Medical Marijuana Degrees?

Yes - and now imagine some idiot driving, after he's had about four of them. :sad:

Johann

 

Gee -- I wonder why? :jester:

I follow your thinking, CalDog -but I feel that marijuana, even if legalized, would be viewed differently. Incidentally, my back door is about 15 miles from our local wine country. Colleges around here, including one I graduated from, have wine and craft-brewing related programs.

It's possible, although tough, for a smaller operator to do well in the wine business. I think marijuana would be for big players only. The Government would probably charge a huge amount for licenses and only major operations would be profitable -- likely those of Big Tobacco, Big Agribusiness and Big Former Criminals.

Knowing the traditional paranoia of US authorities, a manufacturer or processor would possibly face the additional expense of 17-foot electrified fences, searchlights and mandatory armed guards, 24/7. The Feds are NOT going to make it easy - or cheap.

Come to think of it, the early days of the California wine industry were not exactly peaceful, either.

Blood and wine: the unauthorized story of the Gallo wine empire - Ellen Hawkes - Google Books

The marijuana business would likely bring seasoned (former) criminal producers into the fray, offering much greater opportunity for mayhem. A little guy would not get much sleep, except maybe of the permanent variety. :sad:

Johann

 

I would think that it would be preferred to have the active ingredients in a beverage for at least two reasons. The first is that it would be easier to control the dosage and the second is that you wouldn't be damaging your lungs by pulling in all that smoke. I know it's not the same as tobacco but it seems counter-intuitive that you can breathe smoke and it won't harm you.

I googled marijuana use and sprinted through the results. Maybe it's not a surprise that the results roughly divide into 2 camps, those in favor and those against. Everybody throws numbers at you but there's just got to be bias in those numbers.

http://norml.org/marijuana

NORML says that 25 million Americans have smoked pot in the last year. I'd say that's a very conservative number. I was at a football BBQ and found a button-down banker smoking a joint while grilling the burgers. I think it's much more common than people know because there's going to be under-reporting. Lot's of people will refuse to admit doing something that is illegal.

I think that the legalization of marijuana use is going to follow a path very similar to same-sex marriage. Slow at first but each state will follow in turn, always with some hardcore holdouts. It's simply the trajectory of cultural evolution in our country.

 

No I'm not. of course it does exist and it is a huge (presently illegal) business - on your turf and mine.
And millions of people consume alcohol every day without harming anyone.

But both marijuana and alcohol are intoxicants and their use should preclude driving.
I mean -- you're not even supposed to drive or operate machinery with many cold and cough medicines, for crying out loud!

If you think it's OK to smoke pot and drive -- well, please warn me if you're crossing the border into Canada! :sad:

Johann

 

And Kizmet - I'm not against the legalization of marijuana. Far from it. Hey, I came of age in the 60s! ...But many years later I read the Buddha's teachings that people should avoid intoxicants and so - no more pot or bourbon for me. And yes - I found that advice helpful. :smile:

Whatever people want! I just don't think they should drive under the influence of anything intoxicating. We don't stop selling alcohol because idiots drink and drive - and I don't expect society to keep marijuana illegal to stop people driving under its influence. That doesn't work.

It's just that the consequences of either can be lamentable - and people have to be educated (and regulated) when it comes to driving / not driving.

Johann

 

My apologies, Steve.

It's (now) obvious to me you don't think driving under the influence of intoxicants is OK. As I saw it (maybe wrongly) - you thought I was against selling the beverage because some idiot(s) would drive. No - sell all that people will buy. The only wrong-headed idiot is the buyer who knocks 'em back and then drives. Some will, and we have to realize this -and decide how it should be dealt with.

And yes- Prohibition was a stupid idea. Strange - it was repealed in 1933 and we didn't learn anything. Around the same time, the U.S. could thank the Federal Bureau of Narcotics and its head, Harry J. Anslinger, for finally achieving the prohibition of marijuana throughout the nation.

If people just MUST prohibit something -- then I think it should be tobacco. It does 'way more harm. But prohibition would lead to criminal enterprise. All that would happen is cigarettes would cost more.

Johann

 

In fact, it's that way here in Ontario - right now. On Native Reserves (by law) tobacco products can be manufactured for use on the Reserve and sold there without the payment of Federal or Provincial taxes, which make up most of the retail price. "Runners" smuggle large quantities off the reserve into nearby cities and re-sell them at about a third (or less) of the retail price.

Our Government loses billions every year - and they are pretty well powerless to stop it. About 10 years ago I lived in a Seniors-only building. (I got out, as I felt I was far too young for it!) I saw the "runner" who had the route making his deliveries every week. This town has many slovenly, dirty people who throw their empty cigarette packages everywhere. I'd say one in three packs I see littering the street is an "illegal" brand.

Criminalize anything -- and only criminals will benefit.

