Should cannabis legalization allow cultivation for your own use?

  • 40 Replies
  • 2124 Views

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

*

Offline tkadm30

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1047
    • View Profile
    • IsotopeSoftware
Cannabis legalization in Canada is forthcoming in 2017. However should cannabis cultivation be allowed for your own and personal use?
The bliss of ignorance is deeper in the region of tyranny.

*

Offline puppypower

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 593
    • View Profile
Self cultivation makes the most sense, since it places control in the hands of each person. Theoretically in could make all the marketeers, a moot point, who might try to increase mass consumption for the sake of profits. This could lead to overuse and addiction on a larger scale, than mom and pop growing.

However, the push for legalization was made possible by money; promises of taxes and profits, with personal cultivation standing in the way of revenue projections. If the politicians did not see potential tax money, they would not give it as much effort. If the commercial industries did not see profit, they would not have a put a fire under the politicians with campaign contributions. Self cultivation may not be allowed since it is not part of the master money plan created by the good ole boys cartel.

What has happened in Colorado is self cultivation does occur, with some scale up self growers able to sell product cheaper than the commercially regulated and taxed cartel The cartel double dips the consumer; profit and tax. The free style over growers have lower overhead; not regulated. They can sell cheaper than commercial even before the sales tax.

There is cartel fear, since the free market, through self growing, could lower the demand for cartel product; people grow their own. While the over producers may effectively drive down prices at the commercial level. This is bad for profits and for the state tax revenue projections, which are already included in future budgets. If the state cannot get its promised cut of the pie, it may take the ball and go home.

*

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4894
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Provided that it remains illegal to provide intoxicants of any sort to a minor, or to drive whilst intoxicated, I don't care what anyone chooses to drink, smoke, snort or inject, or where he gets it from.
helping to stem the tide of ignorance

*

Offline chiralSPO

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 1932
    • View Profile
Adults in the US are allowed to brew their own beer--that does not appear to have gotten in the way of enormous corporations or microbreweries...

Similarly, I think a very small portion of consumed cannabis would be self-grown in places where it has been legalized. It is simply more work for (typically) lower quality. I am somewhat wary of large corporations growing and selling marijuana, but anything above-board, taxed, and regulated is bound to be better than drug cartels and mafias. Gangsters don't ask for ID, don't care if their product is tainted, and don't put any of their ill-gotten revenues back into the communities, while corporations rarely use guns to protect their turf...

*

Offline evan_au

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 4310
    • View Profile
In Australia, there are plans to start trials of medical marijuana.

For it to demonstrate medical benefits:
  • the mix of cannabinoids (relative concentration) is important, which is determined by the strain of the plant and probably how it is grown.
  • the amount ingested is important; regulating the dose is hard for a person at home
  • the method of delivery is also important; someone with heart or lung problems will probably make their medical condition worse if they smoke it.
There is also the risk of diversion for non-medicinal use.

*

Offline IAMREALITY

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 275
    • View Profile
In Australia, there are plans to start trials of medical marijuana.

For it to demonstrate medical benefits:
  • the mix of cannabinoids (relative concentration) is important, which is determined by the strain of the plant and probably how it is grown.
  • the amount ingested is important; regulating the dose is hard for a person at home
  • the method of delivery is also important; someone with heart or lung problems will probably make their medical condition worse if they smoke it.
There is also the risk of diversion for non-medicinal use.

All I can say is that it has marked and significant medical benefits; in some cases unique to where nothing else reasonably could take its place.  As far as dosage is concerned, though moderately important, at least there is no true risk of overdose; unlike pretty much any prescription medication you can name; and no one has ever died as a result of ingesting too much.  As far as it being diverted for non-medicinal use, I'd say who cares lol.  I think one of the greatest mysteries of humankind is why the plant, which is probably THE most beneficial and multi-purpose plant on the entire planet, would be something made to be illegal to begin with.  If god existed, I would consider this to be a gift from it...

