(Attachment Link)
I don't think there's a "HUGE" problem with it.
Though I've never met any "effective" / "highly-motivated" / "productive" individuals that do pot.
I do however know a few that became such individuals once they quit.
I suppose if the person's job does not require a huge amount of responsibility, weed would make zero negative impact on their lives.
There are definitely long term effects to use. This is usually the case if someone begins very early, before their frontal cortex fully forms. This isn't to say they can't change back.. it's just a very slow process past a certain age as the brain becomes less malleable.
The brain does not fully form until ~ 25yrs of age. (recent research suggests)
Which is why it's critical that we withhold certain things from children..
I think for responsible adults to "start" smoking, it should be ok... but the increase in lethargy and decrease of productivity should be expected.. As long as this part is provisioned for.. I think as a society we can tolerate another entertainment drug..
(Attachment Link)
It's not frowned upon for a doctor to perform drunk. They can lose their license and in all likelihood get sued for malpractice
I post stupid things after I smoke. I tend to be for legalization, though I need to stay away from it or I **** things up.
i smoked some weed 20 minutes ago. too bad it was mixed with cigarette tobacco. i ****en hate cigarette tobacco.
I've noticed nothing but downsides to the usage of pot
And I now doctors, airline pilots etc already do their jobs while drunk although it's usually frowned upon.Doctors are HIGHLY frowned upon being drunk on duty. I used to drug test doctors.
Of course, enjoyment is a factor, but arguably, there is more risk in inhaling smoke and using hallucinogens, than playing a video game. Plus, if you need to smoke weed to enjoy things, then you should probably find something else.I've noticed nothing but downsides to the usage of pot
If you choose to completely ignore enjoyment then maybe. There are nothing but downsides to fatty foods, sugary drinks, alcohol (which is worse than weed on almost every front), and almost all video games by the same standards. I respect your opinion (but still disagree with it) if you think all of these things (and countless others) should be illegal as well.
I don't even smoke anything, but arguments that completely ignore the fact people enjoy something in spite of possible negative effects are silly.
Of course, enjoyment is a factor, but arguably, there is more risk in inhaling smoke and using hallucinogens, than playing a video game. Plus, if you need to smoke weed to enjoy things, then you should probably find something else.I've noticed nothing but downsides to the usage of pot
If you choose to completely ignore enjoyment then maybe. There are nothing but downsides to fatty foods, sugary drinks, alcohol (which is worse than weed on almost every front), and almost all video games by the same standards. I respect your opinion (but still disagree with it) if you think all of these things (and countless others) should be illegal as well.
I don't even smoke anything, but arguments that completely ignore the fact people enjoy something in spite of possible negative effects are silly.
Of course, enjoyment is a factor, but arguably, there is more risk in inhaling smoke and using hallucinogens, than playing a video game. Plus, if you need to smoke weed to enjoy things, then you should probably find something else.I've noticed nothing but downsides to the usage of pot
If you choose to completely ignore enjoyment then maybe. There are nothing but downsides to fatty foods, sugary drinks, alcohol (which is worse than weed on almost every front), and almost all video games by the same standards. I respect your opinion (but still disagree with it) if you think all of these things (and countless others) should be illegal as well.
I don't even smoke anything, but arguments that completely ignore the fact people enjoy something in spite of possible negative effects are silly.
Trying to portray doing something to be the same as consuming something seems a bit far-fetched
Of course, enjoyment is a factor, but arguably, there is more risk in inhaling smoke and using hallucinogens, than playing a video game. Plus, if you need to smoke weed to enjoy things, then you should probably find something else.I've noticed nothing but downsides to the usage of pot
If you choose to completely ignore enjoyment then maybe. There are nothing but downsides to fatty foods, sugary drinks, alcohol (which is worse than weed on almost every front), and almost all video games by the same standards. I respect your opinion (but still disagree with it) if you think all of these things (and countless others) should be illegal as well.
I don't even smoke anything, but arguments that completely ignore the fact people enjoy something in spite of possible negative effects are silly.
Trying to portray doing something to be the same as consuming something seems a bit far-fetched
Yes, but in context, it was implied that drug usage is alright simply because it's "enjoyable". There are more health concerns with substance abuse than many of the things said. Still, everything must be done in moderation, but drug usage in moderation is still much more hazardous than gaming in excess.
Yes, but in context, it was implied that drug usage is alright simply because it's "enjoyable". There are more health concerns with substance abuse than many of the things said. Still, everything must be done in moderation, but drug usage in moderation is still much more hazardous than gaming in excess.
Yes, but in context, it was implied that drug usage is alright simply because it's "enjoyable". There are more health concerns with substance abuse than many of the things said. Still, everything must be done in moderation, but drug usage in moderation is still much more hazardous than gaming in excess.
I would argue that any excess of weed (I'm talking like Snoop dog 81 blunts a day levels), even smoked rather than vaporized, would be less harmful than somewhat less extreme excesses of alcohol, tobacco (in retail cigarette form anyway), or very fatty foods.
We have a deep schism between public and private behavior that is all but impossible to quantify and legislate.
What pot heads fail to realize, is that loss in productivity is in actuality the same as lost lifespan. Their "useful" lifespan is lost to humanity.
As an individual unit, they may live as long as someone who does not use recreational drug, but their usefulness is reduced...
^^^ this is the main issue social planners have been reticent about legalization of marijuana.
social planners do not care if you die... as long as every moment you've lived prior to death has been effectively appropriated in labor..
What pot heads fail to realize, is that loss in productivity is in actuality the same as lost lifespan. Their "useful" lifespan is lost to humanity.
As an individual unit, they may live as long as someone who does not use recreational drug, but their usefulness is reduced...
