The Marijuana Conspiracy

[sadhatter]

Again, I'm not arguing that it is worse than alcohol, or that people are not stupid. I'm pointing out that the OP's statment that "marijuana is not a danger to the general population" is incorrect, exactly as if he had said that "alcohol is not a danger to the general population".

ETA: By the way, note this part of the article I quoted.

Their risk of an accident was increased whether or not they had used cannabis immediately before the accident.

Thus it shows that they don't actually have to be under the influence of it to still be a greater risk to the motoring public when they are behind the wheel.

My problem with the bolded statement is 2 fold but i am sure it was clarified somewhere.

1) what do they mean by immediate? Depending on your pot, its going to effect you for more than an " immediate " timeframe.

2) If the statement of immediate means within a reasonable amount of time, ( lets say 15 hours just to be safe) i would like to know how it is imparing the drivers. I have never had a joint that impaired my judgment for that long.

But this is beyond the fact, that it is a person's choice to get behind the wheel whether they are tired, drunk, drinking cough syrup, or anything else that you shouldn't be doing while driving. I agree that someone who should not be driving, shouldn't be driving but to attribute that the the substance they imbided versus bad personal descisions, is not fair to the substance in question.

 

[dtugg]

PhantomWolf, I just read the story you linked earlier. It seems they simply asked people about their weed habits. And since there is no way to tell if they were being truthful, I don't think that anybody can make any definite statements. Plus, it doesn't seem, at least from the article, that they controlled for other substances that they may have used. So you may have marijuana plus any combination of alcohol, methamphetamine, cocaine, ecstasy, lsd, ect.

 

[PhantomWolf]

I would like to add weed smoking causes, or a least facilitates laziness in a lot of people.

Tell me about it, I have seen it all to often in my current employment as a second chance tutor....

There are also studies starting to come out that are showing possible causal links between Cannabis use and Lung, Prostate, Cervical, Brain, and Neck Cancers, as well as leukaemia in users' children. The science is still very tenuous at this point as the studies are few, but it is something else to consider. Here's the info given out by our cancer society.

 

[PhantomWolf]

PhantomWolf, I just read the story you linked earlier. It seems they simply asked people about their weed habits. And since there is no way to tell if they were being truthful, I don't think that anybody can make any definite statements. Plus, it doesn't seem, at least from the article, that they controlled for other substances that they may have used. So you may have marijuana plus any combination of alcohol, methamphetamine, cocaine, ecstasy, lsd, ect.

True that it didn't give a number for use of Pot and Alcohol, in the French study I gave they found that about 3% used both. In NZ, while meth is becoming more popular, the use of E, LSD, Coke and other drugs is extremely minimal compared to the use of Pot.

 

[dtugg]

Tell me about it, I have seen it all to often in my current employment as a second chance tutor....

There are also studies starting to come out that are showing possible causal links between Cannabis use and Lung, Prostate, Cervical, Brain, and Neck Cancers, as well as leukaemia in users' children. The science is still very tenuous at this point as the studies are few, but it is something else to consider. Here's the info given out by our cancer society.

I am sure that smoking marijuana must be bad for you lungs and body in general. However, there are methods of using it that totally eliminate the risks associated with smoking. It is edible if prepared correctly (weed brownies), and one can use a vaporizer which allows the inhalation of the TCH without the combustible leafy material. I will be the first to admit that the vast majority of marijuana users just smoke it, however.

 

[PhantomWolf]

But this is beyond the fact, that it is a person's choice to get behind the wheel whether they are tired, drunk, drinking cough syrup, or anything else that you shouldn't be doing while driving. I agree that someone who should not be driving, shouldn't be driving but to attribute that the the substance they imbided versus bad personal descisions, is not fair to the substance in question.

Under this however, you could argue that no substance is a threat to the general public since it is always someone's bad personal desicion that leads to the actions that becomes a danger.

 

[sadhatter]

Tell me about it, I have seen it all to often in my current employment as a second chance tutor....

There are also studies starting to come out that are showing possible causal links between Cannabis use and Lung, Prostate, Cervical, Brain, and Neck Cancers, as well as leukaemia in users' children. The science is still very tenuous at this point as the studies are few, but it is something else to consider. Here's the info given out by our cancer society.

Your first statement, i agree kids should not be smoking. Anyone i knew who started in high school was pretty much a typical hey man smoker.

As for the second, i would be inclined to agree. Smoking anything isn't going to be good for you. And i get annoyed by all the pot users that think smoking isn't going to effect your health in some way.

Pot legalists need to be realistic in what it does and dosn't do, and within the dope community there is an ocean of woo as to the benefits of dope. In reality there is one, it gets you high.Well two if you count no hangover.

