Marijuana

[PersianSpice]

This always seems to be a hot-button issue for a lot of people. We all know the story, so let me get to the point: Should it be legalized? Is it really that bad?

My answer would have to be yes to the first and no to the second. Meaning I'm for the legalization. I've been looking up a lot of myths and facts about weed and honestly, anyone who's against it because of the anti-drug foundations are brainwashed. The effects of weed are not nearly as bad alcohol; it's less addictive than caffeine, it really doesn't damage your lungs at all, most of those "thousands of harmful substances" are in coffee, and any effects it has on your motor skills/memory are gone after you go sober. On top of that, the fact that it "kills brain cells" has also been proven wrong. Honestly, these sound a lot less harmful than that of alcohol. Most of the things that people debate are bad about weed are based on studies that have been conducted in the late 70s and have since then been redone with results that prove otherwise.

I'll support the common theory that the only reason marijuana isn't legal is that the government can't tax or regulate it. Why is it that almost every government-sponsored book, website, etc. says that weed is bad yet sites that aren't show all these statistics proving they aren't as bad as everyone is making them out to be?

So, what's everyone's thoughts on this?

[Chidori]

Yeah, it definitley isn't as harmful as alcohol and tobacco but extensive use can cause paranoid schizophrenia and many other mental issues, for example my uncle used to do it a fair amount when he was growing up and he is now over paranoid about certain things and has fairly minute mental issues. The main reason people view it as such a taboo is because the people you usually associate with regular use of it are complete fuck ups and generally fail hard at life. But this is not the case for everyone who uses the drug and I know plenty of inteligent peopel who use it recreationally and have a great deal of life prospects. As for the legalization thing, it all depends what perspective you look at it from and whether or not you actually think abotu it laterally. From the closed minded non cannabis user would come the opinion of 'It should be illegal, if it was legal people would die every second and all our teenagers would be destroyed' A cannabis user with a similarly closed mind would want to be legal so they could get it easier and generally be able to do it more often. Thinking laterally draws me to the conslusion that if it became legal, the government could tax it horrifically and control the potency thus making those who take it have to pay for more for something that does no where near as much as what is around now. The only upside for cannabis users from it being legal is them being allowed to grow it themselves fairly easily and also, if it did become legal there would be a stupid amount of stupid people protesting and complaining that it would kill their families so I highly doubt it will ever be legalised but the selection of stoners with a brain mass less than the joint in their hand can still hope.

[Zairak]

I personally believe it should be legalized. Whether or not it is bad for you is besides the point. This is not to say I think crimes commited while under the influence of marijuana should go unpunished, however. If somebody feels they can deal with the consequences of taking marijuana, more power to them.

[HeavyDDR]

I dunno. Killing your body just so you can feel good for a little bit with anything seems pretty bad to me.

[Zairak]

Perhaps I should have been more detailed in my post. I do not promote the use of marijuana, nor do I partake in it myself. I am assuming here that you were referencing my post, since you didn't seem to answer the original questions, at least not individually. Anyway. I simply do not see the point in arresting somebody for causing harm to themselves. If they hurt others, fine. However, arresting somebody for simply using it or being in possession of it would seem to me to be extremely similar to arresting somebody for beating their head off the wall. If they want to do it, what business of it is mine or yours? Besides, with few exceptions, most users of marijuana are at least vaguely aware that there are some health risks associated with marijuana.

[PersianSpice]

Actually, weed is less harmful than you might think, it doesn't even kill brain cells. The only bad part about it is when you're actually on the high, after that most, if not all, of the side effects are lost. Anything else besides weed, though, is pretty bad. In other words, real drugs (X, LSD, crack, blah blah blah).

Good post, Chidori. When you say your uncle had extensive use, how long is that? I know someone who's been using it for over 10 years and doesn't have any signs of mental disorder yet.

[WillPhanto1]

I'm apathetic one way or another if they actually do legalize it. And I don't really think it's as bad as some people make it out to be. But really, do we need another legal vice for people to be putting it their mouths, to make them feel good? Then again freedom of choice comes into play here, so it depends on how strong you feel about it.

[Tatterdemalion]

First off, to really understand how marijuana reached the legal and social status it has in the United States, there's a very thorough documentary you should watch, it's called "Grass: History of Marijuana", and I'm pretty sure the whole thing is somewhere on YouTube.