^^^ this is the main issue social planners have been reticent about legalization of marijuana.
social planners do not care if you die... as long as every moment you've lived prior to death has been effectively appropriated in labor..
so as long as I buy an ergodox I will be okay?
as long as you use ergodox in a neutral or positive way, I agree to whatever is stated.Show Image(http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/tuzki-bunnys/tuzki-bunny-emoticon-036.gif)
as long as you use ergodox in a neutral or positive way, I agree to whatever is stated.Show Image(http://www.freesmileys.org/emoticons/tuzki-bunnys/tuzki-bunny-emoticon-036.gif)
And if I should use my ergodox for evil?
I understand the "lazy" and "decrease in productivity" arguments, but I'm curious what those of you who subscribe to this opinion feel about alcohol usage?
If (when) marijuana is legalized, OF COURSE there will be legislation to follow it to keep abuse down. There will be age restrictions, there will be a legal level of intoxication (this is probably the biggest difficulty)... It would never be legalized without fundamentals such as those.
You people are acting as though it's legal to drive drunk, or socially acceptable to show up to work under the influence.
I understand the "lazy" and "decrease in productivity" arguments, but I'm curious what those of you who subscribe to this opinion feel about alcohol usage?
If (when) marijuana is legalized, OF COURSE there will be legislation to follow it to keep abuse down. There will be age restrictions, there will be a legal level of intoxication (this is probably the biggest difficulty)... It would never be legalized without fundamentals such as those.
You people are acting as though it's legal to drive drunk, or socially acceptable to show up to work under the influence.
you can recover from alcohol and work effectively MUCH MORE QUICKLY than marijuana.
With pot, it takes a day or so before you're really "up to working"..
Chill out guys........
way too many words in this thread
marijuana is a gateway drug, soon you'll be smoking crack cocaine and committing violent crimes. you're all going straight to hell.
marijuana is a gateway drug, soon you'll be smoking crack cocaine and committing violent crimes. you're all going straight to hell.
YOLO SWAG FOR JESUS BLAZE IT 420
YOLO SWAG FOR JESUS BLAZE IT 420
marijuana is a gateway drug, soon you'll be smoking crack cocaine and committing violent crimes. you're all going straight to hell.
good thing i found demik while he was in the powder stage, poor guy was grinding up his hardcore white CC's
What pot heads fail to realize, is that loss in productivity is in actuality the same as lost lifespan. Their "useful" lifespan is lost to humanity.
As an individual unit, they may live as long as someone who does not use recreational drug, but their usefulness is reduced...
^^^ this is the main issue social planners have been reticent about legalization of marijuana.
social planners do not care if you die... as long as every moment you've lived prior to death has been effectively appropriated in labor..
I liquify ccs and shoot them into my forehead.
I actually laughed at this haha.I liquify ccs and shoot them into my forehead.
that explains alot.
I liquify ccs and shoot them into my forehead.
that explains alot.
Stop getting off topic you buffoons :DBut this is off topic o.O
But A and/or B are legal, and that/those is responsible for much more crap than cannabis.There are many stupid arguments for legalization... probably conceived while smoking cannabis, and this is the worst one.
Stop getting off topic you buffoons :DBut this is off topic o.O
I'm on weed so on topic
How about 13.37?I'm on weed so on topic
no I will not sell you my 356cl for 2 oz
I liquify ccs and shoot them into my forehead.
I liquify ccs and shoot them into my forehead.
that explains alot.
I am strongly for banning smoking in all forms, but let the potheads eat their magic brownies if they want.Nah, I'd say it's safe to assume there are a lot more alcoholics per regular drinker than there are cannabis-addicts (kind of an oxymoron since cannabis isn't physiologically addictive) per person who smokes weed. It would be even more pronounced if it weren't for the fact society has a self-regulating etiquette regarding alcohol such as it being considered taboo to drink in the early part of the day, drinking during the week (to a lesser extent), and such. Weed is too recent an introduction to Western society and thus doesn't have that, which is why people who wouldn't think of cracking open a bottle of vodka first thing in the morning don't have the same qualms about smoking a spliff on the way to work.QuoteBut A and/or B are legal, and that/those is responsible for much more crap than cannabis.There are many stupid arguments for legalization... probably conceived while smoking cannabis, and this is the worst one.
Consider this: The only reason why tobacco smoking is not illegal is because it's use is already so common. That's it. If it had been introduced on the market today and there hadn't been as many users, it would have been made illegal at once. New types of tobacco products are not allowed, except for helping people quit smoking.
Alcohol is drunk a lot in the western world, but few who drink alcohol are actually addicted to it, relatively speaking.
Never again
Show Image(http://whatstrending.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/tumblr_m82zkdfT2U1ro5z7mo1_500.jpeg)
The problem with all this is god damn old Bible thumping people. once they die off we will get **** done
And career politicians. They ruin government.
Show Image(http://whatstrending.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/tumblr_m82zkdfT2U1ro5z7mo1_500.jpeg)
he did it a few times at parties..
He's not a pot head..
Washington/Colorado legalized marijuana, not "medical" marijuana, so that's different right there.
My honest opinion is that marijuana should be legal and alcohol should be illegal. Just on one fact alone. It is physically impossible to overdose on THC. You will die from lack of oxygen before you would ever be able to ingest enough THC to kill you. And for those of you that don't think you can't be a fully functioning self supporting family man while preforming all responsibilities to society's expectations I call the biggest bull**** flag ever flown.
Now I don't personally smoke anymore (stopped before I joined the Navy) but I know a lot of people that smoke. And you know what? I would rather work next to someone that took a couple hits on the way to work than someone that got totally black out drunk the night before. Before you people start condemning it you should problably get educated on the subject at hand.
