|
The amount of misinformation in op kind of disgusts me, I am for legislation but that should be done in an honest way, not hiding any risks. Saying that marijuana is not a gateway drug is wrong, and I am gonna tell you why. I also want to make one thing clear, I am NOT saying that marijuana leads to stronger drugs because it doesnt make you resistant and need to use a stronger and stronger dose (as with morphine, heroin etc.) what it does however is 'prepare' you for other highs. It being milder etc than acid, shrooms etc makes it less of a 'shock'.
The second thing I want to touch is about the psychological effects, the obvious part is about people with psycholical 'illnesses' may very well get a lot worse than they were before. This is not really important though because it is kind of obvious. The bad part is that also affects normal people (by that I do NOT mean that you will turn into some hippie only saying 'heeey maaan') now these affects might not necessarily be that bad but it is still the case. And before you go flaming me and calling me stupid think for a moment, and now I want you to really think and be honest with yourself. (this is directed at frequent smokers) can you really say that you have not changed at all after you started smoking weed? If you don't then you are either a) not honest b) do not do it that frequently or c) really "lucky" I guess.
This post was not meant as a bash against weed but I just get kind of frustrated when it is glorified as some kind of miracle drug with no downsides.
|
On September 04 2012 20:50 Rassy wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2012 13:38 DigiGnar wrote:On September 04 2012 07:33 Ballistixz wrote:On September 04 2012 07:27 DigiGnar wrote:On September 04 2012 07:19 Ballistixz wrote:On September 04 2012 07:16 EiBmoZ wrote:On September 04 2012 07:13 Ballistixz wrote:On September 04 2012 07:12 EiBmoZ wrote:On September 04 2012 07:09 Ballistixz wrote:
ive seen ppl when they smoke to much weed. ive seen what happened when ppl try to do the stupidest shit while jacked the hell up.
the answer is no. weed may not directly kill u, but it will kill u none the less. what have you seen? maybe you could share with us? b/c i don't know anyone who's smoked too much weed an gone home an beat there wife or kids. maybe this guy is against sugar an he's trying to save all the bags of cookies in the world. ive had friends that smoked way to much and have gotten into car accidents because of the fact that they couldnt even tell if the stree they were on was one way or not. luckily it didnt kill them, but it could have been much worse. then i guess you are all of the prohibition of alcohol then yes? do some research an tell me how the prohibition of alcohol went. an no one is saying it shouldn't be regulated like alcohol, which would include driving on it. alchohol was made illegal at one point. anyone who has taken a middle school history course could tell u the outcome of that. if it wasnt for that outcome alchohol would still be illegal. weed has not had that type of severe setback yet since its illegal already and clearly they want to avoid having it altogether. I guess the mexican cartels don't fight over trade routes... dont know what ur implying. making weed legal wont hurt the cartels in the slightest. If weed became legal, do you think US citizens will buy from a street dealer or a regulated shop that has a paper trail for where it buys the product from? Tell me, how is losing a multi-million dollar industry not going to hurt in the slightest? Remember, one of these guys got on the Forbes list. When its legalised it will still be criminals who run the trade, they have the most experience and an infrastructure already there, they are also not handicapped by a moral code so they can just intimidate newcomers in the business to stay out. Eventually the influence of criminals might decline but criminals will dominate the market for a long time after it has become legal. Annyway:weed should not be legalised, it is to dangerous when its freely available. It is more dangerous then alcohol, and the negative effects are severely underestimated. I know of way more people who do nothing besides beeing stoned all day then i know of people who do nothing besides beeing drunk all day. Btw: i have not just heard of these people, i do actually know them
No it won't the one part of weed trade which isn't illegal in NL is the selling and as a result the coffee shops have completly taken over. I don't know anyone who buys it at a dealer illegally. Only the buyin for coffee shops is illegal an that's where the criminality comes from.
|
Cofeeshops are mostly run by people who where already in the business i think.