 

[jaydeehess]

People could become self sufficient by owning a 10-20 acres of land

So if a family of 5, and 10 workers were sustained by a well designed, well equipped 20 acre land parcel. There is room to spare, and feed the city dwellers at a profit. Thanks

Oh, now its 10 people per 20 acre parcel?

Fine! you are still proposing a world wide monoculture. THAT IS a receipe for global disaster!

Please, oh please, never run for office, and if you do let us know so that we can prepare for your personal version of 2012.

 

[jaydeehess]

Under this however, you could argue that no substance is a threat to the general public since it is always someone's bad personal desicion that leads to the actions that becomes a danger.

Drugs don't kill people, people kill people.

?

 

[sadhatter]

Under this however, you could argue that no substance is a threat to the general public since it is always someone's bad personal desicion that leads to the actions that becomes a danger.

And i would, certain substances can cause an individual to act stupidly, ruin their health, or other bad things. But it is the person's choice to take the substance.

Stupid people will do stupid things, and should be punished accordingly. But to blame a substance for a persons action is shifting the blame.

If a person starts doing coke and due to want for coke breaks into my place and takes my stuff. I don't blame the coke, i blame the person who decided to place the coke into their systems. Something i would never do being a fairly responsible person.

I agree with you that their are some substances that should be illegal ( coke for example). But to what point that is my personal bias, and to what point that is actually a substance that causes bad behavior , well that is a point that can be debated.

 

[dtugg]

True that it didn't give a number for use of Pot and Alcohol, in the French study I gave they found that about 3% used both. In NZ, while meth is becoming more popular, the use of E, LSD, Coke and other drugs is extremely minimal compared to the use of Pot.

It may be possible that 3% use both marijuana and alcohol, but I don't think there is any doubt whatsoever that a much higher percentage of marijuana users also use alcoholic. Also, while the use of meth, coke, MDMA, ect. is low amongst the general public, it is certainly higher amongst marijuana users.

 

[PhantomWolf]

I am sure that smoking marijuana must be bad for you lungs and body in general. However, there are methods us using it that totally eliminate the risks associated with smoking. It is edible of prepared correctly (weed brownies), and one can use a vaporizer which allows the inhalation of the TCH without the combustible leafy material. I ill be the first to admit that the vast majority of marijuana users just smoke it, however.

Again, I'd note the original argument the OP made was that it was not harmful to the body or mind at all. The science would tend to disagree. I'm not here to debate if it should be used or not, just not the relevant facts. If the OP had said "Caffine has no negative effects on the body" I'd be disagreeing with that too (studies show that it can cause more rapid bone lose in post menapausal women).

 

[Dandyone]

Oh, now its 10 people per 20 acre parcel?

Fine! you are still proposing a world wide monoculture. THAT IS a receipe for global disaster!

Please, oh please, never run for office, and if you do let us know so that we can prepare for your personal version of 2012.

You'll be the first one I contact regarding my candacy for public office.

 

[dtugg]

Again, I'd note the original argument the OP made was that it was not harmful to the body or mind at all. The science would tend to disagree. I'm not here to debate if it should be used or not, just not the relevant facts. If the OP had said "Caffine has no negative effects on the body" I'd be disagreeing with that too (studies show that it can cause more rapid bone lose in post menapausal women).

OK.

 

[jaydeehess]

..... Smoking anything isn't going to be good for you. And i get annoyed by all the pot users that think smoking isn't going to effect your health in some way.

Pot legalists need to be realistic in what it does and dosn't do, and within the dope community there is an ocean of woo as to the benefits of dope. In reality there is one, it gets you high.Well two if you count no hangover.

To claim that ingesting any substance that interferes with normal brain function will not cause any lasting effect is IMO playing with fire.

As far as addiction goes, back in the 1970's it was widely thought among the drug culture that cocaine was simply not addictive even though there were people who would snort it until their septum's collapsed. Hmmm, "my face is falling off due to cocaine use but I could quit any time I want. I'm just not all that concerned about my face."

There are pot smokers I know who will book off work because they want to sit on their couch and get high and watch TV. What do they like to watch? It used to be teletubbies and now they are in heaven and will watch Treehouse TV all day.(Canadian cable channel for children up to age 6 or so for most of the day)
Same guys are patently lazy at work. One told his boss that he doesn't want more than 15 hours a week. He has been part time for a year now and there was, a while ago, a chance for him to go full time. He refused. He prefers to let his wife work fulltime (no kids BTW) while he spends most of the week getting high. He only got a job because she was tired of him being high full time!

