12-08-2012, 12:45 PM
|
 |
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 835
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by davidmash
Do we really want our rights and freedoms to be based on a cost benefit basis? If pot has an increased health cost associated with it then the insurance companies can charge a premium for coverage.
It is not the governments job to asses a cost to freedoms. If Nicotine and alcohol is OK, then so is pot. I do not think the COTUS allow you to have it both ways.
|
The .gov has gone along with tobacco because they greatly profit from it, even with full knowledge of the damages it causes. This is perhaps the greatest single example of the government colluding with business to the detriment of the consumer and the public in general. The trend has continued for over 100 years because they (the tobacco sellers, growers, and the .gov) all make a lot of money.
Smoking is very bad. The ideal way to consume MJ is by way of cannabis-infused edibles or “medibles” as they are sometimes called. Not as efficient of a delivery mechanism as smoking but much healthier.
A vaporizer works very well also but it’s still bad for the lungs, albeit not as bad.
What is most interesting about this revolutionary change is that a stigma and cult of secrecy that has existed for the lives of everyone who reads this is gone in both WA and CO.
The WA state .gov is setting up a distribution system with a 1 year finish date. The State of WA recently changed the law so that liquor is sold in grocery stores, instead of state run stores. I expect locals will be able to buy MJ every place that sells booze.
Meanwhile, the major drug dealers of the country - the pharmaceutical and tobacco industries - are already gearing up to offer products for this new consumer market. Another case where the corporation pushes the mafia out of town.
I have to wonder how much LEO and attorney time will be redirected because of the comparative drop in MJ related law trafficking.
|