The war on drugs

[Fatstogey]

Just want to get peoples opinions on the war on drugs.

however i expect it to be slightly slanted here. As the majority of people here are young people. So i am assuming most will be against it.

I am for state regulation. There should be no federal regulations on drugs whatsoever. It should be a state law.

If New York wants to make Herion legal? Then they can. Originally these laws were supposed to be state laws. The fact that they are federal is against the constitution.

Not to mention the billions if not hundreds of billions that have been spent on a drug war that
a. Hasnt gotten us anywhere
b. keeps the criminal enterprises going(all the cartels are quite obviously against legalizing drugs
c. puts non violent offenders in jail. Most of who become violent offenders once they leave jail.

Whats your stance? I am a pot head so im all for weed. However i am not questioning legality. Im saying it should be up to the state. Not the federal government.

Case in point. People in California being arrested by DEA and FBI for drugs(pot) that is legal as per state laws. This is a disgusting travesty.

Personally i think(well actually i know) that drugs will be used anyway. Why not at least decriminalize their sale and production. Because the market will dictate what it wants. And the people want drugs and they are going to continue to do drugs. But they arent hurting anyone but themselves. Which is unfortunate. But not up to government.

Also im gonna throw this video up right here. Cause Ron Paul is the first politician to say what ive been thinking.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufekh_SwZd0&eurl=http://www.ronpaul.com/&feature=player_embedded

LOL and when i read this i thought "stephen baldwin vs Ron Paul?" Are we serious? YOu got a nutcase debating a genius. lol YOu know without even watching that Steve is about to get pwned. lol

And i know a bunch of people who are like "oh ron paul again? Your just a fanboy." Yea cause im a fan boy of our founding fathers and Ron Paul is the only one advocating the constitution. Which is our guide. A guide we are not following. And look where we are now.

[Cursed]

Here's what I think, people who sell, or use any of the hard drugs like cocaine should sentence to death. Immediate death. Like being summarily executed on the spot. Sure it'll be a huge violation of Human Rights, but hey, it's cheap, easy, and sends a big message.

As for weaker drugs like marijuana, just put an age limit on it, or make it like alcohol. There's no way you're going to stop it since it's so widespread.

[Meta]

Drug dealers and the guys who pull the strings behind all the drug selling should be sentenced to death,just like Cursed said before me
But make it be immediate death,on spot.
Users can rot in jail,or just kill themselves by overdosing etc

[Fornicaras]

I read a book on how prohibition massively fails & actually increase the flow of drugs in the country.

Drug war is a waste of time & resources.

[greg770]

I am not a "pot head" but I do smoke it sometimes, all my friends smoke it as well (some even grow it). So i am all for weed too. Drug wars are useless and our mods seem to be somewhat agressive.

[Fatstogey]

I am not a "pot head" but I do smoke it sometimes, all my friends smoke it as well (some even grow it). So i am all for weed too. Drug wars are useless and our mods seem to be somewhat agressive.

Yea they do. Crap. lol

As for the dealers? yea. But not the street level dude. They are worthless. If your gonna kill somone i want the higher ups of these cartels. Not the dude on the corner.

As for users. Who cares. Let them use. Life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Are they gonna end up happy? Probably not. But I DONT WORRY ABOUT WHAT THEY DO. That is the biggest probelm with people int his contry. They want to decide what others do. I dont like it but if you wanna do it thats your choice. Go for it!

[Cursed]

To bad when they do it they end up going crazy and fucking up someone else's life.

[Meta]

As for the dealers? yea. But not the street level dude. They are worthless. If your gonna kill somone i want the higher ups of these cartels. Not the dude on the corner.


I was actually talking about the higher ups,they are the root of ''all evil''

[TW501]

I was actually just about to create a thread about drugs, it's funny that you posted one at the same time. I think that banning the hard drugs like cocaine and heroin are necessary, and not in violation of the constitution. As for marijuana, I think it should be legalized but regulated. While I don't think that it's as dangerous as some make it out to be, I do have a bit of concern that completely legalizing may lead to people assuming that it's completely safe. At the same time, I think that the benefit from legalizing it would outweigh the costs. If nothing else medicinal marijuana and industrial hemp should be made legal.

As for letting the states decide drug policies, I think it's a bad idea. Maybe some degree of control over it, but to have them completely decide independently would be inviting trouble. If New York legalizes heroine but New Jersey has stiff penalties for it, it will undoubtedly lead to problems. There are things for the states to control, and things for the national government to control. In fact, one of the reasons that the current constitution was created was that the previous constitution, the Articles of Confederation, gave so much power to the states that they were practically independent entities.

Of course with an issue like drugs, you have to look at a lot of perspectives, so there's no clear, simple solution to it.

[Paragon]

Yea they do. Crap. lol

As for the dealers? yea. But not the street level dude. They are worthless. If your gonna kill somone i want the higher ups of these cartels. Not the dude on the corner.

As for users. Who cares. Let them use. Life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Are they gonna end up happy? Probably not. But I DONT WORRY ABOUT WHAT THEY DO. That is the biggest probelm with people int his contry. They want to decide what others do. I dont like it but if you wanna do it thats your choice. Go for it!

However the main problem about not clamping down on the users is that once they become addicted to the drug many of them end up doing whatever it takes in order to obtain it, from committing small time crimes to major ones. They not only become a danger to themselves but a danger to everyone else around them. Some are an exception, i.e those who are can afford almost an unlimited amount of drugs aka the insanely rich people, but those who are not in such a financial position are the truly dangerous drug addicts.

Overall i'd be more than happy to see drug dealers get executed as was mentioned earlier, whilst the users of heavy drugs suffer long term jail sentences.

[DK]

I'm all for legalizing marijuana. I never intend to touch the stuff, but I don't see why people should go to jail for something like that when there's alcohol and tobacco being enjoyed freely.

Cocaine, Heroin etc should never be legalised of course. Pot is for the most part harmless in comparison, it's not even addictive like tobacco is.

The only thing I have against pot is that unlike drink or cigarettes, you cant get inebriated from someone else do it. I was once at a house party where some people started lighting up, and i started to feel the effects of their second hand smoke which made me pretty uncomfortable and pissed off enough to leave.

[Fatstogey]

However the main problem about not clamping down on the users is that once they become addicted to the drug many of them end up doing whatever it takes in order to obtain it, from committing small time crimes to major ones. They not only become a danger to themselves but a danger to everyone else around them. Some are an exception, i.e those who are can afford almost an unlimited amount of drugs aka the insanely rich people, but those who are not in such a financial position are the truly dangerous drug addicts.

Overall i'd be more than happy to see drug dealers get executed as was mentioned earlier, whilst the users of heavy drugs suffer long term jail sentences.

Yea but teh people who do that, do it already. Whether its legal or not will not determine what im willing to do for it. And it wont determine whos gonna do it and whos not gonna do it. You cannot predict crime. You cant say that all of the sudden everyone is gonna turn into junkies. I find it highly unlikely.

I smoke weed all the time, right now infact. I used to drink a lot more than i do now, but i still enjoy drinking from time to time. And ive done coke a couple dozen times. Had some offered to me the other night for free. I didnt do it. Not because its illegal but because i dont want to get addicted to coke. Aside from that i dont see how people get addicted anyway. Ive done coke not that much. But plenty enough to have become addicted. But i know better.

Not that im saying hard drugs should be legal. Im just saying that you cannot criminalize drug users. You cannot predict that they will harm others. They are harming themselves for certain. But you cannot say that they are all criminals.

Either way making it illegal hasnt stopped it from happening. Its just given us a bunch of people in jail that didnt harm anyone.

And no the constitution was spot on. And it still is. The power should be with the state.

[arthur11]

Long term effects are pretty hectic though with ganj. I prefer having it illegal otherwise i would be smoking way too much, now i have to go on a trek to get some or i end up buying a £60 bag (discount from £100) so i have a fresh supply for weekends which i can sell on and make some good profit with. If it was legal i personally would be profitless and braindead.

[vgrippa]

As much as I am against hard drugs (cocaine, heroin, etc) I feel we should legalize all of them. Once we legalize drugs use all that money that is completely wasted on this 'war on drug' to support better rehab programs for people who get addicted but genuinely want to quit. That would save the American tax payers incredible amounts of money because they won't be paying for a bunch of druggies to sit in prison and just increase their addiction. I smoke pot and it is a complete joke that it is not legal. It does not have any negative effect on you except your lung capacity but that is a given since you are smoking something. My roommate just took a physics midterm completely baked and only missed one question and he could have went to jail for that, but who was hurting almost acing physics test high? If anything the people who are part of the 'war on drugs' are harming more people because they are encouraging all these dirty cartels and the trafficking of their dirty drugs.

Also if you are strongly against drugs and think they have done nothing for society then you need to throw away every single piece of music you have because without drugs you would not have that music.

[Cursed]

See, when you use a hard drug like cocaine, you get addicted to it, and you'll do anything for more of it, regardless of any rehab you go too. Blackmail, robbery, murder, addicts will do any of that to get drug money. Not to mention when they're on the stuff they tend to be mentally impaired and do reckless, if not outright violent actions. If it were just the druggies being affected then I'd be fine with legalizing all drugs and letting them rot, but it isn't just them. There are innocent people who get hurt by them.

[Aya]

drugs are for the weak people who have probs with accepting the reality

as for legalising teh weed meh..majority of the people start with it then go to cocain etc but its already legal in alot countries plus is really common and easy to get so idk...wont make big diference..Though u must not love yourself to smoke this thing its smells literally like shit and makes u look retarded =_=

As for drugsellers..as long as there stupid people fulling their pockets with money thats going to be one of the easiest ways to make money, no matter of the risks of going to jail and so on..

[metalsoup111]

The War on Drugs has been nearly fruitless endeavor and a monumental waste of time and money, imo. The fact of the matter is, if people want something they will find a way to get it. Things have always worked that way. Prohibition is a prime example. Certain drugs and chemicals show signs of doing harm to one's personal health, but is it not that person's choice. We endanger our health and livelyhood almost daily...

If we consume unhealthy foods, we are slowly killing ourselves. If we use tobacco products, we are slowly killing ourselve. If we stand out in the sun too long and too often, we are slowly killing ourselves. If we don't wear seatbelt and are in a car accident, we could die. If we ingest alcohol on a regular/habitual basis, we are slowly killing ourselves. Ect., ect...

In certain parts of the US, salvia divinorum, a mild psychoactive, hallucinagic, judgement impairing herb, is perfectly legal. Why? I have no clue. That shit will take you to another world (mentally). If somebody decides to go for drive after smoking that shit, they're likely going to kill multiple people. Same with alcohol, minus the trippy hallucinations.

Simple advise to any drug user or someone potentially going to use drugs is to investigate and research any and all side effects. How does it affect the body? What quantities does it take to kill you? If you have moderate intelligence, you'll easily realize how to stay safe and pleasantly fucked up at the same time. Avoid blatantly stupid situations and stupid people. The mind is much more powerful than people give it credit for. Mind over intoxicant. Use your brain. You'll be suprised. It'll truly works wonders.

My solution: legalize and regulate. It's not really that hard of a concept to grasp. People won't be as inclined to go so far out of their way to potentially endanger themselves and/or others if there is no need. There are a wide variety of harder drugs that I'm personally against ever consuming in any from or fashion (I stick with the green), but the point remains the same. Responsible handling and regulation of these substances is a better way to ensure the safety and health of the collective than an all out "war" on users, the majority of whom are concidered to be non-violent.

All of these laws are/have been little more than government's attempt to regulate "sin" rather than actual crimes/something wrong. In the eyes of the religious community it's seen as defiling one's body = defiling one's "Temple of God"...

[arthur11]

But what about us poor students who make money off that stuf :PP :P

@Vgrippa -> Weed does nothing? Weed fucks your brain up long term, you might get lucky but people who have been smoking weed far too much for too long are constantly monging out, or completely paranoid. It effects your brain and lungs <- this is the arguement for why its worse than tobacco.Plus the majority of people smoke skinnys with tabacco in anyway so your often getting the worst of both drugs.

[metalsoup111]

But what about us poor students who make money off that stuf :PP :P

^^Yeah. lol. That's pretty much the only downside...

[blunt_smoker_420]

Here's what I think, people who sell, or use any of the hard drugs like cocaine should sentence to death. Immediate death. Like being summarily executed on the spot. Sure it'll be a huge violation of Human Rights, but hey, it's cheap, easy, and sends a big message.

As for weaker drugs like marijuana, just put an age limit on it, or make it like alcohol. There's no way you're going to stop it since it's so widespread.

I couldn't of said it better myself, i do not partake in the use or think that hard drugs should used its a quick way to mess your life up. On the other hand i think marijuana should be legal its no more harmful than alcohol and the only reason its illegal is because it would be hard to tax.

[vgrippa]

A lot of arguments I see here against drugs sound like arguments from anti-drug commercials which are completely false. Pot is not a gateway drug. I smoke it regularly and I have never once wanted to try hard drugs. People move up to harder drugs for way different reasons then just getting tired of pot or thinking it is ok because pot is ok. That goes against your other argument of long term use making paranoid because if you are paranoid why would want to go out looking for harder drugs? Wouldn't you want to stay home and not get caught? If you want to know the real effects of pot watch the movie 'Super High Me.' Doug Benson after smoking for 17 years stops for 30 days and has doctors do tests on him (sperm count, IQ, memory, lung capacity, etc.), then for 30 days straight he smokes pot from the second he wakes up to the moment he goes to bed and does the tests again. Every single test score went up except for lung capacity which just dropped down to what it was before he quit for 30 days. The doctors actually said that pot should be legalized for recreational use because it has no negative health affects to it. They just didn't agree with it being used for medical purposes.

[arthur11]

Interesting i didnt hear about that. I heard from my friends studying medicine at uni that weed does infact increase (well improve) your mental activity for short periods of time but in the long run numbs certain areas causing shit to happen. Also i kno many long term stoners (in their 30's) whose friends say their whole manner's changed, the pace of their thought process, attention span, how much they talk (even thought they're healthy eaters and phsically fit) etc..and my own personal experiance compliments this, how I personally know if i smoke a reasonable amount on the weekend that im going to be stupid for a few days, thats why with college i try to keep it down because it does make you complacent. Maybe it does depend on your enviroment and bodily makeup, like some people smoke until theyre 100 years old and dont die from it but I think they're many personal stories out there that disprove that weed has no negative effects outside of lung capacity.

[Firevixie]

Reminds me of the drug situation in my country... just last week, a guy from the army got caught with with a suitcase filled with 27 bags full of coke (can't remember the weight, but still... 27 bags is A LOT). There are currently 31 police officers on trial for drug dealing, stealing, and murder. Ironic, huh? :oh:

But what about us poor students who make money off that stuf :PP :P


umm.. no offense, but you poor students can make money in other ways. why don't you smoke some weed and think about it? i'm sure you'll come up with plenty of alternatives.. :rollseyes: (i'm actually serious... just in case it came off a bit sarcastic hehe)

[TW501]

On principle, I think that marijuana should be legalized and that banning it was a really stupid thing to do, but at the same time I find myself rather put off by the fact that so many people smoke it without giving a thought to those laws. Though as I said they probably aren't needed, the fact that people violate laws is rather distasteful. To pick and choose which laws to follow seems to demonstrate contempt for the Rule of Law.

I do feel that marijuana should be legal, though I would personally discourage others from using it. While there is a lot of unnecessary hype around it perpetrated by the anti-drug crowd, it's not entirely harmless either. Health effects aside, I've seen the type of people who smoke pot, and in terms of intelligence and critical thinking abilities...I think you get what I'm saying, so I'll just stop there.

[Marrow Rivengristel]

Its the only way I'd ever go to war.

[arthur11]

umm.. no offense, but you poor students can make money in other ways. why don't you smoke some weed and think about it? i'm sure you'll come up with plenty of alternatives.. :rollseyes: (i'm actually serious... just in case it came off a bit sarcastic hehe)

This is true...work 8 to 4 on saturdays and 5 to 9 in evening in the week afternoons when im not at college, that doesnt quite work when your trying to button down to 4 A-Levels and besides the last 2 shops i worked in went bust because of the recession (zavvi, urban outfitters). I would rather sell a draw everyday of the week, consuming a partial amount of my time and make £70 per week than do something which would depress and tire me out...

[temari]

You couldn't stop drugs from being bought and sold as long as there is demand cus people who wants to take drugs will find a way regardless of wheither it's legal or not.
Unlike many other social causes, I have found that the drug users like- really like- their choices. You cannot help someone who sees no need for "help". I have never seen a dealer throw someone into the back of a van and take them away and force an addiction on them. What i'm trying to say is that everyone is responsible of his own actions wheither if you are a drug user or not so it's up to us to think if we want to take drugs or no and noone will force us, it's our choice.

[Fatstogey]

On principle, I think that marijuana should be legalized and that banning it was a really stupid thing to do, but at the same time I find myself rather put off by the fact that so many people smoke it without giving a thought to those laws. Though as I said they probably aren't needed, the fact that people violate laws is rather distasteful. To pick and choose which laws to follow seems to demonstrate contempt for the Rule of Law.

I do feel that marijuana should be legal, though I would personally discourage others from using it. While there is a lot of unnecessary hype around it perpetrated by the anti-drug crowd, it's not entirely harmless either. Health effects aside, I've seen the type of people who smoke pot, and in terms of intelligence and critical thinking abilities...I think you get what I'm saying, so I'll just stop there.

Well i guess you dont know a lot of pot smokers. I know people who smoke pot that are engineers, contractors, business owners. I know a few who are millionares. I smoke every day and im a technician. You really have no idea who smokes. Youd be suprised if you really knew.

I actually had one contractor. He requested me and my partner. He didnt want anyone else from our company doing his work. Because we do the best work. Our company does crappy work. Our work stands out.
My boss sent 2 other guys. And the contractor was talking to us and said "Man Shawn sent those 2 boys man, they look like dope heads." lol I was high while he was talking to me! I had just smoked right before pulling up to the job. My job involved skilled hand labor and technical skill.

The people you know were lazy and stupid before they started smoking weed.

Im gonna be a business owner by the end of this year(how profitable remains to be seen, lol and its not looking very good). And i know others who are the same.

And you never break the law? You dont speed? Youve never run a red light? You never drank under age?

Of course people wont obey the law. Everyone breaks a law at some point. Shit there are still standing laws in some states that makes oral sex illegal. So rather than judge those breaking the laws. YOu need be judging the entity that is creating these laws.

[TW501]

I've known a few dozen. Some of them were nice people, and some were able to live an average life, but few had much ambition of their own or were the type who were inclined to work hard. They tended to blame authority figures for their own misfortunes and rarely had much drive to improve themselves beyond what was necessary to survive. It's not that pot necessarily makes you stupid, but from my observation it's more like being stupid makes you more likely to smoke pot. I'm sure there are respectable people who smoke or have smoked pot, but such cases are the exception, not the norm. Not to mention that the mentality that would have one so easily break the law for the sake of such petty personal satisfaction is not one to be at all respected. Whether you agree with the law or not, it's still the law, and to spit upon the rule of law so that you can enjoy some weed seems very shallow.

