Medical Marijuana--

[innerSpaceman]

Well, in Morrigoon's defense, the difference is that second-hand smoke can get you high, while second-hand fumes don't really.



I think I de-bunked that pretty well with the whole locomotion ability of humans. But the difference is there nonetheless.

[Disneyphile]

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

Well, in Morrigoon's defense, the difference is that second-hand smoke can get you high, while second-hand fumes don't really.

Hence why if it were legal, it could be sequestered to designated areas, just like tobacco.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

Well, in Morrigoon's defense, the difference is that second-hand smoke can get you high, while second-hand fumes don't really.

I don't intend this to turn into "pick on Morrigoon", but the second-hand smoke argument is a bit of a red herring and was thrown in secondarily, so to speak, when the "addictive and personally harmful" argument was refuted.

Even I don't necessarily advocate 100% boundary free legal pot smoking. But private use in private residences and possibly designated pubic areas allowing people the choice to be around it or not? How is that any more harmful than alcohol or countless other vices?