Leaglize drugs - say what u want

soph · 2003-01-14 17:40:32

If it's true, its a stretch to connect one to the other. Parties, alcohol, drugs-these were all there before video games. Look at the early 80s.

Video games dont cause people to kill people-there is always an underlying problem there...maybe the video game helped bring it out. But then again, maybe getting thrown into a garbage can, getting beaten, etc. did it. Millions of people of all ages play video games. How many of them become druggie murderers because of it?

Josh Cryer · 2003-01-14 18:11:38

I got distracted. Now I don't know if I'm up for a complete reply.

clark, you paint Bob as this immoral bastard who doesn't do anything good for society. Okay, that's totally up to you. And it may be true. But I challenge you to do the same for the 20 million Americans who are active, casual pot smokers. And say the same for the millions of Canadians who smoke pot daily.

Oh, BTW, pot is legal in Canada now. I plan to go up to BC when it becomes offical (maybe I'll have a smoke, I just want to see the party that ensues). Apparently a law was made that the Canadian government had 2 years to decide if medical marijuana was safe, and if by that time they had not made a decision the drug would become legal. Apparently they didn't meet the deadline, and pot is currently legal. There's a very good chance that the judge who made this decision will still stand.

Your little moral story is really ineffectual... Bob is just an idiot. It's his right as its anyone elses. As long as he doesn't mess anyone up in the process.

Josh Cryer · 2003-01-15 17:46:10

Well, I just Googled for "canada pot" and got quite a few hits. I'm surprised you haven't seen anything about it. It's been all over the news lately. I mean, the foreign news. It's a big deal in Canada. It's an equally big deal to us too, since they're such close neighbors, and Americans would begin to flock to Canada to smoke pot and so on and so forth (as if they do't already). Kind of like how teens in California go over the border to Mexico to drink because it's legal there to drink at 18.

http://www.cannabisculture.com/articles/2795.html <- first hit I got. Do you want a less biased site?

You suggest that 10% of all marijuana users have a problem. Well, I'm not a marijuana user, but I have a problem with that statistic. If you're going to create one, it would have to at the most correlate with alcohol, but I would argue much less since it inarguably affects people less than alcohol, from both a health and psychological standpoint.

Bob has nothing to do with marijuana. Bob is a pathetic soul who will go to any length to get a high; he is tourtered by inner demons. Bob doesn't do anything in moderation. Why doesn't Bob just drink one or two drinks, tops? Why does he go so far? Is it because he's ?enjoys the high,? or what? I would wager that Bob is a stupid addict because he has more problems than just the desire to get high.

Just like anyone who takes any recreational activity to the extreme. Look as sex addicts. It's been shown that people with major sex overdrives have been abused as a child. Not all, of course, but many. I even know someone personally whose husband is an alcoholic. He is fine until the bills pick up (like they did at the end of last year), and he totally regresses. Whenever my mom quits smoking, she can manage until something bad happens, and she stresses out (which, due to my youngest brother, is rarely longer than a week at tops).

Before you even approach your argument, you have to prove that marijuana is any more dangerous alcohol. It's not. If we banned alcohol on the justification that there are x number of alcoholics who can't control themselves, then your justification may have grounds in reality. But that ain't happening.

Your assumption is very black and white. That people who do drugs become miscreants, and that without those drugs they would be better people. I would argue that without the triggers that caused them to do drugs in excess, like stress, or their environment, they wouldn't be depraved in the first dang place.

You say that people ?push the envelope.? Well, marijuana isn't that envelope. If anything, alcoholic binging is the envelope. But you don't see many people going about decrying the evils of alcohol, do you? If we were this rational society which did nothing which was harmful to ourselves, ever, many many kinds of recreational activities would simply be banned. Well, we're not.

Marijuana will become legal. Other, geniunely more harmful drugs will stay banned. You don't see people forming political parties talking about how speed isn't harmful, do you?

CalTech2010 · 2003-01-15 21:58:55

You're right. Bob might have external problems that are causing him to use things out of moderation, but why legalize pot and make it easier for Bob to abuse it? Are we really helping Bob by making a quick-escape from reality legal?

