Cannabis  

432 members have voted

  1. 1. Have you ever used Cannabis?

    • Yes
      267
    • No
      165
  2. 2. Will you use Cannabis? again?

    • Yes
      154
    • I am not Opposed
      58
    • Not Sure
      45
    • No
      175
  3. 3. Do You Support Legalization / Decriminalization of Cannabis?

    • Legalize Cannabis
      179
    • Decriminalize Cannabis
      119
    • Keep Cannabis Illegal
      134


Recommended Posts

Yes

Yes

Legalize it

Why? I like hanging around stoners a lot more than drunks, and drinking's legal. Not only that, but selling it legally, taxing it, and using said taxes on education and highways would do a lot more good than using our already-stretched-thin taxes on keeping users and sellers in jail. Besides, has keeping it illegal really saved many lives? It's so easy to find anyway - hell, you can buy some in one of our McDonald's drive-thrus (haven't done this myself, but know of people who have).

I use cannabis on a daily basis. I have been using it for quite some time now, approximately 10 years. I run a restaurant, have two wonderful kids, I own my house and I'm only 24. It hasn't slowed me down a bit. You can't get stoned and chill in your basement every single day, you've gotta stay active.

@Gary7: You made it sound as if your friend started smoking weed after he put a bullet in his head, but your friend didn't get $150,000k into debt because of marijuana, he was addicted to coke. Marijuana did not force him to snort his first line man, you can't pass blame like that.

What kind do you use?

Responsible marijuana use and distribution should be legal. Under 21? No sale; no allowed use. 21+? Allowed, provided you don't operate vehicles or heavy machinery. It should be regulated like alcohol, minus the Sunday-sales restriction.

People think criminalization solves the drug problem. It doesn't. Criminalization makes it more accessible to minors because black market dealers don't check IDs. Considering the link between marijuana use by those under 21—those with rapid neuronal development using a drug that effects neutrotransmitters—and increased risk of developing psychosis and schizophrenia, the last thing you want is to make it easier for them to get. Those black market dealers will likely pressure them into trying other, more dangerous drugs too. Criminalization increases marijuana use by minors, pads the pockets of black market dealers and thus gives them greater incentive to sell to minors, increases the odds of minors developing psychosis or schizophrenia, increases the odds of minors being pressured into trying other drugs, and causes anxiety among those who must confess to their illegal actions to get the medical help they need to stop using marijuana; criminalization isn't a solution, unless you're a drug dealer who stands to profit from it.

I have used cannabis, if the chance came up for a puff, I would probably say yes, and I think it should be legalised.

If it is legalised it will be made purer, I'm sure smoking binbag and mud is probably more unhealthy than Cannabis.

alright i can already tell summer is here....weed smokin boredom LOL

from an economic stand point the legalization of marijuana would free up a lot of government resources to be used in a more important issue. i have actually heard economists toss around this idea....crazy aint it?

i love the comments of people that say their buddy started using marijuana and then ended up on harder drugs. that is in no way because of marijuana. your friends were dumb and irresponsible and wanted something more than just a simple high.

i have a few friends as well, we used to get high here and there and now after not seeing them for a while i find out they use coke. i've been offered coke but i refused it. every once in a while i end up in a party where all people do is coke and no one smokes weed.....

but who cares, whatever the reason for smoking it, as long as you're responsible and active you're going to be fine.

Under 21? No sale; no allowed use. (...) Criminalization increases marijuana use by minors (...)

Your solution isn't really a solution as making the sale and use on kids forbiddens acts still does the same, like tobacco or alcohol.

Adults will still sell the stuff to kids. Kids will still be able to able to get it.

In highschool, it was easier for me to get weed than Alcohol or Tobacco (unless our little city of 35000 went dry)

In Order easiest to hardest

Cannabis

Tobacco (not that hard at all)

Alcohol !!!!!!!! SUPER HARD TO GET (unless your friends brother is 19+ :D)

Edited by Zab
Your solution isn't really a solution as making the sale and use on kids forbiddens acts still does the same, like tobacco or alcohol.

Adults will still sell the stuff to kids. Kids will still be able to able to get it.