When you legalise it, the people selling drugs now will still be the same people selling drugs then, only then they are no longer criminals because its no longer illegal.
Same with prostitution for example, its legal now but the people running it are still the same shaddy people who always been running it, verry few "normal" entrepeneurs will go in that business and banks are not happy to finance it either.
|
On September 04 2012 19:41 DoubleReed wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2012 13:31 Zahir wrote:On September 04 2012 11:47 DoubleReed wrote:On September 04 2012 11:30 Zahir wrote:On September 04 2012 10:54 DoubleReed wrote:On September 04 2012 09:45 Zahir wrote:On September 04 2012 09:23 acidfreak wrote:On September 04 2012 08:31 Zahir wrote:On September 04 2012 08:25 cordrann wrote:On September 04 2012 08:06 Zahir wrote:
[quote]
I dislike arguments like these because they ignore reality. The reality is a lot messier. By your logic we should let everyone do whatever they want. Let docs abuse their patients trust and get them hooked. Let dealers sell drugs to kids. Or a person that was injected by a gang or pimp against their will and is now a junkie. When they buy drugs is it because of their inferior genes? You seem to think every addict has it coming and we shouldn't give a damn. You are being illogical. It being legal would completely change the dynamics of how it is acquired. A lot of the negativity and victimization surrounding drugs is in fact created by the fact that it is illegal. By keeping these things illegal we create more profitable markets for criminal elements. 1. That would be a crime by the doctor. 2. I never said it should just be sold on the street like candy. It should be like alcohol obviously. 3. That would be a crime by the gang or pimp. (if its legal there wouldn't be much motive for them to do this in the first place) Every single example you provide involves a clear violation of a persons right to free will. Your examples are meaningless. Drugs erode free will whether your initial consumption was an act of free will or not. Addiction is addiction. Also I don't think my examples are meaningless because they happen. Your statement "let those too weak to control themselves destroy themselves" only applies if reality is a nice tidy place where kids and others in vulnerable positions are not exploited. Unfortunately they are. I don't think acknowledging that fact is meaningless just because it contradicts your vision of how things should be. My issue is not with your legal stance, which we in fact agree on (legalization with regulations). It's your lack of empathy for drug addicts. Is eating a bar of chocolate one day and wanting to eat more another day because you like it eroding your free will? Because that's how wanting to smoke another joint after initially smoking one is. And you know how eating too much chocolate makes you sick and you don't want to eat it again for a period? Yep, weed is exactly the same. This isn't "should heroin be legalized" thread, it's about god damn weed. It's "addictive" because it's fucking good, not because you don't feel good if you don't consume it (a la heroin and tobacco for that matter). the post I was responding to said all drugs should be legal, which is what I was responding to. I get that this is a weed thread but because this seems to be a relatively common view, I responded to it. I'm sorry..... Buy ya a drink? All drugs should be decriminalized. Because they are health issues and we want people coming forward with their health problems without fear of being put into prison. This is what they did in Portugal and it's worked wonders on lowering drug use rates (people actually stopping their addictions). Distribution of harder drugs can be illegal and punished, of course. That's fine. I see nothing wrong with that. Im not familiar with portugals case, but i did some research on marijuana for a paper and saw plenty of research to support treatment over criminalization. A hairier issue is to what extent the state should support treatment programs, because, even though they are effective and beneficial overall, I am somewhat dubious about forcing everyone to pay for the irresponsible decisions of the few. It's really not fair to those who live responsibly to pay for others' stupid mistakes. That is basically the definition of the entire criminal justice system... The notion that getting people back to being productive members of society being a bad thing, and not in society's best interest is absolutely crazy to me. I will not deny there is a certain element of vengeance involved in criminal justice. If someone does something terrible to you or a loved one, for most people, they expect an equal or greater level of misery to be inflicted on the culprit, regardless of whether this brutalizes and criminalizes the perpetrator even further. Perhaps someday people will grow out of this mentality, but until then I would not expect our conception of justice to be completely overturned. None of this applies to drug use in itself though, as it is a victimless crime, and thus there is not even that amount of justification for imprisoning users. Well you were talking about forcing society to pay for someone's else irresponsible decisions or whatever. This mentality undermines the criminal justice system, whose whole purpose is to serve society. Society pays for prisons and a legal system, even for petty civil suits with the entire intention of forcing society to pay for other people's decisions. There's no way you can get around that. We therefore should be looking for the most effective way for it to be serving society. It's also a very dangerous mentality to have when you listen to the amount of victim-blaming that still goes on in society. "Why should we charge rapists when what really needs to happen is for women to act responsibly..."