While it may not be the best source of info (though it is accurate) it is still a good place to start.
http://www.jackherer.com/thebook/
A sample quote from the book
"After 15 days of taking testimony and more than a year’s legal deliberation, DEA Administrative Law Judge Francis L. Young formally urged the DEA to allow doctors to prescribe marijuana. In a September 1988 judgment, he ruled: “The evidence in this record clearly shows that marijuana has been accepted as capable of relieving the distress of great numbers of very ill people, and doing so with safety under medical supervision . . . It would be unreasonable, arbitrary and capricious for the DEA to continue to stand between those sufferers and the benefits of this substance in light of the evidence in this record. In strict medical terms, marijuana is far safer than many foods we commonly consume marijuana in its natural form is one of the safest therapeutically active substances known to man.”"
You had me till Paris Hilton. She is a trust fund baby.if you quit reading after one name of 200 then you either know the truth (motivation is independent)
Experts Rate Problem Substances
Dr. Jack E. Henningfield of the National Institute on Drug Abuse and Dr. Neal L. Benowitz of the University of California at San Francisco ranked six substances based on five problem areas.
Withdrawal: Presence and severity of characteristic withdrawal symptoms.
Reinforcement: A measure of the substance's ability, in human and animal tests, to get users to take it again and again, and in preference to other substances.
Tolerance: How much of the substance is needed to satisfy increasing cravings for it, and the level of stable need that is eventually reached.
Dependence: How difficult it is for the user to quit, the relapse rate, the percentage of people who eventually become dependent, the rating users give their own need for the substance and the degree to which the substance will be used in the face of evidence that it causes harm.
Intoxication: Though not usually counted as a measure of addiction in itself, the level of intoxication is associated with addiction and increases the personal and socIal damage a substance may do.
1 = Most serious 6 = Least serious
HENNINGFIELD RATINGS
Substance Withdrawal Reinforcemt Tolerance Dependnce Intoxictn
----------- ---------- ----------- --------- --------- ---------
Nicotine 3 4 2 1 5
Heroin 2 2 1 2 2
Cocaine 4 1 4 3 3
Alcohol 1 3 3 4 1
Caffeine 5 6 5 5 6
Marijuana 6 5 6 6 4
BENOWITZ RATINGS
Substance Withdrawal Reinforcemt Tolerance Dependnce Intoxictn
----------- ---------- ----------- --------- --------- ---------
Nicotine 3* 4 4 1 6
Heroin 2 2 2 2 2
Cocaine 3* 1 1 3 3
Alcohol 1 3 4 4 1
Caffeine 4 5 3 5 5
Marijuana 5 6 5 6 4
*equal ratings
My honest opinion is that marijuana should be legal and alcohol should be illegal. Just on one fact alone. It is physically impossible to overdose on THC. You will die from lack of oxygen before you would ever be able to ingest enough THC to kill you. And for those of you that don't think you can't be a fully functioning self supporting family man while preforming all responsibilities to society's expectations I call the biggest bull**** flag ever flown.
Now I don't personally smoke anymore (stopped before I joined the Navy) but I know a lot of people that smoke. And you know what? I would rather work next to someone that took a couple hits on the way to work than someone that got totally black out drunk the night before. Before you people start condemning it you should problably get educated on the subject at hand.
While it may not be the best source of info (though it is accurate) it is still a good place to start.
http://www.jackherer.com/thebook/
A sample quote from the book
"After 15 days of taking testimony and more than a year’s legal deliberation, DEA Administrative Law Judge Francis L. Young formally urged the DEA to allow doctors to prescribe marijuana. In a September 1988 judgment, he ruled: “The evidence in this record clearly shows that marijuana has been accepted as capable of relieving the distress of great numbers of very ill people, and doing so with safety under medical supervision . . . It would be unreasonable, arbitrary and capricious for the DEA to continue to stand between those sufferers and the benefits of this substance in light of the evidence in this record. In strict medical terms, marijuana is far safer than many foods we commonly consume marijuana in its natural form is one of the safest therapeutically active substances known to man.”"
This is one of the only posts in this thread that is constructed with sourcing actual research or study. lol
I'm annoyed at some of you! Some of you have quoted having 'never met a highly productive pothead'... just because you haven't met them, doesn't mean they don't exist! Your sample, although should be considered does not give definitive evidence.
"I took a cup of water from the ocean the other day, there weren't any whales in it, so whales must not be in the ocean."
100th post! Woot!
I dislike those annoying kids that have to tell you they smoke and how high they are. Like everybody on r/trees. It's no longer cool and rebellious. It's common and you are not special.
That's funny lol. but I'm talking about those idiots that are all "Hur dur, this is so funny because [9]"
I dislike those annoying kids that have to tell you they smoke and how high they are. Like everybody on r/trees. It's no longer cool and rebellious. It's common and you are not special.too relevant for me to not post it..
I dislike those annoying kids that have to tell you they smoke and how high they are. Like everybody on r/trees. It's no longer cool and rebellious. It's common and you are not special.too relevant for me to not post it..
http://i.imgur.com/x07sYz3.png
I dislike those annoying kids that have to tell you they smoke and how high they are. Like everybody on r/trees. It's no longer cool and rebellious. It's common and you are not special.too relevant for me to not post it..
http://i.imgur.com/x07sYz3.png
Somebody sold rarar oregano
California jails are filled with people that dabbled in pot, which seems ridiculous.Jails in the USA being overflowing with people who dabbled in $DRUG is less because of $DRUG and more because of rich people in power fearing and hating the poor and the coloured.
... grown adults should be able to make their own decisions.Yet another classic stupid argument, an argument you hear from drug addicts in denial and from libertarians who do not know any better.
It is physically impossible to overdose on THC.Some people suffer extremely ill effects because of THC while others are fine from the same dose. Just saying.
California jails are filled with people that dabbled in pot, which seems ridiculous.Jails in the USA being overflowing with people who dabbled in $DRUG is less because of $DRUG and more because of rich people in power fearing and hating the poor and the coloured.... grown adults should be able to make their own decisions.Yet another classic stupid argument, an argument you hear from drug addicts in denial and from libertarians who do not know any better.