Most pot users that I know are losers. I know a kid who talks all week about getting high next weekend. The thing is, he does it EVERY weekend. His actions are copied exactly by many of the pot users I know. They rant and rave all day about how the government is shit and wondering if they could blow up the propane tank next to our school with a .22 shell.

Out of this huge group of drug users, I know one girl who plays in honor band, stays involved in the community, and keeps up a reasonably good GPA. Out of that huge group, ONE is a decent citizen.

I'm not writing very well right now (midterm week). Bye :angry: :laugh: ???

Josh Cryer · 2003-01-16 00:05:48

I know a kid who talks all week about getting high next weekend.

Yeah, blame that on the whole rebellion thing. It's cool, right? To get high? Obviously it is... I mean, yeah, it's illegal and stuff! Gotta be leet...

Anyway, no kind of drug should be in the hands of kids. Looks like this War on Drugs / marijuana is failing badly if kids can get it so easily, huh? May as well stop blowing tax payers money on such things since we've spent so much to no avail.

BTW, you should report their musing about blowing up propane tanks. I'm willing to wager that, if the people you describe is accurate, they're probably in their own little group or whatever, and you have to wonder what's up with their behavior.

I see no valid correlation between these kids and marijuana, though. I suspect they had and have much bigger issues.

dicktice · 2003-01-16 11:18:39

Never having been a smoker, what I resent most about "criminalization" is the lack of products made from hemp fabrics for sale just anywhere...they're comfortable, wear well, look good, don't shrink, etc. How sad....

Auqakah · 2003-01-16 13:03:38

Okay, so this Bob took LSD but hadn't tried acid? Did I miss something here?
No, Bob has not tried Acid yet. He has not tried LSD (the same thing). He has used other hallucinogens, which I noted, such as "shrooms". Bob will be trying acid in the near future as he went to Arizona for that express purpose. Please reread the previous post.
I fail to see, however, how the [h-e-L-L] (computers can't understand you when you spell words out ) pot could be responsible for causing any brain disorder.
I never said pot was the casue of his brain disorders. However, studies in Japan have shown pot use can exasperate those susceptible to schizophrenia. I believe most of his problems are the result of using multiple drugs at the same time, over a period of time. Synergy can be a bitch.
But pot does not cause neurological damage. Sorry, thats rubbish.
Yes, it does. All drugs affect transmission of neuro chemicals, one way or another. Tolerance and addiction are mere symptoms of the change in brain chemistry- when you take drugs, you are effectrvely taking consious control of the distribution of neurotransmitters within the brain- these are self regulating mechanisms, until we muck about with them.
Drinking causes neurological damage. Pot does too. To what degree, varies with use and with time.

Sorry, slightly misread the first time, with regards to acid.

I have no doubt that it exacerbates schizophrenia, but there is a simple reason for that. I know a number of people who suffer with said condition, and some of those indeed smoke pot. (Some probably meaning that only some have admitted it.) Now, the problem is, that the pot 'masks' the symptoms of a number of brain disorders, such as bipolar, bipolar 2, schizophrenia, acute schizoid disorder, and others. Now that is all well and good - but it isn't actually doing anything but treating the symptoms. The cause is not affected, however (the cause being chemical).

What the problem is, is that if you mask the symptoms, the sufferer incorrectly believes that they are 'better' - and thus they do not require their drugs. So they stop taking their drugs, or they go to the doctor, and say 'my dose needs lowering, because my symptoms aren't as bad'. Naturally, they often don't tell the doctor 'Oh, I smoke pot, by the way' - for the obvious reason. I doubt I have to spell /that/ out.

But despite the 'masking' effect, the symptoms are only held at bay as long as tolerance does not build. And it's very hard to keep the dosage correct in order to continue the 'masking' - and doubtless, it isn't healthy. My father, for example, who suffers from bipolar 2, masked his symptoms via the use of pot for nearly thirty - THIRTY - years, but the amount of pot needed versus money available got too high, his usage dropped, and he suffered all the symptoms that had been masked prior. Now, he did have symptoms in those thirty years, but they were very minor ones, relativley speaking. And I've heard from other people that similar circumstances are fairly common.