I agree that the justice system's purpose should be to serve society. In the case of drug addicts that seems straightforward, thanks to all the data we have now that shows treatment as far and away the most effective option for doing that. I think most people could be convinced of this fact, particularly since drug use is in itself a victimless crime.
Unfortunately, addiction to hard drugs often leads to other crimes. And that's where the issue becomes muddied. Because while counseling and treatment might well be more effective than punishment and deterrence at reducing ALL crimes, and while society might objectively be best served by programs that recognize this fact, subjectively this is rarely the case.
Any time a perceived miscarriage of justice occurs, the victim/victim's family tends to be quite outraged and disillusioned. Trying to explain to them that society actually benefits most from their loved one's killer being rehabilitated and reintegrated would be a daunting task indeed. As would dealing with the media frenzy that often results when a particularly heinous or notorious perpetrator goes free, or gets a 'slap on the wrist'. Due to society's own bias, the net effect of a treatment-oriented justice system might well be negative, as it would inspire extreme disgust and loss of respect for the rule of law in much of the population.
Edit: as to victim blaming. While I would sympathize with any whose life has been wrecked by drugs and is looking to go to rehab, their situation is rarely the same as a woman who was raped. Rape is by definition without consent. Drug addiction - not always, but often enough - happens as a result of a conscious choice. There needs to be at least some recognition of that or responsibility loses all meaning.
Edit2: Wow, for some reason it took me a while to understand what you were getting at. Basically, since treating drug users is more effective, and possibly cheaper than the other alternatives, we should implement it. Well, i've little doubt this is a cheaper option than strict enforcement and incarceration. I'm not entirely sure it is cheaper than simple decriminalization and letting various non profits that already exist provide treatment services. But I suppose it could ultimately be a cheaper option, because it would likely reduce the number of drug addicts, and hence reduce the overall crime rate and add more productive members to the economy.
Let's assume this is actually the case and that government funded treatment is the best economic choice overall. At least on the surface. I think you would have to look very deep at all the possible consequences though. One is taxpayer disillusionment, which is already a problem for funding the arts, space exploration, etc. Not something i always agree with, but in the case of paying for treatment for drug addicts, i would say there is definitely grounds for a moral objection here.
In the case of prosecuting rape, you are paying to protect people from the predatory behavior of criminals. In the case of treatment programs, you are paying to protect people from the consequences of what is usually their own decisions. This is why i feel your rape comparison is invalid here. Rape victims would be the first to point out that, regardless of their behavior, their lack of consent is what matters. They would not advise women to live sheltered lives and avoid their mistakes, but rather, would advocate punishing the criminals who DID make a conscious decision to rape. A recovered drug addict, on the other hand, would be quick to point out and own up to the mistake he made in deciding to abuse drugs in the first place. He would most definitely try to persuade others not to commit the same error. As i understand it, internalizing such notions of responsibility is in fact critical to the recovery process, empowering one to make a strong, conscious decision to not abuse drugs in the future.
so if addicts themselves are able to recognize that a voluntary descent into drug use is a terrible choice with terrible consequences, and are able to hold themselves accountable for the consequences of such choices, i see no reason why the rest of society should not also hold them accountable.
|
Anyone who knows the numbers relating to alcoholism and alcohol related deaths knows that it is the most deadly substance known to man (FACT). The fact that I can't smoke a J without fear of being arrested even though my friends can all drink until they are unconscious vomiting on the floor in front of a cop (as long as its not in public) is completely insane.
