Is Marijuana a gateway drug? (Simpson, conspiracy, racist, politicians)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think it is but it is in no way more of a gateway drug than alcohol is. Both are known to lower inhibitions mind you. Also many people first try marijuana after consuming alcohol.
You apparently missed the update in the same publication that refuted that IQ study. Discounting the effect simply as being due to socio-economic status. Absolutely no causation was shown. Heck, that certain folks keep pointing to that study is an example of said propaganda. That very study also found that there was no impact on those who started using it as an adult. So even if it were valid, only to prevent minors access. Ironically, it also showed that those that had used marijuana had a higher overall IQ than those that abstained for life.
Have you not heard anything Sessions has said about it, just recently? Including simply "good people don't smoke marijuana". Science was never behind the ban, simply cold outright racism.
It should be kept from minors with developing brains except for medical purposes. But why should a 40 year old be prevented from using it in their own home? Great grandma in hospice care? It has proven benefits and negligible proven risks.
No, the science does not say there is "no impact on those who started using it as an adult."
Why should people who help prop up an industry that preys on people and damages their health be prevented from using this chemical? I'm glad you asked that. I am no longer a libertarian. I grew up. The mysterious thing is not that as I grew older, I gave up on these youthful belief systems. The mysterious thing is why middle-aged people and beyond still behave and believe as 20 year-olds do, rationalizing their hedonism, even when it comes at the expense of others. And that ranges from high schools kids that their dealers now target in places like Colorado or Ann Arbor, to the impoverished in third world countries from which this chemical is imported and which causes all sorts of mayhem and despair so that comparatively wealthy kids and adult kids in this country can get a fix. No, the difference is that I don't see "freedom" as the end goal or fundamental principle by which a society should be organized. Freedom presupposes order and peace. If the choice is between your perceived "right" to get a fix and the wellbeing of society, particularly the young and vulnerable, you know with whom I side.
One of the mantras I always parroted was the old, "When we decriminalize illegal drugs, it gets rid of the black market and crime will fall." Of course, wisdom and some study of criminology reveals that criminals don't leave criminal behavior when one avenue of illegal entrepreneurship is taken away, they simply find a new avenue of crime by which to profit.
I think it is but it is in no way more of a gateway drug than alcohol is. Both are known to lower inhibitions mind you. Also many people first try marijuana after consuming alcohol.
Again, another fine argument for more restrictions and regulation of alcohol rather than an argument for loosening restrictions and regulations on marijuana. If we wanted to, we could do some of the same things that we did to the tobacco industry to the alcohol industry, as well. We don't, because people want to get their alcohol fix. Because we are a rights-obsessed culture rather than a common good/responsibility-obsessed culture, we think primarily in terms of what we want for ourselves rather than the collective good. We get the society we deserve.
My goodness, what a load of piffle. That "organization" does little more than paste a series of strawman arguments that it deconstructs. Who in this country argues that “Nationwide, no drug matches the threat posed by marijuana?” Certainly not Jeff Sessions or Donald Trump. They think opioids are the biggest threat.
Thank you for posting one of those propagandistic sources that I mentioned before. It's very illustrative of what I was saying.
No, the science does not say there is "no impact on those who started using it as an adult."
Why should people who help prop up an industry that preys on people and damages their health be prevented from using this chemical? I'm glad you asked that. I am no longer a libertarian. I grew up. The mysterious thing is not that as I grew older, I gave up on these youthful belief systems. The mysterious thing is why middle-aged people and beyond still behave and believe as 20 year-olds do, rationalizing their hedonism, even when it comes at the expense of others. And that ranges from high schools kids that their dealers now target in places like Colorado or Ann Arbor, to the impoverished in third world countries from which this chemical is imported and which causes all sorts of mayhem and despair so that comparatively wealthy kids and adult kids in this country can get a fix. No, the difference is that I don't see "freedom" as the end goal or fundamental principle by which a society should be organized. Freedom presupposes order and peace. If the choice is between your perceived "right" to get a fix and the wellbeing of society, particularly the young and vulnerable, you know with whom I side.
One of the mantras I always parroted was the old, "When we decriminalize illegal drugs, it gets rid of the black market and crime will fall." Of course, wisdom and some study of criminology reveals that criminals don't leave criminal behavior when one avenue of illegal entrepreneurship is taken away, they simply find a new avenue of crime by which to profit.
That enough to drop the IQ argument or at least say it is inconclusive? Can't prove a negative and no positive causation has been shown.
The fact that our bodies, and those of all mammals, have an endocannabinoid system that relates to appetite, pain sensation, and mood that a perfectly natural plant hooks right up to is fascinating and deserving of more study.
Would you agree to this basic tenet? If something is to be prohibited, the duty to prove a need for such prohibition falls on those calling for it. Particularly for a naturally occurring plant.
