# congratulations to 2 states



## cheezyridr (Jun 8, 2009)

colorado and washington legalized it! woooo hoooooo!


----------



## keto (May 23, 2006)

What, My Little Pony? 2 too many if you ask me!

Seriously, did anyone see the latest Nature Of Things? I don't have much use for the host but happened to be doing other things and it was on in the background. Pot is now strongly linked to mental health issues, particularly schizophrenia (sp?) as a trigger and a cause. I did not know this. Makes me feel better about my curmudgeonly stance on the subject.


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

It's closed minded people like this as to why there is so much wasted money, 
time and effort on this stupid drug war.

Strongly linked? How about strong links to the healing aspects?
You can twist the facts whatever you want, or believe what you will.
It still boils down to your own peronal choice, which we don't have.

Alcohol and tobacco are legal, quite wholesome and a non-issue when it comes to health care too, right?


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

This is all that I could find keto...

[video=youtube;dazqMXP4qlg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dazqMXP4qlg[/video]

Do you have a link to your claim? Is the program conradicting itself?


----------



## bluzfish (Mar 12, 2011)

Studies are like statistics - another type of lies. Even working with data from a pristine scientific study, you can twist the results to whatever you want to say. And you would have to examine the study itself to know whether the study controls were indeed done to your satisfaction. Injecting enough THC to kill an elephnat into a mouse and concluding THC is harmful is ridiculous but I have looked into some of these "scientific" results and found this exact same conclusion - you only hear what they want to tell you.


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

By the way, I just had to give a friend a bag because his square-headed doctor would not give him a prescription.

The guys basically knocking on deaths door.
If he gets back an appetite and manages to live a bit longer, is that so bad?

Medicinal marijuana _*is *_allowed, yet there are still stallwarts, including that doctor that refuses patients.

It seems to me, that the people that are dead set against it, never tried it, or did once and didn't like it.
That's your experience, too bad for you. Why refuse anybody and everybody the choice?

Recreationally, there are far less problems than other "legal" drugs.


----------



## keto (May 23, 2006)

I just went on the CBC website/Nature of Things and can't find the episode. Not making it up, tho. Scientific studies, particularly in Sweden and Holland, were discussed at length.

But (and I'm not qualified to answer questions as to their validity, just linking what a google search finds) there's:
http://www.care2.com/greenliving/marijuana-smoking-linked-to-mental-illness.html
http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/expertadvice/problems/alcoholanddrugs/cannabis.aspx
http://www.drugabuse.gov/publicatio...ere-link-between-marijuana-use-mental-illness

That's just a select few on the first page of search results. Admittedly, most of the news concerns use by teenagers but then, that's who they're studying.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Congratulations to Colorado and Washington.

it's a good start.

Anyone who thinks weed is even close to being as harmful as booze, is not on the same page as I am.

I think that's the politest way for me to say it.


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

If you're not predisposed to schizophrenia, you will _*not*_ get it from smoking weed, period.
Trust me on that, or I'd be talking to the voices in my head by now.

If you are, on the other hand, it's not recommended to smoke, simple as that.

[video=youtube;zA87jhI4NC4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zA87jhI4NC4[/video]


----------



## bluzfish (Mar 12, 2011)

I've been doing my own study for about 45 years now. My conclusion is that I like it, I'm not in jail and life is good.


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

Here's one from a molecular biologist, in case you're still wondering.
It's nearer to the end where he talks about predisposition...

[video=youtube;3HzDcC4pBfc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3HzDcC4pBfc[/video]


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

This is from the Columbia University study you listed keto - 

"She also said the study does not prove smoking marijuana alone causes psychosis."

This is in the first paragraph of the RC Psyc link...

"... unlike alcohol and cigarettes, might even be good for your physical and mental health. On the other hand, recent research has suggested that it can be a major cause of psychotic illnesses in *those who are genetically vulnerable*."

And finally, this is from the last link you provided. A little reading would go a long way.
I'm also assuming that you missed the link to predisposition on the Nature of Things too.

