Seattle Police Give Smokers a Guide to Washington’s New Marijuana Law

  • Share
  • Read Later
Richard T. Nowitz/Corbis

Seattle, that leading citadel of progressive-mindedness in the Pacific northwest, gave us Jimi Hendrix, Kurt Cobain, Sir Mix-a-Lot and what is now the Oklahoma City Thunder. Now it’s leading the nation again by informing its residents of their rights when it comes to marijuana use.

Initiative 502, which passed on Nov. 6, allows people in the state of Washington over 21 years of age to possess up to an ounce of weed for personal use. It’s one of the first laws in the country to legalize marijuana for recreational use, and therefore it appears that a certain amount of confusion exists as to what one can or can’t do with the ganja one might have on hand beginning Dec. 6.

(MORE: Two U.S. States Become First to Legalize Marijuana)

Well whether residents prefer it in grandma’s homemade cookies or a tye-dyed glass water bong that an aging hippie threw in at a yard sale because he now uses a vaporizer, the Seattle Police Department want citizens to know the new rules. They’ve produced a webpage to clear the air, called, amazingly, Marijwhatnow? A Guide to Legal Marijuana Use In Seattle. It is an easy to read — but also really funny — comprehensive look at the new relationship between Seattleites and Mary Jane.

(MORE: Viewpoint — Marijuana, Market Forces and Why Colorado’s New Pot Law Could Actually Be a Black-Market Boon)

Some of the questions and answers:

Will police officers be able to smoke marijuana?

As of right now, no. This is still a very complicated issue.

and also:

What happens if I get pulled over and I’m sober, but an officer or his K9 buddy smells the ounce of Super Skunk I’ve got in my trunk?

Under state law, officers have to develop probable cause to search a closed or locked container. Each case stands on its own, but the smell of pot alone will not be reason to search a vehicle. If officers have information that you’re trafficking, producing or delivering marijuana in violation of state law, they can get a warrant to search your vehicle.

and this one is important, too:

SPD seized a bunch of my marijuana before I-502 passed. Can I have it back?

No.

(MORE: From Mexico to Moscow, the World Turns On to U.S. Marijuana Legalization)

The Seattle PD wisely advises that the plant is still classified by the federal government as a Schedule I narcotic; thus it’s probably not a good idea to carry a spliff into a federal courthouse, for example. But they also say that open smoking of marijuana won’t normally warrant an arrest, although it’ll probably get its user a ticket. Most importantly, DWS (driving while stoned) merits much the same treatment as DUI and if an officer thinks a driver is operating a vehicle after having used pot, her or she can be taken to a precinct for a blood test.

(MORE: Marijuana in Colorado: Ready for Business, Complete with Regulations)

But once the new law takes effect, according to Marijwhatnow?, police will no longer make arrests for possession, nor will they assist in any federal investigation into crimes that are not against state law. Colorado, which passed its own ballot measure, Amendment 64, will essentially be doing the same — although no one there has published a helpful guide yet.

67 comments
RaselMirdha
RaselMirdha

Then the D.A. goes along with the lie's the officers have told, if the police have to break the law to enforce it what does that make them??And the police and court will break ALL laws to justify their existence, just as government will lie cheat steal and murder people to hold their power!http://greensidemedical.com/

JamesMatavka
JamesMatavka

If marijuana is legal where is it sold. 

Demosthenes
Demosthenes like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 4 Like

So great the author chose to use "potheads" to describe people who use marijuana. I assume by this wonderful logic everyone who drinks beer is a "drunken lush", people who take medications are "pill freaks" and so on. How about if journalists stop taking cheap shots at people and start being serious? Yeah, didn't think so.

CelticStormer
CelticStormer like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 3 Like

I love how this lowlife reporter describes those that choose to use a much safer...and even medicinal compound....as "potheads". 

Jake17
Jake17 like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 3 Like

Frankly, I think it's laughable how these comments have turned into rants and ramblings about the enforcement of marijuana related DUI's, the police, our legal system, etc. Reading them reminds me of a college bar discussion where half the participants are stoned and the rest are drunk. A bunch of hypothetical, illogical nonsense. Make it easy on yourself, don't drive and smoke and avoid driving for a period of time after you've smoked. Don't smell like a burned out blunt and keep some Visine on hand and use it. When transporting your stash from your point of purchase to your home, keep it in a secured area away from arm's reach and never leave roaches in the ash tray. Enjoy marijuana the same way responsible people enjoy alcohol, in places where consumption is intended or in the privacy of a home. Think of yourselves as models for the other states who are paying attention. Act irresponsibility and flaunt your new found freedom in the faces of others and the consequences will not be good for any of us.

tobyspeeks
tobyspeeks

@Jake17 Good rational sound advice. Now lets go out back and burn one.