*

Offline JimBob

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 6564
  • Moderator
    • View Profile
The mind is like a parachute. It works best when open.  -- A. Einstein

*

Offline tkadm30

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1047
    • View Profile
    • IsotopeSoftware
Should THC levels in cannabis be regulated under federal legalization? Does that mean they will grow and sell a indoor strain with limited THC levels or allow cultivation of cannabis with unrestricted amount of THC ?
The bliss of ignorance is deeper in the region of tyranny.

*

Offline evan_au

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 4310
    • View Profile
Quote from: IAMREALITY
no one has ever died as a result of ingesting too much [cannabis]
 
That is a bold statement.

It is known that people who try to drive a vehicle after ingesting cannabis show severely impaired control of the vehicle. So I am sure that it would have killed someone, somewhere.

Fortunately, I understand that the soporific effects of the drug discourages cannabis users from trying to drive a vehicle immediately.

*

Offline evan_au

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 4310
    • View Profile
Quote from: tkadm30
Cannabis legalization in Canada is forthcoming in 2017. However should cannabis cultivation be allowed for your own and personal use?
This was the topic of a protest in Canada on Canada Day (1st July). The complaint on the poster is that apparently the government wants to license suppliers, and block home-grown cannabis products.

Apparently this protest is run twice per year, and (at least in Vancouver) it seemed to be ignored by the police, despite the variety of supposed cannabis products on display in the market stalls.

*

Offline tkadm30

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1047
    • View Profile
    • IsotopeSoftware
https://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2016/07/04/ottawa-might-try-to-prohibit-homegrown-pot.html

I guess if home cultivation is prohibited then this "legalization" will not end black markets from producing cannabis?

Selling cannabis with low levels of THC will not stop cannabis traffic. 
The bliss of ignorance is deeper in the region of tyranny.

*

Offline chiralSPO

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 1932
    • View Profile
Quote from: IAMREALITY
no one has ever died as a result of ingesting too much [cannabis]
 
That is a bold statement.

It is known that people who try to drive a vehicle after ingesting cannabis show severely impaired control of the vehicle. So I am sure that it would have killed someone, somewhere.

Fortunately, I understand that the soporific effects of the drug discourages cannabis users from trying to drive a vehicle immediately.

I believe this claim can be true if modified to something along the lines of "cannabis has such a high LD50 that there have never been any deaths as a direct result of toxicity associated with overdose"

Obviously, people who are high out of their minds can do things that may pose a danger to themselves or others (especially when vehicles, guns, or chainsaws are involved...)

*

Offline IAMREALITY

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 275
    • View Profile
Quote from: IAMREALITY
no one has ever died as a result of ingesting too much [cannabis]
 
That is a bold statement.

It is known that people who try to drive a vehicle after ingesting cannabis show severely impaired control of the vehicle. So I am sure that it would have killed someone, somewhere.

Fortunately, I understand that the soporific effects of the drug discourages cannabis users from trying to drive a vehicle immediately.

I believe this claim can be true if modified to something along the lines of "cannabis has such a high LD50 that there have never been any deaths as a direct result of toxicity associated with overdose"

Obviously, people who are high out of their minds can do things that may pose a danger to themselves or others (especially when vehicles, guns, or chainsaws are involved...)

Yes, that modified statement is exactly what I meant.

In no way would I recommend going for a cruise on the freeway after getting stoned out of your mind on some really good kind bud...

*

Offline exothermic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 525
    • View Profile
Should THC levels in cannabis be regulated under federal legalization?

Will never happen for two reasons:

1. Every marijuana product sold would have to be run through HPLC or GC-MS analysis, and the cost would be astronomical.

2. Even if they could overcome the economic hurdle, there would be no way to enforce it outside of marijuana dispensaries.

*

Offline exothermic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 525
    • View Profile
It is known that people who try to drive a vehicle after ingesting cannabis show severely impaired control of the vehicle.