" Marijuana use also worsens the course of illness in patients with schizophrenia and can produce a brief psychotic reaction in some users that fades as the drug wears off. The amount of drug used, the age at first use, and genetic vulnerability can all influence this relationship. One example is a study that found an increased risk of psychosis among adults who had used marijuana in adolescence _and_ who also carried a specific variant of the gene for catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT), an enzyme that degrades neurotransmitters such as dopamine and norepinephrine."


----------



## keto (May 23, 2006)

No, I caught the predisposition thing.

I will never understand the arguments linking alcohol and marijuana legalization. Of course, alcohol when abused has far worse potential health issues, both mental and physical. The old 'two wrongs don't make a right' thing. Hell, I smoke cigarettes. Ask me how that's doing for me.

But, hey, I'm not on a crusade. I'm certainly a strong believer in personal liberty and your right to do whatever you want in the privacy of your own home, that isn't harming anyone else. Just wondered if anyone had seen the show. Peace out.


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

When alcohol was under prohibition, it drove it underground into the hands of organized crime.
In fact, it's said that it gave way to the rise of the mob(s) at the time.
Same thing is happening now with pot.

If that relation isn't enough, I'm not sure what would be.

Would you want to have to go to a speak easy to get a drink?
Go to the bowling alley to score a beer?


----------



## Rugburn (Jan 14, 2009)

sulphur said:


> Would you want to have to go to a speak easy to get a drink?
> Go to the bowling alley to score a beer?



Hey man, what's wrong with going to a* bowling alley *to score a beer?


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

LOL

The problem would be, you'd have to buy it in the bathroom and drink it out behind the building.


----------



## Rugburn (Jan 14, 2009)

sulphur said:


> LOL
> 
> The problem would be, you'd have to buy it in the bathroom and drink it out behind the building.


I guess that _*would *_tarnish the experience.......wait a minute! What's wrong with drinkin' beer out behind the bowling alley?


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

keto said:


> No, I caught the predisposition thing.
> 
> I will never understand the arguments linking alcohol and marijuana legalization. Of course, alcohol when abused has far worse potential health issues, both mental and physical. The old 'two wrongs don't make a right' thing. Hell, I smoke cigarettes. Ask me how that's doing for me.
> 
> But, hey, I'm not on a crusade. I'm certainly a strong believer in personal liberty and your right to do whatever you want in the privacy of your own home, that isn't harming anyone else. Just wondered if anyone had seen the show. Peace out.


Would you say the same if prohibition of alcohol was brought back?

If so, then you're unlike most anti-weed people I've encountered.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

I was actually at a party attended by James Watson once. Didn't speak to him. Just had him pointed out to me on the other side of the lounge. He may know a lot about molecular biology and what lies within the cell nucleus, but I'm not gonna place my faith in his knowledge of human psychopharmacology.


----------



## keto (May 23, 2006)

Milkman said:


> Would you say the same if prohibition of alcohol was brought back?
> 
> If so, then you're unlike most anti-weed people I've encountered.


Mike, straw argument, not going to happen. Again, I'm not on any sort of crusade- pot laws are slowly being liberalized and, while I disagree on personal principal, I'm not out shouting from the rooftops against and think that the liberalization trend will continue.

Once again, I just asked if anyone had seen the TV episode. Apparently, nobody did.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

keto said:


> Mike, straw argument, not going to happen. Again, I'm not on any sort of crusade- pot laws are slowly being liberalized and, while I disagree on personal principal, I'm not out shouting from the rooftops against and think that the liberalization trend will continue.
> 
> Once again, I just asked if anyone had seen the TV episode. Apparently, nobody did.


No offense Keto. 

I guess those of us who have had to hide for most of our lives, while those in authority enjoyed their poison, while putting our friends in jail for enjoying theirs, are just so tired of the reefer madness nonsense.

It's a blatant double standard and it brings out the claws a bit.


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

mhammer said:


> I was actually at a party attended by James Watson once. Didn't speak to him. Just had him pointed out to me on the other side of the lounge. He may know a lot about molecular biology and what lies within the cell nucleus, but I'm not gonna place my faith in his knowledge of human psychopharmacology.


