SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
64% of Americans now support the legalization of cannabis, an all-time high since Gallup first asked the question in 1969. Also for the first time, a majority of Republicans (51%) support legalization, up from 42% last year:
As efforts to legalize marijuana at the state level continue to yield successes, public opinion, too, has shifted toward greater support. The Department of Justice under the current Republican administration has been perceived as hostile to state-level legalization. But Attorney General Jeff Sessions could find himself out of step with his own party if the current trends continue. Rank-and-file Republicans' views on the issue have evolved just as Democrats' and independents' have, though Republicans remain least likely to support legalizing pot.
Also at NPR, The Hill, NORML, and Reason.
Related: New Attorney General Claims Legal Weed Drives Violent Crime; Statistics be Damned
4/20: The Third Time's Not the Charm
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 28 2017, @02:33AM (14 children)
I can accept the idea that it isn't good to have SWAT team raids to keep people from their vices, but...
This stuff is still bad. Heck, ignore the drug aspect. Suppose it was sawdust from oak trees. When you smoke, you fill your lungs with tar. You are breathing carbon monoxide, particulates, and all sorts of kinds of cancer-causing lung-obstructing crap.
It is 100% certain that large corporations will engage in sophisticated lifestyle marketing to push the product. There will be brands for women, brands for hipsters, brands for gay people (separately for tops and bottoms), brands for hispanics, brands for business executives (or those who aspire to be such), brands for athletes...
It's like with tobacco: Virginia Slims for women, Newports for blacks, etc. We see it with soda too (extreme sports for one brand, tradition for another...) and with beer and with vodka and with cars...
Business will push this hard, using every psychological trick to make people buy more and be brand-loyal.
Meanwhile, any regulations will be toast. Business will lobby the regulatory agency and the politicians controlling it. Friendly people will get appointed. It will be easiest to pass regulations that show up already written, supplied by the businesses that want to sell this product.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by a262 on Saturday October 28 2017, @02:38AM (3 children)
The most important thing that has to happen for *true* legalization is the right to grow one's own supply. Without that, we're still restricted. Give me the right to grow my own plants and do with them as I choose, and I'll be just fine.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 28 2017, @03:26AM
I consider it a mildly poisonous plant. It's not for human consumption.
It's pretty. It's resistant to bugs. It would be perfect growing under the windows in front of my house.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Saturday October 28 2017, @05:39AM (1 child)
In what states is it legal to purchase for recreational use, but illegal to grow your own? (Its a real question, I really have no idea).
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 3, Informative) by takyon on Saturday October 28 2017, @05:48AM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_cannabis_by_U.S._jurisdiction [wikipedia.org]
Sort by the second column (the colors - get green to the top).
For Washington state, it says "The state allows licensed growers to cultivate marijuana, but does not permit personal growing in one's home except for medical use." For Nevada there is no info in that column.
Everywhere else with legal recreational has allowed plants, usually six, to be grown in one's home. And if you can grow six legally, you can probably get away with 50 with nobody caring.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by takyon on Saturday October 28 2017, @02:42AM (7 children)
Vaping might reduce that, and is considered superior to smoking, although the science is not settled on vaping:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/vaping-health-problems-smoking-e-cigarettes-north-carolina-study-danger-lung-conditions-disease-a8016861.html [independent.co.uk]
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Informative) by Nerdfest on Saturday October 28 2017, @03:43AM (2 children)
Vaping with e-gigs is a completely different thing, and more likely to be bad for you as well. Dry-herb vaping just boils the THC and other compounds off. No tar, no smoke, no strong smell.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Saturday October 28 2017, @03:49AM (1 child)
I think there are e-cigs specifically designed to vape weed. Or more accurately, a vape in pen/e-cig form rather than a tabletop device like the Volcano.
Either way, there is an allegedly safer alternative to smoking cannabis (other than edibles).
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Informative) by t-3 on Saturday October 28 2017, @05:30PM
Other than burnt herb and edibles, there's sublingual drops, oils which can be used topically or for cooking, varied concentrates which can be smoked or vaporized, and there are also pills available worth synthetic or extracted THC.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 28 2017, @07:37PM (3 children)
I don't think people remember Dr Donald Tashkin.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/25/AR2006052501729.html [washingtonpost.com]
" "We hypothesized that there would be a positive association between marijuana use and lung cancer, and that the association would be more positive with heavier use," he said. "What we found instead was no association at all, and even a suggestion of some protective effect."
Federal health and drug enforcement officials have widely used Tashkin's previous work on marijuana to make the case that the drug is dangerous. Tashkin said that while he still believes marijuana is potentially harmful, its cancer-causing effects appear to be of less concern than previously thought."
https://youtu.be/GJmQ16cGBHU [youtu.be]
Interview of Dr Tashkin with Lanny Swerdlow of Marijuana News
(Score: 2) by takyon on Saturday October 28 2017, @07:46PM (2 children)
Everyone can tell that medical science with low sample sizes, p-value hacking, and lots of unknown variables is going to produce contradictory results. That's why I said the science isn't settled.
You just admitted that the same guy has found evidence in both directions, believes cannabis is potentially harmful, and that it has "cancer-causing effects" (of variable/unknown concern). And you're calling me forgetful? Put down the reefer!
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 28 2017, @07:54PM (1 child)
"Tashkin's study, funded by the National Institutes of Health's National Institute on Drug Abuse, involved 1,200 people in Los Angeles who had lung, neck or head cancer and an additional 1,040 people without cancer matched by age, sex and neighborhood."
so 2240 people is a low sample size? OK
thanks. I'm not a previous anon. I lurk and I've read SN.
You are just being rude and obtuse.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Saturday October 28 2017, @08:20PM
Marijuana use and cancer incidence (California, United States). [nih.gov] (64,855)
Marijuana use and risk of lung cancer: a 40-year cohort study. [nih.gov] (49,321, 5,156 used cannabis)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5072387/ [nih.gov]
I will agree that more research is needed and that Dr. Donald Tashkin is not certain if cannabis causes lung cancer or not.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by chewbacon on Saturday October 28 2017, @03:43AM
Smoking it isn’t the only way to consume it. You can extract the psychoactive ingredients and the possibilities are pretty broad there.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 28 2017, @05:54PM
That only implies that we should restrict smoking cannabis to the same level we restrict tobacco, it does not support the current policies, nor does it support restricting other applications of hemp.