No. That's cherry-picked information. Cite your references and I'll show you the inconsistencies.

Three [pivotal] facts to consider:

1. Dose

2. Route of entry

3. Interindividual variables


*

Offline exothermic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 525
    • View Profile
Fortunately, I understand that the soporific effects of the drug discourages cannabis users from trying to drive a vehicle immediately.

Where are you getting your information from?

I've driven for 20+ years either before/during or after smoking and I've had zero accidents or speeding tickets.... and I'm 40.

Similar scenarios with other individuals are virtually endless.

*

Offline exothermic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 525
    • View Profile
should cannabis cultivation be allowed for your own and personal use?

The answer is a resounding & emphatic yes.... unequivocally.

~

*

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4175
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
Fortunately, I understand that the soporific effects of the drug discourages cannabis users from trying to drive a vehicle immediately.

Where are you getting your information from?

I've driven for 20+ years either before/during or after smoking and I've had zero accidents or speeding tickets.... and I'm 40.

Similar scenarios with other individuals are virtually endless.

Then you have been breaking the law and endangering the lives of others. In my life I have had the opportunity to see what illicit drug use does to individuals over time. They themselves think they are fine. It can be like watching a slow motion train wreck.
Fixation on the Einstein papers is a good definition of OCD.

*

Offline IAMREALITY

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 275
    • View Profile
Fortunately, I understand that the soporific effects of the drug discourages cannabis users from trying to drive a vehicle immediately.

Where are you getting your information from?

I've driven for 20+ years either before/during or after smoking and I've had zero accidents or speeding tickets.... and I'm 40.

Similar scenarios with other individuals are virtually endless.

Oy vey what a ridiculously short sighted position. It's completely irrelevant that you haven't yet harmed yourself or others.  All it takes is once.  And the inescapable fact is that you're putting others at risk by your irresponsible behavior, period.  That much is certain, regardless of the denials. And my god the tone you take here in the forums, just such a lack of respect.

*

Offline Colin2B

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 2079
    • View Profile
......just such a lack of respect.

MOD COMMENT:
Can we please have more respect and keep the conversation in these threads friendly.

I appreciate that there are strong feelings here but please keep responses neutral and respect other views, that means both in language and also the Internet versions of shouting.
and the misguided shall lead the gullible,
the feebleminded have inherited the earth.

*

Offline exothermic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 525
    • View Profile
Can we please have more respect and keep the conversation in these threads friendly.

Then you'd better delete the post prior to yours, as well as nearly every other post IAMREALITY makes.

My response was selectively deleted.

My opportunity to defend the very statement I made is now gone.

This forum is dysfunctional.... I'm done.

*

Offline exothermic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 525
    • View Profile
Fortunately, I understand that the soporific effects of the drug discourages cannabis users from trying to drive a vehicle immediately.

Where are you getting your information from?

I've driven for 20+ years either before/during or after smoking and I've had zero accidents or speeding tickets.... and I'm 40.

Similar scenarios with other individuals are virtually endless.


It's real easy for those of you who do not smoke, to ridicule that which you do not understand.

Before I depart, here's my defense once again:

I've never endangered anyone's life as a result of smoking marijuana - ever.

NEWSFLASH:
THC IS DOSE-DEPENDENT - YOU CAN SMOKE WEED WITHOUT IMPAIRING COGNITIVE FUNCTION!

I use THC to [enhance] cognitive function & locomotor skills.... not to impair them!

~




*

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4175
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
It isn't ridicule it's concern for the safety of myself and other drivers on the road with irresponsible fools like you around.
Fixation on the Einstein papers is a good definition of OCD.

*

Offline tkadm30

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1047
    • View Profile
    • IsotopeSoftware
The bliss of ignorance is deeper in the region of tyranny.