GabEhcuoda
GabEhcuoda

Sorry, I think it should be legalized in the nation, but the Feds have to intercede on this. State laws cannot supersede federal law. Just as we have legalized abortion, we can't allow Oklahoma or Mississippi say it's state rights to ban abortion.

Jake17
Jake17

@GabEhcuoda  You are wrong for one simple reason. Federal laws are only effective when there is adequate federal enforcement and (or) cooperation from the states. There are loads of Federal laws that are no longer enforced. Now on Constitutional matters, yours is a valid argument because the Prez and the executive branch are required to protect our basic rights. 

By the way, a huge misconception in this country is that abortion is legalized. That's not exactly the case. Abortion is allowed only because the law in place at the time of Roe v Wade was found to be unconstitutional.

JerBear
JerBear like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 2 Like

@GabEhcuoda in 1923 New YOrk went against the Federal Government and legalized booze in 1933 prohibition was thrown out. The Federal Government has no power at all, the power was given to the states. The federal government ahs gone too far on this issue, the states see it and are fighting back for state rights. The PEOPLE are speaking and it is time for congress to listen. You can interpret this is a tea bagger but Iam not nor will I ever be.

Jake17
Jake17

@JerBear @GabEhcuoda There is no fight going on here and if you think for a moment that federal government has no power at all perhaps you should read up on Ole Miss, circa 1962.

mjcharron
mjcharron like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 2 Like

Marijuana is a great tool. Medically, industrially, revenually, and apparently comedy.

anomicofficedrone
anomicofficedrone like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 4 Like

If Time is now calling all supporters of the legalization of cannabis "potheads", will they call anyone who thinks ending prohibition was a good idea "stinking drunks"?

anusbomb2.0
anusbomb2.0 like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 2 Like

All the articles written on marijuana still treat it like a joke. Mariwhatnow, Munchy munchy crunchy. Pathetic, you are a joke if you are ignorant of marijuana benefits and submit to the propaganda machine.

AtheisticallyYours
AtheisticallyYours

Getting stoned drivers off the road will ASTRONOMICALLY INCREASE DUI arrest rates! THAT is where the prosection of marijuana user will (and should!) be! 

dumdum2150
dumdum2150 like.author.displayName 1 Like

@AtheisticallyYours A Federal  Highway Dept. study found that high drivers think they are More messed-up than they actually         are.There fore they drive slower, more careful and farther behind other drivers. The OPPOSITE of the drunk driver who thinks he is OK. 

BCC1981
BCC1981 like.author.displayName 1 Like

@dumdum2150 @AtheisticallyYours  

 Maybe so, but neither is excusable. 

 You have clearly pointed out here that the thinking and decision making process is impacted by marijuana - just at the opposite end of the spectrum when compared to alcohol. A comparison would be the 90 year old lady that is not confident and driving extremely slow and too concerned to pay attention to what is going on around her - she should not be driving and neither should someone who is under the influence of marijuana.

AngelDavis
AngelDavis

@BCC1981 @dumdum2150 @AtheisticallyYours   Driving High on Cannabis Not an Impairment, Study Saysby Evilpig on November 24, 2010 | 1 CommentXWelcome to I Love Weed! If you are new here, you might want to subscribe to the RSS feed for daily updates. EnjoyDespite what the nation’s “Drug Czar” Gil Kerlikowske might say and what his office might promote, it’s being proven that driving under the influence of marijuana does not make you a dangerous driver. In fact, a new study shows that it makes virtually no difference in the driving abilities of most drivers.Of course, that may not be saying much given the state of some highways in this nation, but at least the road hogs and blind spot lurkers don’t drive any worse while high.Most of the studies for stoned and drunk driving were conducted in the 1970s. Driving simulators, measurement tools, and even drug potency were different then. Although studies into drunk driving have continued to the present, studies of marijuana’s effects on driving have not. A new study from researchers at the Olin Neuropsychiatry Research Center has found that marijuana’s effects on driving – including separating data between men and women – is negligible.1The research is legitimate, double-blind, placebo-controlled and used 85 subjects (50 men, 35 women) on driving simulators. Subjects were tested sober and then shortly after having smoked either a 2.9% THC marijuana joint or an identical placebo.The only measurable difference in driving between those who were sober when stoned was that they tended to slow down and drive slower than otherwise. Which any safety advocate will tell you is almost always a good thing.Other studies conducted overseas, including one in Israel published in 2008,2 showed similar results.These studies and their findings should call into question every “impaired driving” law in which marijuana is treated the same as alcohol and hard drugs.Of course, as marijuana becomes more and more socially acceptable and laws regarding its use loosen or are eliminated, a review of laws that lump it in with other, much more impairing drugs should be conducted as well.  