So all the studies that keto linked that conclusively link marijuana use with a predisposition to a disease aren't enough then?

It's the perpetuation of myths that I don't like.


----------



## Rugburn (Jan 14, 2009)

It's going this way here as well. The dumber the Feds are on this the more proactive states/provinces will have to be. Both in regards to their electorate's wishes and what their budgets can handle from a drug law enforcement perspective. They can intellectualise this all they want, but just as there are those who shouldn't drink there will be those who shouldn't smoke pot. A complex micro-biological breakdown of psychoactive goings on isn't necessary to know that Uncle _____ gets out of control when he gets into the booze. So why all the fancy science and further studies needed when discussing insane marijuana drug policy? Didn't the tidal wave of OCD/ADHD/Anti-depressant drugs make their way into our lives within a handful of years of their developement? Now these drugs are as common as buffered analgesics. They're in our water supply, mother's milk etc. Where's the concern there?


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

Good points Rugburn.

Here's a good argument from a former Superior Court judge - 

[video=youtube;qKgY5eOlhEc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qKgY5eOlhEc&amp;feature=endscreen&amp;NR=1[/video]


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

Portugal decriminalized *all* drugs, not just pot, more than ten years ago.

The usage has decreased since and related crimes have also dropped.


----------



## fretboard (May 31, 2006)

View attachment 1796


...........


----------



## keto (May 23, 2006)

sulphur said:


> Portugal decriminalized *all* drugs, not just pot, more than ten years ago.
> 
> The usage has decreased since and related crimes have also dropped.


That certainly doesn't mirror what has happened in Switzerland, the Netherlands, and of course other places historically. http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/debate/myths/myths4.htm


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

I guess it depends where you're getting your information...

http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/2008/may/09/europe_dutch_marijuana_tax_reven

[video=youtube;uDt8NXLs1ws]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDt8NXLs1ws[/video]


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

Probably another point to make is, these counties decriminalized "possession" of smaller quantities.

They, however, did not decriminalize the distribution of the drugs, at least not in Portugal.

That's like granting a licence to drive and making the purchase of a car illegal.
So of course, you're still going to have an underground element to distribute the drugs.

Besides that, those issues are mainly dealing with hard drugs.


----------



## shoretyus (Jan 6, 2007)

sulphur said:


> If you're not predisposed to schizophrenia, you will _*not*_ get it from smoking weed, period.
> Trust me on that, or I'd be talking to the voices in my head by now.
> 
> If you are, on the other hand, it's not recommended to smoke, simple as that.


Bingo ... I don't have a problem.... but I know that it triggered my ex wife's mental health issues.

I also live in a town that Dr Kammermans practices. 
http://www.intelligencer.ca/2012/08/16/doctor-released-on-bail

I saw a LOT of sick patients that he helped. Funny he can still practice medicine and is the ONLY Dr that CAN"T offer a prescription for pot


----------



## cheezyridr (Jun 8, 2009)

of course a big part of me is happy about all this. where i come from you can't get any job without passing a piss test. 
however, there is one thing that makes me nervous.

i have long held the belief that the entire reason the war in drugs exists at all is because it is a huge gov't revenue stream 
it employs a hell of alot of law enforcement people, judicial people, social programs, and all the little satellite agencies that get involved every time a user/dealer is arrested. it employs huge amounts of people, whom all pay taxes, buy goods and services, etc. 
_i also believe (get out your tinfoil hats) that our government uses assets seized in the drug war to covertly fund things that might be highly unpopular if the public were approached for funding._ kinda like the iran-contra thing with ollie north working with ronnie and the boys to trade weapons for hostages in a roundabout way. so, IF my paranoid theory is correct, then where is the gov't going to find a new source for all that revenue lost, as well as it's effect on the economy? my worry is that it will come from the mission creep we see in the tsa, the ongoing expansion of the patriot act, and the so-called war on terror.