Here, for example:

youtube.com/watch?v=ZGKeq2HrBxA (http://youtube.com/watch?v=ZGKeq2HrBxA)

Anyway, I'd have to say that marijuana definitely should be legal, not only on the principle that it's relatively safe (which it is), but also because if we've established that there are people who want marijuana, and that there are a large number of people who are going to consume it even if it's illegal, accompanied by the fact that it can be grown in parts of the united states, then it would be ridiculous not to make it legal, so that it can be taxed by the government. I'm not a big fan of capitalism, but if you compare the options of 1) spending a great deal of government money trying to prosecute people for a crime that doesn't harm anyone, and is never going to be put to an end, or 2) making capital by taxing something that is in high demand, and which can be grown domestically...it's a no-brainer, really.

Also, legalizing marijuana would significantly reduce international drug trafficking, the money of which can go to pay for a whole number of ungodly operations. Because why would someone buy on the street what they can legally get down the block?

Although I wouldn't mind putting an age limit on purchasing marijuana (which we already do with cigarettes and alcohol), something around 24, not letting people drive while high (then again, why would anyone want to drive while high?), or restricting smoking it in some public places. Otherwise, let it all be legal.

And no, it's not really that bad. LaGuardia proved that over half a century ago.

[PersianSpice]

^Good points. I do recall that the legalization of weed in Amsterdam (I'm pretty sure, I could be wrong, read it really briefly) actually REDUCED the percentage of people doing hard drugs. Funny how that all works out.

[PhillyEagles4Life]

it can go either way, i mean just because it's bad for you doesn't mean it shouldn't be legalized...look at things like alcoholic things, and cigarettes, both of those things are bad for you but they are legal. not saying im a supporter of weed or anything, i have friends that do that stuff and i don't mind, as long as they don't drag me into it which most of them respect my decision to not want to do weed.

[Tatterdemalion]

But who says it's bad for you? That's the real myth that everyone needs to clear up...

[PersianSpice]

The government. Look at these.

This isn't a government-sponsored website. (http://www.drugpolicy.org/marijuana/factsmyths/)
This is. (http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/ongoing/marijuanap.html)

[PhillyEagles4Life]

But who says it's bad for you? That's the real myth that everyone needs to clear up...
Well it can be bad for you based on how often one does it, I know some people that are addicted to it, doing it 24/7 and they just aren't the same anymore. A good friend of mine often thinks somethings there when it's not while he's under the influence of weed.

[Chidori]

Good post, Chidori. When you say your uncle had extensive use, how long is that?
He was alive in the 60s so he must've partied pretty hard, he has long since stopped but negative effects are highly possible but only if you abuse it for an exorbitant amount of time. I do recall that the legalization of weed in Amsterdam
yeah in Amsterdam it is legal to sell in coffee shops and the like but soon they're going to be changing the laws so that you have to be a dutch citizen in order to purchase anything over there because they have gained a reputation of being the Cannabis capitol of the world.A good friend of mine often thinks somethings there when it's not while he's under the influence of weed.
Of course he sees what isn't there when he's under the influence. That can happen with any mind altering drug, even alcohol occasionally.

[PhillyEagles4Life]

Yes I was stating that to give an example of how it can be bad for you, it's mentally damaging.

[HeavyDDR]

less harmful
Less doesn't mean not.

That's like saying stabbing yourself is less painful than shooting yourself, in the end you're half-dead.

And Zairak saying that harming yourself shouldn't be against the law is wrong. Are you trying to say suicide should be legal too?

[PersianSpice]

You know what he means. You're using too melodramatic of an example.

[Zairak]

Wait. Suicide is illegal? How does that work? Do you fine the corpse? In any case, if suicide is not legal, then it most certainly should be. I've always considered the right to die one of the more obvious rights of any person. I just can't see the point in writing numerous laws in an almost completely vain attempt to protect people from themselves.

[Chidori]

That's like saying stabbing yourself is less painful than shooting yourself, in the end you're half-dead.
Using that as an example is pointless, it's like putting uprooting a plant and cutting a dog in half on the same level only slightly less extreme.Suicide is illegal?
Yes.

[HeavyDDR]

Wow dude.

Wow.

So, if a teenager who's parents told him to cut the grass and the teenager goes emo about it, should they be allowed to kill themselves?

If we made suicide legal, everyone would kill themselves over petty little things and the country would DIE. No, the corpse can't get fined, but the fact they're causing trauma to their family, getting the police involved in something that might be suspected to be murder, and the whole "you could have actually done something to help your country" is kinda annoying to the world. If you try to commit suicide, police will stop you. Know why? It's illegal.