As for your second point, no I have not broken the law. I have never drank, smoked, sped, or otherwise intentionally broke the law. If there is a law that I felt was unjust, I would certainly challenge it through court, petition, protest, etc., but unless the law caused direct, intolerable harm to me, I would obey it.

[Firevixie]

Well i guess you dont know a lot of pot smokers. I know people who smoke pot that are engineers, contractors, business owners. I know a few who are millionares. I smoke every day and im a technician. You really have no idea who smokes. Youd be suprised if you really knew.

That is so true... hell, I found out that my graphic design teacher used to smoke pot (she can't anymore cuz she's pregnant). I was like.... "say WHUUUUUT!???" Most of our parents probably smoked pot too back in the day... and who knows if they still do.. :wacko:

[Fatstogey]

That is so true... hell, I found out that my graphic design teacher used to smoke pot (she can't anymore cuz she's pregnant). I was like.... "say WHUUUUUT!???" Most of our parents probably smoked pot too back in the day... and who knows if they still do.. :wacko:

Yes. The people he spoke of are "as advertised." Not saying i dont know any stupid pot heads. But they were stupid before they were pot heads.

I know plenty of highly successful individuals who are marijuana smokers.

Shit the owner of the company i used to work for was a pot head.

All these people who dont know are gonna tell me what weed does to me? I smoking it right now. Im fine. All they know is what theyve been told. Which is a bunch of propaganda. All the "facts" about weed are not facts at all. In-fact actual studies of marijuana are few in number. But most of what has been studies has proven what weve been told to be wrong.

[Levy]

As for your second point, no I have not broken the law. I have never drank, smoked, sped, or otherwise intentionally broke the law. If there is a law that I felt was unjust, I would certainly challenge it through court, petition, protest, etc., but unless the law caused direct, intolerable harm to me, I would obey it.

Come here in canada, at 18 you can drink all you want :P. But unless you've never drove a car, I'm 99.999% sure you're went pass the speed limit at one time or another.

[TW501]

Hence I said 'intentionally'. I've never intentionally surpassed the speed limit, but I can't guaruntee that while driving and focusing on the road I've never gone a mile/ph or two beyond it. But that's different from openly flaunting the law because it suits you.

[Fatstogey]

Hence I said 'intentionally'. I've never intentionally surpassed the speed limit, but I can't guaruntee that while driving and focusing on the road I've never gone a mile/ph or two beyond it. But that's different from openly flaunting the law because it suits you.

Intent doesnt matter if you break the law. It doesnt matter if you didnt do it on purpose. Your still gonna get a ticket.

It doesnt matter if you have cancer. Your still going to jail for possession of marijuana.

And sorry to say it sounds like you dont have too much fun. Ive broke the law plenty enough times. But ive never hurt anyone. And thats the difference. If you dont hurt anyone i couldnt give two shits about what your doing. And you cannot judge what someone will do untill they do it.

When we start trying to predict what certain groups of people do is when they are gonna start doing it. Its obvious that you have a limited experience with people. There are plenty of law abiding citizens who do drugs. And yes alcohol is a drug. But prescriptions as well.

Cocaine. Cocaine has many positive benefits(as do most drugs that become abused) in low doses. I.e. a dose not enough to get you high. Can help people in a bunch of different ways. I read some study but im not gonna make shit up because i dont remember exactly what it said. But there were positive effects of cocaine. But its illegal because its abused.
The same thing goes for amphetamines and ecstasy. In low doses can positively help people. Curing depression is one thing. However they become illegal in their abuse.

And no pot is not a gateway drug. I dont care what youve been told. It is incorrect. Curiosity. Its always there. Just because pot is the first drug that was made available to them does not mean it made them move on to cocaine. Its just that, even though some dealers are scumbags and do do it, some dealers arent gonna sell crack to a 15 year old. But theyll sell em some weed.

I have smoked weed since i was 12 years old. It didnt stunt my growth, im 6'5 250 lbs. I took an IQ test, well many. The most recent of which was a few months ago. I was at 146 which is where all the IQ tests i have taken have been. 140-150. And its still there after over a decade of marjuana use. While in my adolescence no less. IN my growing stages i was smoking weed. I was not 6'5 when i was 15.

I have smoked weed, snorted coke, drank alcohol, taken Lortab/hydrocodine, smoked opium(like 5 times). Thats it.

Coke wasnt a drug of choice to me. I have done it on many occasions. IDK if i had to number id say maybe 50 occasions in which i have done cocaine. I never became addicted. I really didnt like the high very much.

But the main point for me was the low quality. I had some a couple times that was good quality. It was pretty good. But even that wouldnt make me addicted. But it was definately better than the low quality street trash you encounter often. So to me the high does not outweigh the quality of the product. If pharma got into producing cocaine, and it was legalized? I would probably do it a little more often. But it wouldnt become an addiction. Simply because i know better. If you dont, thats not my business. Thats between you and yourself and your freedom.

Oh i havent done any in prolly 4 months. And that was 1 night and it was probably about a year or more before that.

So you are predicting what drug users will do if something is legalized.
a. people dont care if its illegal. You say yourself that you have never broken the law. Would you do cocaine if it was legal? Neither would most people. Usage may increase, but not very much.

b. you really have no clue of the effects of the drug.

c. i am someone who has used drugs and knows a great many of
people who have used drugs. Some are unsavory characters and some are not. Drugs DO NOT MAKE THEM WHAT THEY ARE. Even if the drugs influence them. It was their choice to allow it. It is all their own choice and their own doing. It wasnt done to them.

LOL actually. I was at the beach with this girl at her condo. I was helping read and then take her test, this is her last class and shes taking it online. So i was reading her book for her, then basically took her test for her but i made her figure somthing out.

Yea i was high when i read the material. She made good grades in school. As Bs Cs. And also in college shes made mostly As and Bs. I have a GED. I dropped out of high school. And im doing her test for her. I comprehended the material better and i was high when i read it to her. She wasnt. She doesnt smoke.

I was at her beach condo and her mom came. LOL and i was asking her questions we just read. And she couldnt remember and i told her the answer. Then her mom goes "are you two smoking dope?" i told her i was and that her daughter wasnt. She said "oh we'll well have to smoke one with you." We meaning her and her husband.
Both of which are running their own million dollar businesses. And granted they werent exactly pot heads. Im sure they havent smoked in years. But i was suprised.

Oh also the girl. Yea im smarter than her. But she actually does her school work. Reads the books and goes to class. I never did any of those things. I took tests and passed tests. My teachers would be shocked that i would get an A after missing the last 4 classes and reading no materials. I was almost constantly questioned for cheating.

LOL enough about me. But the girl who makes good grades and all that good stuff. She's smoked weed, not her fav, dropped acid, done a bunch of ecstasy, cocaine, and who knows what else.

However her sister is a coke head stripper. A perfect example of the type of person your talking about. They both came from the same loving family. They both did their fair share of drugs. But the younger sister moved on and the older sister is, im guessing, still addicted to this day. Last time i saw her she seemed to still be doign something.

The drugs had no effect. They were each whoever they were before the drugs. I am telling you this as fact. I have my own research. Ive seen plenty enough and done plenty enough to know.

[TW501]

I'm not interested in how often you smoke pot and drink huge qualities of alcohol, or your (rather dubious) claims that you and all the other people you know are highly successful and intelligent despite frequent drug use. I am well aware that there are people who inflate marijuana's dangers, just as there are those who minimize those dangers, but that's not the point. Your anecdotes provide little in the way of proof, and while I'm sure they offer you and other drug-users comfort, they do not provide a very convincing argument. While I agree that the ban on Marijuana is unnecessary and should be repealed, that doesn't mean that I think we should all go out and have a pot-fest, or that I don't still feel that breaking such a law is unethical.

As for the assertion that smoking marijuana 'doesn't hurt anyone', there are lots of crimes that don't hurt anyone (for the time being, I'll ignore the fact that pot isn't exactly harmless, both for the user and those involved in the process of selling/producing it). There are lots of laws regarding things that may not directly hurt others, but which have negative effects on society overall. For example, shoplifting a few dollars worth of merchandise from a large store may not directly hurt anyone, but has a detrimental effect over the long term as a trend. Not wearing a seatbelt may seem like a personal choice, but when accidents are worse and there are more deaths and more medical bills, it hurts society as a whole. In reality, few crimes are completely victimless. Also, I'd just like to point out that using drugs usually only effect the user, the existance of drugs is pretty bad for society as well, especially considering the other type of drug war going on.

Again (and I can't say this enough times) I support legalizing marijuana as the ban hasn't done much good, but I feel that to openly flaunt your disregard for the law and to spit upon the legal system so you can get a cheap high is incredibly shallow, selfish, and unethical.

[Fatstogey]

Well no matter what the law says. What youve said leads me to believe you sit in judgement. You spoke as though drug users were all degenerates. Just trying to tell you that they arent. And i know more of them than you do. And yes there are a great many who are total losers. But some who arent.

Shoplifting hurts someone. It hurts the company.

Not wearing a seatbelt and getting injured doesnt hurt anyone but you and your family. I promise you the doctor is not hurt by your medical bills.

And instead of a seatbelt i stay aware when im driving. Instead of making seatbelts the law why not require stricter driving education and tests. Most accidents are cause by driver error. So reducing driver error would be a far more effective method than ticketing someone for not having a seatbelt on. Its effective in other countries.

Saying what hurts people and what doesnt will go on all day. But the fact still remains that just because its law doesnt mean its correct. As the marijuana restrictions should be removed because they are unjust. As should our other unjust laws.

Like drinking and driving. J/K lol

[metalsoup111]

A healthy variety of people smoke weed. The stereotypical stoner reference is, for the most part, an inaccurate representation of the entire collective. It is true that there are a lot of unintelligent, unmotivated morons who burn, yes, but, from my experience, as Fats has said, these people exhibited this behavior beforehand and pot did not bring about those characteristics. I happen to smoke weed regularly and I wouldn't say that I'm any of those things, nor would I say that about the majority of the people I know who smoke. Most of us are average people no different than the average non-smoker. To each their own...

[Sarvik]

Hence I said 'intentionally'. I've never intentionally surpassed the speed limit, but I can't guaruntee that while driving and focusing on the road I've never gone a mile/ph or two beyond it. But that's different from openly flaunting the law because it suits you.

o.0
Are you driving a tractor? :P

[TW501]

Is not going over the speed limit really that hard? I've never had an issue with it.

[chinaman1472]

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/DNDZg4BCy2w&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/DNDZg4BCy2w&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[Levy]

Is not going over the speed limit really that hard? I've never had an issue with it.

I do it sometimes but damn going 100km/h (60miles/h) on highways is so SLOW, it kills me.

Honestly, very few people don't go over the limit on highways.

[VanquishedAngel]

Please ... speeding.. I must say that everyone breaks that law at some point in time in their lives. The speed limit is not one of those laws that is supposed to be strictly adhered to and is usually loosely enforeced! (Unless of course you happened to catch-- or be caught by--- someone who has an agenda or someone who just forgot their coffee that morning :tongue:) ... On the War on Drugs... well .. I think that it's a sham. Which drugs are these guys warring against and just how well is that working for them? We're the largest consumer of illicit drugs in the western world. The war on Drugs has been a colossal failure.

However @ Fats... The Federal government should have the right to regulate anything within the Federal boundaries. But there is a way around the sort of absolutism that you seem to be against. The regulatory force should be weak and should coordinate with state authorities. For example... perhaps cutting into the DEA's budget and having them take a less active role in enforcement. Only taking action after State authorities demonstrate a need. But then again this would be after we legalized the drugs that we could. It would be sort of the way that alcohol is enforced currently. I am sure that there are federal statutes governing dui's and so on but such crimes are usually enforced by the states.... I don't know .. just throwing things out there. And just b/c you shared.. I neither drink nor do drugs. I have a hard time taking ibuprofen. I just feel that the Drug War in it's current incarnation is long past useful.

[Darkmaterials]

Most of the bad things about pot seem to originate from bad sources of it.
Shouldn't it be legalised so that they can regulate it?

Hard drugs like cocaine should still be banned ofc.

[Fatstogey]

Most of the bad things about pot seem to originate from bad sources of it.
Shouldn't it be legalised so that they can regulate it?

Hard drugs like cocaine should still be banned ofc.

See most of you dont seem to know the benefits of cocaine, ecstasy, or amphetamines. Its our own fault. These substances used properly could have a great deal of positive effects on your life. Its abuse that leads these drugs to being called "hard drugs." However if we could manage ourselves responsibly they can be used in positive ways. In lower doses. But people would rather abuse them and get high.

Dude ecstasy is a mood altering drug. Tons of people could have their lives changed for the better. But people abuse the drug to get high and now its illegal. Ecstasy could have such a vast positive impact if it was taken correctly in low doses. To regulate or augment the flow of chemicals in the brain. Not the abuse which just dumps all these chemicals at once. Its not the drug thats HARD. Its the way people use it and the dosage they take.

However i do agree that they should not be legal. Not now at least. But you must remain open minded so if the public is ready to be responsible some day we can use these drugs responsibly and positively. The drugs are good for people. Its just the way we use them that is bad.

So just keep in mind that these drugs are usually abused because they actually work. These drugs are real. They arent placebos. They affect us a great deal. Thats why they are abused. But in lower doses they can affect us positively. So dont stay totally close minded to the drug. Just remember that its us who make ecstasy bad. Ecstasy could help tons of people with mental issues or depression and the like.

Its not the drug that destroys us. Its our uses of it. If we use it another way it can be just as positive. As positive as it is destructive now. So make sure you make that observation. That we are bad. Not the drug itself.

[Darkmaterials]

See most of you dont seem to know the benefits of cocaine, ecstasy, or amphetamines. Its our own fault. These substances used properly could have a great deal of positive effects on your life. Its abuse that leads these drugs to being called "hard drugs." However if we could manage ourselves responsibly they can be used in positive ways. In lower doses. But people would rather abuse them and get high.

Dude ecstasy is a mood altering drug. Tons of people could have their lives changed for the better. But people abuse the drug to get high and now its illegal. Ecstasy could have such a vast positive impact if it was taken correctly in low doses. To regulate or augment the flow of chemicals in the brain. Not the abuse which just dumps all these chemicals at once. Its not the drug thats HARD. Its the way people use it and the dosage they take.

I know about the potential medical benefits of some illegal drugs, don't make me out to be ignorant.
The reason I think they should be banned still is because of their potential for abuse and side effects.


However i do agree that they should not be legal. Not now at least. But you must remain open minded so if the public is ready to be responsible some day we can use these drugs responsibly and positively. The drugs are good for people. Its just the way we use them that is bad.

No.
The drugs can be good for some people. If I started taking cocaine it would do me more harm than good.


So just keep in mind that these drugs are usually abused because they actually work. These drugs are real. They arent placebos. They affect us a great deal. Thats why they are abused. But in lower doses they can affect us positively. So dont stay totally close minded to the drug. Just remember that its us who make ecstasy bad. Ecstasy could help tons of people with mental issues or depression and the like.

Its not the drug that destroys us. Its our uses of it. If we use it another way it can be just as positive. As positive as it is destructive now. So make sure you make that observation. That we are bad. Not the drug itself.

The drug is bad in the sense that it's effects cause people to seek it out, if none of these drugs gave you a high or anything else they wouldn't be abused.

[Valionx]

Put users in jail for a couple of months, since they are mostly victims; and put dealers lifelong in jail/death sentence. That would do a lot, more than a hundred campaigns.

[Fatstogey]

Put users in jail for a couple of months, since they are mostly victims; and put dealers lifelong in jail/death sentence. That would do a lot, more than a hundred campaigns.

Forget the street level dealers too. They arent worth it. You need to get the higher ups in the cartels. But they cant

Anyone who works in this country directly from the cartel. Is probably from the cartels home country. So they cant get information. BEcause the people who they catch here still have relatives in columbia who will be killed if they talk.

so forget the street level dealers too. The people higher up are the truely evil ones.

[TW501]

The street dealers are still perpetuating the cycle of crime and addiction. Drug dealers are extremely harmful to society, and should absolutely be punished.

[Fatstogey]

The street dealers are still perpetuating the cycle of crime and addiction. Drug dealers are extremely harmful to society, and should absolutely be punished.

Im more worried about the people who created the cycle.

[TW501]

Well of course the cartel leaders should be the top priority, but the people smuggling in drugs and selling them can't be ignored.

[Kyou Shikyo]

Well in my opinion, I partitally agree with Cursed-san and her propositon to kill anyone on the spot who is found using hard drugs such ask cocain or meth but not that users found using less intense drugs such as pot being sent to prison for a couple months.

The failure of the dubbed "war on drugs" is painfully apparent, this is comparable to using words to extinguish a physical fire, utterly useless.

The world needs shock and vioence to move forward, periods of peace bring forth further disagreement and conflict, followed by continuations of violence to push the cycle in order, this is undeniable, take a glimps of our recorded history.

This will bring about horrible debates and vulgar violations of human rights, but this is unevitable, my conclusion to this problem is to execute anyone found using drugs in general, as well as those found with intent to sell. This most definitally will shock the world into fear of the word "drugs", drastically reduce the number of known users and distributers, the remaining would begin to feel the threat of capture and death too great and at a great probability, kill themselves, the high ranking cartels would soon begin feeling the damages and gradually fall apart due to loss of revenue from the slim number of users/distributers. This shouldnt be a war on drugs, this should be a war on the humans responsible.

There should be no legalization on any drugs, every last drug disrupts society, elimate the entire problem, society will respond positively, legalize certain drugs, society will inevitally respond negatively, but as always, force a front as if everything is a smile and a laugh.

When you come down to it, a drug is a drug, when a human takes a drug, he is then driven into rash and troublesome behavior, remove the drugs, remove the association, remove the problem.

[Fatstogey]

Well in my opinion, I partitally agree with Cursed-san and her propositon to kill anyone on the spot who is found using hard drugs such ask cocain or meth but not that users found using less intense drugs such as pot being sent to prison for a couple months. Well than what is next? People smoking pot going to prison? That is simply ridiculous. People who have no understanding of others and think their way is the only way are the people who should be executed.

The failure of the dubbed "war on drugs" is painfully apparent, this is comparable to using words to extinguish a physical fire, utterly useless.

