Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-21-2010, 07:01 PM
 
19,023 posts, read 25,896,344 times
Reputation: 7365

Advertisements

Mostly Oil....... The evil wild wood weed can damage big oil. Big oil knew that when they were not big oil around 1930.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-21-2010, 07:48 PM
 
Location: Northeast NJ
345 posts, read 641,809 times
Reputation: 357
Because the topic of addiction comes up in the occasional drug/pot /legalization debate, I feel the need to clarify the differences between psychological addiction and physical addiction.

Psychological addiction is the frequent or habitual use of any object or substance to produce a desirable mood change. In this sense, virtually anything can be psychologically addictive, be it food, television, video games, the internet...even positive things like reading or running. Marijuana, like many other things, is capable of being psychologically addictive, depending on the person using it.

Physical addiction is when your body is literally dependent on an substance. As in, the substance itself alters your nervous system in such a way that withdrawal symptoms are seen when the substance is absent.

That is the main difference - withdrawal. If I, say, smoke weed consistently for a year, but then have to quit for whatever reason, my body will not react negatively to the absence of THC. Sure, I may crave it, in the same way that a PC gamer might crave World of Warcraft if he hasn't played for a few days, but I will not be physically ill from not smoking grass.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-22-2010, 07:17 AM
 
Location: Ohio
24,623 posts, read 19,073,042 times
Reputation: 21738
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moth View Post
Such a response is evidence that many people are simply incapable of discussing the topic in a rational manner.
You got that backwards.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Moth View Post
Yours automatically assumes someone in a vital industry, in this case a chopper mechanic, will be lit up like a Christmas tree on the job.
Um, excuse me, those were military members and they had been partying the night before and were not "toking" on the job.

Yes, that incident actually happened. It is in no way "hypothetical" and the 47 people who died really are dead, just ask the families.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Moth View Post
You blatantly ignore that most people drink in approved places or at home. Likewise most people who do such work avoid the 5 Martini lunch. Why would they not treat pot the same way?

And of course they do. There is nothing stopping people from getting stoned on the job now. And most do not. Just as most do not keep a pint of vodka in their raincoat by the desk.
The reason I blatantly ignored it is because as a former military member, a former police officer, and a former private investigator, I have seen or investigated incidents in which people were injured, maimed and killed by others who were drug users and who were not using on the job or at the time of the incident, but who had used within 24 hours prior to the incident.

Also working at the GAP Distribution outlet a female employee was seriously injured when pinned by a fork-lift driver. No, he wasn't using on the job, but the first thing he did every morning when waking up was roll and burn one.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-22-2010, 07:25 AM
 
35,309 posts, read 52,087,305 times
Reputation: 30999
I'm guessing that in keeping with the abhorrence of nanny state policies the Repubs would be the first to agree that laws restricting what some one can consume is high level nanny state interference and these interfering laws should be done away with forthwith, think of the money that could be saved

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-22-2010, 10:57 AM
 
Location: North Cackelacky....in the hills.
19,567 posts, read 21,818,077 times
Reputation: 2519
Quote:
Originally Posted by jambo101 View Post
I'm guessing that in keeping with the abhorrence of nanny state policies the Repubs would be the first to agree that laws restricting what some one can consume is high level nanny state interference and these interfering laws should be done away with forthwith, think of the money that could be saved
I am not a Repub but a conservative and I think ALL drugs should be made legal,as should prostitution.

With this drug legalisation also comes the deal that NO-ONE using such drugs can be on any sort of welfare program...

And that said drug users have no protection against being denied work simply because they use drugs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-22-2010, 11:49 AM
 
35,309 posts, read 52,087,305 times
Reputation: 30999
Quote:
Originally Posted by oz in SC View Post

With this drug legalisation also comes the deal that NO-ONE using such drugs can be on any sort of welfare program...

.
We agree on legalization of all drugs ,but Oz i thought there werent going to be any big government social programs in the upcoming Conservative Utopia ,no welfare,no unemployment benefits,no SS pension,no medicaid and for sure no affordable healthcare for all. so i guess if you are smoking pot the idea of using a government run social program is rendered kinda moot.

I do seem to be applying wrong labels to people these days as when i call some one a Republican they correct me as you did by saying i'm a conservative or vica versa or i'm not either i'm a tea partier, maybe some one could give me a quick definition on the distinctions? or should i just use rightwing as the politically correct term.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-22-2010, 12:50 PM
 
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
448 posts, read 532,654 times
Reputation: 168
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea View Post
No, he wasn't using on the job, but the first thing he did every morning when waking up was roll and burn one.
Sounds like a good life to live.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-22-2010, 02:44 PM
 
Location: A great city, by a Great Lake!
15,896 posts, read 11,942,607 times
Reputation: 7502
Quote:
Originally Posted by k.smith904 View Post
The "damage to society" rhetoric is simply used to get people behind prohibiting something with little or no facts to support the prohibition. Who gets to decide what is good and bad for society? If its not hurting anyone else, whats the problem?

The only reason it's illegal, is because the money can't be taxed. Same with drugs (along with pharm, prison/police lobbies). If Uncle Sam can't get his share, then it must be evil.



Real Crimes: Theft, Murder, Rape, Fraud, Anything Else Violence-related.



You took the words right out of my mouth! Go after the REAL criminals!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-22-2010, 03:22 PM
 
Location: North Cackelacky....in the hills.
19,567 posts, read 21,818,077 times
Reputation: 2519
Quote:
Originally Posted by jambo101 View Post
We agree on legalization of all drugs ,but Oz i thought there werent going to be any big government social programs in the upcoming Conservative Utopia ,no welfare,no unemployment benefits,no SS pension,no medicaid and for sure no affordable healthcare for all. so i guess if you are smoking pot the idea of using a government run social program is rendered kinda moot.
Well the fedgov. would certainly need a lot less of our money if that all happened and we would have more of it to use as we see fit...

Quote:
I do seem to be applying wrong labels to people these days as when i call some one a Republican they correct me as you did by saying i'm a conservative or vica versa or i'm not either i'm a tea partier, maybe some one could give me a quick definition on the distinctions? or should i just use rightwing as the politically correct term.
Republican is a party.

Conservative is a political position or ideology.

It is why I use Leftist to describe people on the...left.
They aren't liberal for sure.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-22-2010, 04:22 PM
 
Location: Blankity-blank!
11,446 posts, read 16,147,945 times
Reputation: 6958
Most informed, knowledgeable, patriotic, god-fearing Americans know that marijuana makes users into screaming, crazed, psycho killers. They grab butcher knives and run through crowds, slashing as many innocent people as possible. Then, after a day or so of smoking joints, they are hopelessly addicted and move on to worse drugs, like heroin. In order to maintain their immoral and sinful drug habit they kill people by the dozens.
Marijuana also makes good, decent citizens into atheists and commies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top