----------



## bluzfish (Mar 12, 2011)

Bang on Cheesy. You aren't paranoid if they really are out to get you. The legality of using drug money to fund secret pet military and ops projects is definitely an incentive for the government to do nothing to change the status quo. In actual fact, there is no incentive at all for the government to do anything. They would have to account for any tax money from legalization - drug money is easy for them to launder or simply steal from themselves.


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

To the people who may be against weed being legal, or legal and regulated in someway.... what do you think will go wrong if that happened? Do you realize how many people are using it in a lot of places? Those people smoking are still going to be smoking. No less, more than than they already do. Very little would change except that people would be able to legally use a natural drug that they feel helps them.

Here in Canada we can grow hemp (contains no THC). In most places in the States that's illegal because weed is. Hemp has a bunch of pretty amazing uses. People are also attempting to drink cannabis juice (non-psychoactive) and taking Cannabis oil and getting some impressive results for health conditions. As long as the archaic drug laws are on the books, none of these things get a chance to grow and improve. I'd rather the silly war on drugs end, and allow things to progress.

Bottom line... just because a drug is legal... it doesn't mean you have to use it.


----------



## Spikezone (Feb 2, 2006)

Milkman said:


> Congratulations to Colorado and Washington.
> 
> it's a good start.
> 
> ...


Man, I couldn't agree with you more!
-Mikey


----------



## 10409 (Dec 11, 2011)

Honestly I never thought i'd see the day, I wonder what will become of the so many incarcerated people now that their crime isn't much of a crime.

I haven't smoked in years but I cook with it often. Which is the way to go in all honesty. the main health concern caused by pot is that it's smoked. smoking anything is bad for you. plus it's expensive as all hell. I bought 100$ worth and made 3L of THC cooking oil. That will make me 26 batches of brownies (for instance). I figure that's about a six month supply for a heavy user...for me it should last nearly 2 years.

Plus I can eat it in public with nobody the wiser.

On a side note, I'm gonna go buy shares in beef jerky.


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

I also agree with cheezy.

Here lies the problem. The US textile industry wants nothing to do with hemp.
The big oil companies want nothing to do with hemp, which is one of the best biofuels available.
The pharmaceutical companies want nothing to do with weed, there's no money in a natural product for them.
The US prisons are privatized, make their cash off of the inmates, they want nothing to do with deregulation/legalization.
The DEA, TFA, police agencies in general, want nothing to do with deregulation/legalization.

Any, or all of the above are obstacles to any kind of rational thought on the subject,
whether it's lobbyists greasing palms, or fear of losing jobs/money.


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

mike_oxbig said:


> *Honestly I never thought i'd see the day, I wonder what will become of the so many incarcerated people now that their crime isn't much of a crime.*
> 
> I haven't smoked in years but I cook with it often. Which is the way to go in all honesty. the main health concern caused by pot is that it's smoked. smoking anything is bad for you. plus it's expensive as all hell. I bought 100$ worth and made 3L of THC cooking oil. That will make me 26 batches of brownies (for instance). I figure that's about a six month supply for a heavy user...for me it should last nearly 2 years.
> 
> ...


I was listening to a podcast about some of the laws regarding crack cocaine and sentencing in the States. I guess at one point that sentences were way more severe than for cocaine or heroin. They revised that at some point, but it didn't affect the sentences of people already in jail under the old law.


----------



## Mooh (Mar 7, 2007)

Anything that is smoked is bad news. Tobacco, weed, whatever. I wish it all didn't exist. However, it does and therefore it should be regulated, ie, in some way legalized and controlled.

As for hemp, the bias against it just amazes me. It's a great substance, renewable too.

Peace, Mooh.


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

As the states takes a step forward, we take one backwards.

Thanks Harper! Maybe child luring is a safer past time?

http://metronews.ca/news/canada/432134/canada-ups-pot-sentences-as-states-legalize/


----------



## mrmatt1972 (Apr 3, 2008)

I don't think there are any serious health risks with Cannabis, but as long as it is prohibited by law the risk is supporting organized crime. Mary Jane is the primary source of income for the bad guys and a good reason to not buy the stuff is to keep money out of their hands. Ending prohibition ends that problem, reduces (not increases) use and frees up law enforcement $ for real crimes. I'm all for ending prohibition - I'd love to see the day when farms grow it and you buy it at the CLBO store.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

And...the A-holes drag their heels yet again.