Lobbying and political bullshit has prevented the legalization of the magic herb for too long. It's time for us to open our eyes to the bullshit and legalize it.
|
"I'm sorry, but this is the biggest nonsense I've ever heard."
No unfortunatly its not nonsense , i do verry well understand the difference between alcohol and weed as i have a huge amount of experience with both of them.
I have seen the extremes of both and i even have experienced the extremes of both myself , and i feel i can safely say that weed is more dangerous then alcohol.
It is true that a real alcoholic is way worse of then someone who is heavily adicted to weed (as in smokes joints all day) but only a verry small amount of recreational alcohol users end up beeing a severe alcoholic.
Beeing adicted to weed is less damaging for your health then beeing adicted to alcohol is,that is true but it is equally damaging for your labour productivity and ability to work, maybe weed is even more harmfull in this aspect.
What is more important though is that a quiet high percentage of recreational weed users ends up beeing a problematic user,so problematic that the use limits the person ability to function in society
This is a way higher percentage then the percentage of alcohol users wich end up beeing a severe alcoholic to the point where it limits their ability to function (alcoholics can function quiet well in society)
Alcohol is an upper basicly, it makes your more active and socially engaged while weed is a downer, it makes you less active and socially engaged.
"If you smoke a lot of weed constantly (and with that I mean huge amount every day for years) you get a slow memory, and you become a slow person in most cases. Until you stop, and after a few weeks you're much improved already. Fuller recovery can take several months."
So:how is this not a bad thing ?
|
On September 04 2012 21:28 Roflhaxx wrote:
The amount of misinformation in op kind of disgusts me, I am for legislation but that should be done in an honest way, not hiding any risks. Saying that marijuana is not a gateway drug is wrong, and I am gonna tell you why. I also want to make one thing clear, I am NOT saying that marijuana leads to stronger drugs because it doesnt make you resistant and need to use a stronger and stronger dose (as with morphine, heroin etc.) what it does however is 'prepare' you for other highs. It being milder etc than acid, shrooms etc makes it less of a 'shock'.
The second thing I want to touch is about the psychological effects, the obvious part is about people with psycholical 'illnesses' may very well get a lot worse than they were before. This is not really important though because it is kind of obvious. The bad part is that also affects normal people (by that I do NOT mean that you will turn into some hippie only saying 'heeey maaan') now these affects might not necessarily be that bad but it is still the case. And before you go flaming me and calling me stupid think for a moment, and now I want you to really think and be honest with yourself. (this is directed at frequent smokers) can you really say that you have not changed at all after you started smoking weed? If you don't then you are either a) not honest b) do not do it that frequently or c) really "lucky" I guess.
This post was not meant as a bash against weed but I just get kind of frustrated when it is glorified as some kind of miracle drug with no downsides.
I think what motivates most people is that if alcohol and cigarettes are fine then weed definitely is, not that weed has no downsides.
|
On September 04 2012 21:51 Rassy wrote:
"I'm sorry, but this is the biggest nonsense I've ever heard."
No unfortunatly its not nonsense , i do verry well understand the difference between alcohol and weed as i have a huge amount of experience with both of them.
I have seen the extremes of both and i even have experienced the extremes of both myself , and i feel i can safely say that weed is more dangerous then alcohol.
It is true that a real alcoholic is way worse of then someone who is heavily adicted to weed (as in smokes joints all day) but only a verry small amount of recreational alcohol users end up beeing a severe alcoholic.
Beeing adicted to weed is less damaging for your health then beeing adicted to alcohol is,that is true but it is equally damaging for your labour productivity and ability to work, maybe weed is even more harmfull in this aspect.