To date there has been no science to justify the prohibition.
That enough to drop the IQ argument or at least say it is inconclusive? Can't prove a negative and no positive causation has been shown.
The fact that our bodies, and those of all mammals, have an endocannabinoid system that relates to appetite, pain sensation, and mood that a perfectly natural plant hooks right up to is fascinating and deserving of more study.
My anecdotal study would be of the gifted high school class. We still meet at the big reunions. There's a healthy who's who size-up. Those that used pot in high school....frankly achieved less. That said, those that drank excessively in high school (ding) also achieved less. The straight arrows tended to have the model families, successful careers with advancement and a calm demeanor on the world. The drinkers tended to have put on more weight and be less stable. The stoners....well, that had the greatest variance. Opinions were sharper, history less stable, more prone to "victimization". Some dealt with it and had a slower start. Some didn't. None were close to being the "leaders".
Interestingly enough, former straight arrows that had begun drinking or smoking pot later in life didn't seem to be affected. Of course, sharing a joint or having a drink or two is wholly different from getting blitzed when younger.
Anyway, that's my .02. Whether it's basic maturity or something in the brain's formation, best to keep young adults off the drugs/booze.
This is truly priceless. Here are your words earlier in the thread: "Very interesting. Especially since in my 47+ years of experience with the plant, my finding are diametrically opposed to yours. In other words: JUST THE OPPOSITE."
Ah, so his subjective experiences render his opinion null and void, but your subjective experience is valid. Why? Because you use the drug and he does not and you thus must get a better cross-section of the marijuana abuser population! Brilliant! Spiffy good logic, mate!
Because, my dear friend, I have 47+ years of direct daily experience with the plant, and 25 years of research on it, how it became illegal, and its effects on the humans who consume it.
It's really pretty funny, because if I came on here and said I had 47 years of experience growing roses, 99.9% of the people who respond would say "Hey, I bet you're an expert! Let me ask you a question!". But since the plant is cannabis, not only is my 47 years of experience to be totally disregarded, but in fact it is used against me to say "Hey! You use marijuana! You don't know what you're talking about!"
Do you not see your double standard and your jadedness? It's really pretty obvious to most of us.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chiociolliscalves
It would be refreshing if advocates were frank about their advocacy. If you simply stated,"Look, I want to do what I want to do. I know there are serious risks in using this chemical, but adults should be free to do foolish, harmful things," I could respect that. Instead, we get fallacious arguments coupled with bro science, meant to obscure the legitimate data about the harm done by the long-term use of this chemical.
What would be even more refreshing would be a frank response from someone like you to the following facts:
I am 62. I have used it almost daily for over 47 years. I could fill you in on my health, my career, my accomplishments, etc., but let's just say during this period I have been quite the entrepreneur, paid my taxes, smiled, opened the door for people, and have never filed a medical insurance claim in my life.
For the last 25 years I have studied more about the plant itself and how it became illegal. So I'm pretty up to speed on that part too.
Currently I build a complex piece of test equipment for a niche market in the electronics industry. I designed the hardware which I build from scratch, and wrote the software. I have been doing that for about 18 years. Before that, I founded and ran a computer networking company in Oklahoma City which is still in business.
I own my own home, and keep my yard up. My health is so good that I have never filed a medical insurance claim in my life. I do not even have a family doctor, just a dentist.
About 28 years ago, I stopped using it completely for 3 years. Looking back, I can say without a doubt those were the least productive 3 years of my career.
Yet, you want to see me in jail or rehab...
So, that is me being "frank about my advocacy". I'm sure you will reply with the normal canned responses I'm so used to with prohibitionists like you. But in formulating your response, please consider answering these questions, if you don't mind:
I want to know why you know better than I about how the plant affects me and my life?
I want to know why some of you would rather have seen me in prison for these last 47 years rather than being a productive member of society?
Also, exactly when will it affect my brain? I mean, at this point I can still type, work, spell, pay taxes, etc. When will I lose these abilities because of my cannabis use?
When are my lungs going to become nothing but a big lump of cancer?
When am I going to be involved in a fatal car crash (my last accident was in 1981)?
When am I going to stop being productive and do nothing but sit on the couch and eat Doritos?
When am I going to have to have the government start taking care of me (I've never taken a government handout in my life)?
When am I going to gateway to something even worse?
Last edited by Raddo; 06-04-2018 at 09:58 PM..
Reason: typo
Anyway, that's my .02. Whether it's basic maturity or something in the brain's formation, best to keep young adults off the drugs/booze.
Which is really a parenting issue. The reason I didn’t try any alcohol or marijuana growing up had nothing to do with its legal status and everything to do with my parents.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.