I didn't present a "solution" to stop marijuana use among children. If anyone expects government laws to entirely prevent certain behaviors, they're unrealistically optimistic. I merely presented a way to lessen its use. On average, minors find it more difficult to purchase alcohol than marijuana because, unlike most tobacco and liquor stores, they don't need to wait in the drug dealer's parking lot for an hour to find someone "cool enough" to buy it for them.

Drugs like this only make one want a bigger fix thus, moving onto stronger things.

If you want to smoke your stinky weed, then be my guest, do it in your own space and don't walk around the streets and try impose it

on others.

I am glad our parliament has moved cannabis back to a class b drug.

I see in Britain in 20 years half the population 25-65 with severe mental issues and bloated livers as this socialist government

has allowed the electorate to smoke and drink themselves into that situation.

Another thing when you want to get off your stinky drugs then pay for your own treatment.

lee, you dont' have a clue about it, I have never wanted a bigger fix, you don't get addicted to marijuana at all comparable to something where you need a fix. (Some people have been known to be sold Cannabis mixed with other drugs without knowing it which is the only time something like this would happen)

And we are not imposing it on anyone, thats like saying if someone walks down the street with a smoothy they are imposing it upon you to buy one.

also marijuana doesn't cause SEVERE mental issues unless that person already has a susceptibility to it due to an already existing problem.

It is just like alcohol, you don't drink it if you have a bad liver or have an addictive personality or a really violent person, or you die, become an alcoholic, or are an extreme violent drunk.

don't smoke Cannabis if you have a mental problem, or it very possibly will cause you harm

Lee, you are uneducated on Marijuana and it's effects on people. I come to this conclusion from your first line:

Drugs like this [Cannabis] only make one want a bigger fix thus, moving onto stronger things.
Edited by Zab
No drugs kill. A good friend of mine went over 150,000 in debt on cocaine and ended up putiing a bullet in his head. He started smoking pot. So no, I will never support the legalization of any mind altering drug.

He would have put a bullet in his head if he had worked in investment banking and lost that much money or if he got addicted to gambling instead. The fact that he moved on from pot to cocaine is not the fault of cannabis. It is the fault of your friend who made that choice. It's only this lack of personal responsibility that really justifies keeping things controlled/illegal.

Also, plenty of mind altering drugs are already legal. Alcohol and many prescription medications. Do you think cancer and surgery patients should be denied morphine and anesthetics?

Never used it, never will. I am opposed to any drug use simply because it is a major cause of a lot of violence and most people just use it to escape their true life/problems, which in the end is just wasting time you could be using to fix those problems.

How do you know this? Evidence?

Alcohol can make people volatile but cannabis does the opposite.

How do you know why other people use drugs? I think making such assertions is a bit ignorant, as is the judgement that escaping your worries for a while is necessarily a bad thing.

....

And we are not imposing it on anyone, thats like saying if someone walks down the street with a smoothy they are imposing it upon you to buy one.

also marijuana doesn't cause SEVERE mental issues unless that person already has a susceptibility to it due to an already existing problem.

....

If you smoke in a public place other people *will* end up inhaling it, just like cigarette smoke. Therefore you ARE imposing it on others. If someone can smell it then they must be inhaling at least some chemicals from it.

I find it strange that you think psychosis and schizophrenia are not severe...

In public is not imposing it upon someone as long as they aren't inhaling it, did i say they were? You can be in public and make sure others aren't inhaling it. as well "I" do not believe to smell it is to inhale it when it comes down to the physics of it, but i am not a physicist so have no right to argue that point.

And having worked in Mental Health Care hospital, (one in our town, as well my mom worked there, and i ended up there as well, but not anymore) I have never met a case that Cannabis alone induced these mental illnesses upon people WITHOUT preexisting problems. and this is by todays standards a huge mental hospital, though they have been removing wards and moving them to London Ontario to close this one down because of the cost of running it (Very old building yet REALLY BIG, most people think it's a bad decision).

Drugs like this only make one want a bigger fix thus, moving onto stronger things.

One could argue the same for caffeine.

If you want to smoke your stinky weed, then be my guest, do it in your own space and don't walk around the streets and try impose it

on others.

Do you agree to legalizing or decriminalizing it so people can smoke their stinky weed in their own space?

I am glad our parliament has moved cannabis back to a class b drug.