The world needs shock and vioence to move forward, periods of peace bring forth further disagreement and conflict, followed by continuations of violence to push the cycle in order, this is undeniable, take a glimps of our recorded history.
Yea but if you look at history the consensus of the public has changed greatly in terms of our violence. You cite this as proof to the perpetuation of our own brutal ways. Yet that history you use says the opposite. It says society has become increasingly less violent. People used to kill in mass as spectator sport. But not today. So yes we are evolving to be less violent. And there is proof of that in our history.The value of human life has gone up a great deal. However even today smaller groups with more power are still perpetuating the violence. But society as a whole is less violent.

This will bring about horrible debates and vulgar violations of human rights, but this is unevitable, my conclusion to this problem is to execute anyone found using drugs in general, as well as those found with intent to sell. This most definitally will shock the world into fear of the word "drugs", drastically reduce the number of known users and distributers, the remaining would begin to feel the threat of capture and death too great and at a great probability, kill themselves, the high ranking cartels would soon begin feeling the damages and gradually fall apart due to loss of revenue from the slim number of users/distributers. This shouldnt be a war on drugs, this should be a war on the humans responsible.No because some people know their rights. They wont allow you to kill them. If people are coming to kill me because im using some cocaine? I have guns. So you can come try.

There should be no legalization on any drugs, every last drug disrupts society, elimate the entire problem, society will respond positively, legalize certain drugs, society will inevitally respond negatively, but as always, force a front as if everything is a smile and a laugh.
The war on drugs disrupts society more than the actual drugs do.
When you come down to it, a drug is a drug, when a human takes a drug, he is then driven into rash and troublesome behavior, remove the drugs, remove the association, remove the problem.

Its quite apparent that you have absolutely no experience with any drug users. So any policy you think of is null and void to me because you are judging with absolutely 0 understanding.

[Kyou Shikyo]

Its quite apparent that you have absolutely no experience with any drug users. So any policy you think of is null and void to me because you are judging with absolutely 0 understanding

Admittedly, you are correct, I have insuffiencient evidence supporting my claim, my perspective was that of one outside looking in, not inside looking out. I am deeply sorry.

[shinji]

The key word when it comes to drugs is "moderation" although I think heroin need not apply as it's said to be extremily addictive.

As for the rest if you are using them to a stage where it's effecting your social life then you are crossing the line many of them can be used in moderation and to be honest the feeling is amazing at times but prolonged use can show effects.

I beleive hard drugs should remain illegal not because they are "bad" or "evil" but because the majority of people can't be trusted using them.

[Fatstogey]

The key word when it comes to drugs is "moderation" although I think heroin need not apply as it's said to be extremily addictive.

As for the rest if you are using them to a stage where it's effecting your social life then you are crossing the line many of them can be used in moderation and to be honest the feeling is amazing at times but prolonged use can show effects.

I beleive hard drugs should remain illegal not because they are "bad" or "evil" but because the majority of people can't be trusted using them.

Alot of these drugs can be used positively. Cocaine, ecstasy, cocaine, amphetamines. They all have positive effects when used in low doses. Its the abuse that is the problem. Shit all the anti depressents out there. Could be replaced by smaller doses of ecstasy and have better results.

[Goroth]

Wherever there is light, there will be shadow...

Personally I think strong moderation would be more successful than banning or simply choppin' every single heads that got involved in those cases.

[TW501]

Alot of these drugs can be used positively. Cocaine, ecstasy, cocaine, amphetamines. They all have positive effects when used in low doses. Its the abuse that is the problem. Shit all the anti depressents out there. Could be replaced by smaller doses of ecstasy and have better results.

I see what you're trying to say, but do you honestly believe that most people will be using them properly if legalized? Sure, ecstasy has some uses in psychotherapy, but as a day to day drug, it doesn't work the same way as anti-depressants.

While I can see the rationale for legalizing things like marijuana and ecstasy (even though I would never use them), I honestly can't fathom the logic behind legalizing drugs like heroin and cocaine. They're simply too dangerous and addictive to be legalized (not to mention the other type of drug war they tend to fuel).

[He's a Mentalist]

Taking the drug Ecstasy can lead to addiction, it also affects areas of the brain and nervous system. Making it easy and legal for children (or people) to obtain is pretty dumb.

Sure, ecstasy has some uses in psychotherapy

That practice was stopped in the 80s.

[TW501]

That's what I was saying. Though it has a few legitimate uses, it really isn't necessary in modern times due to other methods existing, and it would almost certainly be used primarily for recreational purposes. I guess I wasn't clear enough.

[NoxieDC]

Most of the problem with people being hesitant with the idea is because the majority is pretty damn stupid; either that or there are a few really dumb idiots out there who make it look bad for the rest.

A lot of the "addictions", "abuses" and whatnot are just as good arguments against lifting the alcohol prohibition as they are with today's drug prohibition: "Ah, people will abuse it and get drunk and start killing and raping." Maybe, you know? Maybe they will in the first 2 years, but with time I strongly believe the population will learn how to handle the newly gained freedom (considering if drugs would be legal).

Some regulations are necessary. I sure as hell wouldn't want some 38 year old formerly convicted of first degree murder taking cocaine in large amounts. A general test of personality and record at 18 would settle it mostly, but like with most things, small unknown exceptions could exist. If parents who KNOW FOR A FACT pot wouldn't harm their kid, then why not?


Conclusion: the pros outweigh the cons.

[Fatstogey]

Taking the drug Ecstasy can lead to addiction, it also affects areas of the brain and nervous system. Making it easy and legal for children (or people) to obtain is pretty dumb.



That practice was stopped in the 80s.

Wrong. Abusing the drug ecstasy can lead to addiction.
Whats sad is that ecstasy would probably be legal today if it wasnt patented already. Drug companies have no interest in drugs that are patented already.

Its sad that yall simply look at "HARD DRUGS" vs Legal Drugs. Oxycontin, i would say, is a HARD drug. Its legal. Yea it helps some who are in pain. And some abuse it. Lets make it illegal.

I mean making things that harm us illegal could get outta control really quickly.
Skydiving is now illegal because you could die.
Football is illegal because you could break something.
Racing is illegal because people die in racing.

The question is not, "Does this drug hurt people and should we make it illegal."
The question is, "Do we have the right to tell people what they should be doing."

And the answer is no. Drugs arent mankinds biggest problem. Our biggest problem is that everyone wants everyone else to be just like them. With no understanding at all.

Its scary that humans will so quickly judge something they have no knowledge of.

Again i smoke weed everyday. I used to drink more often. But a little less now, however i still indulge myself from time to time. And ive done cocaine, idk maybe like 50 times? Ive never done ecstasy but many of my friends did it quite constantly.

And i never once saw someone who commited a crime, high, that wouldnt have when they were sober. So all this relationship between drugs and the criminal element isnt natural. It is created by the law. Often times drugs are the only things that they do that is illegal. Ive said before youd be suprised who does drugs.


Also to see the judgement of people who use drugs anyway. And i mean drinkers. Example. This bartender i know, she was sick or something one day.
I said "maybe you should crush your pill up and snort it." LOL just kidding around. She was kinda pissed and said "um... i dont do DRUGS!" Excuse me but you were drunk as shit 2 days ago. So i hate to inform you but you are infact a drug user.

[Cursed]

Wrong. Abusing the drug ecstasy can lead to addiction.
Whats sad is that ecstasy would probably be legal today if it wasnt patented already. Drug companies have no interest in drugs that are patented already.

Its sad that yall simply look at "HARD DRUGS" vs Legal Drugs. Oxycontin, i would say, is a HARD drug. Its legal. Yea it helps some who are in pain. And some abuse it. Lets make it illegal.

I mean making things that harm us illegal could get outta control really quickly.
Skydiving is now illegal because you could die.
Football is illegal because you could break something.
Racing is illegal because people die in racing.

The question is not, "Does this drug hurt people and should we make it illegal."
The question is, "Do we have the right to tell people what they should be doing."

And the answer is no. Drugs arent mankinds biggest problem. Our biggest problem is that everyone wants everyone else to be just like them. With no understanding at all.

Its scary that humans will so quickly judge something they have no knowledge of.

Again i smoke weed everyday. I used to drink more often. But a little less now, however i still indulge myself from time to time. And ive done cocaine, idk maybe like 50 times? Ive never done ecstasy but many of my friends did it quite constantly.

And i never once saw someone who commited a crime, high, that wouldnt have when they were sober. So all this relationship between drugs and the criminal element isnt natural. It is created by the law. Often times drugs are the only things that they do that is illegal. Ive said before youd be suprised who does drugs.


Also to see the judgement of people who use drugs anyway. And i mean drinkers. Example. This bartender i know, she was sick or something one day.
I said "maybe you should crush your pill up and snort it." LOL just kidding around. She was kinda pissed and said "um... i dont do DRUGS!" Excuse me but you were drunk as shit 2 days ago. So i hate to inform you but you are infact a drug user.
Wrong, there was an incident at my school where someone, mind you a perfectly law abiding student who never once got in trouble with the police, decided to do some drugs, I believe it was either cocaine or heroin. He then decided it would be an awesome idea to surf on a moving car. He promptly got thrown off when the driver realized there was someone on the car. I believe his head and brains were strewn across 25 feet of pavement.

[NoxieDC]

That isn't a crime as more as it is a proof of stupidity and a cruel form of amusement for myself. Sorry.

Was that his first time? How much did he take? Because if he instantly abused or got something powerful, it's sad.

[vgrippa]

Wrong, there was an incident at my school where someone, mind you a perfectly law abiding student who never once got in trouble with the police, decided to do some drugs, I believe it was either cocaine or heroin. He then decided it would be an awesome idea to surf on a moving car. He promptly got thrown off when the driver realized there was someone on the car. I believe his head and brains were strewn across 25 feet of pavement.

A few questions:

Was there any other substance involved?

How much did he use?

Why didn't the people he was with stop him?

Who told you the story of what happened?

There is always a TON of information left out of public briefings regarding drug related incidents in order to sway personal opinion on drugs. The history channel has a ton of specials on drugs and in every one they say police leave out information in news reports regarding drugs. Make sure to get the whole story before you draw your conclusions.

Whats funny is how the war on drugs actually funds the drug cartels they are trying to fight because causing demand to sky rocket and supply to "decrease" raising the drug cartels prices making them more money. If the government really wanted to stop the cartels they would legalize drugs. If drugs are legalized the cartels no longer have any control over the industry and they lose their power. Then instead of wasting money on fighting a never ending battle they use that money to create rehab programs that actually work instead of wasting taxpayer money to pay for people sitting in jail who are just going to do the drug again once they get out. However if you look at the big picture it really does fit American society, just keep adding to the fire(problem) until it burns all its fuel and dies.

[Fatstogey]

Wrong, there was an incident at my school where someone, mind you a perfectly law abiding student who never once got in trouble with the police, decided to do some drugs, I believe it was either cocaine or heroin. He then decided it would be an awesome idea to surf on a moving car. He promptly got thrown off when the driver realized there was someone on the car. I believe his head and brains were strewn across 25 feet of pavement.

And the problem comes from the fact that you instantly want to blame drugs. As opposed to the persons own stupidity. Just because he did does not mean every drug user is out surfing on cars.

Also i comes from the people close to that person. They cant accept that the person tehy loved was a freaking moron.
My best friend. Hes pretty well an alcoholic. However i used to partake myself so i understand where hes at. And he has to evolve beyond it himself. This dude has done plenty of drugs. Probably all but crack and heroin. Now he smokes weed a couple times a week, he does coke prolly every 2 months or so. But he still drinks every single day. And drinking is legal. He came from the bowels of drug use. Every day, every weekend. Coke ecstasy weed alcohol ghb ampehtamines xanax hydrocodine... on and on. Ive seen him take it all. All but heroin and crack.

However this dude always learns the hard way. When he was around 19 he had a camaro z28. He got in an arguement with his parents and sped away from the house. He was doing 100mph on road not built for the speed. He lost control and he got thrown out of the car and slid accross the asphault for like 150 ft. Its crazy that not only did he live but he walked back home afterwards. Police came a knocking later. Btu he wasnt high or drunk.

He also got arrested by an under cover cop student at our highschool for selling her acid at school. But most of them got of cause it was entrapment cause none of the students actually brougth it to school. She encouraged them to.

Anyway he stopped doing teh drugs he was doing. But still drinking a lot. He had a motorcycle. he got drunk and drove the motorcycle all the tiem drunk. almost at least once a week. He wrecked his bike 5 times. Once he went down trying to take an on ramp at like 75mph. He had no helmet on and was wearing a tanktop. Again he walked away with some nice lacerations and road rash but he lived. he wasnt drunk or high.

He wrecked doing wheelies. He was also ran of the road twice that wasnt his fault. Peole just cut him off and ran him off the road. And again he still doesnt wear a helmet.

I told that at his funeral i was gonna tell all his friend and his family that he was a jackass and a moron for riding a motorcycle drunk adn without a helmet. And that if he would be embarrassed for me to do that in front of his family and friends then maybe he should think.

Again drug user. 3.8 gpa. Crazy bike rider. All around person who does things that put himself in danger all the time. He learns the hard way on every single issue. But even after his drug use maintains hsi intelligence. Luckily his bike was stolen though. Cause he did more dumb shit sober on his bike than he ever did high or drunk. The bike and pushing the limit. Looking death in the face at 186mph was a high by itself. He didnt do it because he was a drug user.

He just likes doing dumb shit. Drugs being somethign dumb that he did. But never something id blame for his death. Cause he did plenty of dumbass shit while not taking drugs.

Hes my best friend. And if he dies I expect him to take full responsibilities for his actions. And i will blatantly say it to all his loved ones at his funeral. This fucker was just a crazy stupid motherfucker. No matter how smart he seems. Drugs didnt make him do stupid things. Even smart people ENJOY doing stupid things. Drugs bieng one of those stupid things. Not the cause for the other stupid things they do.

Stop blaming drugs. Blame the person. Even if the drugs take control of them. They decided to do it. Accept responsibility for your own actions. Ive done plenty of drugs and i dont blame any of the things ive ever done on drugs.

But i have an understanding of them. I know many who used. Ive used, with a greater degree of repsonsiblity than most that i knew. You simply cannot pass judgement with teh false information you believe to be true.

Ive done plenty of drugs myself. ON average though ive done less than most of the people i know. My iq is around 150. Im a certified hvac technician. And handy man type. Ive done everything myself on my own house. Ive done everything from flooring to plumping electrical, a/c(obviously). Ive never stolen anything from anyone. I think you should earn what you have. I mean i have hurt people before. But never of my own desire. Im 6'5 so ive had a lot of dudes who try to figth me for no reason. And i feel bad about it a lil bit. But at the end of the day its their own choice to fuck with me. And they have to pretty much push me or hit me to get me to do something. Yet they still do it.

And i know dozens upon dozens of heavier drug users who are in teh same boat i am. While at the same time i know drug users who are scumbags and i prefer not to associate with. Drugs play no roll in who they are or who i am. We both have used the same drugs and hes scum and im not.

You guys, quite apparently, have very few experiences with drugs and users as i do. They arent the evil people you think they are. Teh a/c tech coming to fix your a/c. He might be a drug user. But given is technical expertise youd never know. I am a perfect example. If you met me i wouldnt appear to be a drug user at all, other than alcohol if u meet me at the bar but i dont drink much outside of a bar.

I use drugs very responsibly. And agian ill say that the majority i know didnt do it as i did. But they are still turning out ok. Those that dont just dont.

You cant say everyone is the same because they all use a drug. Its absolutely ridiculous. Ive done plenty of drugs. And ive never committed a crime. Other than speeding, using drugs lol, p2p mp3s, and a few times drunk driving.

And its not "oh your lucky that youve never hit anyone drunk driving." No its "im not a dumbass like the rest of you and i know i need to pay attention adn i have the ability to do that even if ive been drinking." Ive actually avoided being hit by a drunk driver. WHILE i was drunk driving. Because i know that because of the fact that im drunk i need to pay even more attention and i can force myself to do it. Most cant. But again you cant just assume things affect everyone the same way with no understanding.

[vgrippa]

I completely agree with stogey. I have met all kinds of people that do drugs and they have nothing to do with the way that person acts. My first year in college both of RA's on my floor smoked pot and they actually bought from me, yet both of them were extreme responsible people. One of them just graduated with a degree in Mechanical Engineering and the other one just got back from studying abroad in New Zealand for her biology degree. Neither of them are violent or scummy people they are just normal college students trying to get a degree. I deal and smoke marijuana and have done mushrooms but I am still going to college for electrical engineering and I am going to take over my families electrical company. Drugs haven't slowed me down at all (chemistry handled that job for me). If anything drugs have helped me better understand the world around me or "ego death" as some call it.

[He's a Mentalist]

Wrong. Abusing the drug ecstasy can lead to addiction.
Whats sad is that ecstasy would probably be legal today if it wasnt patented already.

Abusing something can't lead to addiction because, you are already addicted if you start abusing it. 2) There are cases in which Ecstasy has had major effects on the brain and nervous system of humans. Take your "wrong" comment and shove it. The rest of your post was just inference that does not need to be addressed by me.

[notorious UZIMAKI]

mentalist - shit i guess i'm addicted to ETOH cuz i downed a forty yesterday. ;) the whole legalization argument is important bc of the broader societal implications, ie tax payer money spent on law enforcement, jails, etc. i used to think that marijuana obviously should be legal given that people negatively influence society when drunk than high, but pcp, cocaine etc should be illegal. but its really a slippery slope. drugs can make people do stupid shit, so can love, so can hate. people need to be held accountable for their actions. so dont prohibit alcohol on beaches bc a fight broke out (san diego), arrest people who are drunk in public, or vandalizing etc. we'd save a shit load of money collectively if drugs were regulated and distributed by the government, state or federal. i mean shit - there were thousands of murders in mexico last year bc of drug cartels. you wipe them out (kind of) by legalizing and controlling the substances. oh well, mostly speculation by me, but damn, cant a college kid smoke weed without blowing through a paper towel tube topped by a downy fabric softener sheet while blowing out the window w a fans aid haha

[NoxieDC]

Mentalist, your point being? Guns and alcohol have done the same thing but they're legal. If anything, that's a selling point for legalizing weed.

Also, stogey, we get it! You're a smart pothead! Jesus kid, no need to brag about it to everyone you just met! :P

[Afrojack]

Legalize it.
Medicine:

* Deaths from marijuana use: 0
* From 1842 through the 1880s, extremely strong marijuana (then known as cannabis extractums), hashish extracts, tinctures, and elixirs were routinely the second and third most-used medicines in America for humans (from birth through old age). These extracts were also used in veterinary medicine until the 1920s and longer. 2
* For at least 3,000 years prior to 1842 widely varying marijuana extracts (bud, leaves, roots, etc.) were the most commonly used real medicines in the world for the majority of mankind's illnesses. 2
* The U.S. Pharmacopoeia indicated cannabis should be used for treating such ailments as fatigue, fits of coughing, rheumatism, asthma, delirium tremens, migraine headaches, and the cramps and depressions associated with menstruation. 3
* In this century, cannabis research has demonstrated therapeutic value and complete safety in the treatment of many health problems including asthma, glaucoma, nausea, tumors, epilepsy, infection, stress, migraines, anorexia, depression, rheumatism, arthritis, and possibly herpes. 3
* Deaths from aspirin (U.S. per year): 180 - 1,000 +
* Deaths from legal drugs (U.S. per year) at doses used for prevention, diagnosis, or therapy: 106,000

Hell if it wasn't for the paper/lumber and cotton industry skyrocketing, growing pot in this country never would of been made illegal in the first place.