Tobacco addiction spreads when people are subjected to second-hand smoke. That's it.
Becoming an addict is never your decision, it is a decision that the drug made for you. It feels like you made a choice, but you did not know it because the drug had tampered with your mind, literally!
While you don't have a choice of becoming an addict, you do have the choice of not actively spreading addiction to other people.
However, many drug addicts refuse to actively do anything that would restrict their drug own use, and that is why I think that there needs to be laws against smoking.
It is physically impossible to overdose on THC.Some people suffer extremely ill effects because of THC while others are fine from the same dose. Just saying.
BTW, I think that medicinal marijuana should be sold in pill or drink form, in pharmacies, on prescription, like any other medicine. Any other way, and you are not really serious about it being used as medicine.
Note, I am not anti-marijuana. I don't use it, nor do I know anyone who does. It is not so common over here. I would probably have tried if when I was in Amsterdam a month ago if I had not been on medication at the time. I don't want to end up like Heath Ledger or Brittany Murphy, you know.
... grown adults should be able to make their own decisions.Yet another classic stupid argument, an argument you hear from drug addicts in denial and from libertarians who do not know any better.
Tobacco addiction spreads when people are subjected to second-hand smoke. That's it.
Becoming an addict is never your decision, it is a decision that the drug made for you. It feels like you made a choice, but you did not know it because the drug had tampered with your mind, literally!
While you don't have a choice of becoming an addict, you do have the choice of not actively spreading addiction to other people.
However, many drug addicts refuse to actively do anything that would restrict their drug own use, and that is why I think that there needs to be laws against smoking.
Any more thoughts on the legality of weed? Seems that the movement has been gaining stream recently.
Any more thoughts on the legality of weed? Seems that the movement has been gaining stream recently.
I know a lot of people who use windows and apple products who smoke weed. This obviously means it's fine and both operating systems are as good as one another.
Any more thoughts on the legality of weed? Seems that the movement has been gaining stream recently.
Making laws against what substances people are allowed to injest/inhale/inject is asinine. All recreational drugs should be de-criminalised immediately.
Making laws against what substances people are allowed to injest/inhale/inject is asinine. All recreational drugs should be de-criminalised immediately.
While I don't really understand your reasoning or logic I'm not sure I really agree too much.
As animals go, we are a pretty ****ed up species and many of us can't last without gambling, drinking, fighting etc etc... drugs are just another problem with our ****ed up species.
While I'm more than aware that 90% of drug caused deaths that arn't Heroin or some other insane drug are mostly made up by the media and that if drugs where legalised and then controlled so that people didn't die from some retard cutting rat poison with E, it would also have pretty sad results.
We are (at least in Europe) moving away from Smoking being acceptable and the insanely massively powerful smoking companies are feeling the pain, with drugs legalised new drug companies would sprout up and replace them, people who once smoked would slowly move onto drugs as people with addiction problems have addiction problems, and by legalising it you'd essentially be saying, yeah its safe and good now, no worries.
This would cause more fallout and Hospitals and AA-type places would be over-run and under funded thanks to the lobbying powers of the drug companies.
I'm personally not sure where I stand on the matter, I've done a wide range of drugs myself and have had some pretty good times, but as a society trying to bring something that alters your state of mind so quickly and drastically and make it 'safe' would probably do more harm than good.
Employment and the economy are still trying to get back on track and with more young people going to uni getting jobs after that is becoming more and more difficult, having the allure of legal drugs would only make the situation worse.
If you want a good example of how a legal drug can cause huge economic and social problems you only have to look at alcohol and its effects... and that's been around for thousands of years...
who is weed? why is she illegal? i oppose immigration regulation.
who is weed? why is she illegal? i oppose immigration regulation.
Making laws against what substances people are allowed to injest/inhale/inject is asinine. All recreational drugs should be de-criminalised immediately.
While I don't really understand your reasoning or logic I'm not sure I really agree too much.
As animals go, we are a pretty ****ed up species and many of us can't last without gambling, drinking, fighting etc etc... drugs are just another problem with our ****ed up species.
While I'm more than aware that 90% of drug caused deaths that arn't Heroin or some other insane drug are mostly made up by the media and that if drugs where legalised and then controlled so that people didn't die from some retard cutting rat poison with E, it would also have pretty sad results.
We are (at least in Europe) moving away from Smoking being acceptable and the insanely massively powerful smoking companies are feeling the pain, with drugs legalised new drug companies would sprout up and replace them, people who once smoked would slowly move onto drugs as people with addiction problems have addiction problems, and by legalising it you'd essentially be saying, yeah its safe and good now, no worries.
This would cause more fallout and Hospitals and AA-type places would be over-run and under funded thanks to the lobbying powers of the drug companies.
I'm personally not sure where I stand on the matter, I've done a wide range of drugs myself and have had some pretty good times, but as a society trying to bring something that alters your state of mind so quickly and drastically and make it 'safe' would probably do more harm than good.
Employment and the economy are still trying to get back on track and with more young people going to uni getting jobs after that is becoming more and more difficult, having the allure of legal drugs would only make the situation worse.
If you want a good example of how a legal drug can cause huge economic and social problems you only have to look at alcohol and its effects... and that's been around for thousands of years...
It's ideological. If you're of the opinion that authority should have the power to dictate the behavior of individuals based on collective effect, then that's one particular standpoint - although not one I can agree with even slightly - that means there would be zero point in us debating it and we'd have to leave it at that.
I believe strongly in individual liberty, and that the only behavior that should be dictated is where it has direct effect (or where there's a contract - legal or social - in place, as an aside). i.e. I think it's permissible for authority to forbid me from punching someone in the face - for instance, because I'm causing direct harm to that person as a result of my actions. However what when it comes to things like which recreational drugs I choose to use, the government should have no say whatsoever, regardless of the collective effect.
who is weed? why is she illegal? i oppose immigration regulation.