The reasoning behind the reclassification was moronic. The main argument was about the link to increased odds of developing psychosis and schizophrenia. What is their solution to that? Oh yes, sending people to prison for even more years with thieves, rapists, and murderers! I must ask your parliament: what increases the odds of developing psychosis and schizophrenia more, inhaling marijuana smoke or living with thieves, rapists, and murderers? (Clinical depression, psychosocial stress, and sleep deprivation are some of the leading functional causes of psychosis while social disadvantage, poverty, racial discrimination, unemployment, and poor living conditions are some of the leading functional causes of schizophrenia, and all of these effect prisoners.) The reasoning behind the reclassification consisted of downright stupidity plus a willful ignorance of the opinions of those on the advisory committee on the misuse of drugs (i.e. the experts); in short, it was moronic.

Another thing when you want to get off your stinky drugs then pay for your own treatment.

The reason the government pays for treatment is to help people become more productive members of the work force again, which leads to the government getting its money back in the form of taxes. Stopping treatment would accomplish nothing, merely causing people to remain unproductive and letting them become drags on the economy.

lee, you dont' have a clue about it, I have never wanted a bigger fix, you don't get addicted to marijuana at all comparable to something where you need a fix. (Some people have been known to be sold Cannabis mixed with other drugs without knowing it which is the only time something like this would happen)

I agree completely. I have also never wanted a bigger fix. I don't even take aspirin unless it's necessary. People too easily confuse personal choices with chemically induced behavior. The people who generally want a bigger fix are those suffering from clinical depression or some other mental ailment. Drug use shouldn't be approached as a criminal problem, it should be approached as a medical problem.

I can also testify to marijuana being mixed with other drugs and chemicals. That is how I lost two front teeth. There was something other than mariuana in what I smoked, which caused my stomach to feel knotted and I became so lightheaded that I fainted, falling off the back pegs of my friend's bike and smashing my face into the street pavement. Next thing I know, I'm waking up in the hospital with a swollen, bloody face. I have fake teeth in the front now, that sometimes taste like metal. Anyhow, criminalization was partly responsible for that incident. If it were legal, the contents of the marijuana could be regulated and there wouldn't have been rat poison or pesticide (commonly used around plants) in it for me to inhale.

If anyone expects government laws to entirely prevent certain behaviors, they're unrealistically optimistic. I merely presented a way to lessen its use. On average, minors find it more difficult to purchase alcohol than marijuana because, unlike most tobacco and liquor stores, they don't need to wait in the drug dealer's parking lot for an hour to find someone "cool enough" to buy it for them.

Or they haven't met /don't have decent decent enforcers / punitive / penitentiary action. That's what's wrong with in most countries; corruption and/or lack of punishment/reeducation.

It isn't uncommon for someone to commit violent offenses or risk time for a lot of money. They'll be inside a literal hotel for X amount of time, courtesy of my taxes and the ****ty laws.

Compared to your country and Canada--- all it's very easy to get (alcohol, tobacco, drugs). There are very few places that actually check citizen cards, people still believe in desenrascan?o>* of their peers, and the moneybringers. Your suggestion couldn't work here.

Desenrascan?o is a Portuguese word used in common language in Portugal, to express an ability to solve a problem without the adequate tools or proper technique to do so and by use of sometimes imaginative resource fullness when facing new situations. Achieved when resulting in a hypothetical good-enough solution. When that good solution escapes us we get a failure (enrascan?o -entanglement). Most Portuguese people strongly believe it to be one of the their most valued virtues and a living part of their culture./i>

