|
On September 02 2012 16:37 SpiffD wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2012 16:34 TheRabidDeer wrote:On September 02 2012 16:31 SpiffD wrote:On September 02 2012 16:29 Sea_Food wrote:On September 02 2012 16:05 HunterX11 wrote:On September 02 2012 15:57 TheRabidDeer wrote:
I think alcohol and weed are equally addictive. That is to say, the only way you become addicted to either is when you use them as escape mechanisms (or maybe if it runs in your family). Cigarettes however, are truly addictive and the only reason they are legal (hopefully) is because prohibition wont work on them at this point. You can think that all you want, but it is objectively wrong. On top of that alcohol withdrawal can kill you. Alcohol is a very core food product. You cannot even make bread without it. Banning weed is much more reasonable than banning alcohol. You can't make bread without alcohol? I've been making bread wrong all these years! You cant make bread without yeast Yeast eats sugar and produces alcohol (among other things) Buddy you better reread your biology textbook from highschool. Yeast only makes alcohol in the absence of oxygen which is not the case when breadmaking. Even if it did make alcohol as a byproduct when making bread wouldn't make alcohol a core food product.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1709087/pdf/canmedaj00470-0140b.pdf
"Professor Nicholas Knight and Miss Violet Simpson, chemists at Cornell College, Iowa, reported to the American Chemical Society that they had collected twelve samples of ordinary bread from bakeries and housewives' ovens, and after chemical analyses found that the alcohol content in this prosaic food varied from .04 to 1.9 per cent."
On September 02 2012 16:37 acker wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2012 16:34 TheRabidDeer wrote:
You cant make bread without yeast
Yeast eats sugar and produces alcohol (among other things)
EDIT: Well you can make bread without yeast, just not good bread. You don't need alcohol to make yeast. You're confusing causation.
I didnt say you need alcohol to make yeast. I said you need yeast to make alcohol.
|
On September 02 2012 16:29 Sea_Food wrote:
Alcohol is a very core food product. You cannot even make bread without it.
Direct. Quote.
It's very possible to make bread without alcohol as a core food product.
On September 02 2012 16:40 TheRabidDeer wrote:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1709087/pdf/canmedaj00470-0140b.pdf"Professor Nicholas Knight and Miss Violet Simpson, chemists at Cornell College, Iowa, reported to the American Chemical Society that they had collected twelve samples of ordinary bread from bakeries and housewives' ovens, and after chemical analyses found that the alcohol content in this prosaic food varied from .04 to 1.9 per cent."
The alcohol content of your average orange juice can equals this.
|
On September 02 2012 16:29 Sea_Food wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2012 16:05 HunterX11 wrote:On September 02 2012 15:57 TheRabidDeer wrote:
I think alcohol and weed are equally addictive. That is to say, the only way you become addicted to either is when you use them as escape mechanisms (or maybe if it runs in your family). Cigarettes however, are truly addictive and the only reason they are legal (hopefully) is because prohibition wont work on them at this point. You can think that all you want, but it is objectively wrong. On top of that alcohol withdrawal can kill you. Alcohol is a very core food product. You cannot even make bread without it. Banning weed is much more reasonable than banning alcohol.
Errrr, the drug X is also used in Y so it makes no sense to ban it ? Wait wut ? Cannabis has a lot more non-recreational uses than alcohol - hemp, medicine, paper etc. and yet remains illegal.
Also there is nothing reasonable about banning a drug which a) creates no physical dependency b) you cannot overdose on and c) can be abused heavily without any serious negative health effects. Not to mention the effects of Cannabis as compared to Alcohol - have you ever seen two stoned guys get in a fight or a stoned father beating up his family ? Ya, thought so.
|
On September 02 2012 16:40 TheRabidDeer wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2012 16:37 SpiffD wrote:On September 02 2012 16:34 TheRabidDeer wrote:On September 02 2012 16:31 SpiffD wrote:On September 02 2012 16:29 Sea_Food wrote:On September 02 2012 16:05 HunterX11 wrote:On September 02 2012 15:57 TheRabidDeer wrote:
I think alcohol and weed are equally addictive. That is to say, the only way you become addicted to either is when you use them as escape mechanisms (or maybe if it runs in your family). Cigarettes however, are truly addictive and the only reason they are legal (hopefully) is because prohibition wont work on them at this point. You can think that all you want, but it is objectively wrong. On top of that alcohol withdrawal can kill you. Alcohol is a very core food product. You cannot even make bread without it. Banning weed is much more reasonable than banning alcohol. You can't make bread without alcohol? I've been making bread wrong all these years! You cant make bread without yeast Yeast eats sugar and produces alcohol (among other things) Buddy you better reread your biology textbook from highschool. Yeast only makes alcohol in the absence of oxygen which is not the case when breadmaking. Even if it did make alcohol as a byproduct when making bread wouldn't make alcohol a core food product. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1709087/pdf/canmedaj00470-0140b.pdf"Professor Nicholas Knight and Miss Violet Simpson, chemists at Cornell College, Iowa, reported to the American Chemical Society that they had collected twelve samples of ordinary bread from bakeries and housewives' ovens, and after chemical analyses found that the alcohol content in this prosaic food varied from .04 to 1.9 per cent." Show nested quote +On September 02 2012 16:37 acker wrote:On September 02 2012 16:34 TheRabidDeer wrote:
You cant make bread without yeast
Yeast eats sugar and produces alcohol (among other things)
EDIT: Well you can make bread without yeast, just not good bread. You don't need alcohol to make yeast. You're confusing causation. I didnt say you need alcohol to make yeast. I said you need yeast to make alcohol.
