RE: The winds of change have a funny smell

RE: The winds of change have a funny smell (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

tj444 -> RE: The winds of change have a funny smell (12/12/2012 9:44:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SadistDave I think the administration has other plans. However it's apparently just a political concern for Obummer, not an issue of freedom. I don't think this will turn out quite the way you all imagine that it will. He doesn't need to win votes atthis point, so I suspect that in the end his percieved support for legalizing pot will go up in smoke. -SD- Since you replied to me, apparently you did not read (or understand) my previous posts.. I have already stated that what goes on in WA state with pot means squat to the Feds and that the Feds will never ever legalize it.. So its turning out exactly as I expect.. which means the pointless and expensive War on Drugs will continue to be paid for by all you American taxpayers..

JeffBC -> RE: The winds of change have a funny smell (12/12/2012 12:58:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub But there is no good alternative but to try and limit the use of some of those street drugs don't you agree? Well actually I don't agree with that. At least so far the data seems to suggest that trying to legislate this sort of thing only makes criminals. So no, I do not believe I should engage in a plan which I know to be unworkable and I know to be VASTLY expensive rather than "do nothing". In this case, "do nothing" seems like a better choice. Although honestly, if I wanted to make society more productive and engaged with reality I'd be offering a better reality to engage with. That, I suspect, would do a lot to minimize abuse.

kdsub -> RE: The winds of change have a funny smell (12/12/2012 1:44:39 PM)
quote: Well actually I don't agree with that. At least so far the data seems to suggest that trying to legislate this sort of thing only makes criminals. I don't care about criminals...and anyway do a search and find the results on crime in some European countries that have liberal drug policies... I found crime declined at first but the gains are being lost as users reach the limits of their access. It is the children I worry about... not the damn criminals...yes I am all for free treatment centers to cut abuse but free access will only make more tragedies with these highly addictive drugs. Butch

SadistDave -> RE: The winds of change have a funny smell (12/12/2012 5:35:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 Since you replied to me, apparently you did not read (or understand) my previous posts.. No clue. I never can figure out who the hell this thing is replying to... It was just a sort of general statement, not directed to anyone in particular. -SD-

tj444 -> RE: The winds of change have a funny smell (12/12/2012 7:09:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SadistDave quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 Since you replied to me, apparently you did not read (or understand) my previous posts.. No clue. I never can figure out who the hell this thing is replying to... It was just a sort of general statement, not directed to anyone in particular. -SD- If you mean it to be a general statement to no one in particular then type "FR" or "fast reply" at the very top of your post.. then people will know you dont mean it to anyone in particular.. If I had seen that then I would not have responded cuz I would have known your post wasnt directed at me..

TheHeretic -> RE: The winds of change have a funny smell (12/12/2012 10:44:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub free access will only make more tragedies with these highly addictive drugs. Butch Butch, nobody has legalized any, "highly addictive drugs." And as far as increasing tragedies goes, it's sure as hell going to cut down on the number of tragedies involving competing drug gangs, and innocent bystanders.

kdsub -> RE: The winds of change have a funny smell (12/13/2012 8:24:55 AM)
quote: Butch, nobody has legalized any, "highly addictive drugs I do understand you are not...but some here are advocating drugs like meth and heroin be legal with free access. Butch

SimplyMichael -> RE: The winds of change have a funny smell (12/13/2012 8:36:52 AM)
Nobody is advocationg free access to drugs. Not even pot. The reality is drugs are a problem for two reasons: Criminalizing them creates the same problem as prohibition did except now there is so.much profit involved that it corrupts ever aspect of society but most see this issue. The other most people dont see. Our shitty health care system fails addicts who often use drugs as a way of self.medicationg to escape horrible/hopeless social conditions or to self medicate for mental health issues.

tj444 -> RE: The winds of change have a funny smell (12/13/2012 9:23:53 AM)
There is another aspect.. the US govt also pressures other countries like Canada & Mexico to keep pot illegal even outside its borders, spreading the futile War on Drugs.. If it had not been for that pressure, Trudeau would have made pot legal in Canada decades ago... and there was some article I read recently about Mexico wanting to make pot legal there.. The US govt is nutz when it comes to pot, they even throw people in jail just for selling pot seeds even when those people dont step foot into the US.. that kind of arrogance & blind powermadness disgusts me (& I am not alone in that).. The US govt has the right to do what crap it wants within its borders, but absolutely no right to push that on other countries.. [>:]

lovmuffin -> RE: The winds of change have a funny smell (12/13/2012 3:23:53 PM)
I would say legalize all of it including opiates with a few exceptions like meth. If ya want to snort coke, have a barrel full.