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • My father still uses a programme written in dbase3. Still manages to work with a little help from dosbox. 
    • Microsoft hides these secret Windows 11 performance boost settings available on every PC by Sayan Sen Windows enthusiasts often look for ways to extract as much performance out of their systems as possible, and it's often the case that they try and do so while trying to minimize the heat and power consumption. This is especially relevant in the case of mobile Windows PCs since laptops and notebooks tend to get hot and management of that heat and power is harder in such a form factor. As such users often turn to techniques like under-volting which can be used to squeeze out the maximum capabilities of a chip while also maintaining lowered power levels. There are official apps from AMD and Intel with the likes of Ryzen Master and XTU (Extreme Tuning Utility). While these are quite handy, most enthusiasts probably prefer to dig into the BIOS and play around with settings there like Curve Optimizer on Ryzen, which lets users set various frequency-voltage scaling values. These are essentially called P-States. If you are not familiar with them, Processor Power Management is done through Advanced Configuration and Power Interface (ACPI) P-states and C-states. While P-states or performance pwoer states handle CPU voltage-frequency scaling, C-states deal with CPU sleep states so that some of the CPU functions, which are not necessary at that moment, can be disabled. The P-states and C-states work together to make the processor run more efficiently. It helps the OS and apps determine which cores can be parked and which should be boosted. Of course not every user is an enthusiast or knows the technicalities and integrities of how things like overclocking or undervolting work. Thankfully for them Windows itself offers something pretty cool, though it is hidden by default on all systems. By default, Windows only has two P-States, "Minimum Processor State" and "Maximum Processor State." However, this can be changed with a Registry trick to expand the options under a secret "Processor performance boost mode" dropdown. This essentially enables the HWP or hardware P-States available on a device, and these are not controlled just by the OS itself as the underlying hardware gets involved too. In total there are five Processor Performance Boost Mode profiles that control how Windows requests and allows CPU turbo/boost behavior under the different power policies. They are: Disabled: In this mode, processor boosting is effectively turned off. The CPU will avoid entering turbo or boost frequencies and instead operate closer to its base frequency ceiling. This can significantly reduce power consumption and heat output, but at the cost of reduced burst performance and responsiveness in short workloads. Enabled: This is the standard behavior where boost functionality is allowed under normal conditions. The processor can opportunistically increase frequency when workload demands it, balancing performance gains with power and thermal constraints as managed by the system. Aggressive: Aggressive mode favors performance more heavily, allowing the CPU to enter higher boost states more readily and sustain them longer. This should in theory improve responsiveness under bursty or heavy workloads but increases power draw and thermal output compared to the default enabled behavior. Efficient Enabled: This mode still allows boosting, but with a stronger bias toward energy efficiency. The system attempts to use boost more selectively, avoiding unnecessary frequency spikes when the performance gain is marginal. Efficient Aggressive: This is a hybrid approach where boost is still performance-responsive, but the system continuously weighs efficiency more heavily than in Aggressive mode. It aims to deliver noticeable performance improvements while reducing wasted power in less demanding scenarios. Here's how to enable the Processor performance boost mode: Open Registry Editor: Press Win+R, type regedit, and click OK. Go to: HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Power\PowerSettings\54533251-82be-4824-96c1-47b60b740d00\be337238-0d82-4146-a960-4f3749d470c7 (where HKLM stands for HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE_) Modify the value of Attributes from 1 to 2 (you can find modify option by right-clicking) After that, exit Registry, you should now be able to see the new "Processor performance boost mode" dropdown menu: As you can see there are now five new P-States or CPPC states or power profile available that help define the boost mode processor setting on your PC. Wrapping it up here's a quick run-down of the settings as defined by Microsoft itself. Setting Description Disabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is disabled. Collaborative Processor Performance Control (CPPC) behaviour is disabled. Enabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is enabled. CPPC behaviour is Efficient Enabled. Aggressive The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is enabled. CPPC behaviour is Aggressive. Efficient Enabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is Efficient. CPPC behaviour is Efficient Enabled. Efficient Aggressive The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is Efficient. CPPC behaviour is Aggressive. Aggressive At Guaranteed Windows calculates the desired extra performance above the guaranteed performance level, and asks the processor to deliver that specific performance level. Efficient Aggressive At Guaranteed Windows always asks the processor to deliver the highest possible performance above the guaranteed performance level. In the next part we shall be comparing these settings to explore how much of a benefit or regression they can provide in terms of performance and power efficiency. If you decide to change the values on your system and are experiencing problems like crashes or an overheating PC, make sure to revert the steps back to the original state.
    • I think he means you haven't reviewed previous UFC games. Of course it doesn't matter... Every time you just report on something that involves the President even if just simply what happened you guys usually get accused of being anti-Trump. We live in fun times.
    • So how did you solve the problem? Disabling Secure Boot isn’t a solution.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      Leroy Jethro Gibbs earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Conversation Starter
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Month Later
      AndreaB earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      agatameier earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      agatameier earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      518
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      198
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      147
    4. 4
      ATLien_0
      93
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      77
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!