opinion on legalization of marijuana in Canada

Aide · Feb 13, 2002

I am a graduate criminal justice student and I couldn't agree more. We are filling are prisons with non-violent drug offenders. I am not a big fan of legalization but I do favor decriminalization. We should treat addicts not incarcerate them. The adult system falls short when it comes to rehabilitating offenders. Recidivism rates are sky high so they are not getting enough help on the inside.

EXOTIC NURSE, RN · Feb 13, 2002

MarnnaRn Why should I turn her in for drug abuse? Is she really a drug abuser because she may smoke a "spliff on her off day. If I saw you in a bar drinking socially and you got drunk should I turn you in for that? I think not....... Who is to say that was the first time she smoked a "spliff or the second time in her whole entire life....that does not constitute her as a drug abuser.....

MarnnaRN · Feb 14, 2002

yes, if I came to work with a hangover, I can't do my job. And, since marijuana is ILLEGAL, yes that makes her an abuser.

Rustyhammer · Feb 14, 2002

I also say legalize it! If for no other reason than the absolutely absurd amount of money the US spends on "the war on drugs"

Legalize it and put all those farmers in Iowa back to work, slap a sin tax on it and we can go on our merry way.

:cool:

mattcastens · Feb 14, 2002

Originally posted by thisnurse
matt you have some very good points. i just have always thought that as a society its a double standard. if we say its ok to be high on alcohol, then why is it NOT ok to be high on weed?
as far as i am concerned they are nearly the same.
you keep bringing up crack, there is no comparison between them and its not really a good analogy.
crack is addicting, crack is dangerous.
im talking about the nature of the drug, not driving under the influence or anything else, just the effects.

when you consider the prohibition, isnt it the same thing? there was a core group that believed that alcohol should never be legal. then came the speakeasys.
you say that i am using flawed logic when i say that it should be legal because people are already doing it, and yet you use the exact same logic when you say that we cant ban alcohol because its already legal and it wont work.
(people are already doing it)B]

The point I am making is that pot is in fact dangerous. No, it won't make someone psychotic and ready to kill, it won't make someone think that they can fly off buildings or run naked into traffic, but is dangerous in the same way as tobacco or alcohol. Breathing in smoke and particles is dangerous, taking in toxins that alter brain function (no matter how brief)is dangerous -- this goes for tobacco and alcohol as well (no, I don't smoke; yes, I drink in extreme moderation).

I suppose I am, in a way, using a double standard when comparing pot to alcohol. But my question is why we should add one more dangergous chemical to the mix. People will do both whether legal or not, there's no getting around that. Prohibition of alcohol didn't work, neither does prohibition of illicit drugs. But we have to draw the line somewhere when it comes to health hazards and where we take a stand. The root to my argument is why legalize another health hazard?

I am not morally against marijuana. I had been known to smoke it in my past, before I learned more about health and started to take better care of myself. I enjoyed it quite a bit, too. I think the current legal system needs to be revamped to take a different path to dealing with drugs (treatment, not punishment). At the most, the penalty for pot should be a fine, somewhat akin to a traffic ticket, not jail. I am also all for using marijuana in a medical setting.

On the subject of the overdose, I'm not really up on the root of the respiratory depression. When I saw it I hadn't even started nursing school yet and was working as a nursing assistant in ICU. I would imagine it had to do with the sedative effects. You are right, though, that eating three days of pot brownies is very different than smoking. As I recall, one brownie can keep you high for up to six hours, while the buzz from smoke only lasts a couple at most. I remember a nurse asking why he had ingested so much. He responded, "I kept getting the munchies." :chuckle

mattcastens · Feb 14, 2002

I'd also like to add that this is one of the first long-running threads I've seen in a long time that hasn't degraded into insults and self-righteous posts. Maybe we're all high....

EXOTIC NURSE, RN · Feb 14, 2002

Did I ever say that the nurse went to work with any kind of effect No I did not and you said yourself if you came to work with a hangover then yes but she did not come to work with any kind of results ...................I am not and will not turn someone in for drug abuse on that note....but if you want to turn people in for that then you go right ahead.....I feel some people take things to far and that would be stretching things quite a bit just to say Oh I turned this nurse in for smoking weed on her off day. Getting drunk is no better than getting high on weed but if one choses to drink on their off day or smoke weed on thier off day that is their business. If I see danger of someone being under the influence of anything in the workplace then Yes I am obligated to turn them in to the Supervisor but not to tell the Supervisor Oh you know I saw Nurse so and so smoking weed on her off day !

wrightgd · Feb 14, 2002

I have been looking for the original document that I referred to about the duration of impairment in the test with pilots smoking marijuana... Still haven't been able to find it...

These sites make reference to the same study, and mention that the impairment was for more that 24 hours... There's lots of "statistics" on the effects of marijuana in these also...

Hope this helps in your study...

www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/drugfact/

http://www.wctu.org/marijuana_-_safe_.html

http://members.optusnet.com.au/~apfdfy/Effects.html

George

semstr · Feb 14, 2002

Legalize it!!

But he, I am from the Netherlands originally, so I think different I guess.LOL

Take care and keep on the good (d)w)eeds, Renee

thisnurse · Feb 14, 2002

a person who smokes on their day off is no more an addict than those idiots at the hockey games or concerts that scream whats left of their brains out and have a good time at eveyone elses expense..

a spliff? i never heard that one before.

i think you are wrong when you say there is no place in medicine for marijuana.

i worked in the VA for a bit with cancer patients.

that little pill called marinol did wonders for some of those patients as far as N/V and appetite inducer. i dont see any ill effects from it either.

i dont see that it can/should be used for pain control. its not an opoid. its different. but i think we would be doing some of our patients a disservice by completely dismissing it.

matt.. pot CAN be dangerous. i dont think that the recreational user is in any danger. i think the danger comes to play when azzholes think they can drive or do other similar tasks, or when it is abused. and yes it can be abused, just like alcohol. that munchie thing cracked me up. nurses really see their share of shyt heads.

and thanks for the links george...ill check them out after my shift.

EXOTIC NURSE, RN · Feb 15, 2002

This nurse: a "spliff" is what weed is called in the West Indies so now you have learned something new today...........

mattcastens · Feb 15, 2002

Originally posted by thisnurse
i think you are wrong when you say there is no place in medicine for marijuana.
i worked in the VA for a bit with cancer patients.
that little pill called marinol did wonders for some of those patients as far as N/V and appetite inducer. i dont see any ill effects from it either.
i dont see that it can/should be used for pain control. its not an opoid. its different. but i think we would be doing some of our patients a disservice by completely dismissing it.

I must have missed a post ... who was against using marijuana in medicine?