tazzygirl -> RE: The winds of change have a funny smell (12/13/2012 5:14:33 PM)
Just piss in the bottle as you walk into work, please. [:D]

jlf1961 -> RE: The winds of change have a funny smell (12/13/2012 5:39:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lovmuffin I would say legalize all of it including opiates with a few exceptions like meth. If ya want to snort coke, have a barrel full. Dont you think that is a little extreme? According to just about every thing on cannabis and the United States, the plant was grown by Thomas Jefferson, George Washington and was a common cash crop in the United States up to the early 1900's. Aside from smoking and eating it, you can use it to make paper, clothe, rope (not as strong as modern synthetics) and other products, INCLUDING BIO FUEL. Cannabis has proven medicinal properties, actually the THC and similar compounds in the plant. The immediate physiological and psychological affects are no worse than alcohol. None of that is true of other narcotics.

tazzygirl -> RE: The winds of change have a funny smell (12/13/2012 5:49:50 PM)
quote: Cannabis has proven medicinal properties, actually the THC and similar compounds in the plant. So does Cocaine quote: The immediate physiological and psychological affects are no worse than alcohol. Though Cocaine is highly addictive. Cannibis studies dont agree with your assertion that its no worse than alcohol on the body. http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/healthy_kids/Can-Marijuana-Prevent-Cancer.html 1. Marijuana use is associated with higher risk for testicular cancer. In a 2011 study published in the journal Cancer, researchers from the National Cancer Institute found that men with testicular cancer were 2.2 times more likely to be regular marijuana smokers (daily or more often) then men without this rare cancer. A 2009 study from the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center in Seattle found the same thing. Researchers aren’t sure exactly why, but note that “The exact mechanism of how heavy marijuana use might increase the risk of TGCT (testicular germ cell tumors) is unknown, however chronic marijuana exposure has multiple adverse effects on the endocrine and reproductive systems such as gynecomastia, impotence, reduced sperm counts, and suppressed testosterone.” 2. Marijuana more than doubles lung cancer risk. French researchers concluded in a 2008 study that marijuana users were 2.4 times more likely to develop lung cancer than non-users. And cancer investigators in New Zealand found that the heaviest marijuana users in their 2008 study had a five-fold higher risk for lung cancer compared to non-users. In general, they found that smoking one joint daily for a year raised risk slightly more than a pack-a-day smoking habit did. 3. Yes, some marijuana compounds seem to protect against cancer -- but others ding DNA and dampen immunity. Cannabinoids extracted from marijuana pushed brain-cancer cells to die faster in one 2009 Spanish study. And a 2009 Brown University study found lower odds for squamous-cell cancers of the head and neck among marijuana smokers. But that’s not a great reason to light up. In 2007, Canadian researchers found levels of ammonia, hydrogen cyanide, nitric oxide and other nasty chemicals in marijuana that were three to 20 times higher than in tobacco. The researchers note that while tobacco’s toxins -- including 50 that are cancer-causing -- have been studied extensively, those in marijuana haven’t. There’s plenty we don’t yet know. But more is being revealed. In 2009, another team of Canadian scientists watched what happened when they added condensed marijuana or tobacco smoke to animal cells in test tubes. Marijuana damaged DNA more than tobacco did. And in 2010, University of South Carolina scientists found that cannabis suppresses immunity - which could leave users’ bodies under-equipped to fight cancer.

DomKen -> RE: The winds of change have a funny smell (12/13/2012 5:54:30 PM)
I'd say legalize pot and some of the really mild party drugs like xtasy. Cocaine, meth, all the opiates and the strong hallucigens (PCP and LSD) should stay illegal. My standard is the drugs that really make a person unable to function and almost force the user into criminal activity to support the habit should not be legal. The really dissociative hallucigens result in harm to both the user and others from so called "bad trips" often enough I see no way they can be used safely.

tj444 -> RE: The winds of change have a funny smell (12/13/2012 6:38:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 you can use it to make paper, clothe, rope (not as strong as modern synthetics) and other products, INCLUDING BIO FUEL. There is a huge difference between hemp & "pot", its like night and day.. and hemp is what is used to make paper, cloth, rope, protein powder, oil for cooking, other foodstuffs, and biofuel.. Hemp has so little thc in it that all you would do is get a headache from smoking it.. and yet, the US govt classifies hemp as an evil drug.. so US tobacco farmers still grow that poison plant instead of converting to growing beneficial hemp.. Canada issues permits to farmers there to grow hemp & refine it and no wild craziness ensued.. [:D] As far as medicinal use for pot goes, people can find other ways to use it without smoking it.. they can make a butter with it, cookies and in other baked goods.. I dont know if a bong is better, some people claim it is better/healthier that smoking it..

jlf1961 -> RE: The winds of change have a funny smell (12/13/2012 7:00:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tj444 quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 you can use it to make paper, clothe, rope (not as strong as modern synthetics) and other products, INCLUDING BIO FUEL. There is a huge difference between hemp & "pot", its like night and day.. and hemp is what is used to make paper, cloth, rope, protein powder, oil for cooking, other foodstuffs, and biofuel.. Hemp has so little thc in it that all you would do is get a headache from smoking it.. and yet, the US govt classifies hemp as an evil drug.. so US tobacco farmers still grow that poison plant instead of converting to growing beneficial hemp.. Canada issues permits to farmers there to grow hemp & refine it and no wild craziness ensued.. [:D] As far as medicinal use for pot goes, people can find other ways to use it without smoking it.. they can make a butter with it, cookies and in other baked goods.. I dont know if a bong is better, some people claim it is better/healthier that smoking it.. Actually, the history is quite clear, you can use the pot plant to make rope, paper, and if you crush the oil out of it, you can make a pretty good biofuel.