She doesn't have her GREEN card.
Making laws against what substances people are allowed to injest/inhale/inject is asinine. All recreational drugs should be de-criminalised immediately.
While I don't really understand your reasoning or logic I'm not sure I really agree too much.
As animals go, we are a pretty ****ed up species and many of us can't last without gambling, drinking, fighting etc etc... drugs are just another problem with our ****ed up species.
While I'm more than aware that 90% of drug caused deaths that arn't Heroin or some other insane drug are mostly made up by the media and that if drugs where legalised and then controlled so that people didn't die from some retard cutting rat poison with E, it would also have pretty sad results.
We are (at least in Europe) moving away from Smoking being acceptable and the insanely massively powerful smoking companies are feeling the pain, with drugs legalised new drug companies would sprout up and replace them, people who once smoked would slowly move onto drugs as people with addiction problems have addiction problems, and by legalising it you'd essentially be saying, yeah its safe and good now, no worries.
This would cause more fallout and Hospitals and AA-type places would be over-run and under funded thanks to the lobbying powers of the drug companies.
I'm personally not sure where I stand on the matter, I've done a wide range of drugs myself and have had some pretty good times, but as a society trying to bring something that alters your state of mind so quickly and drastically and make it 'safe' would probably do more harm than good.
Employment and the economy are still trying to get back on track and with more young people going to uni getting jobs after that is becoming more and more difficult, having the allure of legal drugs would only make the situation worse.
If you want a good example of how a legal drug can cause huge economic and social problems you only have to look at alcohol and its effects... and that's been around for thousands of years...
It's ideological. If you're of the opinion that authority should have the power to dictate the behavior of individuals based on collective effect, then that's one particular standpoint - although not one I can agree with even slightly - that means there would be zero point in us debating it and we'd have to leave it at that.
I believe strongly in individual liberty, and that the only behavior that should be dictated is where it has direct effect (or where there's a contract - legal or social - in place, as an aside). i.e. I think it's permissible for authority to forbid me from punching someone in the face - for instance, because I'm causing direct harm to that person as a result of my actions. However what when it comes to things like which recreational drugs I choose to use, the government should have no say whatsoever, regardless of the collective effect.
Having a job that forces me to deal with a fairly wide range of different people, I've come to the conclusion that 99% of people, are total ****ing idiots and that they are incapable of rational thought about even fairly basic human up keep.
For example, take a place like America (for example), America has enjoyed amazing wealth for a very long period and as such has access to all kinds of foods, activities etc etc... yet instead of people having the best food possible (becasue they have a great economy) they eat poorly which gives them horrible international obese %'s.
If people where smarter and able to say, you know what, today I'm going to have a McDonald's as a treat. But tomorrow I'll make up for it by going for a run and make a pasta salad which I can put in the fridge and have for lunch the following day. But instead people tend to just go to fast food places and never learn how to cook or diet properly.
That's just an easy example, but there are many that range to many things all resulting in the same conclusion, by in large most people are total ****ing idiots.
Like Socialism is great, its a fantastic idea... only it doesn't work with humans lol... at least not yet...
who is weed? why is she illegal? i oppose immigration regulation.
She doesn't have her GREEN card.
She will after I'm done with her.
Having a job that forces me to deal with a fairly wide range of different people, I've come to the conclusion that 99% of people, are total ****ing idiots and that they are incapable of rational thought about even fairly basic human up keep.
For example, take a place like America (for example), America has enjoyed amazing wealth for a very long period and as such has access to all kinds of foods, activities etc etc... yet instead of people having the best food possible (becasue they have a great economy) they eat poorly which gives them horrible international obese %'s.
If people where smarter and able to say, you know what, today I'm going to have a McDonald's as a treat. But tomorrow I'll make up for it by going for a run and make a pasta salad which I can put in the fridge and have for lunch the following day. But instead people tend to just go to fast food places and never learn how to cook or diet properly.
That's just an easy example, but there are many that range to many things all resulting in the same conclusion, by in large most people are total ****ing idiots.
Like Socialism is great, its a fantastic idea... only it doesn't work with humans lol... at least not yet...
I'm not sure what you mean by socialism. What we're talking about doesn't really fall under the umbrella of socialism. In fact, the opposite - trying to dictate people's behavior - has more in common with practical socialism than what I'm talking about, which is more like libertarianism (although I hate to be associated with people who label themselves that).
I would agree that a large proportion of people are irresponsible idiots, not the majority, but a large proportion, which is evident from obesity rates, alcohol-related violence/crime/medical emergencies, etc. But I still don't believe that justifies curtailing the personal liberty of the population as a whole. Not only that, but I think creating a nanny-state to try and combat these collective issues, just makes it worse. The UK is an atrocious example of that, to be honest. There's definitely a mood here amongst a lot of people that the government is there to solve every single social problem.
For instance, in the last few years kids have been dying occasionally from using new "legal-high" drugs, which are formulated and released so quickly, the government can't respond and ban them in time for them to already be in wide circulation. Every time one of these kids dies, there's a big outcry in the tabloids and such, about what the government should be doing, how this is being allowed to happen etc. Well, my response to that is why is that even the government's problem? How about putting the responsibility with the parents or the kids themselves? One of the reasons this happens is because we've created this idiotic nanny state where anything remotely bad for you is legislated against, so when something that's legal comes along, people just go ahead and assume it's perfectly safe, rather than actually weighing the risks and taking responsibility for their actions - which is what they should be doing.
I'm not sure what you mean by socialism. What we're talking about doesn't really fall under the umbrella of socialism. In fact, the opposite - trying to dictate people's behavior - has more in common with practical socialism than what I'm talking about, which is more like libertarianism (although I hate to be associated with people who label themselves that).