But the fact remains that when the symptoms return, they return with a vengeance. That /might/ be due to the pot; or, it might be due to the fact that their condition has been mistreated due to the masking effect for so long that their condition has just progressivley got worse.

Lastly, pot isn't a psycho-active drug. That is, it doesn't interfere with the d-2 receptor's in the brain. Rather, it works on another area of the brain altogether - the same area of the brain that opiates act upon. Opiates do not cause brain damage (see hundreds of thousands of doctors addicted to them with no loss of performance for details).

Now, if opiates don't cause brain damage, and cannabis acts upon the same region of the brain, I fail to see how there is any damage being done.

Oh... and alcohol is just completely different to pot. It actually prevents the lubrication of neural pathways in the brain via the rather unpleasant business of coating them. It actually causes massive neural misfiring - which is why drunk people are prone to vomiting, muscle cramps, poor muscular control, and passing out. The fact is that alcohol is a poison. That is, it is /toxic/ to human beings. Just like nicotine, in that respect. Cannabis isn't.

Simple.

Auqakah · 2003-01-16 13:10:10

Oh, and soph, that quote is true. I heard it myself (from the horses mouth, as it were) on a TV program a few weeks back - was I Love 1989, which was part of a series of programs by the BBC about the eighties, innovativley called 'I Love the Eighties', which was a follow-up to 'I Love the Seventies'.

Clever titles indeed.

soph · 2003-01-16 14:04:12

I know a kid that smokes pot every day. He's a 4.0 honors student, and a star lacrosse player on varsity since freshman year. He is obviously very productive, cal, and his athletics isnt hurt at all.

In fact, many of the "potheads" in my school are kids you would never know-some you do, mainly because they play up the image to be cool (long hair, acting retarded, etc.), but most pot smokers are pretty normal.

Josh Cryer · 2003-01-16 15:45:11

clark, just to point something out about the higher courts in Canada, they've basically ended prohibition for medical marijuana users. And Canadians think that the laws will not succeed (due to the whole cost of distributing pot).

http://www.cannabisculture.com/articles/2800.html

If Canada does legalize pot, I suspect it will be legalized in the US the first chance some democratic leaders get into congress (ie, they'll do it because it would be a politically wise thing to do).

And just because opiates don't kill brain cells, it doesn't mean that they're not psychoactive, I don't think... in fact, I've read articles calling THC / marijuana psychoactive.

Josh Cryer · 2003-01-16 16:18:19

Drug users don't vote. You don't vote, you don't count.

C'mon clark, there are Marijuana Parties in practically every state.

But yes, you're right that there are people with vested interests in the drug war. I mean, we're the same country who flies genetically engineered pesticides in crop dusters to kill marijuana plants in Mexico (cannibas is immune to must pesticides, too, so this stuff is some nasty crap). Those guys have got to be one of many people who benefit from the drug war.

But the question will be, ?If Canada and Britian can do it, why can't we?? And people will flock to Canada just to do pot. Plus, pot imports from Canada will increase (despite that it's illegal, once it's legal there, growing it is much easier). ?Stopping marijuana? at this point becomes less and less dooable.

Josh Cryer · 2003-01-16 16:50:02

European boarders are about,well, a dozen times more strict than Canada's. You're looking at a much smaller area to cover, too. Smuggling from Canada to the US is so infinitely simple. I mean, you can literally walk across the boarder.

Go check out Pot TV... the guy explains how easy Canada -> US smuggling of pot is. It's funny, because he says that if the US legalized pot, we'd put him out of business. So he suggests that he might not like the idea. :laugh:

Ack, edit, I gotta go. I just wanted to point out that reducing it as much as possible isn't really working, if kids can get the stuff as easily as Cal here suggests. As you point out, actually, the point is not to reduce it, but keep those who have vested interests in reducing it, in power.

dicktice · 2003-01-16 16:50:57

Why anyone with any amount of sense, with knowledge beforehand, would even want to "try" anything that might degrade their ability to function physically and mentally, is more than I can understand. But, criminalization by the establishment, of habit-forming (whatever) without providing humane ways and means of kicking a victimizing habit, is worse than criminal! Drug addiction education similar to up-to-date hygene courses in schools should be available to all, myself included, to avoid getting started out of sheer ignorance. (I thank you...next?)

clark · 2003-01-17 13:07:35

I would like the drug laws in this country to change. I also would like for there to be options to prevent young children from making mistakes becuase they lack the ability to make mature decisions.

