Live Above The Influence... e_e

[quote name='fraggedbylaggers']I really find it crazy that it is illegal when alcohol isnt. I smoke maybe once every three months and enjoy it.[/quote]

I think the goverment already learned its lesson once when they made the Prohibition Amendment....doubt thats gonna happen again any time soon.

EDIT: Forgot my history there for a moment...and to think that was my favorite class in high school
 
[quote name='joe2187']I think the goverment already learned its lesson once when they made the Prohibition acts....doubt thats gonna happen again any time soon.[/QUOTE]

Prohibition Acts? They amended the fuckin' Constitution.
 
[quote name='joe2187']I think the goverment already learned its lesson once when they made the Prohibition acts....doubt thats gonna happen again any time soon.[/quote]

Which is an excellent reason of why the "war on drugs" needs to be stopped. Prohibition does not work. We lock people up and treat them like criminals instead of properly educating and giving them the help they need. Our war on drugs have cost billions of dollars and our nations drug problem is just as bad as it ever has been. Make something illegal and a black market run by ruthless criminals will open up.

Marijuana is comparatively harmless. It isn't toxic (alcohol is very toxic to the bodies tissue), one cannot overdose on it, it isn't addicting (in the physical addiction sense), it does not cause cancer surprisingly even when smoked (It has been shown to REVERSE cells that may go cancerous) and even than it can be ingested/evaporated to remove tar/carcinogens.

Yet we lock up people and destroy there lives, spending billions on prisons and law enforcement when they can be concentrating on actual dangerous criminals.
And of course I ignore what allows the federal government to tell us what we can or cannot put into our bodies. A constitutional amendment was required to prohibit alcohol, and any rights not specifically granted to the federal government is the right of the people/state.

/end rant
 
Dear OP,

You're killing my high. Just smoke and shut up, already, because nobody cares. You already have a mob of pissed off citizens against you, including the geniuses behind the entire campaign against drug use. You'll never win. They are better than you. These people could give a shit about your choleric letter and your disposition behind marijuana use in contempt of your limited experiences with it. So stop shoving your hidden agenda down theirs and our throats and just smoke it all off... and be quiet.

Love,

marijuana for recreation user
 
its tough to compare the war on drugs to alcohol. Alcohol has been around forever, and has been widely accepted by the world community. Its tough to go form legal to illegal, drugs however, for the most part have always been looked down upon.

in a perfect world, alcohol would be illegal too and nobody would drink, but its unreasonable to expect people to do that now after so many years of drinking.
 
[quote name='omgu8myrice'] Its tough to go form legal to illegal, drugs however, for the most part have always been looked down upon.[/quote]So was alcohol at plenty of times in history.
 
[quote name='JolietJake']So was alcohol at plenty of times in history.[/quote]

yes, but it was always legal until prohibition. you cant expect people that have legally grown up on alcohol to stop all of a sudden, especially when theres such a large supply of alcohol floating around.

Saying that money should be spent on murderers and rapists rather than Pot smokers is a bad argument IMO. By that logic, you can say we should let robbers, money launderers, and prostitutes off the hook, because we need jail space/ resources for the "bad criminals". If you break the law, you break the law.
 
And yet another thread to Support my theory that at this rate of retardation, we will all be extinct within a couple decades.
 
[quote name='thekeybladewars']Dear OP,

You're killing my high. Just smoke and shut up, already, because nobody cares. You already have a mob of pissed off citizens against you, including the geniuses behind the entire campaign against drug use. You'll never win. They are better than you. These people could give a shit about your choleric letter and your disposition behind marijuana use in contempt of your limited experiences with it. So stop shoving your hidden agenda down theirs and our throats and just smoke it all off... and be quiet.

Love,

marijuana for recreation user[/quote]Wow, you're a badass!
 
[quote name='omgu8myrice']yes, but it was always legal until prohibition. you cant expect people that have legally grown up on alcohol to stop all of a sudden, especially when theres such a large supply of alcohol floating around.

Saying that money should be spent on murderers and rapists rather than Pot smokers is a bad argument IMO. By that logic, you can say we should let robbers, money launderers, and prostitutes off the hook, because we need jail space/ resources for the "bad criminals". If you break the law, you break the law.[/quote]

Drugs were legal too up until the first decade of the 20th century. You could go to your local pharmacy to pick up some heroin or cocaine (remember where the name Coca Cola came from?) 100 years is nothing compared to all of human history and mans desire to alter there own mind.
Your logic is flawed, you are using straw man arguments. Nobody said we should start letting criminals off the hook. But the difference between robbers and money launderers and prostitutes and drug users is victims. Robbers and money launderers victimize other people, prostitutes and drug users do not.
 