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/USElection/2012/11/07/20340126.html


----------



## Guitar101 (Jan 19, 2011)

mrmatt1972 said:


> I'd love to see the day when farms grow it. (weed)


I'm retiring from beef farming so this may be a viable option for me. However, the influx of musicians into the community could become a problem. It hard enough keeping the raccoon's out of my corn.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

It's one of those crops where the kids will hop the fence to get into your field, and then won't be able to hop the fence to get out again.


----------



## allthumbs56 (Jul 24, 2006)

I think the day will come.

It's far too tempting of a revenue stream. Governments have used up the income from gas, alcohol, tobacco, and will soon have sucked all they can from gambling. When that happens they will turn to prostitution and drugs. 

Of course you won't be able to grow your own, and there'll be lots of new riddiculous rules about how and where you can use it. And you will pay twice the price for it at the MCBO.


----------



## Ship of fools (Nov 17, 2007)

While my wife and I do not smoke for recreational purposes we are under the strong opinion that if Canada took the same approach and regulated it as they do with booze that it would make a giagantic difference in stupid criminal records and in improving the health of a lot of sick people and would reduce the crime of biker gangs trading it for Cocaine.
It is very well possible that there may be a few individuals who may have earlier on set of pyscotic episods from smoking pot but they may also be pre-disposed to those conditions. But to me I look at it like a person who cannot contorl his gambling or any other addiction, do you stop all individuals because of a few. No I think you can take some of that money that would be earned and help those few.
Like it or not it is a changing world and we need to be responsible as to how it changes and I am sure that once Stephen Harper is removed from power things could very well change and it may just happen in my life time.
As for growing ones own well its not really that easy of a process to weed out the male from the female and cloning can be difficult, so I am sure we will see large scale farms created with some expertice in how much THC is produced in different varieties, its like beer some are oaky woith Molsons and folks like me like their small brewiers that specialize in what they make.ship


----------



## Beatles (Feb 7, 2006)

Not likely anything will happen in the near future. Here is an excerpt from today's Toronto Star....

_Tuesday was also the day that drug measures in the Conservative government’s omnibus Safe Streets and Communities Act, passed last spring, came into full force.
_
_Canada’s new law provides a mandatory six-month jail term for growing as few as six marijuana plants, twice the mandatory minimum for luring a child to watch pornography or exposing oneself on a playground._


----------



## 4345567 (Jun 26, 2008)

__________


----------



## Chito (Feb 17, 2006)

nkjanssen said:


> Pot isn't my drug of choice. It gives me a *sore throat* and makes me sleepy.


Most chronic pot smokers nowadays use vaporizers, where there is no combustion that occurs which avoids the inhalation of the toxic and carcinogenic by-products of smoking it. Also the sleepiness caused by pot is dependent on the type of pot you smoke.


----------



## cheezyridr (Jun 8, 2009)

Guitar101 said:


> I'm retiring from beef farming so this may be a viable option for me. However, the influx of musicians into the community could become a problem. It hard enough keeping the raccoon's out of my corn.


dude, if you need a farm hand, i'm totally there


----------



## Mooh (Mar 7, 2007)

nkjanssen said:


> Pot isn't my drug of choice. It gives me a sore throat and makes me sleepy.
> 
> That said, I can't think of any rational reason that I should want to deny someone the ability to toke up while I'm enjoying a few beers or maybe a nice bourbon.


Except maybe secondhand smoke.

Peace, Mooh.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

Me, I've just never "gotten" intoxication as a desirable state, regardless of what produces it. Being amongst those who are intoxicated holds about as much charm for me as waiting for my wife outside the card store. I know folks_ like _it, and hold nothing against them; I just don't get it. I've also never really liked the smell of pot. One of the reasons why I simply stopped going to concerts for years. I'd rather be passed by someone on the street with a big cigar than someone with a joint.