Johann

 

Johann - I don't remember saying that you were against the legalization of marijuana. I'm sorry if I suggested that. Also, I agree with you that the tobacco industry is worse. Once, in a job interview, someone asked if there was a job that I wouldn't do. I told them that I'd never work in the tobacco industry. I still feel that way.

I don't think I'd start smoking pot just because it became legal, so on a certain level I don't really care what happens. On another level however I think it does matter and here's the two sides as I see them. #1 It's costing the US taxpayer about a shmillion dollars a day to continue the fight against marijuana use. Frankly, I'd like to put my share of that money back into my pocket. The cost of maintaining people in prison, all the court actions, all the investigating by police, the feds, etc. We've been fighting this war on drugs for 50 years and as far as I can see we're losing on every front. I believe the expression is "Throwing good money after bad." On the other hand there's #2. What will be the treatment costs? Will my insurance premiums (already quite high) just go through the roof because Jonny Jones has to go to a treatment program seventeen times before he finally quits? I'm the one (along with all the other policy holders) who are paying for his treatment. I don't want that either.

 

Well, I can assure you -- you haven't missed much, and you've certainly made better use of your time! :smile:

For sure. Weed is not nearly as bad. Period. Not even in the same league...

It's not nearly as dangerous. Oxycodone is a semi-synthetic opioid, with all the addiction dangers inherent in such drugs.

Marijuana can - in some cases- be somewhat addictive, but much less so than opiates, and less often. Some people develop dependency and become unable to control their marijuana use even though it interferes with their lives. That's addiction, I guess - but of a milder sort. This is said to affect about 9% of the total spectrum of marijuana smokers - possibly up to about 16% of those who start very young.

There can sometimes be some non-drastic withdrawal symptoms - much like cigarette-smoking withdrawal. These symptoms peak in about a week, I'm told. I quit smoking in 1977 and my only problem was - I couldn't think for about a month. Fortunately, I had a job that didn't require it! :smile:

If that happens, I suggest:

(a) You move to a less-restrictive state, or...

Welcome to Canada, eh? :smile:

Johann

 

Hmm - just realized. Those incidence figures on people having problems with marijuana seem pretty parallel with figures on people having problems with alcohol.

Ah, well -- lots of intoxicants get a person to pretty well the same "place" - so it's no wonder that some share similar incidence of usage-related problems, I guess. Certainly no reason there to ban alcohol or ban marijuana. I find they're good things to avoid for me, personally -- but if others want 'em -- so be it.

One thing - like Maniac, I just don't want any smoking whatsoever around me.

Johann

 

One difference, at least when I was a kid, was that it was easier for an underage person (say 14+) to buy pot than it was to buy alcohol. There were lots of kids who smoked pot before they drank alcohol.

 

I'm sure that's still true. I know it is around here, anyway. I think it's easier for very young people to buy marijuana than to buy cigarettes. Anyone can be fined up to $4,000 here, if they sell or give tobacco to someone under 19. Variety store owners get charged with that one, mostly.

It's a serious charge, selling dope to minors - but of course, weed-dealers don't get reported very often.

Johann

 

I previously wrote (in Post #16 above):

But I was wrong to suggest that Humboldt State University might have academic programs about marijuana in the future. The reason is that Humboldt State already has one today: the "Humboldt Institute for Interdisciplinary Marijuana Research" (HIIMR):

Here's an example of an on-campus presentation that HIIMR sponsored a couple of weeks ago:

HIIMR does not offer degree or certificate programs, but I'll bet that they would follow after legalization.

 

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly lol

I was surprised by some of the negative responses to marijuana, it's apparent some have not spent the time pouring through review after report etc. No matter how much money the government had to pump into trying to prove marijuana was evil, they did. Another fact is that the NIH would only pay for studies that showed the negative effects of pot, so if your handing out cash to people for that you get that. Did you know not one persons ever died from it? Crazy to keep it so illegal or am I the crazy one to want people to stop dying over the drug war....a war that's based on racism, homophobia and money.

Now after getting all that out of my system the reason I think there will be a growing demand is quality improvement on the product. As it comes out of the closet, people are going to need better ways to grow, test, improve and manufacture. If you think greens are the only form of cannabis than your wrong. There are ways to make wax, shatter, cracked, hash ( bubble hash, finger hash, etc).

Those figures are based on court reporting. In most states if not all, first time offenders are sent to rehab. It is impossible to get addicted to cannabis.

 

I had no idea I was asking such a pointless question....

Really your going to quote the DOJ Nazis? Do you really believe that pot is more harmful that cocaine? I doubt it. Racism and homophobia is the real crime with pot.

There are degree's in corn production so why not?

Right on, you know the problem is when people blindly believe what the government is saying and that supports the limiting over our rights. I just read a story where a senator voted no on marijuana for medical reasons, then got bust a few weeks later with pot while the whole time investing millions in the California marihuana industry.