God dang.

Anyway.

My example is fine, you guys are just taking it too literal. I'm saying hurting yourself is stupid no matter how you do so, whether it be with gun or knife, or marijuana or cigarettes. Doesn't matter how addictive it is, IT IS addictive and if someone gets addicted to it, like cigarettes, you keep buying and buying and buying, and injuring yourself over and over and over. It's stupid no matter how you look at it.

Using drugs is like paying to count to ten or to take a deep breathe, and then punching yourself in the gut afterwards.

[Tatterdemalion]

Less doesn't mean not.

That's like saying stabbing yourself is less painful than shooting yourself, in the end you're half-dead.

And Zairak saying that harming yourself shouldn't be against the law is wrong. Are you trying to say suicide should be legal too?
See, with that one poorly constructed (yet rhetorically crafty) analogy you just completely undermined, ignored, disregarded and senselessly dismissed theentire concept of a comparative. No, less doesn't mean not. But then again, less does mean less.

For example, pinching yourself on the arm is less painful than shooting yourself. It's not painless, no, but it's less painful. This difference in the amount of pain is illustrated by the comparative "less."

If we were to say that the fact that one thing is markedly less harmful than another is irrelevant, thenyou're opening up a gateway to a world of insanity. No, something that's less harmful than something else. But it's less harmful, which is what matters.

Also, for the record, I'm not too sure that stabbing yourself is any less painful than shooting yourself in the first place.

And as for suicide being illegal no, I'm pretty sure that in the contemporary United States suicide is not a crime. Assisted suicide, yes, but not suicide. That is, you don't get fined or sent to prison for trying to kill yourself.. That is, at least in my state.

[Tatterdemalion]

Wow, just 14 minutes too late...anyway, the idea that if suicide were legal (which it is, by the way) everyone would suddenly start killing themselves is a ridiculous assumption to make...also, keep in mind that if suicide was punished by law, and someone did want to kill themselves, I sincerely doubt that the fact that they may be dissuaded by the fact that they may face legal punishment if they were to survive...because the point of suicide is to not survive. And also, you're trivializing death.

And the police will stop you from committing suicide (I think it's conceptually a public health thing), but no, it's not a crime by statute. That is, you can't be charged with attempted suicide, you can't be put on trial for it, and you can't be convicted of it.

And another matter for the record, marijuana/THC isn't chemically/physically addictive the way that tobbacco/nicotine is. That is, it's very possible to casually use marijuana without becoming addicted. Addiction to marijuana is for the most part a psychological dependence, not a physical dependence.

Okay, that's it...I think.

[killshot]

So, if a teenager who's parents told him to cut the grass and the teenager goes emo about it, should they be allowed to kill themselves?
Whether they are allowed or not is irrelevant. Suicide may be illegal, but that law can't possibly be enforced. If someone is determined to die then no one can stop them. The police might try to stop a suicide, but in this case the person would have to be attempting their suicide in public. I think that attempted suicides in a public area are more of a cry for attention than a genuine wish to die.

I think that the alcohol ban of the 1920's shows just what happens when the government tries to pass a law they can't enforce. Marijuana is not difficult to purchase and the demand for it is high. I think our government should stop throwing away tax dollars trying to suppress this stuff when there are so many things our money could be better spent on. Marijuana is safer than most legal drugs so I see no reason to prohibit its use.

[HeavyDDR]

Um suicide being illegal is pretty enforced. If I went around saying, "I'm gonna kill myself, I'm gonna kill myself," with ropes around my neck and a shotgun up to my head, chances are, a police officer is going to tackle me. Most likely, this means it's illegal.For example, pinching yourself on the arm is less painful than shooting yourself. It's not painless, no, but it's less painful. This difference in the amount of pain is illustrated by the comparative "less."
Question is, why do it in the first place? AGAIN, you guys are taking me TOO LITERAL.Also, for the record, I'm not too sure that stabbing yourself is any less painful than shooting yourself in the first place.
Wow aren't you on topic.That is, it's very possible to casually use marijuana without becoming addicted. Addiction to marijuana is for the most part a psychological dependence, not a physical dependence.
Doesn't matter what adjective you throw in front of it, it's still dependence. An unhealthy dependence.

