Live Above The Influence... e_e

[quote name='Gothic Walrus']
It seems to have gone unnoticed (save for Liquid 2), but I've got a few sources in my first post in this topic (somewhere around #20), which is more than pretty much anyone else has provided so far. [/quote]

The national institute on drug abuse is not exactly an unbiased source. Much of the research is outdated/cherry picked and has been refuted by unbiased sources.
 
Delicious google found interesting things:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/06/030630112652.htm

Interesting excerpts:
"Surprisingly, we saw very little evidence of deleterious effects."
Click to expand...


"raised the question of practical significance. If we barely find this tiny effect in long-term heavy users of cannabis, then we are unlikely to see deleterious side effects in individuals who receive cannabis for a short time in a medical setting."
Click to expand...

- Igor Grant, M.D., the study's senior author, a UCSD professor of psychiatry, and director of the Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research (CMCR)
 
[quote name='mrlokievil']Everything is bad for you. Smoking doesn't cause cancer, it only ups the chances. If smoking caused cancer, everyone who smokes would have cancer.[/quote]

I hope this was sarcastic, because smoking definitely causes cancer. It doesn't just up the chances.
 
[quote name='GBmanNC']Sure there is. The true gateway drugs are alcohol and nicotine.[/quote]

Anything that impairs your judgement is a gateway drug. You are less likely to refuse ecstasy that someone is pushing on you if you are completley wasted...
 
[quote name='mikej012']I hope this was sarcastic, because smoking definitely causes cancer. It doesn't just up the chances.[/quote]

Err huh? Smoking increases the chance of cancer, it doesn't cause cancer. Though I guess it depends on how you define things.
 
[quote name='GBmanNC']Err huh? Smoking increases the chance of cancer, it doesn't cause cancer. Though I guess it depends on how you define things.[/quote]

Last time I checked a cigarette pack, the Surgeon General disagrees with you, but I guess he could be wrong or it may have changed as it's been a while since I've looked at one. From my understanding, cigarette smoke doesn't make you more susceptible to cancer from some other source. The components of cigarette smoke are directly what causes it.

So I guess you could say it does increase your chance of cancer because it causes it, but not that it increases your chance but is not the cause.
 
Interesting, but when I read that article and the quotes from his sources it doesn't seem to match up.

If I'm reading right, he says tobacco doesn't cause cancer because it doesn't happen automatically, or that people who smoke don't get cancer near as often as we are sometimes told. "We hear things like, 'if you smoke you will die.'" His problem seems to be that smoking is portrayed as a one way ticket to cancerville. Fair enough, but that doesn't mean that tobacco doesn't cause cancer, it just means it's not guaranteed.

Also, if I'm reading right, all the sources he quotes say that tobacco will or has caused cancer or death, not just increase the risk. He argues one thing in his paper but supports it with quotes that say the exact opposite of what he's arguing.

That article didn't seem to prove anything other than cancer rates from tobacco being exaggerated, and even if you don't smoke you might still get cancer.
 
[quote name='GBmanNC']A bullet to your chest is likely to kill you. Smoking is not likely to kill you, although it increases your chances. Smoking increases the incidents of cancer but does not cause cancer. Heres a nice article on it http://www.journaloftheoretics.com/Editorials/Vol-1/e1-4.htm[/quote]

First off, didn't read that article. I have read others, though.

Secondly, it was bullet:death like smoking:cancer, not smoking:death.

Anyway, there are chemicals within cigarettes that directly alter cells in a way that causes cancer. That's how it increases your risk of getting cancer.

A bullet to your heart does not instantly cause you to die, it's not even 100% (though it's more likely to kill you than smoking is to give you cancer), but if you get shot in the heart and you die, do you say that the bullet "increased your chances" of dying or that it "caused" your death? After all, there is a certain likelihood that you will die at any given moment, and that bullet simply made it much more likely to happen.

A guy smokes, he gets cancer because of the "increased chances" of getting cancer that smoking brings. How is that not, therefore, "causing" the cancer?

As mikej was saying, if you're using "increases chances" in the sense that the smoking actually doesn't do anything and it simply somehow helps something else give you cancer, you would be wrong. If you're using "increases chances" rather than "causes" as in it doesn't 100% of the time give you cancer, but admit it is directly responsible for it, then you're playing with words in a misleading and unnecessary way.
 