I would agree that a large proportion of people are irresponsible idiots, not the majority, but a large proportion, which is evident from obesity rates, alcohol-related violence/crime/medical emergencies, etc. But I still don't believe that justifies curtailing the personal liberty of the population as a whole. Not only that, but I think creating a nanny-state to try and combat these collective issues, just makes it worse. The UK is an atrocious example of that, to be honest. There's definitely a mood here amongst a lot of people that the government is there to solve every single social problem.
For instance, in the last few years kids have been dying occasionally from using new "legal-high" drugs, which are formulated and released so quickly, the government can't respond and ban them in time for them to already be in wide circulation. Every time one of these kids dies, there's a big outcry in the tabloids and such, about what the government should be doing, how this is being allowed to happen etc. Well, my response to that is why is that even the government's problem? How about putting the responsibility with the parents or the kids themselves? One of the reasons this happens is because we've created this idiotic nanny state where anything remotely bad for you is legislated against, so when something that's legal comes along, people just go ahead and assume it's perfectly safe, rather than actually weighing the risks and taking responsibility for their actions - which is what they should be doing.
Ah so your from the UK too??
Yeah my bit about Socialism was to highlight that having good ideas and good intentions for society is good, but not always practical.
Though I would say the sheer majority of people, on the planet are idiots. I would even go as far as to say that most people who have the legal right to vote, don't possess the brain power to be able to even make an informed decision on how to vote, let alone be pushed into it come election time.
I think the UK is pretty good on the whole, it's not perfect and it's pretty ****ed up in alot of places but this 'nanny state' has come becasue people have wanted it and brought it in, and for the most part its pretty good and helps people alot.
The part about legal highs is also bull****, like total bull****. The last two people to die of legal highs didn't die from any legal high they took, in fact the last kid who 'died' from it at uni died from an overdose on another illegal drug he was taking as well as the legal high. But legalising drugs won't stop people from making there own cheap nasty drugs, if anything it might spur it on.
Legalising it would mean that more people try it, becasue hey its ok now its legal right?
This would in turn raise the % of addicts to any particular type of drug, and we all know how that ends.
Like I said I'm not sure where I stand, I think there are drugs like LSD, MDMA and some others that should be legalised as they are non-toxic and totally safe, but others like Heroin and Cocaine shouldn't probably be ever legalised.
I'm not sure what you mean by socialism. What we're talking about doesn't really fall under the umbrella of socialism. In fact, the opposite - trying to dictate people's behavior - has more in common with practical socialism than what I'm talking about, which is more like libertarianism (although I hate to be associated with people who label themselves that).
I would agree that a large proportion of people are irresponsible idiots, not the majority, but a large proportion, which is evident from obesity rates, alcohol-related violence/crime/medical emergencies, etc. But I still don't believe that justifies curtailing the personal liberty of the population as a whole. Not only that, but I think creating a nanny-state to try and combat these collective issues, just makes it worse. The UK is an atrocious example of that, to be honest. There's definitely a mood here amongst a lot of people that the government is there to solve every single social problem.
For instance, in the last few years kids have been dying occasionally from using new "legal-high" drugs, which are formulated and released so quickly, the government can't respond and ban them in time for them to already be in wide circulation. Every time one of these kids dies, there's a big outcry in the tabloids and such, about what the government should be doing, how this is being allowed to happen etc. Well, my response to that is why is that even the government's problem? How about putting the responsibility with the parents or the kids themselves? One of the reasons this happens is because we've created this idiotic nanny state where anything remotely bad for you is legislated against, so when something that's legal comes along, people just go ahead and assume it's perfectly safe, rather than actually weighing the risks and taking responsibility for their actions - which is what they should be doing.
Ah so your from the UK too??
Yeah my bit about Socialism was to highlight that having good ideas and good intentions for society is good, but not always practical.
Though I would say the sheer majority of people, on the planet are idiots. I would even go as far as to say that most people who have the legal right to vote, don't possess the brain power to be able to even make an informed decision on how to vote, let alone be pushed into it come election time.
I think the UK is pretty good on the whole, it's not perfect and it's pretty ****ed up in alot of places but this 'nanny state' has come becasue people have wanted it and brought it in, and for the most part its pretty good and helps people alot.
The part about legal highs is also bull****, like total bull****. The last two people to die of legal highs didn't die from any legal high they took, in fact the last kid who 'died' from it at uni died from an overdose on another illegal drug he was taking as well as the legal high. But legalising drugs won't stop people from making there own cheap nasty drugs, if anything it might spur it on.
Legalising it would mean that more people try it, becasue hey its ok now its legal right?
This would in turn raise the % of addicts to any particular type of drug, and we all know how that ends.
Like I said I'm not sure where I stand, I think there are drugs like LSD, MDMA and some others that should be legalised as they are non-toxic and totally safe, but others like Heroin and Cocaine shouldn't probably be ever legalised.
Cocaine is fairly harmless, frankly. Also I've know recreational heroin users, but it's always seemed like a knife edge of becoming a habit, still up them though. Even with heroin addicts, 90% of the problems they have are due to the exorbitant prices, the fillers the heroin is cut with, and poor administration - all of which are largely the fault of prohibition. If you legalised heroin tomorrow, and sold it for say £1 a gram (which is easily doable, whilst still making a profit, if it was legal), pure, and in pre-loaded syringes with instructions included you would see crime figures and drug-related deaths drop massively overnight.
I've done massive amounts of cocaine with zero ill effects.
I've done massive amounts of cocaine with zero ill effects.
