Also significant is a new study by Canadian scientists showing that marijuana repairs damaged brain cells and reduces anxiety and depression.

As it is, I have to destroy brain cells in order to reduce anxiety! ;-)

Diesel spills into secondary and tertiary mountain streams kills salmon fry and is creating a series of silent springs.

Indoor grown bud is also subject to spider mite infestations, to which growers respond by dousing the whole grow room with extremely toxic pesticides.  

Guess what?  They don't wash the pesticides off before they ship the bud to consumers.

 Putting aside whether or not these idiots have ever smoked marijuana, do they know ANYONE who has? What are the drawbacks of even, hell, habitual use? They like to eat and laugh.  So what? Who cares?

i suspect the seagrams and M & M Mars Co's might argue otherwise. and god help them if they try and make snickers bars illegal!

there is no valid, scientifically based evidence, to support the claim that use of pot inevitably leads to use of harder drugs, or even significantly increases the probability, there just isn't. this hasn't stopped the harry anslingers from asserting it, but it just isn't so.

I conclude people like Walters and his ilk have never used it and simply have no idea what they're talking about.  Bet they routinely have a few cocktails at lunch, though.

The main reasons, I'm convinced, that MJ use ever leads to harder drugs is because it breaks the psychological barrier to using something illegal, but more importantly, the fact that buying the stuff, depending on your source, can open the door to the ability to get hold of more dangerous drugs for those so inclined.  The vast majority aren't so inclined, and legalization would eliminate both of those hazards altogether.

While the drug's potency may be rising, marijuana users generally adjust to the level of potency and smoke it accordingly, said Dr. Mitch Earleywine, who teaches psychology at the State University of New York in Albany and serves as an adviser for marijuana advocacy groups. "Stronger cannabis leads to less inhaled smoke," he said.

is entirely consistent with what has been shown in tobacco smokers. [Smokers "compensate" for low-tar or low-nicotine cigarettes by inhaling deeper, etc.]

This is similar to findings by researchers in Israel who found that "cannabinoid drugs are helpful in cases of nerve damage and trauma"

Themes in Chemical Prohibition By William L. White, from: Drugs in Perspective, National Institute on Drug Abuse, 1979

The main themes:

1. The drug is associated with a hated subgroup of the society or a foreign enemy.

2. The drug is identified as solely responsible for many problems in the culture, i.e., crime, violence, and insanity.

3. The survival of the culture is pictured as being dependent on the prohibition of the drug.

4. The concept of "controlled" usage is destroyed and replaced by a "domino theory" of chemical progression.

5. The drug is associated with the corruption of young children, particularly their sexual corruption.

6. Both the user and supplier of the drug are defined as fiends, always in search of new victims; usage of the drug is considered "contagious."

7. Policy options are presented as total prohibition or total access.

Now, don't that sound like yer average stick-up-the-arse culture warrior? Back in the day of alcohol Prohibition, he looked like this. (Click on the individual pics for detail.)

Seriously, theres a reason why bootleggers only dealt in spirits and hooch. The more powerful and compact the substance, the easier it is to get more of it across the border.

More THC just = less amount needed to smoke to get the same effect. Some of that Dutch stuff really can knock you back on your ass if you aren't careful though, but at least it won't permanently blind you or something like bad hooch could.

Well....I ain't been having any flashbacks and I feel cheated!   I paid good money for those drugs,  with the full understanding that at some later date I would experience flashbacks.

Where  the hell is  Ralph Nader when you need him?

Garden gnome burning one! Look great placed next to the front door welcome mat.

However, I believe that just because something is bad for you doesn't necessarily mean it has to be illegal.  We have to look at the costs and benefits of prohibition.  

After decades of research, the federal government has not made the case that the ill effects of marijuana use justify its illegalization.  Take this recent study.  

"Particularly worrisome is the possibility that the more potent THC might be more effective at triggering the changes in the brain that can lead to addiction," Volkow (director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse) said.

I think there is also a possibility that Volkow is talking out of both sides of her *ss.  I find it "particularly worrisome" when I see studies that couch their conclusions in "likelihood" and "might".  After all these decades of prohibition, doesn't the government have any conclusive studies documenting marijuana's harmful effects.  Over thirty years ago, Dr. Lester Grinspoon studied the effects of marijuana and concluded that smoking marijuana is no more and no less harmful than drinking a cocktail.  I see no studies  that contradict this conclusion.