I don't believe that marijuana should be criminalized or controlled.

That said, I fuckin' hate the vast majority of pot smokers I've met over the course of my life. Shut the fuck up about how oppressed you are.
 
I had a family member who was addicted to drugs and I personally don't mind the commercials. Why? Because this family member put me through living hell. They were addicted to a lot of different things except for the ones that are difficult to get off of as far as I know. My mom went bankrupt trying to help this family member. There's a lot more to this but I have absolutely no tolerence for anyone who does drugs because it's not just them thats puffing on a joint of snorting coke. It's their entire family and their friends. It's not just their life they are screwing with, they are screwing with the lives of everyone around them. It took me nearly ten years to forgive my family member because said family member had several relapses, stole my mother's pain killers and other medications, and even stole my pain killers whenever I had dental work done or when I hurt my shoulder and had to have surgery. Marajuana was one of the drugs this family member did as far as I know, they tried everything to get high. Another family member of mine was caught doing it as well but was younger and was grounded for several months. His grades slipped signifigantly when he started. And he doesn't deny it to this day that it was the fault of marajuana.

I don't tolerate any drugs that make people high... period... I even hate pain killers, but if it's necessary, its necessary. The few times I've had to take them I hate the feeling of being high they give me just by taking the one pill. I lay down and whine until the feeling wears off. My husband is on the other side of the spectrum with this though. He completely disagrees with me, but knows how I feel about this and understands why. So he never tries to argue with me about it cuz he knows what I've been through. Plus he knows it's pointless to argue with me about it because of what I've been through. I'm only stating how I feel here about the commercials, not trying to get people to jump on me about it cuz I know there will be someone somewhere that is itching to do so.
 
[quote name='omgu8myrice']its tough to compare the war on drugs to alcohol. Alcohol has been around forever, and has been widely accepted by the world community. Its tough to go form legal to illegal, drugs however, for the most part have always been looked down upon.

in a perfect world, alcohol would be illegal too and nobody would drink, but its unreasonable to expect people to do that now after so many years of drinking.[/QUOTE]

Your point is well recieved, but I'd call into questioning that a perfect world would include forbidden fruits like drugs. Some drugs like LSD have very powerful therapeutic use, and though I don't know many, some people use drugs in that manner. Drugs are commonly associated with the anybody who buys the ATHF Movie DVD, but there are some (intelligent) people who use drugs as a form of spiritual exploration. To go to an extremity, there are many things that affect us chemically, that in your "perfect" world would not be necessary(ex. Chocolate, Caffiene, Anti-depressants). I believe that drugs shouldnt be illegal, because people should be given a choice of what exactly they want to do. Those people who enjoy the exploration of their own mind with good intentions, should be alllowed access to that which enables them to do so. Total criminalization is a blunt, and simple way of handling something, that if done delicately, would stop the needless war on drugs. Some countries understand this point well, some don't, we seem to be the former
 
[quote name='omgu8myrice']yes, but it was always legal until prohibition. you cant expect people that have legally grown up on alcohol to stop all of a sudden, especially when theres such a large supply of alcohol floating around.

[/quote]Do you think that no one used drugs until after they were made illegal?
 
[quote name='omgu8myrice']its tough to compare the war on drugs to alcohol. Alcohol has been around forever, and has been widely accepted by the world community. Its tough to go form legal to illegal, drugs however, for the most part have always been looked down upon.

in a perfect world, alcohol would be illegal too and nobody would drink, but its unreasonable to expect people to do that now after so many years of drinking.[/quote]

Drugs have always been looked down on?

What kind of education do you have (if any)?

Morphine, Codene, Vicodin, etc - are all used by the modern medical profession as pain killers.

Almost all ancient cultures from the Greeks to the Mayans to the Chinese used drugs as keys to spiritual enlightenment.

Thomas Jefferson (third President of the United States of America) grew cannabis hemp (marijuana is produced from hemp) and had this to say:
The culture [of tobacco] is pernicious. This plant greatly exhausts the soil. Of course, it requires much manure, therefore other productions are deprived of manure, yielding no nourishment for cattle, there is no return for the manure expended
... It is impolitic. The fact well established in the system of agriculture is that the best hemp and the best tobacco grow on the same kind of soil.
The former article is of first necessity to the commerce and marine, in other words to the wealth and protection of the country.
The latter, never useful and sometimes pernicious, derives its estimation from caprice, and its value from the taxes to which it was formerly exposed.
Click to expand...