Why are you guys arguing about this. Who cares? There's illegal stuff in a lot of the drugs we already take. What's in adderall is basically meth. A lot of pain medication or anxiety medication contains an opiate (read: heroin) derivative.
|
On September 02 2012 16:43 acker wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2012 16:29 Sea_Food wrote:
Alcohol is a very core food product. You cannot even make bread without it.
Direct. Quote. It's very possible to make bread without alcohol as a core food product. The alcohol content of your average orange juice can equals this.
You should read the names, I didnt say that. Somebody else did.
Orange juice has alcohol again because of the yeast on the fruit peel. The amount depends on how long it is allowed to ferment. I am not arguing quantities, just pointing out facts.
|
On September 02 2012 16:45 TheRabidDeer wrote:
You should read the names, I didnt say that. Somebody else did.
Orange juice has alcohol again because of the yeast on the fruit peel. The amount depends on how long it is allowed to ferment. I am not arguing quantities, just pointing out facts.
True, I missed that.
But the point remains; alcohol is a trace quantity in these foods, and is not a core product necessary for making bread.
|
On September 02 2012 16:11 acker wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2012 16:02 NTTemplar wrote:
On my list I would exclude alcohol if people could control themselves better as it is helpful for many to have a better time in many social gatherings and its harm is minimal when taken at reasonable amounts, as it mostly is just like candy that it is unhealthy food; however still exclude smoking since I am allergic and how it directly affects those around you, as compared to drinking which only affects you (but you in turn of course can do stupid things if you get too drunk) I don't think you're nearly as smart as you think you are. Alcohol is BY FAR the most lethal recreational drug to innocent bystanders in America, especially if you're looking at drugs taken at low doses and by nonaddicts (we call most of these lethal incidents "DUIs"). You'd have to raise the currently average tax on alcohol by approximately 300% to completely internalize the cost alcoholics do to society at large. When I see stuff like this, I don't see a benevolent intellectual concerned with the good for the general populace. I see a rather normal someone who can't but help impose his own prejudices onto others by law, while arguing for exemptions for his own personal vices. Especially stuff like this: Show nested quote +On September 02 2012 16:02 NTTemplar wrote:
Not limiting harmful substances to me is an elitist view, feels like the smart people don't care if less fortunate people kill themselves and if the world went to hell they would have no problem staying in a bunker and watch millions outside be nuked to death or whatever. The implication that the unwashed masses need your personal guidance on which vices are acceptable and which are not. You know what elitism is? You're looking at it. Respecting the fact that everyone has their own personal uses for their own personal money isn't elitism. Respecting that everyone has a right to spend their life as they see fit on their vices isn't elitism, either. That's the exact opposite of elitism. Incidentally, the unwashed masses aren't the only people who use these drugs you want to ban. Plenty of people smarter than you or me use or used these drugs as well.
I used the term "smart" as the one I replied to chose it, I highly dislike it myself, reason being most of your post.
There are so many categories to be smart at that saying on/off, either smart or not smart makes no sense to me.
I don't consider myself smart, but I consider myself to have good judgement for what is good for my body and mind, and what is bad for it.
Smart (assuming we are going by IQ or exceptional achievements within major science fields) by no means need to have good judgement along side that.
I believe anyone that does different harmful substances lack good judgement on what is good and what is bad for themselves, nothing more or less.
As far as alcohols lethality goes I only looked from the perspective of my own country which is Norway where taxes alleready are ridicouless which may be one of the major reasons why it is such a minimal problem in comparison to your country.
It also makes me sad to hear what you see, it feels very pessimistic, believing noone can possibility care for others and if giving impressions they do their intentions must be egocentric. I never impose rules on anyone, I never tell anyone I have met to not drink/smoke etc, they chose what they want to do.