Fiber:

* Hemp is the oldest cultivated fiber plant in the world.
* Low-THC fiber hemp varieties developed by the French and others have been available for over 20 years. It is impossible to get high from fiber hemp. Over 600,000 acres of hemp is grown worldwide with no drug misuse problem.
* One acre of hemp can produce as much usable fiber as 4 acres of trees or two acres of cotton.
* Trees cut down to make paper take 50 to 500 years to grow, while hemp can be cultivated in as little as 100 days and can yield 4 times more paper over a 20 year period.
* Until 1883, from 75-90% of all paper in the world was made with cannabis hemp fiber including that for books, Bibles, maps, paper money, stocks and bonds, newspapers, etc. 2
* Hemp paper is longer lasting than wood pulp, stronger, acid-free, and chlorine free. (Chlorine is estimated to cause up to 10% of all Cancers.) 2
* Hemp paper can be recycled 7 times, wood pulp 4 times.
* If the hemp pulp paper process reported by the USDA in 1916, were legal today it would soon replace 70% of all wood paper products. 2
* Rag paper containing hemp fiber is the highest quality and longest lasting paper ever made. It can be torn when wet, but returns to its full strength when dry. Barring extreme conditions, rag paper remains stable for centuries. 2
* Hemp particle board may be up to 2 times stronger than wood particleboard and holds nails better.
* Hemp is softer, warmer, more water absorbent, has three times the tensile strength, and is many times more durable than cotton. Hemp production uses less chemicals than cotton. 2
* From 70-90% of all rope, twine, and cordage was made from hemp until 1937. 2
* A strong lustrous fiber; hemp withstands heat, mildew, insects, and is not damaged by light. Oil paintings on hemp and/or flax canvas have stayed in fine condition for centuries. 2

Yes I realize hemp and what is considered MJ are slightly different. However they (cotton, and lumber corporations) used the "killer mexican dirty weed" as a scapegoat, to get rid of the hemp plants, in order to maximize their profits in a time where forests were getting felled nonstop, and cotton was massively "in", and they had to get rid of the only thing in their way.

The tax thing I mentioned, here's a report from a panel of folks, including a Nobel Prize winner talking about it.
http://www.prohibitioncosts.org/MironReport.pdf
Quote:
The report estimates that legalizing marijuana would save $7.7 billion per year in
government expenditure on enforcement of prohibition. $5.3 billion of this savings
would accrue to state and local governments, while $2.4 billion would accrue to the
federal government.
• The report also estimates that marijuana legalization would yield tax revenue of $2.4
billion annually if marijuana were taxed like all other goods and $6.2 billion annually if
marijuana were taxed at rates comparable to those on alcohol and tobacco.
Now the DEA in it's lifetime has seized and then destroyed billion and billions of dollars worth of weed. That could of been used, remember, we're ignoring the medicine angle atm, for rope, clothing, paper, construction, etc, oh yeah, and biodiesel. It's by one of the best things on the planet to use for biodiesel, Henry Ford thought so too... then the gov suppressed his hemp ethanol fuel, shoved leaded gasoline down everyone's throat, and called it a day. Hell, Ford built a car from hemp 10 times stronger then sheet steel, beat the piss out of the thing with an ax without denting the panels. If nothing else, thing off the tax revenue that could of been gotten if you legalized it, and taxed it HIGHER then cigarettes or alcohol.

There's also the benefit that hemp plastics are biodegradable in addition to being stronger then sheeted steel.

Pot isn't a gateway drug, it does have beneficial medical uses, but it's treated with such ignorance, it's insane. Nearly any FDA approved drug is many times more harmful to you then smoking a joint. Got to love our government.

[notorious UZIMAKI]

must be some financial benefit somewhere i'm not seeing. otherwise damn. there really isnt a reasonable argument to keep weed (et al) illegal

[jambon]

I think the question that should be ask for those who wants to legalize "hard drugs" is when and what do we consider it as being abuse.

[He's a Mentalist]

Mentalist, your point being? Guns and alcohol have done the same thing but they're legal. If anything, that's a selling point for legalizing weed.

Also, stogey, we get it! You're a smart pothead! Jesus kid, no need to brag about it to everyone you just met! :P

It should be pretty apparent that ecstasy should not be legalized like Fatstogey wants it to be. I do not care for less harmful drugs like marijuana. But even marijuana has negative impacts on brain development and certain areas of the brain are damaged with continual use.

And the problem comes from the fact that you instantly want to blame drugs.

Drugs had a play in his friends stupidity.

[NoxieDC]

even marijuana has negative impacts on brain development and certain areas of the brain are damaged with continual use.
For the last time, NOTHING IN THIS WORLD is just good or just bad. But marijuana (as afro clearly presented) is for the most part a very good thing.

[DarkBunny]

yes i agree with afro and noxie marijuana seems to have some great uses

[He's a Mentalist]

For the last time, NOTHING IN THIS WORLD is just good or just bad. But marijuana (as afro clearly presented) is for the most part a very good thing.

I'm starting to think people have trouble reading around here. I did not imply that marijuana was worse than any other drug. I did in fact say that marijuana did have some negative effects on the brain overtime like any other drug. But, to be on the upside of things and provide some other evidences that marijuana could be used in some cases, or used moderately... THC, the ingredient that gets the users their high can actually, or does, kill off cancer cells located within the brain. That still does not take away from the fact that continual use of marijuana would lead to impaired brain activity, or a person who uses it daily operates more slowly than others.

[Fatstogey]

It should be pretty apparent that ecstasy should not be legalized like Fatstogey wants it to be. I do not care for less harmful drugs like marijuana. But even marijuana has negative impacts on brain development and certain areas of the brain are damaged with continual use.



Drugs had a play in his friends stupidity.

Ive never taken ecstasy. Nor would i if it was legal. I just want people to stop telling other people what they should be doing.

And where is the research that says marijuana has negative impacts on brain development. Is that research? Or is it just hear say that u guys are once again stating as though its fact? I mean there are tons of things that talk about this research. But i havent heard it from a credible source. There is no concrete research on marijuana. Or any other drugs. Because they are illegal to research.

Its it harmful to youths? IDK it maybe. But i know myself. And i know that ive been smoking weed since i was 12 years old. And my brain functions just fine. My growth hasnt been stunted. I never ran over a little girl at the drive through. Andi didnt sit there on the couch and deflate like it shows in the commercial.

Im not hear to argue any research about this drugs. Cause a great deal of it is simple propaganda.

However i am sick of people not accepting responsibility for thereselves.

Oh he died doing something stupid. It was the drugs fault
He killed his classmates, it was a video games fault.
I burned myself with my coffee, it was Mcdonalds fault.
I slipped and fell at wallmart, it was walmarts fault.

A nation full of blamers. When in fact its simply the people who are stupid. Ive researched that myself. I see it everywhere i go.

And no matter how harmful. Guess what. If a guy wants to take heroin until he dies. THATS NON OF MY BUSINESS. If he gets high and kills someone then its our business. But we cannot judge before it happens. You cant stop people from hurting theirselves.

IM a little beyond the simple issue of drugs. IM just wondering when does people trying to tell everyone else what they should be doing end. I do care about humanity but the rigth way is not the way of forcing everyone to be the same. Laws to me are to protect people from other people, not to protect me from myself. Thats nobodies godamn business but mine.

I mean seriously. People are starting to abuse cough medicine because it can be psychedelic. So we alont the lines weve drawn we should make cough medicine illegal.

[He's a Mentalist]

Common riffraff need assistance. People just don't know what is good for them, so the government steps in to help out. We have laws placed here because it can limit accidents caused by 'x'...

Oh he died doing something stupid. It was the drugs fault
He killed his classmates, it was a video games fault.

There have been studies where exposure to violence as a child through imagery such as television and various violent video games have desensitized a child. They play a role in the actions a person takes in life. A kid killed his classmate: while the video game may not be the primary factor, you cannot say it did not play a role in his action. The same with drugs...

[Fatstogey]

Common riffraff need assistance. People just don't know what is good for them, so the government steps in to help out. We have laws placed here because it can limit accidents caused by 'x'...



There have been studies where exposure to violence as a child through imagery such as television and various violent video games have desensitized a child. They play a role in the actions a person takes in life. A kid killed his classmate: while the video game may not be the primary factor, you cannot say it did not play a role in his action. The same with drugs...

Well again. Ive done drugs. Ive played GTA. I watched my first R rated movie at 6 years old. I remember watching Demolition Man when i was 8. It was pretty violent for the time. Ive always been a huge fan of violent movies and games. And ive never killed anyone.

Its not the game. Its the parents that are allowing the games and movies to raise their children. I watched movies and games. If kids are living the movies and games its parents fault. NOt the games fault. Again its time to take responsibility. If they dont know any better than they should be in prison or dead. I dont care what games they played. Because i played them all. If they arent mentally fit enough to separate reality from a game, then they shouldnt be in society anyway. I dont blame the game. Its their own damn fault for be affected by it. Because i wasnt and millions others arent.


We keep making laws for things that effect a minute minority.
Terrorism would be a prime example. We passed tons of legislation about terrorism. Yet how many US citezens have been effected by terrorism directly? Ill give it 50,000(which is probably greatly over exaggerated) to be fair.

306,162,749 people in the US. And 50,000 are affected by terrorism.

Thats around .00015% of the population. Yet our new legislation against it affects everyone.

Why? Cause people are told to be scared.

AGain. A lot of you in here dont know anything about drugs except the unresearched cliche's youve been told your whole life. Ive smoked pot for half my life and i am perfectly fine. Ive been drinking for years. I think the first time i did coke i was 18 or 19. I know right from wrong.

Its drugs that make people do things. Its the fact that they know they can use it as an excuse because its widely accepted. I dont care if your high drunk or whatever. I still hold you accountable for your actions.

Anwyay aside from all that. Main point is. Legallity of drugs should be cecided on the state olevel not hte federal level. Its against the constitution. That way. If one state wants Herion to be legal? Tehy can. If you dotn like it you can move to another state. Let people do what they want.

Life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. NOt, you should do what i think you should do. Is drug us productive? Absolutely not. Is it your business what hes doing to himself? Absolutely not.

Its natural selection. Those who want to be weak enough to fall into drug use and not make it out, well thats just the way it is. And making laws and throwing these people in jail is NOT the solution. Quite obviously its not working at all. So we have precedent of that.

I mean some people are useless. They should be thrown in jail for not being a productive member of society? No. They should be put in jail for crimes. NOt crimes we assume theyll commit.

[He's a Mentalist]

What is fine and works for you may not work for the next person who follows a similar path. That is what I meant to say in the above.


I mean some people are useless. They should be thrown in jail for not being a productive member of society? No. They should be put in jail for crimes. NOt crimes we assume theyll commit.

The point is that those people have broken the law while being aware of the consequences for their actions taken. So, I would say throw them in jail because they broke a law.

Its natural selection. Those who want to be weak enough to fall into drug use and not make it out, well thats just the way it is. And making laws and throwing these people in jail is NOT the solution. Quite obviously its not working at all. So we have precedent of that.

You fell into drug use, so does that mean you are weak? Because, by your own words, you still smoke a joint a day.

If you don't mind fatstogey, I want a short succulent post. No need to type up long posts when you can just say all of it in 5 sentences.

AGain. A lot of you in here dont know anything about drugs except the unresearched cliche's youve been told your whole life. Ive smoked pot for half my life and i am perfectly fine. Ive been drinking for years. I think the first time i did coke i was 18 or 19. I know right from wrong.

Un-researched cliche's? These "unresearched cliche's" have been conducted on animals.

[vgrippa]

There have been studies where exposure to violence as a child through imagery such as television and various violent video games have desensitized a child. They play a role in the actions a person takes in life. A kid killed his classmate: while the video game may not be the primary factor, you cannot say it did not play a role in his action. The same with drugs...

There are also studies that show children who grow up being neglected by their parents do not develop a good sense of right from wrong because of a lack of discipline. Once again placing the blame on something else doesn't solve the problem. You and only you can create your own reality so to sit here an say oh its drugs fault or the videogames made me do it is wrong. The one that made you do it was yourself. You were the one that choose to take that videogame as reality. It was your brain not the brain of the videogame developer or drug dealer. Just like all those mentally retarded anti-drug commercials say, "Think for yourself" and "Live above the influence." Live above the influence of society and determine your own conclusions through personal experience.

oh well, mostly speculation by me, but damn, cant a college kid smoke weed without blowing through a paper towel tube topped by a downy fabric softener sheet while blowing out the window w a fans aid haha

HAHA! that brings back sooo many memories from the dorms. I can't even count how many people would ask: "Why does your room always smell like a dryer?" If you patented that piece of technology you would make millions off pot heads.

[He's a Mentalist]

There are also studies that show children who grow up being neglected by their parents do not develop a good sense of right from wrong because of a lack of discipline. Once again placing the blame on something else doesn't solve the problem. You and only you can create your own reality so to sit here an say oh its drugs fault or the videogames made me do it is wrong. The one that made you do it was yourself. You were the one that choose to take that videogame as reality. It was your brain not the brain of the videogame developer or drug dealer. Just like all those mentally retarded anti-drug commercials say, "Think for yourself" and "Live above the influence." Live above the influence of society and determine your own conclusions through personal experience.

So people will not get one idea from your post and respond to my post in a similar fashion as the ending of the first two sentences of your paragraph...


There have been studies where exposure to violence as a child through imagery such as television and various violent video games have desensitized a child. They play a role in the actions a person takes in life. A kid killed his classmate: while the video game may not be the primary factor, you cannot say it did not play a role in his action. The same with drugs...

I get the sense that you were just adding on to your post and not directly responding to my own post. What you posted could lead others astray and attack the same post in the same fashion you did near the ending of your paragraph. But the rebuttal of your post to my post was:

There are also studies that show children who grow up being neglected by their parents do not develop a good sense of right from wrong because of a lack of discipline.

Lack of discipline plays a major role in a child's development (which is a negative factor). While lack of discipline plays a major role there are minor roles that also attribute to that child's growth. I am not directly placing the blame of a child's actions on video games nor drugs, but rather saying that they may have a minor impact on his/her actions.

[Rosh]

Ok firstly I totally get why people feel you should be jailed with "class a" drugs and people that distribute the drugs I get that and I feel the same way, but I don’t think you should be jailed for marijuana I mean yeah its bad but not you should be locked up bad if you get what I mean.

[NoxieDC]

If marijuana ever gets legalized and soled in stores, I hope they'll do something to not make it smell so nasty. :wacko:

@Mentalist: minor roles are minor roles. If you're going to give them more credit then they deserve, stop and reflect (taking in general now). Lack of caring and deprivation of the soul is the major problem in most of today's sick society. If you'd see this from my point of view, we as a species are ripped from natured and dumbed a hell of a lot down! :wacko: Sure, we've made microscopes and determined the origin of the Universe (very laudable facts) but some base traits are just weird. Parents keep kids with down syndrome. Why? It isn't gonna make his life any better, the parents will most likely cry throughout this period... I could give you plenty of examples if you'd like.
So if drugs are like alcohol, and we've seen alcohol is ok, then why is marijuana and co. illegal?

Smoking long term will badly effect your brain and lungs, but it's your choice
Drinking a beer with a friend might make you break his things, but it was your choice

Plus - and I've had friends confirm this - it's better to be drugged then drunk, because while on drugs, at least you can control yourself.

And now they're thinking of banning toy guns, but they're gonna keep the fucking real ones!

[vgrippa]

This is the only article I have found that accurately describes marijuana.

http://www.world-mysteries.com/marijuana1.htm

He covers the reasons why marijuana was banned and how the media manipulated the public into thinking it is bad just like they always have. I recently watched a show on the history channel about marijuana and they used almost all the facts this guy does so there must be some validity to them. Funny how the criminalization of marijuana along with almost every problem we face today comes back to one thing, $$$MONEY$$$

[TW501]

That is not an accurate article. It's clearly pushing a certain viewpoint, and isn't properly sourced. I found several inaccuracies, and there are several leaps in logic and just plain idiotic statements. Sorry, but that's just a very bad article and does not do your viewpoint justice.

[metalsoup111]

^^Stoner logic will only get you so far. lol...

[vgrippa]

That is not an accurate article. It's clearly pushing a certain viewpoint, and isn't properly sourced. I found several inaccuracies, and there are several leaps in logic and just plain idiotic statements. Sorry, but that's just a very bad article and does not do your viewpoint justice.

I can never understand how your side can be so vague in your answers but the other side has to dig through the depths of the world's knowledge to prove their side. Give me all the points that are wrong and where you got the info. Explain why it doesn't do my viewpoint any justice. Just because you think your side is right doesn't make you exempt from explanations. Don't pull the "because God says so excuses" our government has sucked that tit dry.

[TW501]

Actually I'm on your side, I just think that particular article is rather unscientific in its claims, makes unsubstantiated statements, and is obviously pushing a point rather than being an even handed assessment. The article reads more like a combination of a trivia book and a propoganda pamphlet rather than a legitimate article.

MARIJUANA is DANGEROUS. Pot is NOT harmful to the human body or mind.
When smoked, it actually does cause some health problems. It has high concentrations of chemicals such as ammonia and hydrogen cyanide. There is also a bit of evidence that marijuana moderately increases the risks of some mental illnesses in people with predisposition to them. People who smoke marijuana heavily over a long period of time have been shown to have higher risks of heart and brain problems. Again, I'm in favor of legalization, but the claims that marijuana causes no harm is false. There is a danger involved; maybe not as great as a lot of people think, but not as safe as pot-smokers think.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7150274.stm
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pmcentrez&artid=539839
http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2008/05/13/pot-stroke.html
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080602/marijuana_effects_080602/20080602?hub=Health

Where did the word 'marijuana' come from? In the mid 1930s, the M-word was created to tarnish the good image and phenomenal history of the hemp plant
The term marijuana (along with cannabis) was used since the 1800's. The movement against it popularized the name, but it wasn't created for that purpose.

Entrepreneurs have not been educated on the product potential of pot.
You can find out about the uses for industrial hemp in the average trivia book. It's not like it's a closely guarded secret hidden away in a vault somewhere. Other countries already use it for industrial purposes. It's existence is not a secret, and there are no corporations trying to keep the word from getting out. In fact, wouldn't it be in the best interest for corporations to have legalized hemp? An easily, cheaply grown product with a number of industrial uses and potential products that can be sold for profit. Wouldn't it be in the best interests of a large corporation to invest heavily in it and grow thousands of acres of the stuff?