BTW, is no hangover really a "benefit" to a person? You can easily avoid a hangover with alcohol as well. Just don't have more the 3 or 4 drinks in an evening. I rarely have more than 2 and I I never feel bad later.
(to be clear, in my 20's I drank a lot more. I was keeping up to my friends, some of whm became alcoholics. Then I got a job on a weather station in the Arctic and no one on the station was a heavy drinker. About 4 months in I realised that I still had 10 beer in the 12 pack I had brought with me and my 26 oz bottle of Scotch was 3/4 full. My epiphaney was that I was not the heavy drinker my southern friends were AND it simply did not matter. One's manhood is not measured by the amount of intoxicant one can ingest and remain upright.

 

[jaydeehess]

You'll be the first one I contact regarding my candacy for public office.

Thank you. Now just to be perfectly clear, are you or are you not promoting a worldwide monoculture as a viable plan?

 

[dtugg]

To claim that ingesting any substance that interferes with normal brain function will not cause any lasting effect is IMO playing with fire.

As far as addiction goes, back in the 1970's it was widely thought among the drug culture that cocaine was simply not addictive even though there were people who would snort it until their septum's collapsed. Hmmm, "my face is falling off due to cocaine use but I could quit any time I want. I'm just not all that concerned about my face."

There are pot smokers I know who will book off work because they want to sit on their couch and get high and watch TV. What do they like to watch? It used to be teletubbies and now they are in heaven and will watch Treehouse TV all day.(Canadian cable channel for children up to age 6 or so for most of the day)
Same guys are patently lazy at work. One told his boss that he doesn't want more than 15 hours a week. He has been part time for a year now and there was, a while ago, a chance for him to go full time. He refused. He prefers to let his wife work fulltime (no kids BTW) while he spends most of the week getting high. He only got a job because she was tired of him being high full time!

BTW, is no hangover really a "benefit" to a person? You can easily avoid a hangover with alcohol as well. Just don't have more the 3 or 4 drinks in an evening. I rarely have more than 2 and I I never feel bad later.
(to be clear, in my 20's I drank a lot more. I was keeping up to my friends, some of whm became alcoholics. Then I got a job on a weather station in the Arctic and no one on the station was a heavy drinker. About 4 months in I realised that I still had 10 beer in the 12 pack I had brought with me and my 26 oz bottle of Scotch was 3/4 full. My epiphaney was that I was not the heavy drinker my southern friends were AND it simply did not matter. One's manhood is not measured by the amount of intoxicant one can ingest and remain upright.

While weed can certainly be psychologically addictive (often resulting in chronic laziness as I pointed out earlier), just the same as anything can be, it is not physiologically addictive. I was an everyday smoker for years and I quit cold turkey with no ill side effects whatsoever. If I tried that with heroin, or coke, or even alcohol, I would have been in a world of hurt.

 

[jaydeehess]

While weed can certainly be psychologically addictive (often resulting in chronic laziness as I pointed out earlier), just the same as anything can be, it is not physiologically addictive. I was an everyday smoker for years and I quit cold turkey with no ill side effects whatsoever. If I tried that with heroin, or coke, or even alcohol, I would have been in a world of hurt.

Oh I agree. I quit weed specifically because of two things
1) I did some patently and utterly stupid things while high.
2) When I had it I seemed to almost be in a race to use it all. I would be at work and by 3 pm would be looking forward to the evening, alone watching TV.

There just seemed to be something wrong with that picture

 

[PhantomWolf]

I would be at work and by 3 pm would be looking forward to the evening, alone watching TV.

Heck I never used the stuff, and I'm wanting and looking forward to being home watching TV by 9am....

Perhaps it's TV that's addictive....

 

[Dandyone]

And if that is what your after your not going to get it. Pot would severely hamper alcohol, possibly tobbacco, and the government would not be getting any income from the fines, etc that us users may be required to pay if we get caught.

If your expecting the government to give up all of that revenue, and let you simply grow the product in your backyard, you are ignorant of how government works. The only way this is ever going to happen, is when the hey man school of pot smokers learns that change in most cases is from within the system, especially in situations like this. If your asking the government to give up a big piece of their pie and not give them anything in return that is politically naive.

You need to start realizing what, Of the people, By the people and For the people is all about. The highlighted statements in your post display your utter and pathetic resignation to a tyranical entity. Sounds like you are humbly approaching some kind of Royal higness with your hat in your hand over your heart, hoping the mighty one is in a good mood. I'm not a part of their pie to be eaten at their whim, and what's in my back yard is none of their bussiness.

Now I understand what all this FOTL movement is about. As a governed people we need to really rethink our place in this equasion, using the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights as a guide. When the government fears the people, there is liberty, when the people fear the government there is tyranny. In the US right now things are terribly askew.