References:1 – Sex differences in the effects of marijuana on simulated driving performance. by BM Anderson, M Rizzo, et al, Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, March 20102 – Effects of THC on driving performance, physiological state and subjective feelings relative to alcohol. by A Ronen, P Gershon, et al, Accident; analysis and prevention, May 2008

http://iloveweed.net/2010/11/driving-high-on-cannabis-not-an-impairment-study-says/

BCC1981
BCC1981 like.author.displayName 1 Like

@AtheisticallyYours 

Are you daft?? I know tons of "stoners" that get stoned at home while sitting and watching a football game. The whole DUI thing will take place but just because one uses it, does not mean one should go to jail. Contrary to this...next time you take a sip of alcohol, you should go to jail because that is where you belong. Drunks, which you would obviously be if you drank a sip, are angry, violent, bitter. They constantly kill people from their drunken, reckless, driving and are, in general, very obtrusive people - none of which can be said about a stoner who is happy to watch the colors swirl and moving objects made pretty.Lastly, there has never been a death in the history of medical traces with regards to Marijuana use. There are stupid decisions that have caused deaths (driving for example), but nothing like alcohol poisoning, liver failure from drinkers for example. Next time you drink, think of the potential bills that your family will incur because of your failed liver or that you were drunk and ran someone over.

You, sir, are an uneducated country bumpkin and what is wrong with the American public in general. You, sir, are part of the 48 (or whatever percent) that  voted for a lying piece of crap called Romney because they shutter themselves behind a fake wall of perfection. You, sir, is what is wrong with America.

From, you're neighbor up north in Canada. 

Cheers!

AtheisticallyYours
AtheisticallyYours like.author.displayName 1 Like

@BCC1981 @AtheisticallyYours Look Canadian-let me put you "in check" about a few things: 1.) I am a WHITE MALE, that VOTED FOR OBAMA-TWICE! 2.) You are completely clueless on the issue of the dangerousness of Driving Under the Influence of ANY DRUG, marijuana included (hell, you Canadians won't even LET a person with 1 DUI into your country!), 3.) I am a certified AOD Counselor who works in a DUI Program, and sees the stupidity of DUIers on a DAILY BASIS (maybe they need to do their driving in Canada-and DUI of marijuana no less!), and 4.) I would rather see marijuana legalized (that is why I voted for Obama for a second term!), and alcohol RE-illegalized! I agree that alcohol is more dangerous then marijuana, but DUI of either is just as stupid, and dangerous, and THAT is the only level of enforcement law  enforcement will be able to deal with, now that pot is legal in WA! 

AtheisticallyYours
AtheisticallyYours

@MalcolmKyle So, does this mean you would advocate a "stoned impairment level " for drivers, the same one exists for alcohol? 

BCC1981
BCC1981

@AtheisticallyYours @BCC1981 Well I never said anything about color or race...not sure where that came from....but I am quite happy to hear that you had voted for Obama - my apologies for assuming otherwise.On to the other fact, I never said that people should be driving stoned and, contrary to your understanding of my post, I firmly believe that, if you are driving and under the influence of ANYTHING, you should be charged appropriately if the situation warrants it.

My issue is with your statement regarding those that are "pro-marijuana" (or prosection as you put it) needing to be in jail where they should be. If this was to be adhered to, then drinkers should be put down because what happens when one gets drunk has the potential to be ten fold worse than a person that smokes marijuana. Your one line statement was very ignorant and clearly shows that you have not researched anything; rather you have provided your knee jerk opinion.