Hemp is the ONLY plant where the males appear one way and the females appear very different, physically! No one ever speaks of males and females in regard to the plant kingdom because plants do not show their sexes; except for cannabis.
I used to have a few decorative Kiwi plants that had distinct male and female plants. I'm sure there are other plants like this as well.

I think the word ‘DRUGS’ should not be used as an umbrella-word that covers all chemical agents. Drugs have come to be known as something BAD. Are you aware there are LEGAL drugstores?! Yep, in every city. Unbelievable. Each so-called drug should be considered individually. Cannabis is a medicine and not a drug.
That would only be true if it were used in it's medicinal form. Since the majority of use is recreational, there is no way it can be considered to be medicine. Drug isn't an inherently bad term, and it's pretty silly to try to reclassify marijana as anything but a drug.

There are honestly way too many things wrong with that article to list. There are blatant falsities and lies with a dose of paranoid conspiracy theories. If you want to push such radical ideas, you're going to need to provide proof. The article was so poorly written, so conspiracy-oriented, so outrageous in its claims, that I literally felt my support for medicinal marijuana and industrial hemp shrinking as I read it. The article made no distinction between industrial hemp, recreational marijuana, and medicinal marijuana, which is probably my biggest problem with it. The types of hemp used for industrial purposes are different from the kind used to get high. It's the same genus, but the plants themselves can't really be compared in their use.

It's really just a propoganda piece designed to portray marijuana as a way to solve all of the world's problems if not for the evil business conspiracy out to crush a brave group of potheads out to unveil the truth to the poor misinformed sheeple of the world.

The pot plant is an ALIEN plant. There is physical evidence that cannabis is not like any other plant on this planet. One could conclude that it was brought here for the benefit of humanity.
The anti drug movement is lying to you. Stop believing everything you hear and learn the truth: Aliens gave us pot.

[unknown T]

hokay....

well since there has been discussion as to the affects of marijuana i feel inclined to say this.
yes they exist. BUT it is the user's choice whether or not to subject themselves to it.

having said that i am a very big pro choice person for every possible choice. each question has a different answer for each person and each person should have the right to choose as they wish--in my opinion

however the drugs still should not be legalized without a way to make sure that the customers would not have their addiction exploited by now legitimate companies

[Fatstogey]

That is not an accurate article. It's clearly pushing a certain viewpoint, and isn't properly sourced. I found several inaccuracies, and there are several leaps in logic and just plain idiotic statements. Sorry, but that's just a very bad article and does not do your viewpoint justice.

What are proper sources? The propaganda sources that have lied to us from the beginning?

Anything arguing against such propaganda isnt gonna have "proper sources" because the so called proper sources are the ones who are lying.

And yes weed can be used as fuel. And yes that was likely teh largest proponent of its illegalization.

How did they do it? Well during that time a great deal of people were still racist and it was seen as the evil drug being pushed by black people. And they used this to their advantage to garner support against mariujuana.

Go watch the futurama episode where MOM wants the achovies that Fry wants.

Its simply idiotic to think that these things dont happen.

PROFIT. Runs the world.

It can save lifes. I can feed millions. I can provide energy for ever. I can grow faster crops. It can heal the sick.
But can we make a profit?

That question exists above any question that follows it. Can we profit?

Texaco. Owns patents on some kind of new battery that could be used to power cars. Hmm... Why dont these batteries exist yet? No way would they hold out on something like that. Right?

There are TONS!!!!!!!!!! of things that have been plowed over or bought up by oil companies. And not just oil. Things are bought to be destroyed all the time.

Because again. Profit.

If i start some company making some revolutionary device. Then Exxon comes and they wanna buy it for 50 million dollars. Because they see the potential(not the potential of the product, or the potential for mankind. the potential to hurt their future profit). I could make that money with my product but it would take years and years. Or i can just sell out and make all that money right now. What am i gonna do? Work hard for 10 years or sell out and make it all now and retire?

And we know what most people will do.

I know a ton of people who think that tobacco companies "want weed to be legal." No jackass. Why? They say. Doesnt matter. I know 1 fact. If big tobacco wanted weed to be legal, it would be legal. The why isnt important.
Tobacco is way more dangerous than weed. With more side effects and no high. But its legal. Because tehy want it to be.

Now yes it does seem foolish to me. But these big companies all rally together. Tobacco companies may want weed to be legal. But then big oil company guy says "hey buddy if you make weed legal for you to sell and profit from, people are gonna start making fuels and all kinds of other stuff to. So dont do that! Wait a little while. When the oil runs dry then we can make it legal."

Sure they might legalize it. But not till all previous profits are maximized.

I dont need sources. Simple logic works for me. Because human beings are easily predictable. However those trends are beginnng to change.

Rather than question the credibility of his sources. You should a. determine whether or not the statements were logical(they are) and b. then go back and question the crediblity of your own sources.

Your lucky im too lazy. It would be fun to create a fake source and get you to buy into it. But it would be very time consuming creating something that could fool you. But i could. Again because humans are easily predictable. I make something really flashy using big words. Then slap the seal of the FDA on it. And youd eat it right up.

Which is the point. Dont just assume information comming from large private organizations or government to be fact.
These people lie about more shit than any other.

Why would this dude lie in his marijuana article? Cause he wants it to be legal? So he can get high? Cause he probably does that anyway. He wrote the article to demonstrate the point. The govt are liars. Marijuana is not simply the issue. Its not just "oh these people wanna get high" There are tons of things weed could be used for. I get high anyway. Id prefer not to go to jail for it. But that wont stop me. Cause its my born right as a human being. And fuck any organization trying to take that from me. I wont yield from my freedom. If i wanna get high im gonna fucking get high. The real issue is the great benefits we could have from it. That are being robbed from us.

Weed as fuel? ARe you kidding me. The US has more farm land than any other country in the world. We could export weed fuel. And its totally renewable. And the plant grows damn near wild. Its an easy plant to cultivate. A LOOOOOOT easier than corn. Which is what is used for ethanol now.

Weed being illegal is terrorism! Now i am a little more radical in my ideals but will yield to those in disagreement with my ideals. Because there is at least some kind of validity to these substances being illegal. I wont stop on the issue but i will yield for now. Because people as a whole arent responsible enough for them now. But remind you to up for re evaluating those opinions should the day arise that we are responsible enough. Because we do evolve.

[TW501]

Dude, the article said that aliens gave us weed. Seriously, how am I supposed to take that article seriously? There are factual innaccuracies all over the place, and the idea of a mass business conspiracy is just plain idiotic. The anti drug movement is the result of well meaning but overzealous people who disagree with the very principle of using mind altering substances like drugs and alcohol, not a mass conspiracy.
I don't get how you outright dismiss all sources with credibility as propoganda yet pretty much immediately accept a site like that as fact because it sounds good to you. I'll reiterate the fact that I actually do think that industrial hemp and medicinal marijuana should be legal, but that site was simply too inaccurate, unsourced, and conspiracy-oriented to believe.

[Fatstogey]

Dude, the article said that aliens gave us weed. Seriously, how am I supposed to take that article seriously? There are factual innaccuracies all over the place, and the idea of a mass business conspiracy is just plain idiotic. The anti drug movement is the result of well meaning but overzealous people who disagree with the very principle of using mind altering substances like drugs and alcohol, not a mass conspiracy.
What facts? What are facts to you? Thats the problem you think i read this like its the bible. NO. I read it all and interpret it with my own logic. Is any of it, credible source or not, actually factual? Thats what im saying. What institutes have enough credibility for you? If the FDA said weed makes you retarded. Your gonna believe it? Because its basically what they do say.
I have precedent in my own drug use for my factual foundation. And most facts are in fact a lie. I never did anythign for a long time because i believed what they said. Then i did it myself and none of that happened. So i can say that what they say is a lie.


I don't get how you outright dismiss all sources with credibility as propoganda yet pretty much immediately accept a site like that as fact because it sounds good to you. I'll reiterate the fact that I actually do think that industrial hemp and medicinal marijuana should be legal, but that site was simply too inaccurate, unsourced, and conspiracy-oriented to believe.

No i take it all with a grain of salt. Its not "it sounds good to you." Its a locigal deduction. I take in all the information available, CONDIDERING NONE OF IT TO BE FACT, and make my opinion.

Believe none of what you hear and only half of what you see.

You determine factual credibility based on what? how big the company is? How much money they have? How much notoriety they have?

I first consider what will make them profit. Because the actions of almost any person or company can be decided by what will make them profit. If the answer is yes they profit from it. Then i find it a highly likely possibility. Because again. Humans, being easily predictable, will do socially repugnant things in order to profit.

I apply it to anything i question. religion, business, govt, consipiracy,drugs, and the list goes on and on. In any issue. I always ask. Wheres the profit?

Weed is illegal. Its not particularly harmful. so why is it illegal. First question is, wheres the profit? Well it would go to Oil and pharma. But thats just primarily using logic. Even if I have no empirical evidence, that doesnt make it any less logical.

Wheres the profit? Humans can be predicted using this question more than any other. And while it may not apply to everyone individually. It must always be applid to business and govt, because there is always someone trying to profit. ALWAYS. They arent doing anything good for us if they cant profit.

[Kotoumaru]

I believe weed should be legal everywhere.

I don't know if it's good for health, but I know from my experience that it doesn't have any worse side-effects than tobacco. Actually, after some good weed, I feel I can breathe easier. I am a tobacco smoker since I was 12. Some studies claim it is good for ones health, I don't know.
Other studies claim it kills brain cells. Well, it may be true, I've realized that in many of my friends behaviour, after some serious pot smoking the last couple of years. They think and talk slower and "freeze" at times. I'm not making this up. I smoke weed from time to time too and I experience some "brain numbness" the next day. I don't know if it's cause of the weed, because sometimes it's a fucking amazing high, but others I realize I just burned my brain. Maybe weed with pcp or some shit.

Anyway, I don't know so I can't really take sides.

I believe it should be legalized, so that it's cleaner, it's cheaper, it loses the "forbidden" tag so the demand goes down and prices with it. Also by legalizing it there can be studies and make it treat health problems and help people.

To those who claim that weed can lead to hard drugs, it can't and can. Let me tell you what happened to me and my friends. We went to this new dealer cause the usual got caught and was in jail. So, we are there and the dude says "I don't got any weed right now, but I don't want to dissapoint you, since you are new, so here's 6 Ecstacy (we were 6 guys), on me". We were like fuck this shit, but one guy took the pills. He liked it and kept taking on a regular basis. He isn't the guy we all used to know anymore. So, it all depends on the person. Some people know better than to start taking more serious drugs, some are stupid and do take them. It's not cause of the weed, it because some people are stupid. Those kind of people are the ones that drive while drunk and then people blaim alcohol, or when teenagers fuck without condoms and get AIDS and people blaim the schools for not having sex ed at a younger age, or the parents. It's that persons fault.

Weed is fun, I like the high, but I smoke on special occasions because it fucks me up sometimes and I can't function the next day.

About legalizing hard drugs, I think they should become like the other legal drugs. Become regulated. People doing all the paperwork required to use them as anti-depressants or w/e. This would result in "cleaner" drugs and less drug addicts, since people would be thinking "Why go to that shady guy and take it, while not knowing what the fuck he put in it, than go to that hospital or w/e, fill some papers and take it for 50$ less?".

All the money saved could be used for rehabilitation programs and research for drugs with the same effects and less side-effects to treat the addicts.

After all, Heroin started out as a substitute to morphin I think, to treat bad cough, from Bayer, so if they wanted they could make a new drug like it with less side-effects to give to all the addicts that want to be rehabilitated.

About the dealers, I think they shouldn't even bother with small fries, go after the big guys. If the big guys are gone, small time dealers will go out of bussiness too.

A main problem with drugs being illegal is that, a guy could get busted for smoking pot and next thing you know he is in jail, getting raped. When he's out he's probably going to be a criminal. He can't find any jobs, he got into that kind of life in jail (he had to), so now he has lost his life for smoking a joint. Of course that doesn't apply 100% with the hard drugs, but it does to some extent.

So, to sum up, I believe they should legalize weed and decriminalize it and legalize the hard drugs that can be used as prescription drugs, but regulate them and don't just hand them out to anybody and under any circumstance.

[DarkBunny]

I believe weed should be legal everywhere.

I don't know if it's good for health, but I know from my experience that it doesn't have any worse side-effects than tobacco. Actually, after some good weed, I feel I can breathe easier. I am a tobacco smoker since I was 12. Some studies claim it is good for ones health, I don't know.
Other studies claim it kills brain cells. Well, it may be true, I've realized that in many of my friends behaviour, after some serious pot smoking the last couple of years. They think and talk slower and "freeze" at times. I'm not making this up. I smoke weed from time to time too and I experience some "brain numbness" the next day. I don't know if it's cause of the weed, because sometimes it's a fucking amazing high, but others I realize I just burned my brain. Maybe weed with pcp or some shit.

Anyway, I don't know so I can't really take sides.

I believe it should be legalized, so that it's cleaner, it's cheaper, it loses the "forbidden" tag so the demand goes down and prices with it. Also by legalizing it there can be studies and make it treat health problems and help people.

To those who claim that weed can lead to hard drugs, it can't and can. Let me tell you what happened to me and my friends. We went to this new dealer cause the usual got caught and was in jail. So, we are there and the dude says "I don't got any weed right now, but I don't want to dissapoint you, since you are new, so here's 6 Ecstacy (we were 6 guys), on me". We were like fuck this shit, but one guy took the pills. He liked it and kept taking on a regular basis. He isn't the guy we all used to know anymore. So, it all depends on the person. Some people know better than to start taking more serious drugs, some are stupid and do take them. It's not cause of the weed, it because some people are stupid. Those kind of people are the ones that drive while drunk and then people blaim alcohol, or when teenagers fuck without condoms and get AIDS and people blaim the schools for not having sex ed at a younger age, or the parents. It's that persons fault.

Weed is fun, I like the high, but I smoke on special occasions because it fucks me up sometimes and I can't function the next day.

About legalizing hard drugs, I think they should become like the other legal drugs. Become regulated. People doing all the paperwork required to use them as anti-depressants or w/e. This would result in "cleaner" drugs and less drug addicts, since people would be thinking "Why go to that shady guy and take it, while not knowing what the fuck he put in it, than go to that hospital or w/e, fill some papers and take it for 50$ less?".

All the money saved could be used for rehabilitation programs and research for drugs with the same effects and less side-effects to treat the addicts.

After all, Heroin started out as a substitute to morphin I think, to treat bad cough, from Bayer, so if they wanted they could make a new drug like it with less side-effects to give to all the addicts that want to be rehabilitated.

About the dealers, I think they shouldn't even bother with small fries, go after the big guys. If the big guys are gone, small time dealers will go out of bussiness too.

A main problem with drugs being illegal is that, a guy could get busted for smoking pot and next thing you know he is in jail, getting raped. When he's out he's probably going to be a criminal. He can't find any jobs, he got into that kind of life in jail (he had to), so now he has lost his life for smoking a joint. Of course that doesn't apply 100% with the hard drugs, but it does to some extent.

So, to sum up, I believe they should legalize weed and decriminalize it and legalize the hard drugs that can be used as prescription drugs, but regulate them and don't just hand them out to anybody and under any circumstance.

i agree with you here:)i myself have done it and its a great high but i don't believe it gets you into hard drugs its usually about the person who takes it,i mean my friend smokes weed on a regular basis and has tried cocaine once.

[He's a Mentalist]

Talks of propaganda but no proof for your fascicle assumptions... You won't get anywhere in a debate if you do not support your argument with some substance.

Believe none of what you hear and only half of what you see.

I believe in the facts backed by the research.

http://www.drugabuse.gov/PDF/InfoFacts/Marijuana08.pdf

Read and educate...

[Kotoumaru]

You sure write for the "Head up my own ass" magazine.

Personal experience is far more useful from your fucking links to shit I don't give a fuck about.

[Aidan]

fuck it lets have an anarchy, let the retards OD and the rest of us can get fucked up in peace. violence is more fun when you're fucked out of your mind on PCP anyway.

[TW501]

Personal experience is far more useful from your fucking links to shit I don't give a fuck about.
Only if it's our personal experience, not yours. Every single drug user and alcoholic I met claims to be totally in control and perfectly aware of everything they're doing while high/drunk and that they've suffered no ill effects (they also tend to claim that they've found just the right technique to drive under the influence of alcohol or drugs). It's anecdotal evidence, not the type of thing to build a solid case on. I've met plenty of drug users, most of whom were underachievers, rather unintelligent, and had greater reactions to drug use than they claimed. I try not to base my arguments on this though, as it's just my experiences. A proper argument must be based upon facts and backed up by proper evidence. If you inherently distrust any information given by a reliable source with authority on the subject, that's your problem.

[Aidan]

hold I'm a shit fucked daaaaaamn should smoke if I want as
dude though I thik ehwe shold everyone drugs is from in YOU HEADD

[Kotoumaru]

Did you read what I posted? I admit there are side-effects, but not with casual use, but rather intense use of Marihuana. Those side-effects also differ from person to person as well.

I smoke, I've been drunk and I've been high and I assure you smoking pot is way more harmless than tobacco or alcohol. After so many joints I've smoked I can't tell anything different about me. I've seen people change after extensive use though.

Actually, you certainly are more creative and your senses are hightened under the influence of weed. It's nothing like alcohol, you have full control of your body and you function rather normally.

I believe it can be beneficial if taken in moderation. So, even if brain cells are "burned" they are replenished. I do find it harder to function the next day so I assume that some brain cells get burned or some areas of the brain are numbed, but if you like smoke a joint or two every now and then, there's no way you'll have any permanent side-effects whatsoever.

Since you like to read about stuff so much, why don't you read about its denefits too and compare facts with facts?

Also, personal experience is useful no matter whose it is. You have to evaluate what the person's saying and how plausible it is. We make decision every day based on other peoples experiences and sayings.

It's better than a goverment article, the same goverment that spends millions to stop hemp, and keeps on blaming marihuana for all the terrorism, because they'll lose money. Of course they're going to write it's harmful etc. and you uncontitionally believe it just because it's the goverment? When I saw that link ended with .gov, my bullshit detector went off instantly.

By keeping it illegal the goverment promotes cartels, gangs, murders, terrorism, period

[reiatsudown]

I smoke, I've been drunk and I've been high and I assure you smoking pot is way more harmless than tobacco or alcohol.