lovmuffin -> RE: The winds of change have a funny smell (12/13/2012 7:13:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen I'd say legalize pot and some of the really mild party drugs like xtasy. Cocaine, meth, all the opiates and the strong hallucigens (PCP and LSD) should stay illegal. My standard is the drugs that really make a person unable to function and almost force the user into criminal activity to support the habit should not be legal. The really dissociative hallucigens result in harm to both the user and others from so called "bad trips" often enough I see no way they can be used safely. Meth is not a mild party drug. I would definitely say legalize cocaine. Legalize opiates like heroin. No way law enforcement is going to stop it anyway. I dont think people are going to line up at the heroin store if it becomes legal. Legalize mushrooms and peyote, then not much need for LSD.

tj444 -> RE: The winds of change have a funny smell (12/13/2012 7:18:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 Actually, the history is quite clear, you can use the pot plant to make rope, paper, and if you crush the oil out of it, you can make a pretty good biofuel. History perhaps but today, if you cant even make it legal to grow hemp for paper, food products, etc, then what kind of chance do you have to make the hard stuff legal for that (supposed) purpose? not to mention, if those things were made with real pot, the US govt wouldnt even allow it to be imported into the US.. no one in their right mind would grow real pot to make rope or oil, etc.. even the legal importation of hemp is a fairly recent event.. Its just another example of the US govt outsourcing jobs to China (which is the worlds largest producer)..

jlf1961 -> RE: The winds of change have a funny smell (12/13/2012 7:47:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: Cannabis has proven medicinal properties, actually the THC and similar compounds in the plant. So does Cocaine quote: The immediate physiological and psychological affects are no worse than alcohol. Though Cocaine is highly addictive. Cannibis studies dont agree with your assertion that its no worse than alcohol on the body. http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/healthy_kids/Can-Marijuana-Prevent-Cancer.html 1. Marijuana use is associated with higher risk for testicular cancer. In a 2011 study published in the journal Cancer, researchers from the National Cancer Institute found that men with testicular cancer were 2.2 times more likely to be regular marijuana smokers (daily or more often) then men without this rare cancer. A 2009 study from the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center in Seattle found the same thing. Researchers aren’t sure exactly why, but note that “The exact mechanism of how heavy marijuana use might increase the risk of TGCT (testicular germ cell tumors) is unknown, however chronic marijuana exposure has multiple adverse effects on the endocrine and reproductive systems such as gynecomastia, impotence, reduced sperm counts, and suppressed testosterone.” 2. Marijuana more than doubles lung cancer risk. French researchers concluded in a 2008 study that marijuana users were 2.4 times more likely to develop lung cancer than non-users. And cancer investigators in New Zealand found that the heaviest marijuana users in their 2008 study had a five-fold higher risk for lung cancer compared to non-users. In general, they found that smoking one joint daily for a year raised risk slightly more than a pack-a-day smoking habit did. 3. Yes, some marijuana compounds seem to protect against cancer -- but others ding DNA and dampen immunity. Cannabinoids extracted from marijuana pushed brain-cancer cells to die faster in one 2009 Spanish study. And a 2009 Brown University study found lower odds for squamous-cell cancers of the head and neck among marijuana smokers. But that’s not a great reason to light up. In 2007, Canadian researchers found levels of ammonia, hydrogen cyanide, nitric oxide and other nasty chemicals in marijuana that were three to 20 times higher than in tobacco. The researchers note that while tobacco’s toxins -- including 50 that are cancer-causing -- have been studied extensively, those in marijuana haven’t. There’s plenty we don’t yet know. But more is being revealed. In 2009, another team of Canadian scientists watched what happened when they added condensed marijuana or tobacco smoke to animal cells in test tubes. Marijuana damaged DNA more than tobacco did. And in 2010, University of South Carolina scientists found that cannabis suppresses immunity - which could leave users’ bodies under-equipped to fight cancer. Okay, I think I said immediate physiological and psychological effects. I did not say there are no long term health risks to the use of pot. Like the legal recreational drugs in use today, I can see none that are not harmful. IF the government were to take every substance that is proven harmful to humans due to excessive use, I do believe that the American population would be living on water and some sort of algae protein, and even then I am not sure.

tazzygirl -> RE: The winds of change have a funny smell (12/13/2012 8:55:06 PM)
My post said nothing about excessive use. It mentioned one study of heaviest use.. with a 5 fold cancer rate... done after one with a 2.4 rate. I keep hearing how pot never killed anyone. Then neither did smoking tobacco or inhaling any other carcinogens. Hey, Im all for legalizing medical use. And I think anyone should be allowed to have it in their homes... as long as they keep it in their homes. But "immediate physiological and psychological effects" means it allow a scape goat. How many cigarettes does it take for someone to get cancer? How many joints? See my point?

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875