[PersianSpice]

If you have a problem with us taking you so literally, then stop giving dumb examples. Honestly, the suicide example was just ridiculous. How else are people supposed to respond? Weak. Weed gives people a good time, it's basically like getting drunk, which has most likely killed more people than whatever weed has done. That's pretty much the only reason: fun. It's not that psychologically deep or anything, people get bored and see weed, try it, have fun on the high, and continue doing it. The effects are honestly not that bad. You seem to think that people who smoke weed a couple of times are just killing themselves, but there's plenty of people out there that lived long, healthy lives and smoked weed at one point. And seeing as how it's less harmful than more drinks, shouldn't it be okay to have?

It's typical if the first thing that popped into your head when you think of someone who smokes is some pale, white guy that has huge bags under his eyes, but that's honestly not how it really is. A LOT of people do or have done weed at some point. Whether or not they liked it is irrelevant because the thing is that they're still alive and in good health. Funny how that works, huh?

Also, keep in mind this is a topic about marijuana and it's legalization. Not "TINGS DAT HURT U", there's probably a different topic about that.

[HeavyDDR]

Not "TINGS DAT HURT U",
Except the whole "it's a drug" thing.

[Tatterdemalion]

Um suicide being illegal is pretty enforced. If I went around saying, "I'm gonna kill myself, I'm gonna kill myself," with ropes around my neck and a shotgun up to my head, chances are, a police officer is going to tackle me. Most likely, this means it's illegal.
Nice to see you're being scientific, so okay, feel free to go out and experiment. Yes, the police are responsible for preventing suicide when possible, but suicide is not against the law, in that, if you look in the actual law books it's not treated as a crime, and if you attempt to commit suicide, you will not be charged with committing a crime in a court of law.

So no, the fact that police officers will prevent you from committing suicide does not mean that suicide is against the law. If a district attorney were to prosecute you for trying to kill yourself, then you'd have an argument. Or, furthermore, you'd have an even better argument if you could demonstrate that suicide is illegal by pointing to some sort of written law. Because laws are written down, and are accessible by the public. Until then, stop taking leaps in logic.Question is, why do it in the first place? AGAIN, you guys are taking me TOO LITERAL
Actually you're taking me too literally. My point was that your analogy is poorly constructed. You're trying to say that the fact one thing is less of something than another is insignificant by comparing two painful things, yet using two examples which are both extremely painful, which makes for a very irrelevant analogy.

As far as why you should do it in the first place, I never said that you should cause yourself pain. You made the jump by changing the adjective from "harmful" to "painful." The reason we have analogies is to compare a single aspect of something, not to say that two things are exactly the same in every respect, and if you don't understand that, then I suggest you shouldn't use them in the first place.

So, for the record, I'll clear things up. Shooting yourself and stabbing yourself are painful. Smoking marijuana is pleasurable. Which is not the same thing as painful. So you wouldn't stab, pinch, or shoot yourself, because those things are painful. You would possibly consider smoking marijuana because it is pleasurable. Which, again, is not the same thing as painful.

See the difference? Maybe you should stop taking your own analogies, and mine, so literally.Wow aren't you on topic.
Quick, LOCK THE THREAD!Doesn't matter what adjective you throw in front of it, it's still dependence. An unhealthy dependence.
Yes, it does matter, because the adjective changes the nature of the noun. That's why we have adjectives.

And also, you have yet to establish how smoking marijuana is "killing your body," a notion which you introduced in your first post, yet haven't done anything to back up.

And the addiction argument is one thing, but keep in mind that addiction is in no way the same as casual use. In fact, it's a very different thing. So recognizing that adjectives and nouns do have actual meanings, are you saying that marijuana is in some way unconditionally bad for you (which you haven't done anything to justify), or are you saying that addiction to marijuana is not a good thing (which I, and I'm sure plenty of other people would agree with?

You don't think occasionally smoking marijuana leads directly to addiction, do you?

[Tatterdemalion]

Except the whole "it's a drug" thing.
Are you sure you know what a drug is? I'm just asking...because the definition of a drug is not "things that hurt you...or u...or whatever"

I mean, yes, drug abuse is bad, but that whole sort of "drug = bad" word association thing really oversimplifies something that;s far more complicated, and far less black and white.

[PersianSpice]

Nice. Just pick ONE thing to respond to like you always do. See, marijuana barely hurts you, just about as much, if not, less than alcohol. Yet that's accepted widely. If people smoked weed more casually like drinking, then it wouldn't be as much of a problem. It's only a problem because some asshats decided it should be even after studies pretty much disproved the dramatized negative effects.