Dude's right on the money. In my book hardcore alcoholics are worse than hardcore potheads, but I could be sued for copyright infringement because I just copied the passages off every single person I've ever met in my life ever. Who actually thinks pot is worse? Take it from me because I get to see most of this stuff from the outside looking in. I'm one of those annoying self-involved health dude athletic workaholic types who doesn't really drink and doesn't smoke much unless I'm really stressed out, and the only good people like me can serve is an impartial opinion on these arguments. I've just never been involved with this stuff, so there's no reason for me to be defensive about any of it, okay, and even on my high horse this war of drugs is fucking stupid. There's no good reason for it. The whole thing is a joke.

If a kid takes one ecstasy nobody goes "FUCK LET'S CALL THE POLICE". People have the same reaction if a kid drinks or smokes or lights up. Substance abuse is substance abuse. Alcohol can fuck you up and endanger others, pot can make you lazy and static, cigarettes can give you cancer, and none of this stuff is any more or less prevalent in society now than they ever were. I haven't read the entire thread but I'm sure most people have said what I am right now. Because anyone who's lived in the real world should be able to come to that agreement. The war on drugs is a joke. It's so stupid that I'm starting to think there's some crazy conspiracy behind it, because politicians and parents at large can't be that thick. You can't keep people from experimenting with themselves, and that's why this stuff is different than other crimes. People are going to do what they want with their own bodies, whether it's abortion or prostitution or suicide or drugs, no matter what the law says.

The only useful war is to get the purity and cleanliness of these drug dealings under control. I've known a handful of people who got their shit ruined because whatever they took was laced with some dirty bs. I don't know how often this happens, but that's one aspect of drugs I can see the government actually being of use in if there's some legal and official regulator.

[He's a Mentalist]

Actually, you certainly are more creative and your senses are hightened under the influence of weed. It's nothing like alcohol, you have full control of your body and you function rather normally.I do not know where you get your facts from but they surely aren't supported facts, so please post some evidence for your claims... In fact, marijuana impairs your senses... Here is a little info :

Inhalation of the substance results in a quickened heartbeat, dry mouth and throat, blood shot eyes and in some cases an elevated blood pressure. It inhibits quick motor skills thereby reducing the ability to drive a car or operate machinery. Short term memory is impaired as is the sense of time and place. Sometimes an adverse reaction to the drug can induce an acute sense of fear and loss of control accompanied by a rapid heartbeat and a feeling of panic. This subsides after a few hours. ~ professor's houseThere is no scientific evidence to support your claim that marijuana enhances your senses.


I believe it can be beneficial if taken in moderation. So, even if brain cells are "burned" they are replenished. I do find it harder to function the next day so I assume that some brain cells get burned or some areas of the brain are numbed, but if you like smoke a joint or two every now and then, there's no way you'll have any permanent side-effects whatsoever. There is no way you'll have permanent side effects?

Studies have demonstrated that inhaling marijuana over a long period of time can cause cellular changes in the lung tissue called metaplasia. Metaplasia is considered pre-cancerous. It has been found that marijuana smoke contains over 50 -70 percent more carcinogens than tobacco smoke.I am, and people should be more inclined to trust reliable studies than some person over the net giving you his ill-advised opinion.

Since you like to read about stuff so much, why don't you read about its denefits too and compare facts with facts?Did. The cons outweigh the pros...


It's better than a goverment article, the same goverment that spends millions to stop hemp, and keeps on blaming marihuana for all the terrorism, because they'll lose money. Of course they're going to write it's harmful etc. and you uncontitionally believe it just because it's the goverment? When I saw that link ended with .gov, my bullshit detector went off instantly.You could not be more wrong. Show me a quote of the government blaming marijuana for terrorism... My bullshit detector is going off now reading your post.

By keeping it illegal the goverment promotes cartels, gangs, murders, terrorism, periodNice slippery slope. :/

[TW501]

So basically he distrusts any inoformation from a source with any authority (because as anarchists, libertarians, and anti-intellectuals know, authority=wrong). I'd sooner trust the government than people who I don't know on the internet or unsourced conspiracy sites. Obviously I wouldn't make a decision soley on that sort of site (or any site) but it's valid enough for me, as I don't inherently dismiss anything with authority as false.

[Kotoumaru]

There is no scientific evidence to support your claim that marijuana enhances your senses.

It does mine. I'm the fucking evidence and everybody other pot smoker that has posted. In fact while under the influence of weed I draw my best drawings. Of course I don't have any evidence but my own word against yours. I've experienced it, you haven't.

Yes, they did blame marihuanna for the terrorism, gangs, killings, hard-drug abuse.. I think it's on one of the latest anti-drug commercials too. If I find it on youtube, I'll post it.

I am not an anarchist nor a libertatian.
I never said trust this or that, I said compare all the facts and see what's more plausible. Do you even remember what the goverment did about alcohol control? Remember all the gangs then? Until they grew some fucking brains and legalized it. Goverment lied and deceived everybody back then and everybody knows. The same thing's happening now.

Hemp can be fuel, clothing, food, medicine. Do you really think it's in their best interests to legalize it? Everybody will lose money except the average citizen.

Anyway, believe what you will.

[TW501]

I never said trust this or that, I said compare all the facts and see what's more plausible. Do you even remember what the goverment did about alcohol control? Remember all the gangs then? Until they grew some fucking brains and legalized it. Goverment lied and deceived everybody back then and everybody knows. The same thing's happening now.

The banning of alcohol (prohibition) was due more to the temperance movement than a sinister government plot. It was popularly believed that alcohol was responsible for most of society's ills (stupid, I know, but that was the common belief at the time). The american temperane movement had been going on for about forty years before congress started prohibition. I don't know what you mean by 'they lied then' as they were giving into a popular idea at the time, not concocting a sinister plot. Of course prohibition was a failure, but are you really going to distrust every government study over that? Furthermore, you seem to claim that it's somehow in the government's best interest to keep pot illegal, but what about you? As a pot smoker, wouldn't it be in your best interest to portray pot in the most positive light possible?
As I said before, I'm in favor of legalizing marijuana, but the idea that there is some government conspiracy to suppress it is just silly.
Hemp can be fuel, clothing, food, medicine. Do you really think it's in their best interests to legalize it? Everybody will lose money except the average citizen.
Now you're talking about something completely different. Industrial hemp and recreational marijuana are two different things. It's like comparing a nice juicy red delicious apple to one of those crabapples people feed to birds. If you smoked industrial hemp, all you'd get is a headache. Also, if having industrial hemp would hurt industry and government so much, why did the governments of France, Germany, Canada, Italy, Poland, Ukraine, United Kingdom, and even several US states have chosen to make industrial hemp legal. Their economies and government haven't been hurt by the production of hemp. The ban in the US is foolish, but it's not part of some conspiracy to protect business interests.

[Fatstogey]

The banning of alcohol (prohibition) was due more to the temperance movement than a sinister government plot. It was popularly believed that alcohol was responsible for most of society's ills (stupid, I know, but that was the common belief at the time). The american temperane movement had been going on for about forty years before congress started prohibition. I don't know what you mean by 'they lied then' as they were giving into a popular idea at the time, not concocting a sinister plot. Of course prohibition was a failure, but are you really going to distrust every government study over that? Furthermore, you seem to claim that it's somehow in the government's best interest to keep pot illegal, but what about you? As a pot smoker, wouldn't it be in your best interest to portray pot in the most positive light possible?
As I said before, I'm in favor of legalizing marijuana, but the idea that there is some government conspiracy to suppress it is just silly. You cant just look up prohibition in wiki and then assume thats all true. BEcaue even today we have cartels who are lobbying in washington. Lobbying to keep prohibition. Just like they did with alcholol. The criiminals wanted it to be illegal more than anyone else.

And its not just saying governmenti s corrupt. Its saying that even if big government isnt corrupt, they are still grossly inefficient. Alos its not in the govt's best interest to keep weed illegal. Its in the best interests of oil, tobacco, and alcohol.

And as far as hemp goes. Barney Frank and Ron Paul have introduced new legistlation to legalize hemp production.

Now you're talking about something completely different. Industrial hemp and recreational marijuana are two different things. It's like comparing a nice juicy red delicious apple to one of those crabapples people feed to birds. If you smoked industrial hemp, all you'd get is a headache. Also, if having industrial hemp would hurt industry and government so much, why did the governments of France, Germany, Canada, Italy, Poland, Ukraine, United Kingdom, and even several US states have chosen to make industrial hemp legal. Their economies and government haven't been hurt by the production of hemp. The ban in the US is foolish, but it's not part of some conspiracy to protect business interests.

Yes it sure is. IF its not then what is the reason to make it illegal? There isnt one. Except for profit. Profit for the companies that already exist and have a great deal to lose if any of it is made legal.

The fact that weed doesnt harm anyone is part of the reason we know its being illegal is a bunch of bullshit. If its not for big business then what is the reason?

[vgrippa]

There is no scientific evidence to support your claim that marijuana enhances your senses.

Research "Cannabinoid Effect" it is what marijuana does to your sense which are identical to the symptoms that hunters experience while in the woods alone. They start to get a slight feeling of paranoia which causes their sense to focus due to the increase in fear they are experiencing. That is why when you are in the woods you hear the slightest of noises and small twitches in the grass are easily picked up by your eye. Also you get hungry faster because of the increase in adrenaline which increases your metabolism.

@stogey: I agree with your plea to logic and thinking for yourself instead of letting other people do it for you but it is a hard argument to push because of how distorted the meaning off logic is. Logic today is all about finding "credible" sources and using other peoples word to back up your own instead of using your own observation and research skills to draw your own conclusions. T.V. just furthers this idea because people do not think about what they watch on T.V. they just take it hook, line, and sinker unlike how when people read newspapers which gives them a chance to at least interrupt the information they are given. However, this opinion is probably false because there has been no "research" study to back up it up.

[TW501]

Yes it sure is. IF its not then what is the reason to make it illegal? There isnt one. Except for profit. Profit for the companies that already exist and have a great deal to lose if any of it is made legal.

The fact that weed doesnt harm anyone is part of the reason we know its being illegal is a bunch of bullshit. If its not for big business then what is the reason?
Those businesses that you claim would be hurt by legalizing industrial hemp also exist in the countries that actually did legalize it. It had little effect on their economies and businesses. Why are the wealthy businessmen in those countries not bothered by it while the businessmen in the US would supposedly be so threatened by it that they resort to conspiracies to keep it from being legal?

[Fatstogey]

Those businesses that you claim would be hurt by legalizing industrial hemp also exist in the countries that actually did legalize it. It had little effect on their economies and businesses. Why are the wealthy businessmen in those countries not bothered by it while the businessmen in the US would supposedly be so threatened by it that they resort to conspiracies to keep it from being legal?

Because no other country in the world has the same amount of fertile farmland that the US has. The amount of production from those other countries would probably be less all put together than it would in the US if it was legal.

Another reason is that they are afraid. If farming hemp or even marijuana became legal. Farmers would stop growing corn and wheat. Because profit per acre would be vastly greater growing hemp and marijuana than it would corn. And it would be a lot easier to grow.

Another industry i forgot about is coal. Coal is burned to make energy. The same could be done with weed, and its renewable. The US is the Saudi Arabia of coal exportation. We export more coal than any other country in the world.

Hemp and marijuana are so versatile they can disrupt several industries.
Think if your a farmer. Your struggling to grow corn. Then instead you could grow marijuana. Now they can take the same land and make $250,000,000 a year growing marijuana, instead of 15,000,000 growing corn. On the same land.

Is it likely to take out these industries? Probably not. If you ran these industries would you take the chance? No, because the possibility is there. It has potential to steal some of their profits. And offer alternatives. Alternatives that can be grown by anyone themselves.

You have to go to a doctor and then a pharmacy to get xanax. But weed you can grow yourself.

As far as fuel goes though, weed is not the most efficient. But it is about twice the yeild of fuel per acre as corn. And is easier to grow.

Its fear of its potential. Potential to cut into profits. They couldnt control something that grows like a "weed."

[NoxieDC]

Video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWQUgdSy9yI)

Only one point in the whole video that sounds silly but otherwise I recommend you watch it.

So: hemp (cannabis) can:
1) Be used for its fiber.
2) Is a plant that can grow easily without the use of pesticides & other chemicals
3) Be used for creating ethanol (and as far as this movie says plastic)
4) Get you high and make you enjoy life!
5) Be abused just like anything else.

I dare you to find me something that has genuine potential to be purely evil (meaning you don't consider how it will reform some industries but think of the concept I've presented and judge it).

[btill9000]

I smoke, I've been drunk and I've been high and I assure you smoking pot is way more harmless than tobacco or alcohol.

Your right. Cigs should definitely be illegal too.

[NoxieDC]

Your right. Cigs should definitely be illegal too.
It doesn't sound like it but I'm hoping that was a joke.

[kochito22]

I see no reason why they should be legal. Smoking cigs is slow suicide.

[NoxieDC]

Life quality over life expectancy. Do you chose a long boring life which you feel you don't do anything with or a short but rich one? (exaggerated only to demonstrate the principle)

They are legal because it offers a choice (enlarging our potential for a fun life) and that means power. Power to the people, it's the way towards evolution.
Think of it like this: cigarettes, drugs and alcohol already exist so there are those who will desire for them. Denying them that will only cause stress and inhibit those individuals and cause social restlessness in general (remember the prohibition, how good that was [/sarcasm]).
In a larger scope, that's why humans are pack animals: to provide for one another! If a man in power (who got there only and only because of the common citizen) restricts freedom of choice and openly admits it, it would make for bad relations, wouldn't you agree?

And btill9000, why just smokes?

[Luna]

While cigarettes and similar tobacco products have volumes of studies showing their detrimental health effects, those effects don't seem to impair the user's ability to function in society nearly as much as abusing some other substances. Smokers are still capable of holding jobs and carrying out day to day activities that other substance uses may find more challenging.

I'm by no means condoning tobacco use, or one addiction over another, but we have crack addicts and alcoholism [among other things], not tobacco-ism. I've yet to hear of stories where the family of a tobacco user had nearly the level of impact as alcoholism can have on the family. Not to disregard families who deal with the early death of a family member due to tobacco related illnesses.

I'm not trying to diminish or trivialize the effects of tobacco, but I don't really see the necessity in making it illegal. There are plenty of cities already prohibiting smoking in many ways, such as in public restaurants, within 15 ft of entrances, etc. anyway.

I'd be extremely surprised if a person today can honestly not be aware the potential damage cigarettes can do, so if they choose to partake and do not end or seek help in ending an addiction, they're most likely coherent enough to accept that decision.

[He's a Mentalist]

Your right. Cigs should definitely be illegal too.

No they shouldn't, they cause cancer.

[NoxieDC]

@Luna: good point. Education on any potentially addictive drug I recommend should be acquired from peers who have taken it and found a way to still function normally. They make the real impact.
Example: when I first tried weed I was with friends who had taken and gotten high of almost every drug they could find. They had their fun partying almost daily, getting stoned, smashed, hammered, fucked, backed and tripped, but they eventually understood how their lives were slowly getting ruined and so they quit. Point taken? A drug is a scooby snack: make it a relief and a luxury and not a necessity. But I guess that varies greately from one to another as I can get "high" feeling without getting drunk so it's nothing incredibly addictive (after my first weed smoke I lasted more then a month, just to give you an idea).

[btill9000]

I'd be extremely surprised if a person today can honestly not be aware the potential damage cigarettes can do, so if they choose to partake and do not end or seek help in ending an addiction, they're most likely coherent enough to accept that decision.

I see no reason why they should be legal. Smoking cigs is slow suicide.
It doesn't sound like it but I'm hoping that was a joke.
Life quality over life expectancy. Do you chose a long boring life which you feel you don't do anything with or a short but rich one? (exaggerated only to demonstrate the principle)

If only you were just lowing your own life expectancy or you were only committing suicide slowly. In actuality your second hand smoke effects more than just your life. Suicide also doesn't qualify. It's more like running into a building and shooting a bunch of people........and then committing suicide but doing it slowly? If all smokers would put a a plastic bag over there head and smoke inside of it.....wait nevermind that last part, but yeh you get the point.

[Luna]

If only you were just lowing your own life expectancy or you were only committing suicide slowly. In actuality your second hand smoke effects more than just your life. Suicide also doesn't qualify. It's more like running into a building and shooting a bunch of people........and then committing suicide but doing it slowly? If all smokers would put a a plastic bag over there head and smoke inside of it.....wait nevermind that last part, but yeh you get the point.

Ok, but like I said, some cities have been banning smoking in public restaurants, bars, etc. Similarly, I don't know if it's a law or just a rule for some institutions, but there are also places that require smokers to remain 15ft or more away from the entrance to a building. It's not like you have people smoking in elevators, offices, airplanes, other confined spaces, etc. I think you're blowing this out of proportion. How many people who do not live with a smoker die of second hand smoke related illnesses or diseases in a single year?

[Exploits]

Ok, but like I said, some cities have been banning smoking in public restaurants, bars, etc. Similarly, I don't know if it's a law or just a rule for some institutions, but there are also places that require smokers to remain 15ft or more away from the entrance to a building. It's not like you have people smoking in elevators, offices, airplanes, other confined spaces, etc. I think you're blowing this out of proportion. How many people who do not live with a smoker die of second hand smoke related illnesses or diseases in a single year?

More than you would think. The issue is that it's near-impossible to prove. When you enter hospital with lung cancer and are asked if you smoke, two things happen;

- If you say yes, they attribute your smoking to your cancer and case is closed.
- If you say no, they attribute your cancer to genetics and assume you lucked out.

In reality there are thousands, perhaps millions of things that could have resulted in you having lung cancer. Pollution is one that's being looked into recently, with ties to asthma and other lung-related illnesses as well. Second-hand smoke has already been proven dangerous. I took the first link, and this is perhaps not the best, but here's some prove regardless.

http://www.lung.ca/media-medias/news-nouvelles_e.php?id=55

She worked in an environment that did not become smoke-free until around 2006 in Ontario, and this is in a country that's considered advanced in its anti-smoking laws (Canada was one of the first to ban indoor smoking in any type of building, and the first to place health warnings directly on packages). Forty years of constantly ingesting cigarette smoke from others, every day, for eight hours a day. She continued to claim up until the day she died that she herself had never smoked so much as a single cigarette.

Of course, the number of people that die of second-hand smoke aren't astonishing in number, but the numbers are there; Simply hard to prove, if not entirely impossible.

[blunt_smoker_420]

Here's what I think, people who sell, or use any of the hard drugs like cocaine should sentence to death. Immediate death. Like being summarily executed on the spot. Sure it'll be a huge violation of Human Rights, but hey, it's cheap, easy, and sends a big message.

As for weaker drugs like marijuana, just put an age limit on it, or make it like alcohol. There's no way you're going to stop it since it's so widespread.

This is pretty much my opinion too and we defiantly need to put a end to overseas trade of those drugs seeing as it gets money to the people who supply guns and ammunition to the terrorist.