So sorry professor, but the war on drugs is largely a twentieth century phenomenon. Unless you're a Muslim or Mormon - ironic because Mohammad was known to enjoy a light type of wine and there's a theory that the "magic oil" Jesus rubbed on lepers to ease their pain was derived from Cannabis. Thank the gods Jesus drank wine openly or we wouldn't be enjoying that in the USA either.
 
You know whats funny, as I type this im staring at my "Of middle eastern origins" or where ever they're from Neighbors sitting on their balcony smoking from a hookah...and if the smell is any clue....it aint just smoke.
 
[quote name='GBmanNC']
But the difference between robbers and money launderers and prostitutes and drug users is victims. Robbers and money launderers victimize other people, prostitutes and drug users do not.[/quote]

The purpose of the government is to protect its people. Just because something doesnt victimize other people doesnt mean it should be legal. Id imagine you would be against the legalization of heroin, in which the only victim is the user (just as an example, obviously this is a more potent drug that pot).

and prostitutes victimize me, by giving me AIDS
 
I think it's good for people that have medical conditions, but I'm not about to support people that use it for entertainment.

Play video games or listen to music....take a shower....there are other things...
 
[quote name='leveskikesko']I think it's good for people that have medical conditions, but I'm not about to support people that use it for entertainment.

Play video games or listen to music....take a shower....there are other things...[/QUOTE]

Don't forget the third category.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychonaut
 
[quote name='omgu8myrice']The purpose of the government is to protect its people. Just because something doesnt victimize other people doesnt mean it should be legal. Id imagine you would be against the legalization of heroin, in which the only victim is the user (just as an example, obviously this is a more potent drug that pot).

and prostitutes victimize me, by giving me AIDS[/quote]

And yet the war on drugs is the complete opposite of protecting people. Its the government waging war against its own citizens. Even though I wouldn't protest in the streets over it, yes I do believe it is my right to use heroin if I so choose.
If you think prostitution is illegal because of stds, I have a bridge to sell you... Its legislating morality, which a government should never do. There are plenty of places where prostitution is legal and regulated and stds are not a problem.
 
[quote name='Moxio']The OP takes things way too seriously.[/quote]

I agree. Honestly, I find the Comcast commercials more offensive because they are too fucking stupid...
 
The funny thing about pro-drug stances is that people with such preach that it is about "choice". That's BS. Why? These things impair your judgment. They hamper your ability to reason. They do exactly the opposite of the claim pro-drug people bastardize in their lame attempts to rationalize what they know is wrong. Drugs severely limit and usually extinguish all choice on the user's part all together.

If you want freedom, if you want true ability to choose, go take up an instrument or a sport or something and just live your life healthy. That is what these ads are trying to portray.

If you're going to choose otherwise though, just do so and shut the hell up about it so I don't have to hear you complain and whine anymore. And don't bring up cigarettes and alcohol for the millionth time in this thread. If I feel this way about something like marijuana, the same obviously goes for any other drug, no matter what consumer-friendly label you put on it.
 
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 name='seanr1221']I'd rather see them put out more commercials on the dangers of over-the-counter drugs. I think I've only seen one.[/quote]

You mean prescription drugs? I've never seen a commercial about OTC drugs.
 
[quote name='omgu8myrice']and prostitutes victimize me, by giving me AIDS[/quote]

LOL - when you get busted for soliciting pros, try telling the cops that one. They are going to bust a gut laughing at your dumb ass.
 
[quote name='camoor']LOL - when you get busted for soliciting pros, try telling the cops that one. They are going to bust a gut laughing at your dumb ass.[/quote]

relax man, i was kidding
 
[quote name='omgu8myrice']relax man, i was kidding[/quote]

OK, I couldn't tell.

Some people really do believe in the nanny state though, they usually team up with the moral crusaders to form a powerful (and scary) voting bloc.
 
[quote name='GBmanNC']Marijuana is comparatively harmless. It isn't toxic (alcohol is very toxic to the bodies tissue), one cannot overdose on it, it isn't addicting (in the physical addiction sense), it does not cause cancer surprisingly even when smoked (It has been shown to REVERSE cells that may go cancerous) and even than it can be ingested/evaporated to remove tar/carcinogens.[/QUOTE]
Those statements go against most of the research I've seen. I'd love to see your sources for those statements.