What is more important though is that a quiet high percentage of recreational weed users ends up beeing a problematic user,so problematic that the use limits the person ability to function in society
This is a way higher percentage then the percentage of alcohol users wich end up beeing a severe alcoholic to the point where it limits their ability to function (alcoholics can function quiet well in society)
Alcohol is an upper basicly, it makes your more active and socially engaged while weed is a downer, it makes you less active and socially engaged.
"If you smoke a lot of weed constantly (and with that I mean huge amount every day for years) you get a slow memory, and you become a slow person in most cases. Until you stop, and after a few weeks you're much improved already. Fuller recovery can take several months."
So:how is this not a bad thing ?
You obviously do NOT understand the difference between alcohol and weed. This is made apparent by your stance that weed is in any way more dangerous than alcohol. Its not even worth responding to the rest of your post because its simply made-up information with no study, no control, no conditions given, etc. I can make up a long-winded study that never happened claiming it supports my side too, although such a method is quite frankly beneath me. Not to mention you went one step further and made up some base-less statements in quotations too. Such lowly methods are not going to net you any back-up.
At this point, I have no option but to assume you're trolling. Anyone who refers to alcohol as a stimulant or "upper" as you so naively put it is either attempting to get rises out of people like a child or they are one of those people FOX loves to have on their "news".
Also to the fools attempting to produce highly specific conditions in which weed might be harmful, this is also nonsense. I can aimlessly produce several specific scenarios where any particular object or substance could be villainized, but that does not make it something that an intelligent person would consider a serious factor in its general use.
This thread has long since become one side bashing their heads against a small group of people who not only spout propoganda but who have no evidence for their statements, no studies that aren't proven false or rigged, who don't bother to read the OP or watch real evidence and real studies that HAVE been conducted and even documented by video and who are willing to make up quotes and studies just because they realize there's nothing for them to grasp on to. They're no better than creationists thinking they're somehow head-strong, logically-thinking and intelligent people while the other side has such a ridiculous amount of tangible evidence. The big question anyone reasonable has is "How is it even possible that there's still so many raised to be so foolishly ignorant?"
|
On September 04 2012 21:51 Rassy wrote:
"I'm sorry, but this is the biggest nonsense I've ever heard."
No unfortunatly its not nonsense , i do verry well understand the difference between alcohol and weed as i have a huge amount of experience with both of them.
I have seen the extremes of both and i even have experienced the extremes of both myself , and i feel i can safely say that weed is more dangerous then alcohol.
It is true that a real alcoholic is way worse of then someone who is heavily adicted to weed (as in smokes joints all day) but only a verry small amount of recreational alcohol users end up beeing a severe alcoholic.
Beeing adicted to weed is less damaging for your health then beeing adicted to alcohol is,that is true but it is equally damaging for your labour productivity and ability to work, maybe weed is even more harmfull in this aspect.
What is more important though is that a quiet high percentage of recreational weed users ends up beeing a problematic user,so problematic that the use limits the person ability to function in society
This is a way higher percentage then the percentage of alcohol users wich end up beeing a severe alcoholic to the point where it limits their ability to function (alcoholics can function quiet well in society)
Alcohol is an upper basicly, it makes your more active and socially engaged while weed is a downer, it makes you less active and socially engaged.
"If you smoke a lot of weed constantly (and with that I mean huge amount every day for years) you get a slow memory, and you become a slow person in most cases. Until you stop, and after a few weeks you're much improved already. Fuller recovery can take several months."
So:how is this not a bad thing ?
10+ years daily heavy smoker here. Also quite a heavy drinker. So i got "some" experience as well. Thing is, i come to a completely different conclusion than you:
Quitting to smoke weed completely was really hard for 2 days (!), then sleeping problems disappeared. I still got cravings but it's np really. I though the weed was my problem but it wasn't. So atm i smoke from time to time, because i want to and i don't feel endangered or lessened in my abilities in any way. Well, when im really high of course i'm not at 100% but i'm still way more productive/fit compared to being drunk.