Also you doubt legalising drugs would reduce drug related crime? I can't really fathom this statement. If that was the case then why aren't there moonshiners brewing up deadly swill in homemade stills and gangs murdering each other with tommy guns over the distribution of alcohol? Could it be because alcohol is legal and therefore produced in a sanitary and controlled manner by accountable manufacturers and distributed through supermarkets and off-licenses? Similarly, I doubt many heroin addicts are going to be mugging people or breaking into houses to fund their habit when the cost of it drops from hundreds of pounds (£) a day to less than £1 (which is perfectly possible if it was legal).
As for deaths from cocaine, the same thing can happen with ecstacy. One badly mixed pillhs would drop
Saying someone is a recreational heroin user is a strange claim. It's one of the most addictive substances on the planet, and I really don't see how someone can ever claim that they only use it for recreation.
I was being facetious, but really cocaine isn't that harmful.
The kind of alcohol-related crime you're talking about - i.e. people getting into a scrape on a friday night are absolutely nothing compared to prohibition crime from alcohol being illegal, with gangs, y'know, going out and shooting each other, murdering police, etc.
And of course you can sell drugs that cheaply, especially one as simple as heroin. Most generic drugs cost pennies. As I've already said, most of the harm caused by recreational drug use is the byproduct of prohibition, not the drugs themselves.
Every single place this has been tried (e.g. Portugal) goes completely against your assumptions, and the rates of crime, harm - even usage have all dropped as a result of decriminalisation.
The biggest negative effect cocaine has on an individual is on their wallet.
As for heroine, I've only known one user closely. His name was Will, and he died in his car in a Target parking lot at the age of 19 with his less than one year old daughter in the back. I am not kidding.
Saying someone is a recreational heroin user is a strange claim. It's one of the most addictive substances on the planet, and I really don't see how someone can ever claim that they only use it for recreation.
Where do you actually get your information from though? Is it the media or is it real life? How many heroin users have you personally known?
Saying someone is a recreational heroin user is a strange claim. It's one of the most addictive substances on the planet, and I really don't see how someone can ever claim that they only use it for recreation.
Where do you actually get your information from though? Is it the media or is it real life? How many heroin users have you personally known?
None. Because doing heroin is a ****ing stupid idea. And if you are going to do something seriously harmful, on a regular basis, that wastes a stupid amount of money, most of which goes to Afghan drug barons (who I HAVE met, not nice people if I'm honest), and carries a large prison sentence, then no offence, but I don't want to be associated with you.
Drugs are about supply and demand. It's basic capitalism. Something in high demand? Put the price up. Why is the price of heroin so expensive if you say it's so cheap to make? Because the demand is high. BECAUSE IT'S ****ING ADDICTIVE. If it wasn't addictive, if people weren't stealing morphine to try and get rid of their heroin cravings, then why would people be prepared to pay hundreds of pounds for a fix?
You might be able to make drugs cheaply but they wouldn't be able to sell them at that price becasue of taxation... like I said.
And your example of Portugal isn't that good, drugs where 'legalised' in a move to help combat the insanely high % of people with HIV largely due in part to drug users sharing needles. No formal studies have been completed on the effects of the period (looking at the wiki page on it).
I'm not sure how you can really come up with any correlation between Portugal and the UK as in the UK the biggest cause of HIV is unprotected sex (http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/HIV/Pages/Causes.aspx)...
None. Because doing heroin is a ****ing stupid idea. And if you are going to do something seriously harmful, on a regular basis, that wastes a stupid amount of money, most of which goes to Afghan drug barons (who I HAVE met, not nice people if I'm honest), and carries a large prison sentence, then no offence, but I don't want to be associated with you.
Drugs are about supply and demand. It's basic capitalism. Something in high demand? Put the price up. Why is the price of heroin so expensive if you say it's so cheap to make? Because the demand is high. BECAUSE IT'S ****ING ADDICTIVE. If it wasn't addictive, if people weren't stealing morphine to try and get rid of their heroin cravings, then why would people be prepared to pay hundreds of pounds for a fix?
I've done massive amounts of cocaine[attachimg=1]
None. Because doing heroin is a ****ing stupid idea. And if you are going to do something seriously harmful, on a regular basis, that wastes a stupid amount of money, most of which goes to Afghan drug barons (who I HAVE met, not nice people if I'm honest), and carries a large prison sentence, then no offence, but I don't want to be associated with you.
Exactly my point then. You claim recreational heroin use is somehow impossible, whilst admitting you have zero first hand experience of users. So I'm assuming you're going off media stereotypes.Drugs are about supply and demand. It's basic capitalism. Something in high demand? Put the price up. Why is the price of heroin so expensive if you say it's so cheap to make? Because the demand is high. BECAUSE IT'S ****ING ADDICTIVE. If it wasn't addictive, if people weren't stealing morphine to try and get rid of their heroin cravings, then why would people be prepared to pay hundreds of pounds for a fix?
Of course heroin is addictive, I would never claim otherwise. Not sure where you got that idea from. Also, you're only really half-grasping supply and demand there. Plenty of things are in much higher demand that heroin, like milk for instance, but milk doesn't cost £40 a ml due to arbitrary prohibition laws trying to seize milk entering the country, smuggled in condoms inside people's stomachs as is the case with heroin.
>Claiming recreational use of a highly addictive substance is possible.Then you need to brush up on your reading comprehension, since in the same breath I said I thought that was risky. There is no law of the universe that states an addictive substance can be used recreationally, or that everyone has the same pre-disposition to becoming addicted. Despite what your sadly narrow world-view may dictate.
>Not sure where I got the idea from
Milk is not illegal. It is also seen as one of a developed country's basic needs. Millions of litres of it are produced and sold every day around the world. The supply is high, the demand is high, yet the legal vendors of milk are all competing for customers. Hence the price is low.Precisely my point. That's why drugs like heroin would be vastly cheaper once prohibition laws were repealed and as a result the associated crime would drop.