MalcolmKyle
MalcolmKyle like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 3 Like

Google "MARIJUANA DRIVING STUDY". You'll see two common findings:1. Drivers under the influence of marijuana are VERY SLIGHTLY impaired.2. Unlike those under the influence of alcohol, marijuana consumers are aware they are VERY SLIGHTLY impaired and they CONSISTENTLY ADEQUATELY COMPENSATE by slowing down and being a little more cautious. That doesn’t mean they get in the fast lane on the interstate and drive 15 miles per hour. Marijuana makes you cautious, not crazy. - Those Cheech and Chong movies were comedies, NOT documentaries!

BFD007
BFD007 like.author.displayName 1 Like

What is a shame is how law enforcement can stomp on your constitutional and civil rights then lie in the report as well as lie on the stand to cover it up which is a conspiracy.  Then the D.A. goes along with the lie's the officers have told, if the police have to break the law to enforce it what does that make them??  Then you have a judge and a court system that is in place to make money, not do society any good, anyone that has had to deal with the justice system in this country will tell you it is ALL  about the money and control of society. And the police and court will break ALL laws to justify their existence, just as government will lie cheat steal and murder people to hold their power!

CoNative59
CoNative59

Colorado probably won't be officially publishing any helpful guidelines for our soon-to-be-legal recreational pot smokers.  Our state Attorney General, John Suthers, and our local Colorado Springs District Attorney, Dan May, are total "Reefer Madness" believers.  They even continue to try to subvert our Medical Marijuana laws by continuing to prosecute cancer patients that they bust.  The residents of this state have spoken loud and clearly, and they both need to help the state move forward with reasonable policies and guidelines!  All of the country, and parts of the world, are watching... Good luck Washington.  It will be interesting to see how both of our states handle this exciting new path!

US1776
US1776 like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 2 Like

@CoNative59,   Kudos to Colorado and Washington.   Glad to see there still exists some intelligent life in the U.S.

.

BuddyLast
BuddyLast

well since its legal and some people enjoy smoking it then look for the police to make it a crime in some other way you can bet on that.police will find a way to arrest people who smoke it except themselves there family's and friends can smoke more then CHIEF WAHOO but not the regular citizen.

US1776
US1776 like.author.displayName 1 Like

@BuddyLast,  most police departments are tired of arresting people for marijuana possession.   They would rather be directing their resources to real criminals.

Hipppiematt420
Hipppiematt420

The Law Makers Need to be more clear with the D.W.S.Law. Need To be set in  stone.There are many ways to say you have smoked Cannabis. Smell,Red Eyes, and Food wrappers. And as Any one who has smoked some good bud. All those symptoms can Last anywhere from 2-4 hours or longer. And any one who has smoked will fail a blood test.and there is no blood test that can tell If you have smoked 5 minute ago or 5 hours ago.

The law most be defined.Or you better know a Good Lawyer.

BFD007
BFD007

@Hipppiematt420 There is no such thing as a GOOD lawyer, lawyers are the real problem in this country, get paid win or loose and not even work for it. Great job get paid for doing nothing but hob nob with judges and prosecuters and twisting the law to suit the court!!

JaredWoody
JaredWoody like.author.displayName 1 Like

@Hipppiematt420

This is incorrect. DUI-Drugs (as opposed to DUI-Alcohol) is already an offense that is clearly defined by most states. In the case of establishing Probable Cause (PC) the officers use physical characteristics present in a driver, such as speech problems, bloodshot watery eyes, and odor of alcohol/marijuana to establish PC to believe the driver may be altered. This gives the officers the ability to conduct Field Sobriety Tests (FSTs). FSTs test the individual on their physical capacity to safely operate a motor vehicle. A stoned or drunk person will experience a marked decrease in these capabilities that indicate they are under the influence of alcohol or a narcotic. If an individual fails the FSTs (or refuses to do them) they are then placed under arrest. Portable Breathalyzer Tests maybe conducted to establish a preliminary idea of BAC before returning to the station for a more accurate DataMaster test (which is calibrated more finely). Drivers consent to at-station breathalyzer testing when you receive your license under the legal concept of "implied consent", which is normally addressed in the DMV booklet you study to get your license.Because the FSTs are what people are arrested on, and not on the blood test or PBT sample, this removes the issue of how long ago someone smoked the marijuana. As any law enforcement officer will tell you, it doesn't matter if you drank 10 beers 10 hours ago, or 10 beers 1 hour ago, if you are impaired, you are legally not permitted to drive. The same will apply to marijuana, if you smoke it 6 hours ago, and your friend smoked it 30 minutes ago, your bodies will process it differently based on physiological factors, so giving a time-frame is not a good determinant.