[nuttychemist]

Of course, the number of people that die of second-hand smoke aren't astonishing in number, but the numbers are there; Simply hard to prove, if not entirely impossible.

I think in increased awareness now of the affects of cigarette smoke has brought about all the policies regarding restrictions on smoking in public.

http://www.cancer.org/docroot/PED/content/PED_10_2X_Secondhand_Smoke-Clean_Indoor_Air.asp

2nd hand smoke is a known carcinogen (aka cancer-causing)... there are more studies being done on the affects of 2nd hand smoke. I'm glad that they have banned smoking in public places, I think smoking cigarettes is probably the worst thing you can do to your body... its extremely addictive and there are no health benefits to smoking. If someone wants to pollute their lungs... more power to them... just do it away from me :p

As to illegal drugs... the only drug I'd like to see legalized is marijuana. Mainly because it has medicinal value... if the government legalized and regulated it... it would not only free up space in jails... it would also bring in money for the government. When you legalize something.. then the "thrill" of doing it lessens, sure there will always be potheads... but i think a lot of people would over look trying it because its legal.

I'm not sure what the solution would be for getting rid of the "hard" drugs like crack, cocaine, heroin.. etc... I will say that I think an even bigger problem has become prescription drug abuse... xanax, ativan, percocet, oxycontin... these are just as bad or worse... in a way its worse because anyone can get their hands on prescription medication...

[Kyo]

its extremely addictive and there are no health benefits to smoking.

There are a number of therapeutic uses of nicotine or smoking. For example, smokers are less likely to need surgery to provide extra blood to their heart after an angioplasty.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/05/040525055616.htm

http://www.diagnosticimaging.com/dimag/legacy/dinews/2004080901.shtml

The risk of ulcerative colitis is reduced, and it even interferes with the development of Kaposi’s sarcoma (a type of cancer of the lymphatic endothelium).

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6T32-4GX1HW5-1&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=711ea05c3a9e872d7ae1d12842dd8d75

Perhaps most surprisingly, is that there are connections to smoking and a reduction in allergic asthma.

http://www.data-yard.net/10f/asthma_canada.htm

http://www.data-yard.net/30/asthma.htm

http://www.data-yard.net/10f/asthma-uk.htm

There is also a large body of evidence to suggest that smokers have a dramatically reduced risk of developing Parkinson’s Disease.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/07/070709171619.htm

http://www.trdrp.org/research/PageGrant.asp?grant_id=1613

Nicotine is currently being investigated as a treatment for ADHD, and Schizophrenia.

http://www.enotalone.com/article/4115.html

http://web.sfn.org/index.cfm?pagename=brainbriefings_smoking

http://www.schizophrenia.com/smoke.htm


Sorry, but there are 2 sides to every story. Just like anti-smokers can come up with hundreds of reasons, pro-smokers can do so too. Nothing is absolutely "good" or "bad". Too much smoking will burn down my insides. But living in a glass-castle where everything is pretty & pink is ultimately detrimental to myself, and I will become more vulnerable to diseases, when exposed to them, and less resistant overall. I reiterate, nothing is absolutely "good" or "bad" for you.

[NoxieDC]

To those of you who whine and cry about second hand smoke problems:
1) You're giving yourselves a bad name with all the extremism.
2) Worried about life shortage? How can you miss something you never even had! :P If this is an indication to anything, you LOOOVE to procrastinate! And shit, I do to ut not every day! Use what life you know you've got to do what you have to.
It's not like this kind of death is the kind that brings the harvester over to your door and says "We gotta go." It isn't a surprise end. You will know you're not in your best shape on way or another so do something in your life.

(The reason why I'm not very polite and proper is because you conservative folks remind me of the kind of people George Carlin and Marilyn Manson try to get rid off but you're too damn suborn to go away [I hope there are some people out there who will understand my message and that my speech involves a lot of subtle points of multiple ideas, something people who stick strict to words will never understand])

[Luna]

There are a number of therapeutic uses of nicotine or smoking. For example, smokers are less likely to need surgery to provide extra blood to their heart after an angioplasty.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/05/040525055616.htm

http://www.diagnosticimaging.com/dimag/legacy/dinews/2004080901.shtml

The risk of ulcerative colitis is reduced, and it even interferes with the development of Kaposi’s sarcoma (a type of cancer of the lymphatic endothelium).

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6T32-4GX1HW5-1&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=711ea05c3a9e872d7ae1d12842dd8d75

Perhaps most surprisingly, is that there are connections to smoking and a reduction in allergic asthma.

http://www.data-yard.net/10f/asthma_canada.htm

http://www.data-yard.net/30/asthma.htm

http://www.data-yard.net/10f/asthma-uk.htm

There is also a large body of evidence to suggest that smokers have a dramatically reduced risk of developing Parkinson’s Disease.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/07/070709171619.htm

http://www.trdrp.org/research/PageGrant.asp?grant_id=1613

Nicotine is currently being investigated as a treatment for ADHD, and Schizophrenia.

http://www.enotalone.com/article/4115.html

http://web.sfn.org/index.cfm?pagename=brainbriefings_smoking

http://www.schizophrenia.com/smoke.htm


Sorry, but there are 2 sides to every story. Just like anti-smokers can come up with hundreds of reasons, pro-smokers can do so too. Nothing is absolutely "good" or "bad". Too much smoking will burn down my insides. But living in a glass-castle where everything is pretty & pink is ultimately detrimental to myself, and I will become more vulnerable to diseases, when exposed to them, and less resistant overall. I reiterate, nothing is absolutely "good" or "bad" for you.

Several of the linked examples refer to specific chemicals involved in smoking such as carbon monoxide levels in the blood stream, treating cells with CSC to prevent a specific infection, or effects of nicotine in particular. That being said, I don't think smoking in itself will become a preventative treatment for diseases, but it may lead to some new discoveries in the medical field.

I'm not arguing the legitimacy of any of your examples, but I'm just don't think that typical cigarettes will be proposed in those treatments versus pure tobacco cigarettes, nicotine gum, or other means of increasing the levels of certain chemicals in the body, which on their own may have potential applications without as many of the negative effects related to smoking. Smoking may be the easy way to increase carbon monoxide levels in the body but I'm sure there are alternatives.

[btill9000]

Ok, but like I said, some cities have been banning smoking in public restaurants, bars, etc. Similarly, I don't know if it's a law or just a rule for some institutions, but there are also places that require smokers to remain 15ft or more away from the entrance to a building. It's not like you have people smoking in elevators, offices, airplanes, other confined spaces, etc. I think you're blowing this out of proportion. How many people who do not live with a smoker die of second hand smoke related illnesses or diseases in a single year?

I am not blowing anything out of proportion. One person said that it was like committing suicide, and another said it was a persons choice to lower their own life expectancy. My humorous example was just letting them know that they were wrong. Regardless of how limited it is, I get a whiff of second hand smoke at least once a day if I am out in public.

The only people that defend smoking anything are people that are either (1.) Addicted to smoking (2.) In denial about being addicted to smoking. (3.) People that are bored and have nothing else to do.


Here's what I think, people who sell, or use any of the hard drugs like cocaine should sentence to death. Immediate death. Like being summarily executed on the spot. Sure it'll be a huge violation of Human Rights, but hey, it's cheap, easy, and sends a big message.

As for weaker drugs like marijuana, just put an age limit on it, or make it like alcohol. There's no way you're going to stop it since it's so widespread.

It wouldn't even take a death sentence to deal with drugs. Give me 2 Navy Seal Teams equipped with gas masks, a lighter, a gallon of gasoline, and a speed boat, and I'll solve the worlds drug problem.

All jokes aside, here are the things we need to do.
1. Increase the penalty 10 fold for bringing drugs into the country.
2. Bomb and Burn all drug fields.
3. Declare an actual "real war" on the organizations that sponsor bringing drugs into the US. Real War means Seal teams, Army Rangers, Helicopters, Snipers, and such.

[Kyo]

Several of the linked examples refer to specific chemicals involved in smoking such as carbon monoxide levels in the blood stream, treating cells with CSC to prevent a specific infection, or effects of nicotine in particular. That being said, I don't think smoking in itself will become a preventative treatment for diseases, but it may lead to some new discoveries in the medical field.

I'm not arguing the legitimacy of any of your examples, but I'm just don't think that typical cigarettes will be proposed in those treatments versus pure tobacco cigarettes, nicotine gum, or other means of increasing the levels of certain chemicals in the body, which on their own may have potential applications without as many of the negative effects related to smoking. Smoking may be the easy way to increase carbon monoxide levels in the body but I'm sure there are alternatives.

Yes, but aren't specific chemicals the cause of much irk among the non-smoking body? My point was simple when I made this post. Actually, I'm a smoker, but I won't kid myself into thinking that smoking is a good thing. That said, my point was that anybody can make any article/source/examples say whatever they want, depending on which light they present it. The links I posted were obviously from a smoker's perspective. Somebody else might come, and present the exact same example, but using totally different wordings & approaches, and turn it into non-smoking propaganda. I do not wish for smoking to become a preventive treatment. It would screw up too many things in established societies. Problem is, I find it extremely annoying that people pick on smoking/smokers, because it has an adverse effect on their health. With the same reasoning, I can say that I don't agree with what anti-smoking lobby's do & say, because it increases my stress levels, which is detrimental to my overall health. Idiotic reasoning? Most certainly. Different from lobby's. Not that much. The only system which had an anti-smoking policy such as our modern societies, was Hitler's Nazi regime. Most smokers know what they are exposing their bodies to. And they accept it. Why can't non-smokers accept it? I know those who aren't smokers will bring up the passive smoking stuff. So here you are :

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-wellbeing/health-news/passive-smoking-is-there-convincing-evidence-that-its-harmful-476472.html

http://www.malehealth.co.uk/userpage1.cfm?item_id=2442

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3026933.stm

EDIT : @ btill9000 - Yes, I'm addicted to tobacco. So? Does that belittle me in any way? If tomorrow, for whatever reason it may be, you start smoking, would you have the same view on smokers? How would you have reacted to being maligned in such fashion if you were a smoker? If tomorrow, I stop smoking, for whatever reason it may be, does that qualify me to pass such a condemning judgment on smokers, whom, I was once part of? Would me stopping smoking make me a higher authority in any sort? No. We all are addicted to something or another. We just pick and choose to what we get most attracted to, and indulge. That is all there is to it. Anything can be made bad for you, or your surroundings. The only alternative you would have left if you wanted a hazard-free environment would be to shut yourself in a room, with no outside interference, and even that would have an adverse effect on your health.

[Luna]

Yes, but aren't specific chemicals the cause of much irk among the non-smoking body?

To some extent, yes. But I'm just remembering the "truth" commercials claiming cigs contain crap like rat poison and cyanide, which I can't imagine have any chance of positive health effects on any living creature.

And you're right; information can be twisted and presented in such a way to suit virtually any agenda. I agree on the point that we're all addicted so something or another. It just varies on what, how much, and what effect it has on our lives and well-being. I really liked a passage regarding addictions in a book I read awhile back, but I don't think it really fits in this thread.

[Kyo]

To some extent, yes. But I'm just remembering the "truth" commercials claiming cigs contain crap like rat poison and cyanide, which I can't imagine have any chance of positive health effects on any living creature.

And you're right; information can be twisted and presented in such a way to suit virtually any agenda. I agree on the point that we're all addicted so something or another. It just varies on what, how much, and what effect it has on our lives and well-being. I really liked a passage regarding addictions in a book I read awhile back, but I don't think it really fits in this thread.

Yes, but "truth" is too much of a variable. A blatant example of that is this :

http://forces.org/

This is the smoking lobby's propaganda, and it is as condemnable as its opposite. Neither side is "right", and both are too "arrogant"(idiotic) to accept it.

[btill9000]

EDIT : @ btill9000 - Yes, I'm addicted to tobacco. So?

As long as you realize it. You should also realize that I don't have an issue with tobacco. You can chew that shit till your mouth falls off. If you can find a way, you can liquidize it and inject it as far as I am concerned. You can put it in tablet form and pop them all day....I don't care. However, smoking is a different issue.

Does that belittle me in any way?

Yes if you smoke it in public, around kids, or other places where people can't avoid you, then yes your a pretty horrible person.


If tomorrow, for whatever reason it may be, you start smoking, would you have the same view on smokers?

If I became addicted to a substance, my view would be that said substance should be plentifully available, and I should be able to do it anywhere regardless of how much it harmed others around me.


How would you have reacted to being maligned in such fashion if you were a smoker?

The addiction would contribute to me finding nothing wrong with my behavior, so I guess I'd get defensive.


If tomorrow, I stop smoking, for whatever reason it may be, does that qualify me to pass such a condemning judgment on smokers, whom, I was once part of?

Sure, why not?


Would me stopping smoking make me a higher authority in any sort?

If your not addicted to a substance, then yes I'd be more inclined to listen to your views on how it effects the people around you. Addiction skews perspective. I am going to go out on a limb and say that the opinion of crack addicts was not considered when it was made illegal.


No. We all are addicted to something or another. We just pick and choose to what we get most attracted to, and indulge. That is all there is to it. Anything can be made bad for you, or your surroundings.

The thing is.....your addiction is actually a toxic smoke that comes out of your mouth and goes into the mouth/nose of anyone else breathing around you.


The only alternative you would have left if you wanted a hazard-free environment would be to shut yourself in a room, with no outside interference, and even that would have an adverse effect on your health.

This^ is an example of someone that is addicted to a substance. Addicts are generally selfish in their desire to fullful their addiction, and they usually can care less about those around them. Everyone should notice how the addict completely dismisses the fact that smoking probably effects others more than most other addictions.

[Kyo]

As long as you realize it. You should also realize that I don't have an issue with tobacco. You can chew that shit till your mouth falls off. If you can find a way, you can liquidize it and inject it as far as I am concerned. You can put it in tablet form and pop them all day....I don't care. However, smoking is a different issue.

No, it isn't. It could be argued that chewing/injecting/whatnot is detrimental to public health, not by people like me, but by people like you.

Yes if you smoke it in public, around kids, or other places where people can't avoid you, then yes your a pretty horrible person.

Excuses are always found if wanted. You can always avoid it. I, as a rule of thumb, never smoke around someone who feels uncomfortable about the smoke. But you were quick to judge, and condemn. Who are you to say that? Which authority do you represent? Why am I such a horrible person, when the millions who drive to wherever they want every day pollute more & affect you more than the entire smoking population of the world could ever pretend to exceed, let alone equal?


If I became addicted to a substance, my view would be that said substance should be plentifully available, and I should be able to do it anywhere regardless of how much it harmed others around me.

Then you would make a horrible addict, one that ought to be despised.


The addiction would contribute to me finding nothing wrong with my behavior, so I guess I'd get defensive.

Addiction (in the case of smoking), does not cause any altered states of consciousness & does not impair on one's objectivity.


Sure, why not?

No, because that would be hypocritical from my part, and that would "elevate" me to a higher social level, from which I would have the right to judge & condemn, which would be totally wrong & fallacious.


If your not addicted to a substance, then yes I'd be more inclined to listen to your views on how it effects the people around you. Addiction skews perspective. I am going to go out on a limb and say that the opinion of crack addicts was not considered when it was made illegal.

Again, smoking does not cause any altered states of consciousness & does not impair on one's objectivity. So, no, it does not skew perspective. Being close minded about a subject & condemning something as absolutely evil/bad, however, does skew perspective, reasoning & objectivity. As for comparing crack addiction to tobacco/nicotine addiction, well, that is totally out of context/proportions.


The thing is.....your addiction is actually a toxic smoke that comes out of your mouth and goes into the mouth/nose of anyone else breathing around you.

Refer to the links I posted about passive smoking.


This^ is an example of someone that is addicted to a substance. Addicts are generally selfish in their desire to fullful their addiction, and they usually can care less about those around them. Everyone should notice how the addict completely dismisses the fact that smoking probably effects others more than most other addictions.

^Actually, this is the typical reply I get when talking to people who despise smoking. Who are you to call me selfish, when you are selfishly trying to prohibit/criminalise smoking? Why should I, or anybody else, for that matter, acquiesce to this criminalisation, when there are hundreds of more important public health concerns to be attended to, and nobody is doing anything about them? Did you not read my post? I do not dissmiss the fact that my smoking habit affects people, but if we are all to pick what affects us in an adverse way, would it ever end? And do you judge public health concerns as to how much lives they claim, or which has most visible effects? Then you are the one who is caring less about public health in general. What next? Blaming smokers for the destruction of the ozone layer? It's actually something you could hear, given that it's a habit for anti-smokers to blow things horrendously out of proportion. How much of passive smoking exposure do you need to get affected? Compare that to a day in the city. Preferably a city where smoking is banned in public places. Which does more damage? No, I am not dissmissing the effect of my smoking. It is you who is amplifying, much similar to the anti-smoking lobby (who are the ones who fund most researches that are available in the mainstream, thus, ensuring a biased result) the said effects. Rely, instead, on independant researches. They are far, far more veridic & accurate.

[btill9000]

No, it isn't. It could be argued that chewing/injecting/whatnot is detrimental to public health, not by people like me, but by people like you.

Really well how can you chewing tobacco effect me on the same level that you smoking it does?


Excuses are always found if wanted. You can always avoid it. I, as a rule of thumb, never smoke around someone who feels uncomfortable about the smoke. But you were quick to judge, and condemn. Who are you to say that? Which authority do you represent? Why am I such a horrible person,
when the millions who drive to wherever they want every day pollute more & affect you more than the entire smoking population of the world could ever pretend to exceed, let alone equal?

Okay I'll explain to you what 'if' means since you don't seem to know.When you meet the requirement of the 'if' statement, then what follows applies to you, but if you don't then then nothing applies to you. Now that you have an understanding of what 'if' means, please read my statement again and reply again. I have placed it in spoilers for you.
Yes if you smoke it in public, around kids, or other places where people can't avoid you, then yes your a pretty horrible person.



Then you would make a horrible addict, one that ought to be despised.

Most substance addicts are like that.


Again, smoking does not cause any altered states of consciousness & does not impair on one's objectivity. So, no, it does not skew perspective. Being close minded about a subject & condemning something as absolutely evil/bad, however, does skew perspective, reasoning & objectivity. As for comparing crack addiction to tobacco/nicotine addiction, well, that is totally out of context/proportions.


Addiction (in the case of smoking), does not cause any altered states of consciousness & does not impair on one's objectivity.

Smoking doesn't get a pass because you do it. Smoking is a substance addiction. It doesn't impair ones objectivity? When is the last time you saw a smoker argue that smoking should be illegal?


No, because that would be hypocritical from my part, and that would "elevate" me to a higher social level, from which I would have the right to judge & condemn, which would be totally wrong & fallacious.

Okay?


^Actually, this is the typical reply I get when talking to people who despise smoking. Who are you to call me selfish, when you are selfishly trying to prohibit/criminalise smoking?