I haven't read past page 1 (yet), but basically, what I comes down to is this- Marijuana, when used in moderation, has many benefits. However, just like any mind altering substance, there is the potential for drawbacks and abuse depending on the individual using it.

Its pros and cons should be judged on a person to person basis. If there is a problem, it's likely either because marijuana is not right for that person, or the individual chooses to abuse it. fuckups are going to be fuckups... Lazy people are lazy people, with or without pot. Same for productive, contributing members of society. The drug itself won't change who a person is at his or her core, at least not in my personal experience.

I fully respect the choice of those who do not smoke. I wish that more people would be knowledgeable about the plant before choosing to bash it, but I don't blame them. The government has been hammering all of us with their propaganda for years now, so people don't know any better, and I can't fault them for that. It doesn't make them stupid, or wrong in any way.

EDIT: As far as the gateway drug theory goes, the majority of people I know who smoke pot use no hard drugs. I will admit that there are people out there who will smoke (or drink, or whatever) and seek a stronger, "better" high, and choose to try other things, and those people probably purchase their marijuana from someone whose "business" focuses on harder stuff like cocaine. But I still maintain that the majority of marijuana users don't use any other street drugs.
 
[quote name='Gothic Walrus']While I'd agree with that train of thought in a perfect world, we've got to deal with the fact that people are stupid. If it's legal, they will overdo it and bad things will happen. I hate to use the drinking allegory here, but look at how many people drink themselves into unconsciousness or death, or drive after they've had a few, even though I don't think there's a man alive who hasn't had years of exposure to seeing the potentially grisly aftermath on the news or through personal experience.

It's probably true that legalizing marijuana would have much, much less severe reprecussions, but we've got to question what would happen if marijuana was legalized, and whether the benefits would outweigh the consequences.

I'd love to keep the discussion going, but I've got some papers to finish and an exam to prep for (damn you, college! :twoguns:). If the thread's still going in a week or so when I'll be back, I'll check in then. :)[/quote]

Good point.

People overdo alcohol too, we should ban that.

People also eat too much fat, we should ban fried foods.

People catch too many STDs, we should ban extramarital sex.

After all - if we can trade a little more of our freedom so the government saves us from our desires and curiosity, it's worth it, right?
 
[quote name='JolietJake']Your judgment wouldn't be impaired until after you chose to use them.:roll:

This coming from someone who doesn't use drugs btw, i still have enough common sense to know that.[/quote]Don't imply that I'm a moron. You're a fool if you think that I don't realize that. But the fact remains that it takes away their ability to reason and, therefore, choose.

[quote name='JolietJake']Addiction doesn't apply when plenty of legal drugs are just as if not more addictive. The same thing could be said for most pain medications, yet they are legal.[/quote]Hey, mister vicious circle. Have you seen Jake around? If you see him could you tell him I'm looking for him and am interested in a rational discussion?

You say talking about the negative effects of marijuana is moot because other "bad" things are legal. That is so asinine, I can't even believe it. Of course I know that other drugs are worse. I already said that. But that is not the point of the thread. The thread is about marijuana. And the stuff impairs you. And if it were you and a cliff and impairment, that would be sad but in reality I really don't care. But the fact is that it is you, lack of judgment, and innocent people all around.

Besides, this is not about prescriptions. This is about marijuana in general

[quote name='JolietJake']Well of course thats true, but the point is moot in this context. You can't say pot should be illegal because it's addictive and allow even more addictive drugs to be legal.[/quote]So, who in this thread wrote a law legalizing a more addictive substance. If you can point them out, you may have an argument. Otherwise, once again you are chasing your own tail.



Anyhow, you are silly, drugs are stupid and I am tired.
 
[quote name='camoor']Good point.

People overdo alcohol too, we should ban that.

People also eat too much fat, we should ban fried foods.

People catch too many STDs, we should ban extramarital sex.

After all - if we can trade a little more of our freedom so the government saves us from our desires and curiosity, it's worth it, right?[/quote]

totally different circumstances, people have grown up on junk food and alcohol, and it has become part of most peoples lives. Banning them would just provoke the prohibition response that occured in the 20's..

much fewer people use pot for recreational use though, and the ban has been more widely accepted than say, a ban on alcohol would be.
 