I never tried Mj until I was 21.

I was a fully functional adult. I made a personal choice. I honestly feel that it is nobodys business other than my own, and I resent the fact that I was forced to break unjust laws.

I also see things from the other side. I understand that parents and families don't wnat their children being exsposed to yet more dangers. I understand that it is easy to abuse. I understand that it does destroy many peoples lives- mostly people who fall into drug use at an early age.

I don't think legalizing mj will help. I think it will make it worse by making it more available to more people. As it stands now, it becomes difficult to get once you fall outside the regular circles.

The fact of the matter is supporters don't address these issues- instead they come back with "not addictive" or, they throw out numbers.

I have seen the damage done to people who make poor choices. I have suffered directly from the current drug war.
Yet I see both positions, and I find the legalization to be the weaker adn unrealistic argument.

Auqakah · 2003-01-17 13:36:29

I'll give you the solution to the drug problem:

Honest education, and decriminalisation.

clark · 2003-01-17 13:53:45

I hear you Auq, however I am less than optimistic in educational programs in achieving realistic results.

And decrimilization will lead to greater drug related accidents as people feel more at ease in their use of currently controlled substaces.

Auqakah · 2003-01-17 16:49:48

I see your point on the education front, but I don't think that - in the long run - more people will use drugs if they are legalized/decriminalized wholesale, as it were. They haven't had that problem in Holland (in the long term), and I don't see why here in Britain or in the US would be any different. Also, the Dutch people /still/ support their governments approach. I think that says something in itself; the new government in Holland (well, newish) had promised to do away with the current system of dealing with drugs and replace it with a harsher, prohibitionist version - but they found that they couldn't get the support to do so.

clark · 2003-01-17 17:12:53

I can agree that more people will not neccessarily start using if drugs are legalized, I do think though that there will be more cases of abuse. That means there will be repercussions for society. I think we'll end up with more drug related OD's, more dependancy problems, and greater instances of child abuse.

I also suggest that if you have the opportunity, you visit Amsterdam and look at the city, and the culture there.

It is a small city that receives a great deal of tourists, primarily for the drugs. In the tourist areas, near the red light district, it is absolutely disgusting. Visiting made me realize that I wouldn't want this situation where I live. It's great to visit, but not to live.

Why? Becuase irresponsible people abuse their ability to behave like this. Kind of like 21 yr olds getting drunk all the time- it is an abuse of a privleage.

Also, they have some of the most beuatiful parks I have ever experienced, and it has become home to transiet drug users (primarily heroin)

Josh Cryer · 2003-01-17 17:46:09

You're going to find that behavior anywhere you really look, clark, to be quite honest. Legalization isn't about public rights, it's about private rights. Look at smoking. It's banned in very many resturants. So too would marijuana be, I'm sure.

One can be against something in a certain context but still be for it in another. I'm against drinking and driving, but I'm not against drinking or driving.

Despots are going to exist with or without legalization. The arguments against it are that if it was legalized, there would be ?more of it? (potheads, etc). The arguments for it are that if it was legalized there would be ?less of it? (crime, etc).

It just depends on what your priorities are.

Auqakah · 2003-01-17 17:53:27

When did you visit ?

Holland doesn't have a heroin problem anymore. And those addicts that they do have, have been addicts for a large number of years - Holland has an ageing heroin addict population. And of course, they have so-called 'shooting-galleries' where they can get their gear.

So um. When did you visit?

Oh, and 21 year olds (and most other age groups) drink too much because their parents set the wrong example - as did/does society. And they've been exposed to alcohol advertising for so many years, also.