[quote name='GBmanNC']Drugs were legal too up until the first decade of the 20th century. You could go to your local pharmacy to pick up some heroin or cocaine (remember where the name Coca Cola came from?) 100 years is nothing compared to all of human history and mans desire to alter there own mind.
Your logic is flawed, you are using straw man arguments. Nobody said we should start letting criminals off the hook. But the difference between robbers and money launderers and prostitutes and drug users is victims. Robbers and money launderers victimize other people, prostitutes and drug users do not.[/QUOTE]

According to this, cocaine was included in trivial amounts, and was only there for a few years - they thought that cocaine was benign when the drink was released in 1886, but that school of thought didn't make it through the 1890s.

[quote name='GBmanNC']And yet the war on drugs is the complete opposite of protecting people.[/QUOTE]

The opposite of protecting people is harming them, and I'm pretty sure the government isn't actively trying to do that, or that attempting to make drugs illegal would lead us to that ends. :whistle2:s

[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]

That is true, but if (when?) it becomes an addiction that argument's worthless.
 
[quote name='Gothic Walrus']Those statements go against most of the research I've seen. I'd love to see your sources for those statements.



According to this, cocaine was included in trivial amounts, and was only there for a few years - they thought that cocaine was benign when the drink was released in 1886, but that school of thought didn't make it through the 1890s.



The opposite of protecting people is harming them, and I'm pretty sure the government isn't actively trying to do that, or that attempting to make drugs illegal would lead us to that ends. :whistle2:s



That is true, but if (when?) it becomes an addiction that argument's worthless.[/quote]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 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]

True.

That doesn't change my point, though - if you're addicted, the ability to make unimpaired decisions goes out the window, whether the addiction is to marijuana, Vicodin, Children's Tylenol, or something else entirely.
 
[quote name='Gothic Walrus']True.

That doesn't change my point, though - if you're addicted, the ability to make unimpaired decisions goes out the window, whether the addiction is to marijuana, Vicodin, Children's Tylenol, or something else entirely.[/quote]
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 name='Gothic Walrus']True.

That doesn't change my point, though - if you're addicted, the ability to make unimpaired decisions goes out the window, whether the addiction is to marijuana, Vicodin, Children's Tylenol, or something else entirely.[/QUOTE]

And prescription drugs are illegal to obtain without a prescription.

Which (addiction, non-perscribed usage) is 95% of that category.
 
[quote name='Gothic Walrus']Those statements go against most of the research I've seen. I'd love to see your sources for those statements.
[/quote]


Which statement do you think is false? They are all well known with the exception of marijuana slowing down or reversing cells going cancerous. Heres an article from FOX NEWS reporting it http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,318526,00.html with link to study in article.
Refute any points with current peer reviewed studies.
 
Pot is harmless compared to the current administration of our so called executive "branch". Where our are PSA ads about how the Patriot Act allows the government to tap our phones and secretly search our homes while we're away?

Where are the PSA ads that show how easily universal health care could be funded if we used the money that's currently spent on the frivolous war on drugs instead?
 
[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 additive and allow even more addictive drugs to be legal.[/QUOTE]

I've never said pot should be illegal. My feelings on the subject are probably clear from this topic, but all I've said is that pot currently is legal.

As for your second point, the "even more addictive drugs" may be legal, but they're also regulated, for the most part. No, regulated doesn't mean that nobody can get the drug without a prescription, but it's a bit different than being able to walk into a pharmacy and grab a bottle off of the shelves.
 
As much as I love weed, I could rant for hours on how it's bullshit that everyone makes it seem so bad etc. I will say that it is indeed a gateway drug and there is no denying that. And if you get caught from whoever and start getting tested...Another reason to switch to something else. Start poppin' pills, eat some shrooms, drop some acid tabs and try testing for those.
 
[quote name='GrimNecroWizard']As much as I love weed, I could rant for hours on how it's bullshit that everyone makes it seem so bad etc. I will say that it is indeed a gateway drug and there is no denying that.[/quote]

Sure there is. The true gateway drugs are alcohol and nicotine.
 
[quote name='Gothic Walrus']I've never said pot should be illegal. My feelings on the subject are probably clear from this topic, but all I've said is that pot currently is legal.