*

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4175
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
So while you are off your face in la la land I'm supposed to be happy driving on the same road as you? I am not speaking as a moderator BTW. Just as me. I have a daughter that has just started driving after passing her test. How do you expect me to feel? Have you seen the statistics on the percentage of idiots driving while off their heads? Tell your opinions to the families who have lost loved ones through this irresponsibility. The trouble with drug dependence is denial. Just the same as with alcoholics.
Fixation on the Einstein papers is a good definition of OCD.

*

Offline exothermic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 525
    • View Profile
So while you are off your face in la la land I'm supposed to be happy driving on the same road as you?

I'm not irresponsible and I'm not some 16 yr old who smokes till the point of cognitive impairment.

You are ignorant.

~

*

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4175
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
Lest you should misunderstand.

http://www.bmj.com/content/344/bmj.e536

exothermic will likely argue that this research is drivel since it does not fit with his skewed world model. Don't be fooled.
Fixation on the Einstein papers is a good definition of OCD.

*

Offline exothermic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 525
    • View Profile
exothermic will likely argue that this research is drivel since it does not fit with his skewed world model. Don't be fooled.

Save it. I'm not even gonna bother.

This isn't anywhere close to a real science forum and you wouldn't know what a valid scientific paper was if you were slapped in the face with one.

~

*

Offline tkadm30

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1047
    • View Profile
    • IsotopeSoftware
http://www.bmj.com/content/344/bmj.e536

That study has likely been produced to promote cannabis prohibition. Acute cannabis consumption is not well characterized compared to the effects of alcohol on cognition.

Quote
Nevertheless, alcohol remains the substance most often present in crashes, and the observed association between cannabis consumption and crash risk is less robust than that for alcohol.53 54 For example, a blood alcohol concentration of 0.8 g/100 mL (17.36 mmol/l), which is the criminal threshold for impairment in many jurisdictions, is associated with an increased relative risk of a crash of 2.69, with a substantially higher risk for drivers aged 35 years and younger.54 55

 
The bliss of ignorance is deeper in the region of tyranny.

*

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4175
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
Well here is a different one.

http://www.livescience.com/48171-marijuana-research-health-effects-review.html

Read the bit about middle aged cannabis users. That should give pause for thought while driving. It does soundc a little paranoid to reject all the studies that don't agree with your philosophy. Isn't that one of the symptoms of cannabis use? Paranoia?
Fixation on the Einstein papers is a good definition of OCD.

*

Offline exothermic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 525
    • View Profile
It does soundc a little paranoid to reject all the studies that don't agree with your philosophy. Isn't that one of the symptoms of cannabis use? Paranoia?

You ignorance is deafening.

You won't even allow for the scientific-critique of your references - without a disclaimer that nobody should listen to my response. What a friggin' joke.

~


*

Offline exothermic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 525
    • View Profile
That study has likely been produced to promote cannabis prohibition. Acute cannabis consumption is not well characterized compared to the effects of alcohol on cognition.

Unfortunately your comments fall on deaf ears.

Those who don't smoke will never understand that THC-induced cognitive impairment is dose-dependent.

Likewise, they'll never understand that THC can actually [enhance] cognitive function & locomotor skills.

Speaking of [real] science....

https://www.trafficestimate.com/thescienceforum.com

~

*

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4175
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
But it isn't a joke is it? It is a serious matter that individuals such as yourself expect us to trust your ability to not get too stoned before driving on the same roads as others. So we are supposed to say to a mother who has lost a child "Sorry it appears he got the dose wrong". Do you not appreciate just how absurd your position is? Are you that far gone? How do you think you would feel AFTER you have had a road traffic accident where someone else died? How do you see your life heading in that scenario? It is like you are sleepwalking towards disaster simply because you feel you know best.
 
Fixation on the Einstein papers is a good definition of OCD.

*

Offline exothermic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 525
    • View Profile
So we are supposed to say to a mother who has lost a child "Sorry it appears he got the dose wrong".