So for me, all of this legalization stuff is a bit like finding out pigs knuckles used to be against the law, and now they aren't. I'd have some empathy for folks in jail for eating or cooking something that unimportant or uncritical, but I'd still be thinking "Why the hell did you even want to *do* that?".


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Well, I just got home from a long day of productive work, followed by a complete ass kicking in the gym.

I'm now behind about a half gram of very high quality Canadian herb.

I can assure you I am not feeling paranoid, and I have none of the symptoms associated with serious mental illness(and please know that I do not consider mental illness a joke).

I do feel a little warm and tingly, and supper is smelling nice. I'm posting this while chatting with my kids.

Sounds pretty sinister right?


----------



## b-nads (Apr 9, 2010)

I'm raising glass of fine single malt scotch in your honour, Milk. While not a partaker myself, I honestly can't find any sensible reason why pot is more detrimental than booze or smokes. I tried pot a couple times, and must have done something wrong, because I got nothing out of it. Some @ssholes I know become pretty decent human beings when they've had a spliff. I'm a decent human being - put too many ryes in me and I'll either try to break your leg or hump it...:sSig_ImSorry:


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

I never exhaled.


----------



## cheezyridr (Jun 8, 2009)

sulphur said:


> I never exhaled.


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

Good documentary here...

[video=youtube;PSKJrgGqx_E]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSKJrgGqx_E&amp;feature=g-vrec[/video]


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

mhammer said:


> Me, I've just never "gotten" intoxication as a desirable state, regardless of what produces it. Being amongst those who are intoxicated holds about as much charm for me as waiting for my wife outside the card store. I know folks_ like _it, and hold nothing against them; I just don't get it. I've also never really liked the smell of pot. One of the reasons why I simply stopped going to concerts for years. I'd rather be passed by someone on the street with a big cigar than someone with a joint.
> 
> So for me, all of this legalization stuff is a bit like finding out pigs knuckles used to be against the law, and now they aren't. I'd have some empathy for folks in jail for eating or cooking something that unimportant or uncritical, but I'd still be thinking "Why the hell did you even want to *do* that?".


I rarely smoke socially. I like to smoke right before going to bed at night, or if I get a chance to relax at home and watch a movie or something. I also use it to help with my migraines. So for my type of uses, I find it exceptionally frustrating that it's just not legal. With my migraine history, I am sure I can get a card if I wanted. I just find it ridiculous that I even have to.

The bottom line with any drug being legal is that just because it's legal it doesn't mean you have to use it. And for the majority of people who already use it, just because it's legal it doesn't mean they would start smoking it in public and blowing the smoke in people's faces while letting out a sinister laugh. Most people who smoke weed have their habits just like I do. How I use the drug would not change just because it's legal. It would just allow me to get it easier or grow it myself. There are always idiots who would abuse it just like alcohol. But that's a human nature problem, not a weed problem.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

torndownunit said:


> I rarely smoke socially. I like to smoke right before going to bed at night, or if I get a chance to relax at home and watch a movie or something. I also use it to help with my migraines. So for my type of uses, I find it exceptionally frustrating that it's just not legal. With my migraine history, I am sure I can get a card if I wanted. I just find it ridiculous that I even have to.
> 
> The bottom line with any drug being legal is that just because it's legal it doesn't mean you have to use it. And for the majority of people who already use it, just because it's legal it doesn't mean they would start smoking it in public and blowing the smoke in people's faces while letting out a sinister laugh. Most people who smoke weed have their habits just like I do. How I use the drug would not change just because it's legal. It would just allow me to get it easier or grow it myself. There are always idiots who would abuse it just like alcohol. But that's a human nature problem, not a weed problem.


Right on man.