Yup it's selfish of me to not want to breath in your smoke. I apologize for this.


Why should I, or anybody else, for that matter, acquiesce to this criminalisation, when there are hundreds of more important public health concerns to be attended to, and nobody is doing anything about them? Did you not read my post?

[Literal Translation of ^] OMG theirs other stuff that makes people sick too. Whys mine got to go?


I do not dissmiss the fact that my smoking habit affects people

Of course you don't dismiss it. Your addiction just causes you to not care.


but if we are all to pick what affects us in an adverse way, would it ever end?

This is rather vague. Give me something that compares to second hand smoke to work with here.


And do you judge public health concerns as to how much lives they claim, or which has most visible effects? Then you are the one who is caring less about public health in general.

?????:weird:


What next? Blaming smokers for the destruction of the ozone layer?

Eh Global warming is a crock. Speaking of that, someone start a global warming thread.

For the rest of the response you pretty much repeated yourself so I am going to stop responding here....

[NoxieDC]

Most substance addicts are like that.
I don't really know at this moment whether I should chainsaw you in half or feel sorry for your person.

It pains me to even give thought to your claims to tell you the truth. Simplest thing I want to say is: go in your stupid plastic church and pray nobody ever finds out you exist!

Let's begin shall we?

That "If" statement is an overstatement and full of shit.

Smoking tobacco is a substance addiction clearly. Drinking or smoking anything else isn't seeing as most people can live very well without these for days and weeks and even more. We just like it.
And you're misinterpreting objectivity. Your "objectivity" is from a purely against standpoint (wait, isn't this somehow NOT the definition of being objective?). At least smokers saw the pros.

You are selfish and a prick. Understand that already numbnuts!
"Yup it's selfish of me to not want to breath in your smoke. I apologize for this."
"[Literal Translation of ^] OMG theirs other stuff that makes people sick too. Whys mine got to go?"
Sarcasm means disrespect means you haven't even tried to understand the opponent's viewpoint.If you're going to engage in a conversation, at least try to prove to us you're not an animal!

Neg rep me all you want bitches!

[Kyo]

Really well how can you chewing tobacco effect me on the same level that you smoking it does?

This is not my role. This is the role of "health fundamentalists" & of the anti-tobacco crowd, which you form part of.


Okay I'll explain to you what 'if' means since you don't seem to know.When you meet the requirement of the 'if' statement, then what follows applies to you, but if you don't then then nothing applies to you. Now that you have an understanding of what 'if' means, please read my statement again and reply again. I have placed it in spoilers for you.
Yes if you smoke it in public, around kids, or other places where people can't avoid you, then yes your a pretty horrible person.

IF you had understood my post, you would have understood that I was implying that I smoke whenever/wherever I want, unless someone comes to me and asks me politely to go & smoke somewhere else. Lecturing someone over language is rendered useless when incapable of grasping fairly simple notions such as implication. You are not the one to lecture me over language. Also, you have not answered my post. So I take it that you could come with nothing more than shifting my attention to the proper use of "if" in modern English, to which you failed.



Most substance addicts are like that.

Your reply proves the opposite.



Smoking doesn't get a pass because you do it. Smoking is a substance addiction. It doesn't impair ones objectivity? When is the last time you saw a smoker argue that smoking should be illegal?

Why argue over something as pointless & arbitrary as that? What are you going to come up with? That tobacco is a gateway drug? When was the last time you saw a non-smoker argue over whether smokers should be able to be free to differ, as non-smokers are free to differ? Also, as you seem to have much against substance addicts, do you have the same opinion about those to are addicted to benign substances? I'll give you an example : Do you imply that being addicted to something like apple juice impairs on the addict's objectivity & common sense? If not, why not? It is an addiction, similar to another one.


Okay?

Your eloquent & deep rebuttal has convinced me to alter my ways. Wait. No.:suspicious:

Yup it's selfish of me to not want to breath in your smoke. I apologize for this.

Yes, it is. It's not like I'm shoving it down your throat anyway. Studies have proved time & again that the effects of passive smoking have been overrated & blown out of proportion, but you make no mention of this.


[Literal Translation of ^] OMG theirs other stuff that makes people sick too. Whys mine got to go?

Yes. Tell me then, why should it go?


Of course you don't dismiss it. Your addiction just causes you to not care.

Your lack of arguments is appalling.



This is rather vague. Give me something that compares to second hand smoke to work with here.

No. Anything can be compared to anything, depending on which context they are put in. So, no, it is not vague, you are being elusively dismissive.

Eh Global warming is a crock. Speaking of that, someone start a global warming thread.

For the rest of the response you pretty much repeated yourself so I am going to stop responding here....

Again, your lack of valid arguments is appalling. No, I didn't repeat myself over & over. And no, you did not provide me with a single counter-argument. I take it that you have nothing to reply to it, unless you come up with something out of the blue (come on, try a bit harder, fundamentalists always do).

[Exploits]

Ugh, might as well cut this argument short.

The reason most nobody cares about the pros of smoking is quite bloody simple, and is the same reason nobody brings them up in argument. Much the same way smoking helps the blood thin and so-on, I could argue the same for a bullet to the head as a cure for headaches. Sure, you're dead, and that sucks, but your headache is gone! Yaaaaaay.

There's positives to smoking just like there's positives to everything else, but there's such an overwhelming number of negatives that the entire thing can be summarized as who gives a fuck. It's a simple case of weighing the pros and cons, and fifty years ago when the cons of smoking weren't so obvious, I can understand people picking it up. But in today's day and age, where it's made blatantly clear, people picking it up just seem stupid (Regardless if they are or aren't). The only thing they have going for them now is that they've made a concious decision to smoke knowing full-well all consequences involved, because you simply can't avoid that type of information anymore.

Of course, now that we also know second-hand smoke has ill health effects, its not surprising people over-react in the face of smokers. I at least know better, I don't flip out and scream bloody murder when somebody lights up a Marlboro ten feet in my general direction. But I do know that if I work, sleep, and eat in a pit full of people constantly puffing away, I can't expect anything good either.

The reason people expect smoking to just disappear is a combination of it being inherently bad shit, the fact that its bad shit even for people who don't want to smoke said bad shit, and then the fact that its an expensive, non-positive habit.

That's it.

Hell, at least cocaine doesn't have second hand effects . . . <.<

[TW501]

I found a rather interesting chart tracking public opinion on whether or not to legalize marijuana.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_5ieXw28ZUpg/SaHdPIn7W9I/AAAAAAAAA9o/bKAGrEwC6Eg/s400/pot.PNG
Assuming current trends continue, it seems that soon support for legalizing marijuana will be greater than opposition.

[Luna]

Hell, at least cocaine doesn't have second hand effects . . . <.<

I know you're being sarcastic, but I can't help but think of people who become codependents as a result of living with or trying to have relationships with people addicted to alcohol or hard drugs. I've never heard of cigarettes or other tobacco products affecting a family in such a way, especially as codependent behaviors continue on long after the addict has been through proper rehabilitation or the people involved have separated altogether. Also, I'm pretty sure that a woman doing hard drugs while pregnant can pass along the addiction to her unwitting unborn child.

[SteveW311]

the war on drugs may be well intentioned but it falls fuckin flat when you start to mention, an over crowded prison, where a rapist gets paroled, to make room for a dude who was sold, a pound of weed to me thats a crime. Here's to little people doing time ya'll

- 311

Drugs are a victimless crime.

If you argue a point about the users being victims to the dealers, they go in to buy the drugs, fully knowing the consequences of their actions. It is no one's fault but their own.

[Luna]

Drugs are a victimless crime.

What about the people from whom addicts steal cash or merchandise to pawn? Or the violence over territory related to drug sales? What about kids born into families of drug dealers or drug addicts?

[btill9000]

the war on drugs may be well intentioned but it falls fuckin flat when you start to mention, an over crowded prison, where a rapist gets paroled, to make room for a dude who was sold, a pound of weed to me thats a crime.
The above is partially accurate. Crowded prisons is definitely an issue. If we are going to war on drugs we need to be trying to make it unavailable. Arresting people that use or deal drugs isn't efficient at all.

[Exploits]

What about the people from whom addicts steal cash or merchandise to pawn? Or the violence over territory related to drug sales? What about kids born into families of drug dealers or drug addicts?

Lawfully speaking, its still a victimless crime. By shooting up, a heroin addict harms nobody. Maybe the effects of the drug causes him to harm someone, but thats he himself regardless and not the drugs fault. Those are all just secondary issues to perhaps consider, but there's no direct correlation.

[SteveW311]

What about the people from whom addicts steal cash or merchandise to pawn? Or the violence over territory related to drug sales? What about kids born into families of drug dealers or drug addicts?

how many times have you been robbed by a crackhead? or do you know someone who's been robbed by a crackhead?

Violence over drug territory? really? that territory battle would happen regardless if drugs were in the picture or not. that's gang violence. and think of it this way, if drugs were legalized to a degree, don't you think this battle would stop? Look at the prohibition of alcohol. the mob had territory battles all the time, then when the prohibition was lifted, its stopped. bam! just like that.

and kids born into familes of dealers and or addicts. Dealers, not so much a problem. I bet you wouldn't know a dealer if you were talking to one. they aren't as irresponsible as you make them out to be. I know a couple that have kids, and the kids are just fine, and don't have a clue about what their parents do on the side. Now, when that kids gets to an age where he/she might have an idea. Its the responsibility of the parent to inform their kids about the dangers of drugs just like any family should do regardless of if they are dealing. you can only inform and hope the child can make an educated choice on their own.

as for the addicts raising children... I worked for child protective services at one point in time. the stats on this is staggering. 8 out of 10 children brought into the world by an addict are given up for adoption or another family member will take care of them, right at birth. the other 2 out of 10, normally the parents break the cycle and realize they have a child to take care of. while there will be one or 2 that don't quite break the cycle, its only a matter of time before CPS comes in and takes the child.

[Luna]

how many times have you been robbed by a crackhead? or do you know someone who's been robbed by a crackhead?

What? You honestly expect me to believe that people never steal to get money for their next high? I never said anything about crackheads specifically, but addicts in general. That's beside the point though. Just because I have no firsthand experience doesn't mean it doesn't happen. For all we know, the asshat who robbed my parents' house several years ago was a drug addict and may have been responsible for the other slew of nearby break-ins that were allegedly related. Where there's a will, there's a way, and that way isn't always harmless.

[btill9000]

Okay wait I've been reading the last couple of responses. Even though I disagree, I can understand wanting to legalize marijuana. It appears that there are people in this thread that want to legalize all of it? Thats crazy. Lets just add a new isle to the dollar stores for crack, marijuana, meth, and so on.

[Exploits]

Okay wait I've been reading the last couple of responses. Even though I disagree, I can understand wanting to legalize marijuana. It appears that there are people in this thread that want to legalize all of it? Thats crazy. Lets just add a new isle to the dollar stores for crack, marijuana, meth, and so on.

Legalizing marijuana wouldn't be a bad thing considering that we've already got smoking and alcohol legalized and taxed (Both of which are far more hazardous than pot will ever be). By legalizing it, we'd be instantly killing the blackmarket for it, almost severing entire profit-sectors for criminal organizations, and, of course, making money from it being taxed. But there's a certain point where it's just too far. Legalizing methamphetamine would have the same results, and nobody can deny that. But methamphetamine is a highly-addictive, incredibly dangerous drug which makes even cocaine look like a bottle of Tylenol.

Simply put, a clear line exists where the government is being either intolerant, or just plain ignorant, and when it becomes down-right careless of the people. Marijuana is the former, legalizing meth would be the latter.

[btill9000]

Legalizing marijuana wouldn't be a bad thing considering that we've already got smoking and alcohol legalized and taxed (Both of which are far more hazardous than pot will ever be). By legalizing it, we'd be instantly killing the blackmarket for it, almost severing entire profit-sectors for criminal organizations, and, of course, making money from it being taxed. But there's a certain point where it's just too far. Legalizing methamphetamine would have the same results, and nobody can deny that. But methamphetamine is a highly-addictive, incredibly dangerous drug which makes even cocaine look like a bottle of Tylenol.

Simply put, a clear line exists where the government is being either intolerant, or just plain ignorant, and when it becomes down-right careless of the people. Marijuana is the former, legalizing meth would be the latter.

I know but I've just been reading peoples responses, and their are a lot of people here that seem to be for legalizing the whole load of it.

I can see it now.
Son: Im going to walgreens mom, want anything?
Mother: Yeh grab me a sprite, some gum, and a sack of marijuana.
Mother: Oh yeh, grab that new spongebobe crack pipe.
Son: Mom! Can I have the new G.I. Joe Meth Lab for kids?
Mother: No bring me my damn change back.

[Exploits]

I know but I've just been reading peoples responses, and their are a lot of people here that seem to be for legalizing the whole load of it.

I can see it now.
Son: Im going to walgreens mom, want anything?
Mother: Yeh grab me a sprite, some gum, and a sack of marijuana.
Mother: Oh yeh, grab that new spongebobe crack pipe.
Son: Mom! Can I have the new G.I. Joe Meth Lab for kids?
Mother: No bring me my damn change back.

G.I. Hoeeee, whoring himself out to the Cobra Commander's troops to pay for his addiciton. Toy set out now, now, nowwww! Comes with REAL crack-hoe action!

[rhinowls]

I don't think it's anyone's business what I choose to do in the privacy of my own home as long as I'm not affecting/hurting others. If you're out stealing for your drug habit, then yes, get prosecuted for stealing. If you kill someone for a fix, then death sentence is okey dokey with me.

But if I choose to light up a joint in my own house, and kick back and listen to some music or play cards with some friends, why is it any of your god-damned business?

[notorious UZIMAKI]

yeah, its all an old argument about individual rights, drugs, suicide, prostitution, euthanasia, things that people assume affect themselves and not others. marijuana being illegal is clearly indefensible given the current etoh and nicotine situation. i used to argue all drugs should be legal, that people should be able to choose for themselves what they do. in some ways this debate is predicated on your view of human nature. calvin n hobbes. when i was young i was an optimist and argued for personal freedom to be absolute. the longer i've lived the more i realize humans as an animal species are selfish and largely inconsiderate, complacent and thus ignorant. highly addictive drugs, coke, meth, heroin, should not be legal bc they ruin lives. i know you can apply the slippery slope argument here, but shit, you work in an ER, you see some crazy shit. i've never seen someone high on weed tripping in the ER, i've seen meth heads tweaking, coke masters going into heart failure, and heroin champions shitting bricks. oh yeah, what was my point, a) people need to be protected from themselves b) weed is awesome c) don't flame me for being hypocritical, bc i AM hypocritical. boosh

[NoxieDC]

I know but I've just been reading peoples responses, and their are a lot of people here that seem to be for legalizing the whole load of it.

I can see it now.
Son: Im going to walgreens mom, want anything?
Mother: Yeh grab me a sprite, some gum, and a sack of marijuana.
Mother: Oh yeh, grab that new spongebobe crack pipe.
Son: Mom! Can I have the new G.I. Joe Meth Lab for kids?
Mother: No bring me my damn change back.
When the world will legalize marijuana then maybe kids won't be sent for this. And if and when said situation will occur then i reckon the context would change (not to that degree but still, buying weed won't be profanity).

[Exploits]

post

Yeah, all my teachers in cop-school tell me that between getting in a fight with a drunk or a stoner, stoner all the way.

Anywho, I don't doubt that in ten, twenty, thirty years, marijuana will be entirely legal. I see the entire criminalization of it as simple intolerance. We've had smoking and drinking for hundreds, thousands of years even, so its not something people have had just thrown in there face from nowhere; We all know and understand it. When pot was the new thing, it was exactly that - a new thing. Nobody understood the effects, it did weird, unseen things to people, and it creeped them all out, so they banned it.

Now that the younger, user generation of marijuana has grown old enough to vote, and even run for Parliament, it's just a matter of time that everyone with the power to cause change . . . well, causes it.

[DarkBunny]

Yeah, all my teachers in cop-school tell me that between getting in a fight with a drunk or a stoner, stoner all the way.

Anywho, I don't doubt that in ten, twenty, thirty years, marijuana will be entirely legal. I see the entire criminalization of it as simple intolerance. We've had smoking and drinking for hundreds, thousands of years even, so its not something people have had just thrown in there face from nowhere; We all know and understand it. When pot was the new thing, it was exactly that - a new thing. Nobody understood the effects, it did weird, unseen things to people, and it creeped them all out, so they banned it.

Now that the younger, user generation of marijuana has grown old enough to vote, and even run for Parliament, it's just a matter of time that everyone with the power to cause change . . . well, causes it.
agreed^_____________________________^it will become legal again,pot isn't that bad anyway.

[TW501]

Though I personally find the idea of mind-altering drugs rather repugnant, I agree that it should (and probably will) soon become legal. I still have a rather low opinion of it and its users, but seeing as it is less harmful than tobacco or alcohol, I think it should be legal. The ban is really more trouble than it's worth.

[tsurugi]

Pot's not gonna be legal anytime soon...dont get your hopes up.

Even though thatd def bring us out our recession and you know damn well obama knows that.

Who you think hittin all that humboldt shit the DEA confiscates??? Presidential green amon:

If your too afraid to smoke green...for now just enjoy something legal like salvia...pot will be legal bout the time your 70ish

[Fatstogey]

Pot's not gonna be legal anytime soon...dont get your hopes up.

Even though thatd def bring us out our recession and you know damn well obama knows that.

Who you think hittin all that humboldt shit the DEA confiscates??? Presidential green amon:

If your too afraid to smoke green...for now just enjoy something legal like salvia...pot will be legal bout the time your 70ish

Naw itll be sooner than that. 50 Years is too long. Gotta go by generation. Here in 10-20 years our generation will be entering polititics. But legalizing pot is just 1 thing in a long list of many.

[Exploits]

Pot's not gonna be legal anytime soon...dont get your hopes up.

Even though thatd def bring us out our recession and you know damn well obama knows that.

Who you think hittin all that humboldt shit the DEA confiscates??? Presidential green amon:

If your too afraid to smoke green...for now just enjoy something legal like salvia...pot will be legal bout the time your 70ish

This isn't a new fight, the whole legalizing marijuana business goes back to the 60's, and the widespread experimentation is rooted there as well. I would not be surprised if it becomes legal, or more widely accepted to become legal (As in, 50% of the population) by 2020 at the most. If not in entire countries, then in states or provinces.

[TW501]

I recently came across an interesting bit of news. Apparently Obama's 'drug czar' (the person who directs drug control policies in the US) has proclaimed an end to the 'War on Drugs'.
"Regardless of how you try to explain to people it's a 'war on drugs' or a 'war on a product,' people see a war as a war on them," he said. "We're not at war with people in this country."
Of course drugs are still illegal, but I think this is a step in a positive direction.