Again, your ignorance speaks volumes.

There's no chance in "getting the dose wrong" because there's no need for me to measure out doses of marijuana to avoid cognitive impairment - like countless others, I utilize THC to enhance cognitive function.... not to impede it.

~

*

Offline exothermic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 525
    • View Profile
Are you that far gone?

..... said the moderator of a science forum who doesn't know anything about science.

~

*

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4175
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
It isn't about science. It is about human stupidity.
Fixation on the Einstein papers is a good definition of OCD.

*

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4175
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
The endocannabinoid system incusive of the cannabinoid receptors is distributed throughout the body,. The receptor protein molecules receive chemical signals which bind to said receptor. Physiological processes affected involve appetite (munchies),  sensation of pain, memory and mood. The receptors are G protein-coupled. They sense molecules outside the cell wall activating inside signal transduction pathways. This triggers a biochemical chain of events inside the cell, eliciting a response. Depending upon the cell, the response may alter the cell's metabolism, shape, gene expression or ability to divide. The signal can be amplified to involve hundreds to millions of molecules.
Fixation on the Einstein papers is a good definition of OCD.

*

Offline exothermic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 525
    • View Profile
It isn't about science.

Precisely.

It's never about science with you or IAMREALITY.

That's exactly why it's impossible to converse with either one of you on this "science forum".

~

*

Offline jeffreyH

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • 4175
  • The graviton sucks
    • View Profile
Well let's see G protein receptors are pathways for many diseases which is why a significant proportion of medicinal drugs use this same pathway. Hence why drug users are said to be self-medicating. Gene expression is basically the machinery to build proteins or functional RNA. Abnormal amounts of the resulting gene product (protein or RNA) are linked to various cancers. Would I wish to play this type of Russian roullette?
Fixation on the Einstein papers is a good definition of OCD.

*

Offline IAMREALITY

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 275
    • View Profile
It isn't about science.

Precisely.

It's never about science with you or IAMREALITY.

That's exactly why it's impossible to converse with either one of you on this "science forum".

~

Actually I think your conclusions might be faulty.  I believe the fact that Jeffrey and I actually do believe in science, that we appreciate the fact that it is rooted in facts, critical thinking, logic, and reasoning, that you find it impossible to converse with us.  It appears you lash out whenever someone presents you with anything rooted in those things that doesn't align with your skewed ideals.

Trying to make a claim that anyone takes a 'dose' of marijuana is laughable.  No they don't.  They smoke a joint.  They get high.  Just a few hits is enough to bring their blood concentrations up to the level in the studies that showed driving impairment.  And I loathe when someone tries to pick out exceptions and then try and claim them to be the rule.  That's what politicians do, and what makes them some of the lowest life forms on the planet.  The inescapable fact here, is that for the overwhelming majority of users, if they got into a motor vehicle soon after getting high, their blood concentrations of THC would be more than enough to impair their motor skills and ability to drive as safe as they would if they hadn't.  That's a fact.  An inarguable, inescapable fact.  And no, it's nowhere near as bad as alcohol.  Of course it isn't.  But even if there's one motor vehicle death related to marijuana per 100 (making the number up) from those who were drunk, I'm pretty sure the family of the one would feel the pain just as deeply...
« Last Edit: 18/07/2016 17:30:50 by IAMREALITY »

*

Offline tkadm30

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 1047
    • View Profile
    • IsotopeSoftware
Well let's see G protein receptors are pathways for many diseases which is why a significant proportion of medicinal drugs use this same pathway. Hence why drug users are said to be self-medicating. Gene expression is basically the machinery to build proteins or functional RNA. Abnormal amounts of the resulting gene product (protein or RNA) are linked to various cancers. Would I wish to play this type of Russian roullette?

Actually, cannabinoids are effective anticancer agents. See this paper: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278584615001190
The bliss of ignorance is deeper in the region of tyranny.