I really just want people to have a good life nor do I consider myself "benevolent intellectual"... I think at least... I am not quite sure what it means to be honest; I do consider myself above average capable of different tasks due to a weschler test scoring me at 147 and a stanford binet at 151, but not smart by any means which is pretty much supported by no meaningful achievements within any fields, I am pretty sure I look just as confused as most others when a professor or nobel prize winner talks technical.
When part of the masses dies due to chosing to do these substances leaving parents to carry their teenagers coffin I honestly believe they need my guidance, and people sharing similar views as me.
Again, I am all for freedom of choice, but that doesn't mean I want to bury my daughter or son before they are even finished with basic education. Yes they have the right to live as they see fit, but not kill themselves, as a person you have responsibilities as well, one of them in my opinion is to not hurt the people around you, that cares about you and loves you.
If I understand you right, you consider average intelligent people for the "unwashed masses", which is not what I aim at, I want my view to help anyone that lacks the judgement on this particular matter regardless if they are a nobel prize winner or gold medalist or if they are a kid in school that only gets 2's/D's.
Plenty of average intelligent people have good judgement, my mom never finished high school but still has done fine for herself in life, to you she might just be part of this "unwashed masses" but I see her as someone with a great judgement that helps others.
|
On September 02 2012 16:11 mdb wrote:
NTTemplar, I think you are underestimating the intelligence of the average man and impying that smart people dont use and stupid people use drugs is just insane and stupid.
Please see my post above.
|
Everything is OK if you don't overdo it. It is not very healthy to smoke weed everyday ( I can say from experience), but like once a week is all right.
You also shouldn´t be high at work/school. Only smoke it in your free time...
|
NTTemplar, are you high right now?
Honest question. Because we already have a thread for that.
|
On September 02 2012 17:08 Big-t wrote:
Everything is OK if you don't overdo it. It is not very healthy to smoke weed everyday ( I can say from experience), but like once a week is all right.
You also shouldn´t be high at work/school. Only smoke it in your free time...
Yep, just as you shouldn't be drunk all the time either. The question is not what people should be doing, it's what the government should be regulating. There are quite frankly some behaviors where a legal approach is not the best (or even remotely close to best) solution to the problem.
|
I would love to do what I used to do every day and not worry about going to jail. Keep the government out of my personal business, please.
|
As I already read from another post, some people don't know a real drug addict. I'm not talking about cocaine, just MJ. I met guys who broke into a friend's home to take a laptop and a Wii just to buy some. And a friend of mine smokes at 7am to start the day. I believe in freedom, but with education. In my country (Peru), you are legal since 18, so legalization would be disastrous. In the States is a diferent system, but I think the risk is the same.
|
...What on earth does your above post even mean, NTTemplar?
|
On September 02 2012 14:49 aksfjh wrote:Show nested quote +On September 02 2012 14:30 BeMannerDuPenner wrote:On September 02 2012 14:08 aksfjh wrote:On September 02 2012 13:58 BeMannerDuPenner wrote:On September 02 2012 13:56 aksfjh wrote:On September 02 2012 13:44 tokicheese wrote:On September 02 2012 13:39 aksfjh wrote:
There's really no reason why we should increase access to a substance that impairs judgement and greatly increase the dangers of driving and operating machinery. Really? Pouring money to cartels, making harmless people into criminals, filling prisons past full for possession for a relatively harmless substance isn't a reason? Or maybe if we had a concerted effort and stopped toying with the idea of legalizing it, it would be even more controlled. Certainly, some of the penalties of possession, like 3 strikes laws, are too harsh compared to the crime, and probably contribute to the complacent nature of some officers, departments, and states on the issue. However, that's not a real argument for legalization. when thousands of fine ,tax paying peaceful members of society get treated like the worst criminals evry year(and lifes destroyed cause of that, not by the drug but the legislation) then imho that is a reason. On September 02 2012 13:56 urashimakt wrote:On September 02 2012 13:48 BeMannerDuPenner wrote:
the only reason weed is illegal in most states atm is that changing that would mean a huge image loss for the ruling party.
it would bring tonsa taxes(instead of wasting millions on chasing rnd pothead dude #1523545), take that money from organized crime etc. in the end i havent seen someone succesfully argumenting for the ban, still thats the way it is.
pretty sure in the future this will happen. until then... whatever. evryone smokes anyways. i only know like 2 poeple that never tried it. Not everyone smokes. There are a lot of folks out there who don't smoke for differing reasons (career, "respecting one's body", don't like the stuff, etc). I've tried both drinking and smoking marijuana once and figured if I didn't enjoy it now, why train myself to like it. exactly what i meant. evryone tried it. some like it, some dont. now imagine all those people (including you) wouldve been caught by the police just for trying it once. fines,possible loss of job/license etc. does that sound justified? Yes. How many people do you think would try it if they didn't think they could get away with it? as said out of all the people i know only 2 people never tried it. one of them is my mam. if you think the ban has any effect on that then you should really inform yourself. if anything it makes it more attractive to the rebelling youths. On September 02 2012 14:23 AlexSmerch wrote:
If alcohol is harmful, it does not mean, that weed should be legalized. People become addicted. They want more and more. And this never ends well. People live well without weed. Do we realy need it? No. We needn't alcohol, drugs, cigarettes. We should follow healthy life style.