[templarofsteel]

I think it should be decriminalized, like traffic violations. It will free up space and money for the real criminals, the prisons are over crowded and while I don't really care it is unconstitutional and all. It is harmful, but so is alcohol ( which is more harmful to other people), etc.
If we did legalize, think of the tax dollars we would get :)

[SynaNara]

ok dont hate me for this.
but.
i dont think it should be leagal.
even if it doesnt hurt your physically it will still hurt you mentally. how much so depends on the circumstances. and also being high can put you into situations that can be dangerous. and being addicted to something doesnt always take an addictive substance. i mean, pot didnt become illegal for no reason.

[Tatterdemalion]

I don't hate you, but does the fact that something can potentially be harmful to an individual if used irresponsibly mean that it should automatically made illegal? I mean, if I consume too much sodium, then I can easily be put at risk for hypertension. Does that mean the government should put a ban on sodium, or only allow it to be used in foods under special circumstances? And if I watch television too much, I can potentially become lethargic, and lose ambition and interest in the world and life. I'd consider that to be very harmful indeed, but does that mean the government should outlaw television?

And being high doesn't put you into dangerous situations, it's just that normal situations can be made dangerous if attempted while high. Like driving. But at the same time, drinking and driving is just as, if not more dangerous, and yet anti-drunk driving laws are enough to deal with this, as opposed to outlawing alcohol. And alcohol presents even more of a threat, because if someone has to think about whether or not they're going to drive somewhere, if they're under the influence of alcohol their judgement will be pretty impaired, whereas if they're high, they probably won't want to go anywhere anyway.

And yes, it didn't become illegal for no reason. It became illegal due to a combination of sensationalized propaganda/media, racism, and a general lack of understanding of the substance. If people had understood back then what they understand now about marijuana, I seriously doubt it would have become illegal.

[Sophie]

Think of how much gang violence would be decreased? No one would be shooting anyone over dealer's territories if the Supermarket sells a pack of 20 joints.

[darkarcher]

That's hardly a good point. Gang violence would continue over something else; marijuana is not the only thing they fight over.

Also, if marijuana were legalized, it would not be a good idea to make it over the counter, as that would lead to increasingly easy abuse. If it were made available, it would most likely need to be through prescription.

[Chidori]

You can already get it in some forms through prescription.. If it became legalised making it only available through prescription would be foolish as first you'd need a reason for it to be prescribed to you.. Just going into a health centre and saying YOOO MAAAN I WANNA GET HIGGHHH wouldn't end up with you being given free weed by the NHS.

But alas over the counter in supermarkets wouldn't work either unless they compeltely anhialated the potency. You can already get headshops and the like that sell legal highs and salvia and stuff so it's just more than likely you'll get mroe of those cropping up selling it and perhaps coffee shops and that kind of thing like in amsterdam. Also.. as for the gang culture thing i highly doubt it would have any effect on it whatsoever.. It's usually just down to their own stupidity and lack of being able to get a job.

[darkarcher]

If it became legalised making it only available through prescription would be foolish as first you'd need a reason for it to be prescribed to you
How would that be foolish, now? Why should mind-altering drugs be given out unless someone has shown that they actually need whatever positive effect it would bring?

[Zairak]

I think Chidori meant that it would be pointless to make it legal if you would still need a medical reason to get it. It would be fairly pointless then to change it as our current system already works like that. Only, you know, not through the local pharmacy.

[killshot]

If it became legalised making it only available through prescription would be foolish as first you'd need a reason for it to be prescribed to you.
You talk as if there is no one who could medically benefit from marijuana. Getting high isn't the only reason someone would try to get a prescription.You can already get headshops and the like that sell legal highs and salvia and stuff so it's just more than likely you'll get mroe of those cropping up selling it and perhaps coffee shops and that kind of thing like in amsterdam.
I have been to Amsterdam and shops that sell marijuana do so in a tasteful manner. If your concern is how marijuana should be distributed, then you should see how it is done there. There shouldn't be any need for the drugstore to be involved if marijuana was truly legal.

[Tatterdemalion]

How would that be foolish, now? Why should mind-altering drugs be given out unless someone has shown that they actually need whatever positive effect it would bring?
Um...for recreational purposes? Because people find the euphoric experience they encounter when they consume it to be pleasurable? I think the real question is what good reason there is to make such a substance illegal in the first place.That's hardly a good point. ang violence would continue over something else; marijuana is not the only thing they fight over.

