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.
Sorry to disappoint you, but I'm retired from that sort of thing these days. I have to work for a living now.
Let's just say I did my part to uphold FSU's reputation as a party school, back in the 80's when we could still get away with it.
Hey now! I work for a living as well! I work 40 hrs a week in sales. I also have a small DJ business, and I am planning to go back to school in the Fall to go into meteorology. I also own a home, and have a wife of almost 11 years and an 8 year old. I guess that debunks another myth; that of pot making you lazy! Let's just say that I wouldn't spark one up and go on a joyride, or go to work like that. If and when I do partake, it's strictly "me" time!
I guess I also find it interesting that they treat cancer with a carcinogen.
Cannabis has many different canabanoids in it. THC is just one of them. Their is no pill yet that has them all. The most famous one, marinol, has only THC in it and makes many people sick....btw why would you rather want a synthetic drug vs. a natural one?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calvinist
everything I've heard is that it's much worse for it than tobacco. In addition to that, I don't think most folks use filters when they roll their own.
The war on drugs, just say no, DARE, etc. is full of half truths and lies. There is not ONE proven case of any cancer (including lung) that can be attributed to smoking it. There are hundreds of studies pointing out the fact that it actually protects the body from cancer. The US Government (NIH) admitted in the past few days that cannabis (according to all recent studies) appears to kill cancerous cells while leaving healthy cells alone.
Don't feel bad for not knowing the truth. My own wife told me a few months ago that pot kills brain cells. haha
For all the Republicans and supporters of small government, do you advocate keeping marijuana prohibition in place?
If so, please tell me how the country you claim is broke and needs to slash spending now can afford to spend billions and billions EVERY YEAR to maintain a policy that was put into place with complete lies by the government (reefer madness, etc).
Next, tell me how the same government that is supposed to "get out of citizens way and let them live their lives" is also supposed to stake out homes and kick in doors, barge in with guns pointed at everyone when the DEA or law enforcement knows the person they are targeting is not dealing with coke, crack, heroin, but simply pot.
Also, let me know why you support police arresting people simply for possessing marijuana when we know that everytime a police officer arrests someone for marijuana (around 220,000 times so far THIS YEAR), that cop is off the street for the rest of their shift, therefore leaving 1 less cop available for real crimes such as theft, rape, murder, etc.
Please tell me how you can say that you support a fiscally responsible government that stays out of people's private lives yet still support marijuana prohibition.
Why republicans and supporters of small government? Why not democrats/republicans, and supporters of small government if you want two different groups. The government has no business telling its citizens what they can or cannot put into their body. Government does not own us. Knowledge is gained through education not force.
The drug war unfairly targets minorities and the poor. This sentence blew my mind. "Drug arrests—eighty percent of which were for simple possession in 2005—have enormous consequences"
"Existing evidence does not support the notion that black males are more likely to commit drug crimes—far from it. Instead, whites use illegal drugs at much the same rates as blacks. (National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2002) Young whites are in fact more likely to sell drugs than are young black males. (Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention) Still, the war on drugs is almost entirely fought in poor neighborhoods inhabited by people of color. In 2000, African Americans and Latinos made up over three fourths of all those sent to prison for drug offenses.
According to Alexander, “blacks are admitted to prison on drug charges at rates from twenty to fifty seven times greater than that of white men.” The end result is that one in fifteen African American males is currently incarcerated and that’s not including all those on parole or at some other stage of the penal process. For these men the chances of obtaining any kind of adequate employment, or even shelter, are often highly problematic."
For the same reason a bar or restaurant must get a liquer license. The license and fees are for establishments that sell or serve the stuff. Like micro-brewers, you'd be free to produce your own for personal use or sale to establishments.
So why do we need government to license liquor sales? Why do we allow government to tell us what we can sell and when we can sell it?
Smoking anything is by far the most harmful way of ingesting anything. But I'm sure Memphis will add to this. It doesn't have to be smoked. It can eaten in the form of brownies, and candy or other confections. You can also vaporize it. While yes there are carcinogens in the smoke, there are far less than that of tobacco smoke. Think about this, as a pain reliever it is milder, there is little or no chance of physical addiction, and the side-effects are a buzz, and the munchies.
But that should not be part of the debate. That's why the prohibitionists have won the battle so far. They have made the debate about the merits of pot.
The debate should only be about what we allow government to control. We don't need government telling us how to live our lives, so the value of pot is immaterial. Even if it has no value we should not allow government to ban it.
I won't begrudge someone the chance to use a drug that honestly helps. My only curiosity would be...is smoking the only application for the drug? Could they not package in pill form?
I guess I also find it interesting that they treat cancer with a carcinogen.
Yes Cal, pot is available in a synthesized pill form. After God has blessed us with a free remedy that has always been beneficially available to mankind,
pharmaceutical companies have now replicated God's work and made the high, available. Legally, morally and profitibly. It's like selling the sun, the moon and
the stars. Although these God-given blessings were intended to benefit us, au natural, the drug manufacturers who sleep with politicians, have stepped in
between God and mankind with a costly, synthesized chemical compound to replace the real deal, natural cannabis. They have given it a cutsey name, like all
"designer drugs", Marinol has a clever ring to it's name and a heftier price than a well composted, bud yielding, female pot plant. What God gave us free, they
have commercialized upon. As a younger man, I could never envision times when we'd have to pay to watch television or to buy drinking water, I wasn't able
to make the connection between whatever once seemed to be securely free and what we'd have to pay for and what came free. God gave us pot, it was meant
for our benefit, there is no detrimental aspect but rather a cornucopia of beneficial relief for every issue from economic to medical. You could not produce one iota
or shred of documented evidence, that would contradict this fact.
Your posture on this marijuana interplay, seems to indicate that you've been convinced to support the government's position on controling marijuana.
Are you simply going with the particular tide of thought that allows you to feel as if you are a real American, a self appointed, civil patriot who mindlessly surrenders
their individuality in the guise of unquestionable loyalty to the reigning authority? Have you comforted yourself in a blanket of self security that has prevailed out of
a misplaced sense of trust in those who govern? Beyond a conversational encounter here at city-data, has marijuana ever truly affected any part of your comfort zone,
have you personally experienced any of the problems that might keep one from embracing the concept, that the use of marijuana should be a personal choice?
Ironic, that you should mention fighting cancer. Intrusive government is cancer and many of us potheads are fighting it by taking up our "Johnny Appleseed" attitudes,
and deseminating a clearer picture of the issue of marijuana, we take every opportunity to correct misinformation wherever it occurs. For the most part, we are not that
drug induced pack of blowouts, the hippie generation that the uneducated take us for, we are real, we are noble, we are dignified. For every day that our leaders decry
the evils of cannabis or hemp, our voices, our gospel and our thoughts will be there to counter their propaganda, we've seen through them, they are little more than empty
suits who've hooked their own gold ring while they rode the merry-go-round of one big fat, and overbloated political funland, as they've laughed endlessly, at the poor slobs
like us who've paid for their friggin' tickets.
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.
Let's just say that I wouldn't spark one up and go on a joyride, or go to work like that. If and when I do partake, it's strictly "me" time!