As for your second point, the "even more addictive drugs" may be legal, but they're also regulated, for the most part. No, regulated doesn't mean that nobody can get the drug without a prescription, but it's a bit different than being able to walk into a pharmacy and grab a bottle off of the shelves.[/quote]
Regulating something is one thing, banning it outright is another. I don't care if they regulate the stuff, but banning the "evil plant" is ridiculous.

Hell, i bet it's easier to convince a doctor you need a heavy pain medicine than to buy drugs in some areas. Rush Limabugh was taking oxycontin like it was candy, he had to be getting it from somewhere.
 
[quote name='GBmanNC']Sure there is. The true gateway drugs are alcohol and nicotine.[/QUOTE]

picard-no-facepalm.jpg
 
[quote name='GBmanNC']Which statement do you think is false? They are all well known with the exception of marijuana slowing down or reversing cells going cancerous. Heres an article from FOX NEWS reporting it http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,318526,00.html with link to study in article.
Refute any points with current peer reviewed studies.[/QUOTE]

That link doesn't have much value to it - an experiment performed in laboratory conditions on cell samples is worlds apart from testing it on living, breathing people. The complexity of an organism is completely different than what that experiment tested, and it doesn't really have any validity until it's made it to clinical trials because of the sheer number of environmental variables in the average body. The results are also far from conclusive, since they only tested it on one kind of cancer.

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. I'll let your first two points slide and I have a suspicion I won't get a better source for the last one, but I'd like to see your source for saying that marijuana isn't addictive.
 
[quote name='Gothic Walrus']The opposite of protecting people is harming them, and I'm pretty sure the government isn't actively trying to do that, or that attempting to make drugs illegal would lead us to that ends. :whistle2:s[/QUOTE]

If I may bring forth a slight theory to counter, then I shall mention the State Of Fear concept. Let's say that Psychoactive chemicals like Cannabis, LSD, and Mescaline are known for their ability to cause altered states of perception. Now understanding that, we have the ability to question our reality by way of the "Allegory Of The Cave". I believe that the government could technically be killing to birds with one stone by making that which causes us to question(sometimes, and I am not saying it's the only way to question) illegal, and a source of fear. If we could recall "Reefer Madness", then we'd see just what kind of fear we are( or rather were, given that times have changed) subjected to believe. IT's true that Pot( and other things) aren't all together good; but what might be right for you, might not be right for some. There is no logical reason to deny people the choice to do something unto themselves( with regards to psychoactives), unless there's really something to be afraid of.
 
[quote name='Gothic Walrus']That link doesn't have much value to it - an experiment performed in laboratory conditions on cell samples is worlds apart from testing it on living, breathing people. The complexity of an organism is completely different than what that experiment tested, and it doesn't really have any validity until it's made it to clinical trials because of the sheer number of environmental variables in the average body. The results are also far from conclusive, since they only tested it on one kind of cancer.

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. I'll let your first two points slide and I have a suspicion I won't get a better source for the last one, but I'd like to see your source for saying that marijuana isn't addictive.[/quote]

The study is important because smoking anything,even the grass in your front yard, produces carcinogens. Yet smoking marijuana does not seem to show very high incidents of cells going cancerous like cigarettes do. This may explain why.
And as for marijuana not being addicting, thc can't be addicting because it does not become part of the human chemistry. We are talking about addiction in the physiological sense here. I suppose one could become psychologically dependent on it, but if we are talking about psychological addiction, anything can be addicting (exercising, internet use etc.) A study refuting the gateway theory and marijuana addiction http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v04/n671/a09.html
 
[quote name='Ozzkev55']If I may bring forth a slight theory to counter, then I shall mention the State Of Fear concept. Let's say that Psychoactive chemicals like Cannabis, LSD, and Mescaline are known for their ability to cause altered states of perception. Now understanding that, we have the ability to question our reality by way of the "Allegory Of The Cave". I believe that the government could technically be killing to birds with one stone by making that which causes us to question(sometimes, and I am not saying it's the only way to question) illegal, and a source of fear. If we could recall "Reefer Madness", then we'd see just what kind of fear we are( or rather were, given that times have changed) subjected to believe. IT's true that Pot( and other things) aren't all together good; but what might be right for you, might not be right for some. There is no logical reason to deny people the choice to do something unto themselves( with regards to psychoactives), unless there's really something to be afraid of.[/QUOTE]

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. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top