Auqakah · 2003-01-17 18:08:42

A bunch of links:

A report on cannabis commissioned by the Home Office in Britain, dispelling the 'gateway drug' theory: http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs2/hors253.pdf

A solid reason reason why cannabis should be decriminalized/legalized, especially in Britain: http://www.ukcia.org/activism/soapbar.htm

The US Drug Enforcement Agency held hearings in 1987 to determine whether cannabis should be allowed as medicine. After 1000's of hours of legal deliberations, the judge in charge accepted that cannabis is "capable of relieving the distress of great numbers of very ill people" and that it would be safe to use cannabis as a medicine under medical supervision. He recommended that the DEA should allow cannabis as a medicine, but its Administrator refused. The full text of Judge Youngs ruling is online ... the testimony of doctors, nurses and patients makes astonishing reading. (text from www.ukcia.org) http://www.commonlink.com/olsen/MEDICAL … young.html

The International Society for Cannabis as Medicine: http://www.cannabis-med.org/home.htm

The History of Cannabis: http://www.lindesmith.org/library/mmjgrins.html

Cannabis 'Crime' Statistics (British): http://www.ukcia.org/pollaw/crimestatis … fault.html

The Effects of Cannabis (source: UKCIA): http://www.ukcia.org/effects/effects.php

Cannabis : Should it be decriminalised?

Independent On Sunday debate
Queen Elizabeth Conference Centre
Westminster
11th December 1997 (Source of link: UKCIA): http://www.ukcia.org/library/11dec97debate.php

I can provide more, if you so wish.

Auqakah · 2003-01-19 13:24:55

And one more link for good measure.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/785351.stm

CalTech2010 · 2003-01-28 13:24:17

Maybe someone can explain this to me...

Josh (or maybe it was Auqakah) said that the longer you smoke marijuana, the less tolerant you become of it (ie the more you smoke, the less you need to get high later on)

I talked to my marijuana user friends, and my father (a former user) this past week and they all said that they needed more pot to get high the longer they smoked.

Comments? ???

Echus_Chasma · 2003-01-28 15:59:14

I talked to my marijuana user friends, and my father (a former user) this past week and they all said that they needed more pot to get high the longer they smoked.
Comments? ???

Thats very true.

As you get more addicted you need more to get a high.
I don't know the technicalities of it, but I think its because your body is getting used to the drug and is used to running high for most of the time, so you need more of the drug to get the same feeling. Its the same with all recreational drugs and thats why its harder to give up after you have been an addict for an extended period of time.

I think thats what Josh or Aquakah was meaning when they said it makes you less tolerant.

Josh Cryer · 2003-01-28 22:59:05

Well, it's probably true. I can drink a large cup of caffeinated iced tea before going to bed and sleep fine. Ten years ago, I probably couldn't sleep with even a sip of tea. I'm a lifelong drinker of caffeinated beverages (well, from when my parents would let me), so I've grown accustomed to drinking caffeine.

This goes for all things. Including alcohol and even cigarettes.

The ?addiction? caused by marijuana is not physical, it is psychological at best. Just like addictions to chocolate, or coffee, or even sex. It's not going to create a physical imbalance in the brain which causes you to be actually dependent on it to feel normal (like cigarettes or heroine).

The study I read was talking about the short term effect of marijuana, specifically THC. If you start smoking it, subsequent smokes will have a higher level of sensitivity, so you'll smoke less. Over time, of course, the effect would disappear, so perhaps it's not worth mentioning.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#176 2003-01-14 17:40:32

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#177 2003-01-14 18:11:38

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#178 2003-01-15 17:46:10

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#179 2003-01-15 21:58:55

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#180 2003-01-16 00:05:48

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#181 2003-01-16 11:18:39

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#182 2003-01-16 13:03:38

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#183 2003-01-16 13:10:10

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#184 2003-01-16 14:04:12

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#185 2003-01-16 15:45:11

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#186 2003-01-16 16:18:19

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#187 2003-01-16 16:50:02

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#188 2003-01-16 16:50:57

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#189 2003-01-17 13:07:35

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#190 2003-01-17 13:36:29

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#191 2003-01-17 13:53:45

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#192 2003-01-17 16:49:48

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#193 2003-01-17 17:12:53

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#194 2003-01-17 17:46:09

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#195 2003-01-17 17:53:27

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#196 2003-01-17 18:08:42

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#197 2003-01-19 13:24:55

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#198 2003-01-28 13:24:17

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#199 2003-01-28 15:59:14

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

#200 2003-01-28 22:59:05

Re: Leaglize drugs - say what u want

Board footer