No, weed should not been legalized. we dont need mcdonalds, poptarts,chocolate, chips,coffee, tv or anythign either. and all of that carries the risk of addiction -and sure as hell more people are addicted to fast food/snacks then any drug out there. Yea, I'm going to take the anecdotal evidence from a German pothead as proof that the ban has "no effect." It is a mind altering substance with a high potential for abuse and dangerous behavior while under its effects. In the context of the drug itself, there is no reason it should be legalized in the first place. If you'd like to discuss ther merits of the legality of other substances, foods, products, etc., then do so on the terms of those products.
really? weed a mind altering substance? A mind altering that produces dangerous behavior no less?
Look I dont smoke it anymore but I smoked more than enough of it to know that the shit IS NOT DANGEROUS. Instead of being a sheep listening to what the government paid scientists have 'discovered' because its all bullshit. Does weed decrease IQ scores in kids who use it later in their lives? Probably, but I can almost guarantee that if you ran the same tests but gave the kids good ol' Jack Daniels to drink until they got drunk you would get the same results. I stopped smoking it not because it was ruining my life or because I was becoming a raging drug addict who sucked dicks at the local corner crack house to make a few bucks to get high. I stopped smoking it because I didn't like how chilled it made me and how cautious I was when I was driving. Yes! That's like the opposite of dangerous.
Weed is illegal for exactly the same reason that moonshine is. Because the government can't tax you on it. Because you can grow it in your back yard and they would never know you had it. Alcohol makes (stupid) people violent and beat their wives and children. Gambling is responsible for people selling their houses and blowing their pension in legal 'controlled environments' called casinos, which are only legal because the government gets something out of the multi billion [insert currency] industry it is. Strangely enough, back alley gambling places are illegal too. Why? Its definitely not because they are trying to protect the people.
Crack, heroine, meth etc are dangerous. I know this not because some old guy told me it is, but because I tried them all at least once. Is weed harmful to you body? Probably, but so are cigarettes [which are more addictive that cocaine], alcohol, McDonalds, tinkies and all the other good stuff you put in your body in large amounts. So why should Cannibis be a reason to fight wars over where innocent people get caught in the cross fire? Nobody is saying make marijuana legal to use anytime of day wherever you want. Especially not at the workplace. The same way alcohol is prohibited at work. If that's the argument people are making, alcohol should be illegal too.
|
Marijuana should be legalized for the same reason every other drug should be legalized. This reason is that humans have the rights to life, liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness. This means a right to a life in which you are free to choose your actions, free of coercion, so long as you are not violating the rights of anyone else. Doing any drug is not a violation of anyone's rights and as such, it is wrong for the government to initiate force and prevent you from doing them. The case for marijuana is no different than the case for assisted suicide. It doesn't matter how harmful it is, you have a right to your life and nobody has the right to force you into what they think is best.
|
Yes, yes it should
|
i think people should be allowed to make their own choices. stories like the one on the first page where the kid blames weed because his friend over dosed on some other drug are just mind numbingly sad. i would say that the cause of his death could be attributed to the fact that weed is illegal. and if you actually take time to research the facts in this debate you cant really argue against it.the fact that he was lied to about weed by people he was supposed to trust aka, teachers or parents made him more willing to try other drugs when he realized that weed isnt harmful or bad in anyway. the fact that hard drugs are made more easily available because of the massive black market supported by weed. also the fact that we dont teach the facts about drugs to people is really sad. heroin is life destroying because it is so physically addictive not becasue herp durp getting high is bad. every scientific study ever done on marijuana has come back saying that weed is in no way harmful to the human body, there is no connection to smoking weed and cancer or loss of brain cells. also weed has been shown to cure cancerous brain tumors in lab animals. if you dont like the idea of people drinking or getting high than thats your prerogative but i will fight to the death for peoples right to choose to make poor decisions.
tldr; legalize weed so less people die.
|
Yes, should be legalized in the americas. Its not very diffrent from alcohol anyway, they should do it like they do it in Holland :D
|
Yes legalize it already, weed being classified as an illegal drug is the biggest injustice ever forced on modern society.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