I sure love beer. And to me it's a lot harder to quit it completely. Don't start with cigarettes... That's the worst habit i picked up by far and seems like impossible to quit after 12+ years! Ye i'm weak...
There was a time in my life when i took anti-depressants as well. Doxepin-Neurax to be precise. Doctors over here hand out prescription for that like it's candy. To me that was some heavy stuff. It changed my personality in a way i didn't like at all! I prefer smoking a joint from time to time to taking that stuff any day!
So: Everybody is different. Maybe for you weed had effects you didn't like and alcohol is ok, but that doesn't mean your assumptions count for everyone. K? And what's the problem? If weed is nothing for you, leave it be. No one forces you to smoke. And as was pointed out a lot of times before: You can abuse every substance, even food...
|
On September 04 2012 21:28 Roflhaxx wrote:
The amount of misinformation in op kind of disgusts me, I am for legislation but that should be done in an honest way, not hiding any risks. Saying that marijuana is not a gateway drug is wrong, and I am gonna tell you why. I also want to make one thing clear, I am NOT saying that marijuana leads to stronger drugs because it doesnt make you resistant and need to use a stronger and stronger dose (as with morphine, heroin etc.) what it does however is 'prepare' you for other highs. It being milder etc than acid, shrooms etc makes it less of a 'shock'.
The second thing I want to touch is about the psychological effects, the obvious part is about people with psycholical 'illnesses' may very well get a lot worse than they were before. This is not really important though because it is kind of obvious. The bad part is that also affects normal people (by that I do NOT mean that you will turn into some hippie only saying 'heeey maaan') now these affects might not necessarily be that bad but it is still the case. And before you go flaming me and calling me stupid think for a moment, and now I want you to really think and be honest with yourself. (this is directed at frequent smokers) can you really say that you have not changed at all after you started smoking weed? If you don't then you are either a) not honest b) do not do it that frequently or c) really "lucky" I guess.
This post was not meant as a bash against weed but I just get kind of frustrated when it is glorified as some kind of miracle drug with no downsides.
in that case tobacco is the real gateway drug has it prepares you to inhale smoke.
does alcohol prepare you to get high too? You logic fails.
|
On September 04 2012 21:51 Rassy wrote:
"I'm sorry, but this is the biggest nonsense I've ever heard."
No unfortunatly its not nonsense , i do verry well understand the difference between alcohol and weed as i have a huge amount of experience with both of them.
I have seen the extremes of both and i even have experienced the extremes of both myself , and i feel i can safely say that weed is more dangerous then alcohol.
It is true that a real alcoholic is way worse of then someone who is heavily adicted to weed (as in smokes joints all day) but only a verry small amount of recreational alcohol users end up beeing a severe alcoholic.
Beeing adicted to weed is less damaging for your health then beeing adicted to alcohol is,that is true but it is equally damaging for your labour productivity and ability to work, maybe weed is even more harmfull in this aspect.
What is more important though is that a quiet high percentage of recreational weed users ends up beeing a problematic user,so problematic that the use limits the person ability to function in society
This is a way higher percentage then the percentage of alcohol users wich end up beeing a severe alcoholic to the point where it limits their ability to function (alcoholics can function quiet well in society)
Alcohol is an upper basicly, it makes your more active and socially engaged while weed is a downer, it makes you less active and socially engaged.
"If you smoke a lot of weed constantly (and with that I mean huge amount every day for years) you get a slow memory, and you become a slow person in most cases. Until you stop, and after a few weeks you're much improved already. Fuller recovery can take several months."
So:how is this not a bad thing ?