[quote name='omgu8myrice']totally different circumstances, people have grown up on junk food and alcohol, and it has become part of most peoples lives. Banning them would just provoke the prohibition response that occured in the 20's..

much fewer people use pot for recreational use though, and the ban has been more widely accepted than say, a ban on alcohol would be.[/quote]

You keep switching between talking about ideals and the pragmatic implementation of new policies.

And I'm afraid you entirely missed the point of my post. If you think banning all of those things would result in a perfect society, then you'd probably be alot happier in Pakistan or Saudi Arabia.
 
[quote name='camoor']You keep switching between talking about ideals and the pragmatic implementation of new policies.

And I'm afraid you entirely missed the point of my post. If you think banning all of those things would result in a perfect society, then you'd probably be alot happier in Pakistan or Saudi Arabia.[/quote]

i never said that banning those things outright would result in a 'perfect society', i said that in a 'perfect society' nobody would would do drugs or alcohol; obviously im not naive enough to think that this could ever happen. banning things that have pre-existed for awhile leads to more law breaking.
 
[quote name='omgu8myrice']i never said that banning those things outright would result in a 'perfect society', i said that in a 'perfect society' nobody would would do drugs or alcohol; obviously im not naive enough to think that this could ever happen. banning things that have pre-existed for awhile leads to more law breaking.[/quote]

Like I said, the vast vast majority of people don't drink or smoke marijuana in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. The govenment tightly controls what people can and can't do. It sounds ideal for someone who needs the government to protect him from the wrong choices.
 
[quote name='camoor']Like I said, the vast vast majority of people don't drink or smoke marijuana in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. The govenment tightly controls what people can and can't do. It sounds ideal for someone who needs the government to protect him from the wrong choices.[/quote]

stop bringing other countries into the equation, what happens over there has nothing to do with what goes on here. and even if you want to play that game, why do you ONLY bring up middle eastern countries? There are plenty of other countries out there that have imposed a marijuana ban, while the government still gives freedom to their people.

The government has to draw the line somewhere, and cant keep redrawing it just because there is pressure from a group of people. There are plenty of LEGAL fun things to do, like playing baseball, playing Halo 3, playing the trumpet, and masturbating. You should try one of those and stop complaining about drug laws.
 
Marijuana and other illegal drugs can't be made legal until they are "white" drugs. Doesn't anybody listen to Chris Rock?

Also, if they were legal, how would prisons stay filled or courts tied up? Sure, we could have violent offenders left in prison longer, but wouldn't you rather have a recreational drug user in prison instead of a child molester or somebody who solves problems with their fists or baseball bats?
 
I think that all drugs should be legal. People will do drugs no matter what. I see no problem with it as long as the drug doesn't cause someone to harm another person, and if so, that's when we put them in jail. Why not profit from Marijuana and all of the other " bad" drugs? Then, if people are ready to stop using, they can go to rehab. We can even put labels on the boxes telling them how harmful it is. This would also cut out a lot of drug related crime. What user wouldn't buy legal, FDA approved drugs? Of course, this could lead to theft, which could lead to people selling stolen FDA approved drugs, but I don't know.

However, I am against myself using drugs. Mainly because of the fact that if I started I know that I wouldn't be able to stop. Other than that it's just blind fear, and the stigma of drug users that's been pounded into my head for years. Hey, at least I'm being honest. I think I'll been fine without them, though.
 
[quote name='omgu8myrice']stop bringing other countries into the equation, what happens over there has nothing to do with what goes on here. and even if you want to play that game, why do you ONLY bring up middle eastern countries? There are plenty of other countries out there that have imposed a marijuana ban, while the government still gives freedom to their people.

The government has to draw the line somewhere, and cant keep redrawing it just because there is pressure from a group of people. There are plenty of LEGAL fun things to do, like playing baseball, playing Halo 3, playing the trumpet, and masturbating. You should try one of those and stop complaining about drug laws.[/quote]

:lol:

Chill out man.

And next time, I don't need quite as many details as to how you will.
 