Tekelder
Tekelder like.author.displayName 1 Like

Field Sobriety Tests are completely subjective and not generally a good indicator of impared driving ability.  Most people who have not practiced them, or have physical disabilities, like plantar faciItis, vertigo, ear infection, or a host of other disabilities related to aging will fail virtually all FST which are based on physical agility not mental impairment.  Short of a urine sample or blood test medications other than alcohol would imply guilt regardless of concentration under current law.  Welcom to the prison society.  We will all become casualties of the war on drugs, especially those of us who don't use and have never used.

JaredWoody
JaredWoody

@Tekelder All those factors should be considered by the officer off the bat. Most agencies and states advise officers to ask "Do you suffer any medical problems?" straight off to help make sure that there are no false positives.Also, in the case of DUI-Drugs, police departments employ Drug Recognition Experts, which are certified under a national training program which includes contact with users, classroom instruction, and continuing education. These DREs are able to best determine the nature of the impairment including down to the type of drug (depressant, etc).There are DREs that ID the nature of the drug and then later is confirmed by a suspect requested blood test. There is numerous incidents of this

TRJaredWood
TRJaredWood

Also, please refrain from bully-like, hormonal imbalanced, negative tendencies. Please respect this authors hard work :) she does not know you nor does she need to if you can't converse rationally :)

TRJaredWood
TRJaredWood

If you want or feel that you need help staying sober please don't hesitate. there are many of us out here that can help. ultimately you're the only one who can change your behavior but yes, there is a lot of information available if you just take the time to make an attempt at living soberly. I was able to live this way for a year I couldn't have done it without Jesus and losing my friends that were using. It won't be long before i'm sober again! I have school to begin, muahahaha! :P 

It's still recommended to not use drugs in our lives, for many reasons, and for all the right ones. Be Honest, Be Truthful, and Love with all your Heart. Bye now... :))

TRJaredWood
TRJaredWood like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 2 Like

I'd rather be a pot-head than an alcoholic. I don't have a raging temper to passively contain like i do when i'm drunk. about the worst that happens is my eyes are a bit stuffy but I do know that my past becomes my past and my future becomes my future and i shouldn't be living in either of them. so honestly. I think a lot clearer and straighter when im stoned than when im drunk. I'm so glad to be able to put away the alcohol and pick up my flowers. mmm, coffee :)

studs
studs like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 4 Like

I send kudos to the Seattle Police.  They're job is to enforce the law and they want citizens to understand how the law will be enforced.  Without the benefit of much, if any precedent, they want citizens to understand what acceptable actions are and which actions my get them arrested.  Individual citizens may want to interpret the law, but the Seattle Police is letting them know what they can do that will not get them arrested.

An informed public is an improved public.

Duncan20903
Duncan20903 like.author.displayName 1 Like

pandabearokie, smoking is not required to gain the benefits of cannabis, whether for medicinal need or just for enjoyment. Any potential health hazards due to smoking are not the hazards of cannabis, but of smoking.

  

Vaporization is proven safe,  less expensive, and preferred by patients over smoking by a margin of 7:1 in peer reviewed research published in 2007. 


http://www.cmcr.ucsd.edu/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=149:vaporization-as-a-qsmokelessq-cannabis-delivery-system&catid=41:research-studies&Itemid=135

pandabearokie
pandabearokie

@Duncan20903  I agree with you Duncan. My point  exactly is that smoking marijuana has potential health risks. I had no comment against consuming marijuana.

AndyHazelnut
AndyHazelnut like.author.displayName 1 Like

Really, potheads?  Show some class you alcoholic, braided hair moron ! 

Straight from his Twitter page folks "I deliver news the same way I prefer my Scotch: straight, no chaser" .

Alcoholic looser, go back to covering the LA Riots.

