there is a limited amount of ways to take a pill, whereas there is an amazing amount of contraptions for smoking. Not saying that pills couldnt go the same way i.e. pill crushers that you inhale, putting pills in other orifice's (im not kidding), crushing it up in water, having it as a patch, Im sure people could invent impressive ways to take a pill
i guess it will fail because pill are lame compared to smoking. (see sigarets)
I'm not saying at all that people will stop smoking. That will never die, and that's the whole problem with this stupid war in the first place.
I'm saying, if they made a pill that was legal and gave the same effects (which they are trying to do right now), lots of people would hop on board.
I think it's stupid and I find the whole thing ****ed up in the first place. I'm not in favor of them doing this. But in the meantime, drug companies are one of the biggest lobbiests of politicians, and now the government are raiding medical marijuana shops and closing them down. If the trend keeps going and they develop a pill, doctors are going to prescribe that to people instead of giving them a card.
Not saying that pills couldnt go the same way i.e. pill crushers that you inhale, putting pills in other orifice's (im not kidding), crushing it up in water, having it as a patch, Im sure people could invent impressive ways to take a pill
let's think of a way that will give the same relaxed atmosphere as smoke can give. i can't think of a way a pill can do that unless we put it on fire. that we would probably do whit a vaporizer.
that's the whole problem with this stupid war in the first place.
what? the smoke? it's not what this "war"is about. if it was then why was it socialy accepted to smoke untill the 1980's. untill then smoking was seen as a good thing. not something to be ashamed of but something to be proud of. while the war on drugs started befor the 80's
I'm saying, if they made a pill that was legal and gave the same effects (which they are trying to do right now), lots of people would hop on board.
true but thats only because the smoking is forbidden there. here they wouldn't be able to make much money. maybe a funny 1 timer to find out if it realy works like smoking it.
I think it's stupid and I find the whole thing ****ed up in the first place. I'm not in favor of them doing this. But in the meantime, drug companies are one of the biggest lobbiests of politicians, and now the government are raiding medical marijuana shops and closing them down. If the trend keeps going and they develop a pill, doctors are going to prescribe that to people instead of giving them a card.
The whole thing is ****ed.
i find the whole usa health "care" stupid, but thats your problem. i don't know much about it. it's compleetly different from what i'm used to.
Well I'm against it. My civics teacher told us its a federal law that it's an illegal substance but I don't know if that's true or not. I'm against it though for personal reasons.
Well I'm against it. My civics teacher told us its a federal law that it's an illegal substance but I don't know if that's true or not. I'm against it though for personal reasons.
Being against the legalization of something because it's already illegal doesn't make any sense. Using that logic, if we outlawed video games, then video games should remain illegal because video games are illegal. That just doesn't work.
Being against the legalization of something because it's already illegal doesn't make any sense. Using that logic, if we outlawed video games, then video games should remain illegal because video games are illegal. That just doesn't work.
Just to add....it might be illegal under Federal Law, but each state has the authority to legalize it within their own boundaries.
Well I'm against it. My civics teacher told us its a federal law that it's an illegal substance but I don't know if that's true or not. I'm against it though for personal reasons.
I don't think personal reasons against something are good reasons to make something illegal for everyone.
In Canada it's decriminalized, so we can have it and smoke it, but it's illegal to sell or buy it. It's weird, but it prevents prisons from filling up with people who have done nothing to harm other human beings.
In Canada it's decriminalized, so we can have it and smoke it, but it's illegal to sell or buy it. It's weird, but it prevents prisons from filling up with people who have done nothing to harm other human beings.
your free to smoke it on the street of central toronto for example?
Just to add....it might be illegal under Federal Law, but each state has the authority to legalize it within their own boundaries.
True but that only means you won't get arrested by local law enforcement. You'll get arrested by federal officers and face federal court and federal prison. Also, isn't it technically unconstitutional for the federal government to outlaw marijuana?
Also, isn't it technically unconstitutional for the federal government to outlaw marijuana?
The Government can constitutionally regulate drugs in Interstate Commerce. The Commerce Clause permits congressional regulation of three categories: 1) the channels of interstate commerce; 2) the instrumentalities of interstate commerce, and persons or things in interstate commerce; 3) activities that "substantially affect" interstate commerce.
Its prima facie that under the ICC when the drug has travelled in Interstate Commerce it can be -constituonally- regulated. If something, in this case a drug, has travaled from State A to State B it can be regulated. End of story. Now the question is: what about "home-grown drugs? Can they be constituonally regualted? The answer to this question can be found in Gonzales v. Raich: [...] the regulation is squarely within Congress' commerce power because production of the commodity meant for home consumption, be it wheat or marijuana, has a substantial effect on supply and demand in the national market for that commodity. In assessing the scope of Congressâ Commerce Clause authority, the Court need not determine whether respondents' activities, taken in the aggregate, substantially affect interstate commerce in fact, but only whether a "rational basis" exists for so concluding. Given the enforcement difficulties that attend distinguishing between marijuana cultivated locally and marijuana grown elsewhere, 21 U.S.C. 801(5), and concerns about diversion into illicit channels, the Court has no difficulty concluding that Congress had a rational basis for believing that failure to regulate the intrastate manufacture and possession of marijuana would leave a gaping hole in the CSA. Pp. 12-20.
Long story short, it is considered constitutional.