----------



## mhammer (Nov 30, 2007)

torndownunit said:


> I rarely smoke socially. I like to smoke right before going to bed at night, or if I get a chance to relax at home and watch a movie or something. I also use it to help with my migraines. So for my type of uses, I find it exceptionally frustrating that it's just not legal. With my migraine history, I am sure I can get a card if I wanted. I just find it ridiculous that I even have to.
> 
> The bottom line with any drug being legal is that just because it's legal it doesn't mean you have to use it. And for the majority of people who already use it, just because it's legal it doesn't mean they would start smoking it in public and blowing the smoke in people's faces while letting out a sinister laugh. Most people who smoke weed have their habits just like I do. How I use the drug would not change just because it's legal. It would just allow me to get it easier or grow it myself. There are always idiots who would abuse it just like alcohol. But that's a human nature problem, not a weed problem.


Sensible.

I guess it pays to keep in mind that even where states have voted to decriminalize small amounts, there WILL be other things to attend to that would apply to use of any substance that could alter judgment/reaction-time if a largeish quantity is consumed in a short period (and that can include Nyquil, beer, valium, etc. as well). Granted not many people will do that, but it doesn't take many to mess things up big for others, as MADD can attest. 

I would imagine that the state legislatures would have to grapple with what constitutes prohibitted levels of consumption or blood levels when operating vehicles, heavy machinery, etc., plus how exactly one would legally differentiate between those whose consumption is within the letter of the law and those who have gone beyond it. All of that has to be defined specifically enough to hold up in court should there be a basis for any charges or a determination to make. It's not an impossible task, but it does mean that the work is not exactly finished, simply by virtue of the referendum outcomes.

It's pretty much like that for anything you introduce as a limited "right". Could be pot, could be access to birth control, could be the right to strike, etc.


----------



## al3d (Oct 3, 2007)

Pot is like any other substance. Even Alchool. You start slow, and sooner or later a portion of users will want a bigger high and move on to more potent drugs. Don't tell me it does'nt happen..it's BS..I've seen it happen to more then haft my friends in the day. I stop exactly at my 23rd Birthday when one of my closest friend died of OD the day before, he had been a Weed smoker like us for a LONG time, he got tired of not getting high enough, and withing a year, was hooked on Smake...so...to me, and i in no way judge users, but weed is still a danger...so no legal is good. THey should actually make Smoking illegal as well....and yes.i'm a smoker to.


----------



## bluzfish (Mar 12, 2011)

Walking across the street is dangerous but I know that's not the kind of dangerous you mean when you refer to pot. I too have watched band mates graduate from pot to cocain to heroin and it has always broken my heart to see good people go down under the slavery of addiction. I too lived by the credo "Hey, look what I can do and still survive", and sometimes high just didn't seem to be high enough. To this day, I don't drink any more because occasionally my brain gets nostalgic for the "good old days" that really weren't.

This has been stated over and over in this thread - don't drink, smoke, gamble, eat too much chocolate or anything else if you can't handle it. Responsible people will do this. Irresponsible people need help if they can't handle it themselves. It always has been and always be this way. But you can only go so far in helping people help themselves and prohibition has been proven to be less than effective in being of value in rehabilitation.The taboo on pot only increases it's desirability among peer oriented youth. Even max security prisoners have no problem getting drugs and alcohol.

Again, I have to agree as stated earlier - legalization will not change people's way of life in itself. In fact, it makes it easier to pass on the joint handed to you if it is acceptable as simply a matter of choice and personal preference and not a political or moral statement.


----------



## cheezyridr (Jun 8, 2009)

even if it was legalized all the way, tomorrow, it would still carry the huge undeserved stigma that it currently does. the law cant make someone stop thinking all pot heads are dumb. it can't legislate away the gateway drug myth. it wont be able to stop you from not promoting people or giving them raises because you know they smoke pot. i'd be pretty darn impressed if they would just come out and tell people the truth about urine tests for marijuana, and the difference between thc 35, and thc 9. for me, that one would be nice all on it's own.


----------



## bluzfish (Mar 12, 2011)

True as true can be cheezy.

BTW forgive my ignorance but what actually is the difference between THC 35 and THC 9?


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

The "gateway" theory is a myth.