[quote name='omgu8myrice']totally different circumstances, people have grown up on junk food and alcohol, and it has become part of most peoples lives. Banning them would just provoke the prohibition response that occured in the 20's..

much fewer people use pot for recreational use though, and the ban has been more widely accepted than say, a ban on alcohol would be.[/QUOTE]

How has the ban really been accepted? We havent been able to do anything about it, and we are trying (norml.org) to try to get the ban lifted. Again, the ban was original put into affect because we were trying to get the mexicans out during the great depression because we were afraid of losing the few jobs that we had left to them.

Also, in a government study (so the number is surely higher) in 2006 the number of regular smokers was 10.3% of america. Now if it were legal, the number of people who would admit or start using would go up.

http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/drugfact/marijuana/index.html

Im just wondering, not trying to be combative, but which do you think is honestly worse for our country? People who are high on pot or people who are drunk?

[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']Marijuana and other illegal drugs can't be made legal until they are "white" drugs. Doesn't anybody listen to Chris Rock?

Also, if they were legal, how would prisons stay filled or courts tied up? Sure, we could have violent offenders left in prison longer, but wouldn't you rather have a recreational drug user in prison instead of a child molester or somebody who solves problems with their fists or baseball bats?[/QUOTE]

http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle-old/095/marijuanaprisoners.shtml

Just helping your point.

[quote name='GTzerO']I think that all drugs should be legal. People will do drugs no matter what. I see no problem with it as long as the drug doesn't cause someone to harm another person, and if so, that's when we put them in jail. Why not profit from Marijuana and all of the other " bad" drugs? Then, if people are ready to stop using, they can go to rehab. We can even put labels on the boxes telling them how harmful it is. This would also cut out a lot of drug related crime. What user wouldn't buy legal, FDA approved drugs? Of course, this could lead to theft, which could lead to people selling stolen FDA approved drugs, but I don't know.

However, I am against myself using drugs. Mainly because of the fact that if I started I know that I wouldn't be able to stop. Other than that it's just blind fear, and the stigma of drug users that's been pounded into my head for years. Hey, at least I'm being honest. I think I'll been fine without them, though.[/QUOTE]

I completely agree with your statement.
 
[quote name='camoor']:lol:

Chill out man.

And next time, I don't need quite as many details as to how you will.[/QUOTE]

I didnt find you were complaining. I also understand that other things are "fun" but thats not really the point. Pot has uses above and beyond the "fun" factor; ecological, medical, spiritual, and the list goes on. The fact that we "ban" a plant, and a plant that could probably save our society is idiotic. Im not talking about from smoking it, before people jump on me for that.
 
I really don't believe it when people try to say pot makes you stupid. Most people who smoke pot and are stupid were dumb to begin with. I base this on the fact that I am majoring in Information Technology Management with a business minor and have a 3.9 GPA. I only have 2 more quarters left so this isn't a fluke. I don't think smoking is bad as long as you are responsible when doing it (ex: don't get high before classes , etc).
 
[quote name='Staind204']I really don't believe it when people try to say pot makes you stupid. Most people who smoke pot and are stupid were dumb to begin with. I base this on the fact that I am majoring in Information Technology Management with a business minor and have a 3.9 GPA. I only have 2 more quarters left so this isn't a fluke. I don't think smoking is bad as long as you are responsible when doing it (ex: don't get high before classes , etc).[/QUOTE]

Exactly. The dumb pot-head stigma comes from all the morons who only smoked pot in high school and were dumb to begin with. Ive got friends with almost 4.0 gpas at Tufts and they smoke more than I do.
 
Is there anything wrong with pot? Not really. In moderation, it's not a bad drug.

But is there something wrong with peoples' abilities to control their limits? Absolutely.

People have a habit of being ignorant about taking things in moderation.

This is why I believe, pot and alcohol should be legal, but with MASSIVE restrictions. I'm talking about social security number identified purchase limitations.

I think cigarettes should be banned altogether.

I mean let's face it, the only way alcohol can affect people other than the user is if they either: drive drunk, spike someone's drink, assault someone or drink whilst pregnant.

Law enforcement, given the right degree of power, can manage those possibilities.

Cigarettes on the other hand destroy and devastate everything in their path, and they can travel as far as hundreds of feet when the air is right. People can get cancer and DIE from second hand smoke. That means someone completely unrelated can be minding their own business, and YOUR freedom/rights will persecute them. I thought that was what freedom/rights limitations meant to begin with? And people that say, "Well they should stay away from smokers!" need to get punched in the face. If YOU want to plague your lungs, shorten your lifespan and make yourself stink, you find a place to do it where you only affect you and other indecent people.