I don't even understand how you can say that some1 drunk will work better than someone high. You probably say that because you have no idea the perfectly normal person in front of you is high while any1 who is drunk is obvious since they become mentally challenged.
weed is not a downer i don't even know where you pull that shit from.
i have held a full time job for 10y i think i have earned the right to smoke whatever the hell i want, and no1 can tell me otherwise.
|
On September 02 2012 11:15 EndofCreation wrote:ill continue to add different videos to the OP to make it better for people to learn from 
Just so you know, people that don't advocate the use of drugs probably are not going to watch a documentary of why drugs are good. It's just human nature to be held in our own beliefs until something externally pushes us towards them.
|
How do all of you feel about the illegality of psychedelic mushrooms?
|
On September 04 2012 22:50 Grumbels wrote:
How do all of you feel about the illegality of psychedelic mushrooms?
Perfectly fine to be illegal.
|
On September 04 2012 22:51 Praetorial wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2012 22:50 Grumbels wrote:
How do all of you feel about the illegality of psychedelic mushrooms? Perfectly fine to be illegal.
Why? People are going to want them and get them anyway, what's the point of not letting them?
|
On September 04 2012 22:51 Praetorial wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2012 22:50 Grumbels wrote:
How do all of you feel about the illegality of psychedelic mushrooms? Perfectly fine to be illegal.
Psilocybin mushrooms have been PROVEN to completely cure chronic migraines, just sayin
|
On September 04 2012 21:28 Roflhaxx wrote:
The amount of misinformation in op kind of disgusts me, I am for legislation but that should be done in an honest way, not hiding any risks. Saying that marijuana is not a gateway drug is wrong, and I am gonna tell you why. I also want to make one thing clear, I am NOT saying that marijuana leads to stronger drugs because it doesnt make you resistant and need to use a stronger and stronger dose (as with morphine, heroin etc.) what it does however is 'prepare' you for other highs. It being milder etc than acid, shrooms etc makes it less of a 'shock'.
The second thing I want to touch is about the psychological effects, the obvious part is about people with psycholical 'illnesses' may very well get a lot worse than they were before. This is not really important though because it is kind of obvious. The bad part is that also affects normal people (by that I do NOT mean that you will turn into some hippie only saying 'heeey maaan') now these affects might not necessarily be that bad but it is still the case. And before you go flaming me and calling me stupid think for a moment, and now I want you to really think and be honest with yourself. (this is directed at frequent smokers) can you really say that you have not changed at all after you started smoking weed? If you don't then you are either a) not honest b) do not do it that frequently or c) really "lucky" I guess.
This post was not meant as a bash against weed but I just get kind of frustrated when it is glorified as some kind of miracle drug with no downsides.
When you kind of compare all those drugs you have to include alcohol, caffeine, anti-depressants, etc. as well. All of them are mind altering substances. The weed high prepares you for other highs but alcohol doesn't? Care to elaborate? This is more about how weed is portrayed and treated in our society (you need to go to dealers) than the nature of the high.
Every mind altering substance can play a role in worsening or even causing mental conditions. There are serial criminals e.g. who just commit violent crimes when under the influence of alcohol. People with certain conditions should not smoke weed, but there are as many who shouldn't drink alcohol.
Thc can even be used to treat certain mental conditions as well. It dampens an overactive dopamin system e.g. which is reported to be the cause schizophrenia. Anti depressants do kind of the same, they mostly block your dopamin receptors. I don't want to glorify it, but the misinformation has to stop. We don't know enough to make claims like you did in your post.
There are some studies but nothing precise and final.
Lastly, of course a mind altering substance changes you when abuse it. BIG NEWS! But if you bash the weed, you gotta bash the rest as well.
|
I just cant stand people that are high in public. And the smell is just awful. So i would vote no. I dont care about what effects it has on the brain.
However, I think it should be legal for medicinal use.
|
Legalize - Educate - Regulate.
|
On September 04 2012 22:51 Praetorial wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2012 22:50 Grumbels wrote:
How do all of you feel about the illegality of psychedelic mushrooms? Perfectly fine to be illegal.
They grow in the wild and in many states it's legal to acquire spore sets to grow them yourself. However, often it's illegal to harvest and then dry them as that counts as processing them for consumption. It's somewhat of a minefield, it's easy to cross the line into illegality and suddenly turn into a criminal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