Very few, if any weed dealer that I've met, dealt anything but weed.
People that have the propensity to smoke weed, usually will/would try other drugs.
That doesn't mean that pot lead you there, or your at a higher risk to try other drugs.
If you've tried weed, there's a chance that you might move onto something else,
if you've never tried, or wanted to try weed, you're not looking for a drug to begin with.
If the same person that moved onto another harder drug, had the chance to start with the harder drug,
pot would have been taken out of the equation.
Put simply, pot is one of the first drugs that you're exposed to, not the reason you tried something harder after.

[video=youtube;I9-xOTsIhZk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9-xOTsIhZk[/video]


----------



## smorgdonkey (Jun 23, 2008)

I always talked about that 'gateway' theory being a myth. People will go to the drug that they like the most if it is accessible. 

How many people would drink if it wasn't legal and everywhere?

It's like saying that breast milk and fomula are the gateway to hamburgers.


----------



## shoretyus (Jan 6, 2007)

smorgdonkey said:


> It's like saying that breast milk and fomula are the gateway to hamburgers.


My pedal car was a gateway to the real thing....


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

GuitarsCanada is a gateway to my GAS!


----------



## Chito (Feb 17, 2006)

sulphur said:


> GuitarsCanada is a gateway to my GAS!


Same here... Not that I am complaining.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Hockey is the gateway to violent assault.


----------



## bluzfish (Mar 12, 2011)

As a crazy stupid kid, I tried a few other drugs out of curiosity and concluded they had no attraction for me.


----------



## Electraglide (Jan 24, 2010)

As a crazy kid I tried out drugs and alcohol and concluded that they had an attraction for me. And went on to more drugs and more alcohol. My older brother tried the same thing and decided that alcohol was his thing. My younger brother decided that pot was his thing. Point, no point really aside from every one is different. The older bro still drinks and the younger one still does pot. Me, I quit drinking 8 years ago and stopped drugs longer than that. Go figure.


----------



## Rugburn (Jan 14, 2009)

Having tried to quit coffee, I found it nearly as hard as cigarettes. I won with smokes, so I'll leave coffee alone.....for now. Lol


----------



## torndownunit (May 14, 2006)

sulphur said:


> The "gateway" theory is a myth.
> 
> Very few, if any weed dealer that I've met, dealt anything but weed.
> People that have the propensity to smoke weed, usually will/would try other drugs.
> ...


Thanks for this. There are people who with addictive personalities who get addicted to anything. It doesn't even have to be drugs, for a lot of these type of people, it's gambling and various other things as well. They will do what they want and find a way to get what they want. Weed is no more a gateway than a dozen others things that could set them off.

There are lazy people out there. Weed is not making them lazy...they are just lazy. They would be whether they were smoking or not. I know many many people who function well on weed, some in great professions. Weed does not just make all people lazy. 

So we can never forget the 'human' factor here.


----------



## cheezyridr (Jun 8, 2009)

bluzfish said:


> True as true can be cheezy.
> 
> BTW forgive my ignorance but what actually is the difference between THC 35 and THC 9?



one gets you high, one is inert. the inert one is what is stored in your fat cells. this is what they test for when they drug screen. the party line says that as your body consumes those fat cells that thc molecule is also broken down, and you are in a sense perpetually high. you learn to function that way, and no longer feel it, and that is why pot is bad. because if you smoke it, you're high for a month until your body flushes all that nasty thc. except the one that gets you high leaves your body fairly fast. the one that they test for not only doesn't get you high, but your body isn't capable of using it that way to begin with. literally the whole argument is like the wizard of oz, spinning wheels and throwing levers to distract you with dramatic illusions designed to make people believe and behave according to their agenda rather than truth/fact/whatever label someone might want to use.


----------



## bluzfish (Mar 12, 2011)

Thank you. This is something I would like to do some personal research on. See, everybody? GC is not only fun, but also educational!


----------



## Roryfan (Apr 19, 2010)

Milkman said:


> Hockey is the gateway to violent assault.


The Toronto Maple Leafs are the gateway to hockey.


----------



## sulphur (Jun 2, 2011)

The Leafs are a gateway to golfing!


----------

