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.
No good comes from smoking cigarettes and the nicotine is highly addictive. Some people go through hell trying to quit. Going through the withdrawal is a nightmare. If you were a smoker and quit then you know what I'm talking about. There are over 4000 chemicals used in cigarettes including acetone and arsenic.
Believe it or not pot is not addictive and does have medicinal purposes.
I think pot would be more enjoyable if nicotine were added to it.
The damage clearly wasn't permanent, or I'd still be in psychosis today... as for pot, I'd hardly call memory & concentration issues "psychosis" to the point you were implying. Did you read that article on the cannibal, and how they found unknown pills & possible evidence of bath salts? You claimed his episodes were all due to pot, but it looks like the experts don't really agree.
Please read the paragraph I just added, where it says I'm not denying there are potential risks - I am only saying it should be classified like other similar substances (i.e. alcohol and tobacco), and that adults should be free to make those decisions for themselves. Do you eat or do anything that isn't 100% healthy, and if so, do you want the government telling you not to do them? I thought conservatives were all about small government, but apparently that only applies as you see fit.
I said "long term effects" and they can indeed become permanent. The bath salt speculation was flying around the media BEFORE the toxicology results came in, and once they came in they found no such thing, and therefore were rules out. They found pot, and nothing else. Besides, I'd be OK, with medical marijuana, where you can buy it with a doctors prescription.
I said "long term effects" and they can indeed become permanent. The bath salt speculation was flying around the media BEFORE the toxicology results came in, and once they came in they found no such thing, and therefore were rules out. They found pot, and nothing else. Besides, I'd be OK, with medical marijuana, where you can buy it with a doctors prescription.
I have a prescription for marijuana, and buy it only from state-licensed cannabis clubs... does that suddenly make me less of a "pothead loser" in your eyes?
Btw, the article I posted says they still suspect bath salts but can't accurately test for that (or other "new" substances) yet. His behavior was actually typical of a bath salt psychosis, from what I've seen and heard about that stuff. One thing I haven't tried myself, though! Its recent popularity should teach you something, however - that humans will always find a way to intoxicate themselves regardless of laws & availability. Back when I was a teen/YA, the legal substance of choice was "whip-its" (either from a whipped cream aerosol can or the poppers sold for balloons). People like getting high, so IMO it's best to legalize and regulate everything. Let us make those choices for ourselves, and face the consequences of our actions if anything bad occurs as a result.
The agruments againsts cigs is that it causes lung cancer, emphysema, heart issues, it stinks, etc. Can the exact same things not be said about pot? I've never smoked either, so I don't know, but cigarettes are socially unacceptable, yet pot is socially cool. Why? Thanks
As an adult, why do I need governments permission to use either? That's what the argument should be about.
Btw, Dale - you never answered my question, regarding what you do for a living. I'm going to keep asking, as I'm determined to get an answer from one of you holier-than-thous! I've asked numerous forum members, and have yet to hear back from any. Hmmm.
Really? Why are you trying to get into the personal lives of forum members? Hmmm.
Numerous times? After the second time, when no one answered, you should have learned.
Really? Why are you trying to get into the personal lives of forum members? Hmmm.
Numerous times? After the second time, when no one answered, you should have learned.
I've asked numerous people, not numerous times with each... and I ask for a reason, to see if my theory is true regarding these perfect/holier-than-thou types. Given how often they claim to be "paying for everyone's ills," more responsible than most, etc, I'm assuming they must have REALLY terrific jobs & salaries! What are they hiding, anyway? I have my profession listed in my profile (and status currently), but most of those types have their profiles on private settings. Just a little fishy, that's all.
Oh, I did find out the "profession" of one (now banned) poster who constantly whined about poor people, welfare, immigrants, etc... he was unemployed and on SSDI. Hmmm. Nothing wrong with that, necessarily, but it did make some of his rantings rather hypocritical.
As an adult, why do I need governments permission to use either? That's what the argument should be about.
That's exactly what most of us are arguing, so the possible health risks are really irrelevant... just about everything is bad for you in excess, and unlike some people (i.e. Bloomberg), I think adults should be free to decide what to put in their own bodies. It's great to encourage healthy living, but shouldn't be government-mandated to the point of infringing upon our liberties.
So to bring it back to the OP, pot might be more socially acceptable these days, but legally the government (and some members of society) still favors cigarettes. Pretty backwards, considering the health risks of cigarettes are more easily proven and much more serious than those of marijuana. It's all about money, and at one time, was also about keeping certain demographics in jail.
Too bad the government here doesn't think pot is good. The cops are flying around in an iroquois (the proverbial Bear in the Air) at this very moment, pulling out the patches of decent, hard working growers. How can I relax with my book, with that racket going on?
Hopefully the changing political climate in the US re pot laws, will lead to more enlightened thinking here.
I have seen and experienced the "relaxed / peaceful" scenario and I have seen and experienced the paranoid and the "I'm going to die" scenario, and like I already mentioned I have seen the psychosis scenario happen to a very normal person. Every pot smoker I have ever talked to knows everything about the paranoia which often comes from pot, and most know the uncomfortable racing heart and "should I call the paramedics" panic.
Not true. There are a lot of people who feel that way ONLY when they smoke pot, and many people refrain from it only because they want to avoid the uncomfortable and negative side effects. Are there people who use if on daily bases, who never experience any negative side effects? Sure, but there are just as many who do experience negative side effects.
So then it's simple. If it effects you negatively, stay away from it! That goes for anything! Hard liquor for instance, makes me sick to my stomach. Therefore, I don't touch it.
Yes, but he is arguing the opposite. He says that you can be stoned long after the substance has disappeared from the body.
It hasn't been my experience. Of course, I don't know anyone who smokes all day long as some Rastafarians do. lol Pot does last a bit in the fat cells, but so do many other products, and it's not very long anyway.
I think the problem in this whole pot thing is that the lobbying against it by those who stand to lose money if it's legalized has always been intense and well financed. Also, conservatives throughout the ages have always been the ignorant bunch of the U.S., and conservatives back in the 1930s were no exception to the customary right wing idiocy when they began a concerted effort to trash and destroy the "image" of that particular natural plant.
If I remember correctly, back then the right wingnuts were waging war against marijuana it was primarily because hemp rope was in competition with regular rope or some such thing. It's always money, isn't it? Of course, the right wingers waging war against pot back then didn't admit it was all about money, just as they don't admit it's a war about money now. They just say, "Oh, it makes people bad, it makes people lazy, it makes people ____________ (put in here any kind of really f'd up lie you can come up with lol)
Nowadays the lobbyists are the the alcohol industry. Hell, if some people could grow a plant and smoke or eat that, and avoid having to buy beer and alcohol, I think the moguls that own alcohol fortunes might feel up sh_t's creek suffering that they might have to own only 5 mansions abroad rather than 10. The other lobbyist is the prison corporation industry. Can you imagine how much less money these corporations would make if people weren't arrested for selling pot? OMFG. They probably get a hernia just thinking of their profits going down because the prison population would be low.
It's precisely this sort of sh_t that so endears me to the rich. (NOT!!!!!)
Anyway! There is NO case against marijuana. It's basically a bunch of made-up BS by right wingnuts, AS USUAL, since every NON-ISSUE (like this one, "pro-life", the poor are lazy, yada yada yada), is made up by right wingnuts, and behind all of them is this: ---> $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
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.
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.
