Pot legalization on the way?

[Philly Mike]

Pot is a schedule II drug. This means it can be prescribed, but with a shitton of restrictions...for good reason.

Pot will not be made legal without a prescription for a long time. Which I say is a good thing. A friend of mine died when she was 16 because some stoner, high off his ass on weed, hit her head on with his vehicle (around a curve) because he "didn't realize" it was a one way street even thought he lived there.

By the way, illegal drugs used to be taxed in TN. Drug dealers could pay taxes on sold goods anonymously. Sounds dumb, right? This so-called "crack tax" raised $6 million in the 3 years it was active, because if the taxes were not paid and you were caught, they took cars or whatever to pay the money you owed. All of it went to state drug programs.

Kinda awesome, I think.

So you think alcohol should be completely banned too then right? It does a damn fine job of impairing judgment, yet is legal.

well, for once i agree here with speedbump.
yes I am sorry about the loss of your friend, I also have lost a friend. The people that killed him shot him because they were told to kill someone specific, he wasn't that person but they thought he was so they shot him and he crawled for half a block in the middle of a cold night when he collapsed near an intersection and he bled to death. Alcohol impares judgement for as long and as much as weed.

However I have never heard of someone being a "gun for hire" in return for some cigarettes or some booze. The reason those people went out and did what they did is because the drugs were impossible to get by normal means and someone who was dealing with illegal situations to begin with wanted someone taken care of. My friend was killed at the age of 16, he would have been 28 on the 17th, and to this day it still affects me.

[hoshi]

No it is not schedule 2, is it schedule 1, see for yourself: http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/pubs/scheduling.html

Huh, that's weird.
I'm trying to figure out why I thought it was a schedule II. I'm usually not wrong about that sort of thing, but it seems I am. Was it at one point on schedule II?

That is kind of odd, though. Cocaine is on Schedule II even though it is never, ever given for pain management or anything. Though I am a staunch opponent to the legalization of weed, I will admit it has limited (though existent) medical usage for management of pain/nausea/stress in terminal patients....and most Medical Health professionals would agree. It also is not physically addictive (though I and many others would say there is a risk of psychological dependence). Which means...it's kinda odd it's on schedule I, since it doesn't fit the qualifications.
As for comparing it to Alcohol...doesn't really fit. Yes, Alcohol can be harmful when drank in excess (as it IS a toxin), taken with medication, or if the consumer drives while impaired. I'll admit that 100% ...the difference? It's been around a long time, and there is no taking it away. It is, of course, controlled...by age laws.
The mechanics and risks are quite different, as is the level of impairment. In a way, you're talking about two different animals. Marijuana is classified as a hallucinogen, and alcohol as a depressant.

Who could really say what would happen if we legalized marijuana? Yes, yes, people point at a country where it was legalized. But how can you compare one country to another when it comes to the people? The culture? For instance, in America, we're up a creek because people are in debt up to their eyeballs. In Japan, they're up a creek because people are saving and won't spend.
Even the Netherlands, the icon for pot users, has recently had to crack down. They don't encourage it anymore, they "tolerate" it in "small amounts" as they said. Even those who grow it are limited to 5 plants per home. In Rotterdam, shops selling cannabis within 200 meters of schools must now shut down. In Amsterdam, there are now quite a few official "cannabis-free zones" because of nuisance to inhabitants of the areas.

And, to be honest, then what would employers do? Someone gets hurt on the job or makes a mistake that harms others because they were high. Then what? When I graduate, I'm going into the medical field, so this very poignant to me.

This is something that there will never be an agreement on. Ever.

[Mad Dog]

No it is not schedule 2, is it schedule 1, see for yourself: http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/pubs/scheduling.html

Huh, that's weird.
I'm trying to figure out why I thought it was a schedule II. I'm usually not wrong about that sort of thing, but it seems I am. Was it at one point on schedule II?

That is kind of odd, though. Cocaine is on Schedule II even though it is never, ever given for pain management or anything. Though I am a staunch opponent to the legalization of weed, I will admit it has limited (though existent) medical usage for management of pain/nausea/stress in terminal patients....and most Medical Health professionals would agree. It also is not physically addictive (though I and many others would say there is a risk of psychological dependence). Which means...it's kinda odd it's on schedule I, since it doesn't fit the qualifications.
As for comparing it to Alcohol...doesn't really fit. Yes, Alcohol can be harmful when drank in excess (as it IS a toxin), taken with medication, or if the consumer drives while impaired. I'll admit that 100% ...the difference? It's been around a long time, and there is no taking it away. It is, of course, controlled...by age laws.
The mechanics and risks are quite different, as is the level of impairment. In a way, you're talking about two different animals. Marijuana is classified as a hallucinogen, and alcohol as a depressant.

Who could really say what would happen if we legalized marijuana? Yes, yes, people point at a country where it was legalized. But how can you compare one country to another when it comes to the people? The culture? For instance, in America, we're up a creek because people are in debt up to their eyeballs. In Japan, they're up a creek because people are saving and won't spend.
Even the Netherlands, the icon for pot users, has recently had to crack down. They don't encourage it anymore, they "tolerate" it in "small amounts" as they said. Even those who grow it are limited to 5 plants per home. In Rotterdam, shops selling cannabis within 200 meters of schools must now shut down. In Amsterdam, there are now quite a few official "cannabis-free zones" because of nuisance to inhabitants of the areas.

And, to be honest, then what would employers do? Someone gets hurt on the job or makes a mistake that harms others because they were high. Then what? When I graduate, I'm going into the medical field, so this very poignant to me.

This is something that there will never be an agreement on. Ever.

You have now entered the "Touchy Subject" zone. Enter at your own risk and proceed with caution.

[Philly Mike]

Pot impairs your judgement for almost the same amount of time as alcohol, and in the same manner generally. There are tests that can judge how much weed is impairing you at that time the same way the breathalizer can give a measurement on your impairment under alcohol. that's what employers would do. If you are under the influence of any other drugs I assume depending on the workplace they will have different procedure depending on what is in your system and how much. These places aren't stupid, they will create policy to adapt to the less restrictive laws just as states and counties will have their own legal limits for automobiles.these same issues were raised when alcohol was legalized.