Not really. No, gang violence wouldn't go away entirely, but I don't think anyone's suggesting that it would. The fact of the matter is that as long as there is a strong demand for something that is illegal, it's not going to go away, but instead its distribution is going to go underground, into the criminal world. Once it enters the criminal spectrum, then not only are you providing gangs and organized crime alike with a source of revenue, but you're giving them an incentive to do business, and giving people a reason to support them.

Now, I'm not saying that the solution is to make everything legal, but when you're dealing with something for which there is no reason to make it illegal, why would you give gangs and criminals that much more to work with (which would then also lead to the need do divert things like law enforcement away from more pressing issues to locate, arrest, and prosecute said criminals.

[PersianSpice]

Increasingly easy abuse? It's already abused. So is alcohol, cigarettes, and any prescribed, legal drugs. Anyone who would smoke weed is already doing it so it's not like the whole country would be turned into potheads.

Anyways, I found some more interesting stuff. But since it's all basically from one site, I'll just link y'all there:

http://abovetheignorance.org/

THC actually has a protective effect on your lungs, so if you consume it without smoking it, it can actually help filter tar out of your lungs. Not sure if this is on Above The Ignorance, but oh well.

[Sophie]

Kinda like cigarettes and alcohol?
Welcome to America. The land of the free!
In American I should be allowed to choose how I kill myself. If I want to smoke weed, I should be allowed, it's not like it hurts any one. Surely no more the alcohol and cigarettes do.

I just don't get it ._.

[darkarcher]

I don't think cigarettes and alcohol should really be legal either, especially alcohol, but that's just me.

In general, you can't always point at something that's already allowed as proof that something else should be allowed, since the opposing party may not think that the original things should be allowed in the first place.

[Tatterdemalion]

Well, as far as I see it, there's a much better case to be made against cigarettes than against marijuana.

[darkarcher]

Go ahead, then. Comparing things is a good way of seeing them from different angles.

[Tatterdemalion]

Well, what I'm saying is this: I'd say that it's silly to make something illegal just because it can be harmful to the person who uses it. But nonwithstanding the fact that nicotine is indeed more dangerous than marijuana (which we've pretty much established, right?), the problem is that nicotine, and anything that uses nicotine in such concentration as cigarettes, is indeed a physically addictive substance. And the problem with that is that the entire concept of a free market (if you believe in that sort of thing) is that the consumer ultimately has the choice whether to consume or not to consume a particular product. Now, if a product is indeed chemically addictive, and has additives in many cases that make it even more addictive, then what you end up with is a product that, through the intended use of the product, makes the consumer physically dependent on the product, and therefore dependent on the supplier...which completely screws up the whole supply and demand business.

And you could say that marijuana, and any drug, really, can also be addictive, and that's true, but the thing is that marijuana is addictive the way that hot dogs and hamburgers can be addictive, and not so much the way nicotine and crack cause addiction, and places more responsibility on the consumer, which can still be assumed to be reasonable.

Anyway, that's just one way of looking at it. A strange way, though.

But still, what is the supposed reason that marijuana-like subsances should be made illegal? That much I still don't get.

[darkarcher]

The typical reason is that it's a mind-altering drug, which, even if it is not very potent, can pose a severe risk to others in the same environment as the person taking it.

Honestly, I don't know enough about it to form an accurate statement for or against it.

[metagaia]

I would like it to be legal, simply because I believe that people should be free to do to their own body as they choose (this includes suicide).

I have no interest personally, since I don't like the drug's damage to short term memory, but I do agree it's less harmful than tobacco.

With reagrds to HeavyDDR's suicde example, I think holding a gun to your head would consitite a breach of the peace. Killing yourself otherwise depends on the country that you are in.

[magick]

No man is so foolish but he may sometimes give another good counsel, and no man so wise that he may not easily err if he takes no other counsel than his own. He that is taught only by himself has a fool for a master.

[Tatterdemalion]

The typical reason is that it's a mind-altering drug, which, even if it is not very potent, can pose a severe risk to others in the same environment as the person taking it.
Yeah, but marijuana is a depressant...it doesn't cause people to behave differently than they normally would, it doesn't cause people to become violent, it really doesn't cause people to do anything. You know what most people do when they get high from marijuana? They sit around. Yep, that's it. So unless you're smoking marijuana on a busy highway while driving a truck on 2 hours' sleep, I don't see how marijuana does anything to put others in the same environment as the person taking it at any sort of a "severe risk."