[longtermmemmory]

given current brain scans of long term users and the fact that we know in large enough recreational uses it does in fact cause hallucinations, these doctors have no credibility.

[ConservingFreedom]

given current brain scans of long term users and the fact that we know in large enough recreational uses it does in fact cause hallucinations, these doctors have no credibility.

Utterly irrelevant to whether it meets the Schedule I criterion of having "no accepted medical use."

[truth_seeker]

“given current brain scans of long term users and the fact that we know in large enough recreational uses it does in fact cause hallucinations, these doctors have no credibility.”

Long term users of legal alcohol, legal prescription pain meds, also show several debilitating concerns.

But the doctor or the individual make the choice the benefits outweigh the risks.

I’m almost 67; first smoked some weed about 50 years ago. Stopped in my 20s, but continued drinking into my 40s before quitting that, too.

The point is I have seen recreational drinkers and drug users over a long time, and I don’t see societal risks of marijuana to be greater than alcohol.

Abusers will abuse, if legal or if illegal.

Why spend the LE resources on a “war” on marijuana?

[Ol' Dan Tucker]

given current brain scans of long term users and the fact that we know in large enough recreational uses it does in fact cause hallucinations, these doctors have no credibility.

Wouldn't that be called, 'abuse', not 'use.'

Saying that the abuse of a substance warrants its illegality is stupid. If I drink enough water I can die. Should we ban water because people can die by abusing it?