Pot, in some ways should be moderated the same way. It should NEVER be legal to smoke pot out in public or in places where people who don't want to be subjected to it will be affected.
 
[quote name='NamelessMC']Cigarettes on the other hand destroy and devastate everything in their path, and they can travel as far as hundreds of feet when the air is right. People can get cancer and DIE from second hand smoke.[/quote]

I thought cigarettes were tobacco rolled in paper.
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']How do you manage the children of pot smokers if pot is made legal?[/QUOTE]

???

Same way children of those who take zoloft, and percoset, and vicoden are taken care of. A bad parent's a bad parent. A good parent who smokes pot, is a good parent nonetheless. If she's smoking in the same room, well that's definetly her parenting problem. My aunt and uncle smoke pot as soon as my cousin leaves for school, but have NEVER smoked in her presence.

I can't see the multitude of supposed issues that would arrive if Cannabis were legal (and regulated). Every problem posed thus far can be answered by looking at the way cities like Amsterdam handle their populace of users. Yes there are health issues, but we could put a skull and crossbones on a majority of items at your local supermarket as well.
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']How do you manage the children of pot smokers if pot is made legal?

Do we make special houses for pot smoking akin to brothels?[/quote]

You could look to Netherlands for ordered and peacable implementation of policies that support their citizens rights to liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

I think what Americans resent most is the Federal govt coming in and making one and only one inflexible law of the land on issues that should be states rights or ideally city policy issues.
 
[quote name='omgu8myrice']stop bringing other countries into the equation, what happens over there has nothing to do with what goes on here. and even if you want to play that game, why do you ONLY bring up middle eastern countries? There are plenty of other countries out there that have imposed a marijuana ban, while the government still gives freedom to their people.

The government has to draw the line somewhere, and cant keep redrawing it just because there is pressure from a group of people. There are plenty of LEGAL fun things to do, like playing baseball, playing Halo 3, playing the trumpet, and masturbating. You should try one of those and stop complaining about drug laws.[/quote]

I think it's about time we start imposing lines on what the government can do.. not the other way around. A small group of people should never have this much power over the masses.
 
Also, to stray back to the opening topic, I think it best to view this link particularly.
Drug Control Policy Controversies
More or less proof that not all that the government does in our favor, with regards to drugs, isn't shady. We are most or less hit by a torrent of anti-drug messages in the media, and never once hear the positive side of things unless we get curious on our own(or ask a user).
 
[quote name='PhrostByte']I think it's about time we start imposing lines on what the government can do.. not the other way around. A small group of people should never have this much power over the masses.[/quote]

Too true.

The ironic thing is that he mentioned Halo 3 - ppl in the govt have suggested banning violent video games as well.
 
I smoke pot 24/7, especially on the Toilet and i'm okay.

Just kidding.
I don't support pot, but I don't bother people to stop smoking. I think it's up to the individuals to decide that for themselves.
 
[quote name='camoor']Too true.

The ironic thing is that he mentioned Halo 3 - ppl in the govt have suggested banning violent video games as well.[/quote]

'chill out' ;)
 
[quote name='omgu8yrice']'chill out' ;)[/quote]

I can't, the govt won't let me ;)

JK - to be honest I meditate, do yoga, exercise, basically all that healthy stuff. I also enjoy a beer or two. But I don't think it's my right to tell everyone to chill out the same way, that's my only point.
 
[quote name='camoor']Too true.

The ironic thing is that he mentioned Halo 3 - ppl in the govt have suggested banning violent video games as well.[/quote]

There's some irony in your post too... The funny thing is, a lot of the self-richeous posters on this site will put down marijuana, but will probably start to care about their civil rights a little bit more when Bush tries to prevent Halo 4's release. :p
 
[quote name='PhrostByte']There's some irony in your post too... The funny thing is, a lot of the self-richeous posters on this site will put down marijuana, but will probably start to care about their civil rights a little bit more when Bush tries to prevent Halo 4's release. :p[/quote]

Haha - now all we need is someone to post that "then they came for me" poem :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top