Legalization of marijuana and secondhand smoke (Has this been debated here before?)

[Snowboarder_Bo]

@Derleth

I refuse to compromise on the idea that casually and negligently drugging me is wrong, even if I don’t find out about it right away.

But see, that’s all it is: your idea. You have yet to prove that it’s a fact that a person can be drugged in the manner you describe.

@Derleth

We’ve had threads about how adulterating food to punish a thief is both illegal and morally wrong, even if the adulterants are less harmful than marijuana smoke, but we can’t come to a consensus that negligently exposing someone to carcinogenic and intoxicating fumes might not be entirely acceptable?

Marijuana smoke doesn’t cause cancer, btw. cite & cite

Those are studies done of people who smoke marijuana. If it doesn’t cause cancer in them, it certainly won’t cause cancer in someone who gets their pot smoke secondhand.

Basically, all your ideas don’t have any factual basis that I can find.

[Snowboarder_Bo]

@BigT

I really would be interested in what the actual THC content is in marijuana smoke as compared to the nicotine content in cigarette smoke (relative to their active concentrations, of course.).

I’ve posted this before: Marijuana-Tobacco Smoke Analysis, from Marijuana and Health by the Institute of Medicine, 1982.

[shiftless]

@Derleth

Laws that ensure nobody’s mind is affected without their consent. That’s what this all comes down to, and it is a vital issue when dealing with a known intoxicant that has an area effect.

Your concerns are valid even though I think you are vastly overestimating the effects of pot. It would be nice if we could get high by so easily. But you don’t want to smell pot or have it in your system at all and that is your right. Any legalization should place the same limitations as cigarettes and booze. It wasn’t that long ago that it was outrageous to suggest a smoker not light up anywhere he wants. Could you imagine if they had legalized pot in the 50’s? Everybody would have had a joint hanging out of their mouths, at work, in board meetings. This is a perfect time, now that cigs are severely restricted, to allow pot use within those same restrictions.

If you are really concerned about the effects of things on your body there are much, much bigger concerns than second hand smoke. I think the glues and solvents used to build and clean my house, or the chemicals my neighbor sprays on his lawn, are greater dangers but nobody ever seems to worry about those.

[Buck_Godot]

@Derleth

Well, thanks, I guess. I disagree that I’m whiny but I do like to get another perspective on this debate in addition to the usual pro-pot happy talk.

We realize that you want someone to support your point of view, but in this particular case, unless you can find some cites to back you up, it appears that your point of view is incorrect. There are many people stating that they have been around secondary pot smoke and not suffered any psychological effect. Are you saying that you have experience contradicts this? If not then they that have experience can say with impunity that they know what they are talking about.

I currently go to many restaurants where there are people drinking. Some of that alcohol is vaporized and I inhale it and so some of it reaches my bloodstream. Alcohol is known to have intoxicating effects. Should there special laws to stop the effects of second hand drinking?

[Blalron]

Derleth, for your argument to have any validity, you need to demonstrate two things:

(1) That secondhand marijuana smoke is harmful.

Here’s my rebuttalto that, a study involving over 2,000 people that showed that even very heavy marijuana use doesn’t increase the risk of lung cancer. These are first hand users we’re talking about here, not secondhand users!

(2) That inhaling secondhand marijuana smoke is going to cause any measurable amount of intoxication in a real life situation (as in, not some ridiculously contrived scenerio like being stuck in a phone booth with someone smoking weed).