New York poised to ban smoking in Central Park, Times Square - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Zeke129;27960992]Haha The second hand risks are similar, at least second hand tobacco smoke won't impair you[/QUOTE] Actually, not really. The effects of pot, second hand, or first hand, aren't cancer causing in anyway, shape, or form, and do not deform lungs in healthy adults. There has been many studies, and the rates of lung cancer in pot smokers only is so low, it's not attributable to weed.

Yea pot isn't addictive (I mean your body wont crave it) and is way less hurt full in the long term that cigs or alcohol. You also don't see people smoking nearly as much pot as you would see a smoker smoke. But yet still illegal.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;27965836]Actually, not really. The effects of pot, second hand, or first hand, aren't cancer causing in anyway, shape, or form, and do not deform lungs in healthy adults. There has been many studies, and the rates of lung cancer in pot smokers only is so low, it's not attributable to weed.[/QUOTE] I keep telling people this but I can't remember where I read the studies besides "on the internet".

[QUOTE=Rubs10;27961791][b]IT DOESN'T BOTHER ME SO EVEN IF IT BOTHERS SOMEONE ELSE I'M STILL GOING TO SUPPORT IT EVEN THOUGH THERE ARE NO BENEFITS IN DOING SO[/b][/QUOTE] Wha what how did I support smoking in parks because I feel that durrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr herp herp durpa herp *post has been translated so you can read it easily

[QUOTE=mzathemind;27961272]I've never been really impaired by it. I can still drive straight and all. The only thing I can't do is play video games properly.[/QUOTE] There would be a few issues with having it legal on the streets. The first is that people would claim it could be easily affect their children and this claim may have some merit because children are much smaller and likely have not been high before all adding up to that they would get high off small amounts. Would second hand smoke be enough? I'm unsure, but people would likely claim it to be so. The second issue would be that people may not want to risk failing a drug test because of the second hand smoke. I doubt this claim would be valid at all, but it'd likely be an argument. Lastly, many people would not like to risk getting high as they have certain beliefs or do not enjoy it, both of which are understandable. The last claim would likely be something about health issues, but I really don't see an argument with this one because there aren't likely to be many with a conflict. In my opinion it would make sense to not allow the smoking of marijuana in high traffic areas just to avoid an issue. Although I enjoy the smell and so do many others, there are a lot of people that don't and it is very smelly. The debate about contact highs is interesting. There are two kinds, one where you inhale second hand smoke and another where you inhale no smoke. The first is possible I'd say because I've seen it happen when hotboxing really closed in places. The second one can be a really bizarre effect some people get. I get it myself. If I'm hanging out with a bunch of people who are really high, I will start to feel high myself and then people think I seem high. It is certainly all in the head, but it is pretty interesting.

[QUOTE=gnome;27965993]I keep telling people this but I can't remember where I read the studies besides "on the internet".[/QUOTE] The Union. Has everything important in it, is almost biasless, and is given a huge range of opinions and lots of facts and history.