JerBear
JerBear

@AndyHazelnut because someone likes scotch no chaser makes them an alcoholic?  arent you just a dumbass

Demosthenes
Demosthenes like.author.displayName 1 Like

@JerBear @AndyHazelnut 

...just because someone smokes pot, the author chose to label them "potheads". Hazelnut is simply mirroring the same puritan pearl-clutching attitude back at him. 

daena.vassar
daena.vassar like.author.displayName 1 Like

@JeremyHI second that!Madison Gray gives the impression of a humorless old stooge. The term "potheads" in this context is unwarranted, not clever and is the type of glib labeling rampant in journalism today that makes a confused mess of most important issues that need deeper understanding.On another note, I really liked the cheeky humor in Mariwhatnow (?!) website- it ends with an idyllic scene from LOTR!Ah that Seattle humor!

pandabearokie
pandabearokie

Many of the carcinogens and co-carcinogens present in tobacco smoke are also present in smoke from marijuana.Marijuana smoking does cause inflammation and cell damage, and it has been associated with pre-cancerous changes in lung tissue.Marijuana has been shown to cause immune system dysfunction, possibly predisposing individuals to cancer.

Coinspinn3r
Coinspinn3r like.author.displayName 1 Like

@pandabearokie theory says that, but experiments and tons of research show marijuana actually CURES cancer.

starboyone
starboyone like.author.displayName 1 Like

@pandabearokie REFER MADNESS was FUNNY in the 60s but NONSENSE like you are Spouting is just SAD.  Cannabis has in FACT been shown to INHIBIT Cancer - along with its many other health benefits. 

JaredWoody
JaredWoody

@starboyone @pandabearokie here's an article from the peer-reviewed National Institute of Health, which specifically states that marijuana does have negative, and possibly pre-cancerous effects on lung cells. It however does state that marijuana is LESS harmful than tobacco: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1277837/

Coinspinn3r
Coinspinn3r

@JaredWoody @starboyone @pandabearokie that is a crap, non-reproducible study that is mooted anyway by the failure to show us any bodies.   What, we can reproduce "possible pre-cancer effects" when no cancer ever shows up?

em4rtz
em4rtz like.author.displayName 1 Like

@pandabearokie LOL why would they give "medical marijuana" to patients with cancer if it causes cancer?...... sorry but thats too funny. 

JaredWoody
JaredWoody

@em4rtz @pandabearokie Medical marijuana can be prescribed for pain control purposes as it is less abrasive to the body than some narcotics pills (such as Oxy or Percs) which can cause stomach, and renal problems especially in patients with compromised health already (such as the inability for the stomach or kidneys to repair themselves from pain-med use). Also marijuana can be used long term without risking renal damage or failure, unlike some of the more potent pills that are out there.

RS
RS

@pandabearokie No problem, go take Oxycontin then

pandabearokie
pandabearokie

@RS @pandabearokie That is an intelligent comment! LOL I have no interest in taking Oxycontin but I do have interest in exploring the truth about inhaling smoke of any kind into my lungs.  I have not condemned consuming marijuana, I have only posted what some medical experts have found about breathing smoke.

AngelDavis
AngelDavis

@pandabearokie  you can use a vaporizer that cuts out the carbon-monoxide AND CARCINOGENS but still gives you the THC!  --you people are still having the same argument over and over it is all said and done before google weed vaporizer ................................. PERIOD. -

JasonKing
JasonKing like.author.displayName like.author.displayName like.author.displayName 3 Like

@pandabearokie pandabearokie Most of this has since been proven false, and actually, even long term, habitual smokers were shown (in the most current AND largest study of it's kind) to have ZERO damage to their lung function, even after 20 years!Marijuana is now known NOT to cause cancer because it contains properties that actually mitigate what could potentially cause cancer. This is why you'll find that people who smoke marijuana never get lung cancer. Seriously, go google and find how many cases of lung cancer are directly attributed to marijuana! Very few, if any.Soda is more harmful than marijuana. Not just barely, but significantly more harmful.

JaredWoody
JaredWoody like.author.displayName 1 Like

@JasonKing @pandabearokie Actually Jason, according to research done by the American Medical Association, they recommend that while marijuana is LESS harmful than cigarette smoke, there is still a significant issue with smoke inhalation period.The AMA advises that NO ONE should smoke anything, whether its cigarettes, cigars, E-cigs, hookah, or marijuana, because all forms of inhaled smoke do carry damaging particles into the lungs.Also the AMA has found that marijuana does still contain carcinogens, although as you stated, it does have certain cancer fighting properties as well.