Heroin is illegal. It is seen as a blight on society and a major problem in developed and developing countries. It is very hard to produce, ship and sell. The supply is low because of anti drug initiatives, and the demand is high. Therefore, the price is high.
Blah blah blah weed... Blah blah blah I'm right and you're wrong... No, I'm right and you're wrong, blah blah blah...
In other words, this thread = TL;DR
Don't do drugs, kids.
Don't do drugs, kids.
Everything's better on weed except for other people it seems.
You should smoke some weed. Don't forget to use Windows 98 while you're doing it too.the **** are you talking about
You should smoke some weed. Don't forget to use Windows 98 while you're doing it too.the **** are you talking about
windows 98 and internet explorer ruins the weed bro, way to waste it
You should smoke some weed. Don't forget to use Windows 98 while you're doing it too.the **** are you talking about
windows 98 and internet explorer ruins the weed bro, way to waste it
but smoking weed within Windows is called hotboxing. and last I remember, hotboxing is quite popular these days...
You should smoke some weed. Don't forget to use Windows 98 while you're doing it too.the **** are you talking about
windows 98 and internet explorer ruins the weed bro, way to waste it
but smoking weed within Windows is called hotboxing. and last I remember, hotboxing is quite popular these days...
(Attachment Link)
You should smoke some weed. Don't forget to use Windows 98 while you're doing it too.the **** are you talking about
windows 98 and internet explorer ruins the weed bro, way to waste it
but smoking weed within Windows is called hotboxing. and last I remember, hotboxing is quite popular these days...
(Attachment Link)
You should smoke some weed. Don't forget to use Windows 98 while you're doing it too.the **** are you talking about
windows 98 and internet explorer ruins the weed bro, way to waste it
but smoking weed within Windows is called hotboxing. and last I remember, hotboxing is quite popular these days...
(Attachment Link)
I bet those girls use Windows 98!
or grandmothersYou should smoke some weed. Don't forget to use Windows 98 while you're doing it too.the **** are you talking about
windows 98 and internet explorer ruins the weed bro, way to waste it
but smoking weed within Windows is called hotboxing. and last I remember, hotboxing is quite popular these days...
(Attachment Link)
I bet those girls use Windows 98!
only if they are gold diggers.
or grandmothersYou should smoke some weed. Don't forget to use Windows 98 while you're doing it too.the **** are you talking about
windows 98 and internet explorer ruins the weed bro, way to waste it
but smoking weed within Windows is called hotboxing. and last I remember, hotboxing is quite popular these days...
(Attachment Link)
I bet those girls use Windows 98!
only if they are gold diggers.
or grandmothersYou should smoke some weed. Don't forget to use Windows 98 while you're doing it too.the **** are you talking about
windows 98 and internet explorer ruins the weed bro, way to waste it
but smoking weed within Windows is called hotboxing. and last I remember, hotboxing is quite popular these days...
(Attachment Link)
I bet those girls use Windows 98!
only if they are gold diggers.
And since they're obviously not grandmothers, it's definitive proof that they do NOT use Windows 98.
or grandmothersYou should smoke some weed. Don't forget to use Windows 98 while you're doing it too.the **** are you talking about
windows 98 and internet explorer ruins the weed bro, way to waste it
but smoking weed within Windows is called hotboxing. and last I remember, hotboxing is quite popular these days...
(Attachment Link)
I bet those girls use Windows 98!
only if they are gold diggers.
And since they're obviously not grandmothers, it's definitive proof that they do NOT use Windows 98.
suck it,microsam.bimbowsmicrosoft.windows
i use windows 8or grandmothersYou should smoke some weed. Don't forget to use Windows 98 while you're doing it too.the **** are you talking about
windows 98 and internet explorer ruins the weed bro, way to waste it
but smoking weed within Windows is called hotboxing. and last I remember, hotboxing is quite popular these days...
(Attachment Link)
I bet those girls use Windows 98!
only if they are gold diggers.
And since they're obviously not grandmothers, it's definitive proof that they do NOT use Windows 98.
suck it,microsam.bimbowsmicrosoft.windows
I bet you use a Mac. Because only outdated fools use Macs.
i use windows 8or grandmothersYou should smoke some weed. Don't forget to use Windows 98 while you're doing it too.the **** are you talking about
windows 98 and internet explorer ruins the weed bro, way to waste it
but smoking weed within Windows is called hotboxing. and last I remember, hotboxing is quite popular these days...
(Attachment Link)
I bet those girls use Windows 98!
only if they are gold diggers.
And since they're obviously not grandmothers, it's definitive proof that they do NOT use Windows 98.
suck it,microsam.bimbowsmicrosoft.windows
I bet you use a Mac. Because only outdated fools use Macs.
the superior windows
i use windows 8or grandmothersYou should smoke some weed. Don't forget to use Windows 98 while you're doing it too.the **** are you talking about
windows 98 and internet explorer ruins the weed bro, way to waste it
but smoking weed within Windows is called hotboxing. and last I remember, hotboxing is quite popular these days...
(Attachment Link)
I bet those girls use Windows 98!
only if they are gold diggers.
And since they're obviously not grandmothers, it's definitive proof that they do NOT use Windows 98.
suck it,microsam.bimbowsmicrosoft.windows
I bet you use a Mac. Because only outdated fools use Macs.
the superior windows
Or rather, discuss WEED legalization, as per the OP. Because no government in their right mind is EVER going to (re)legalize meth, cocaine, or heroine. So despite Malphas's brilliantly worded arguments, they're all irrelevant anyway.
I'm not saying you're wrong Malphas, as much of your argument is well informed and well said; I'm saying there is practically zero possibility that a government would take a stance even remotely similar to yours. The only drug this does apply to is, again as per the OP, WEED.
I honestly cannot think of a single activity that wouldn't be made more engaging and fun when stoneddriving is surely more engaging when stoned.
I honestly cannot think of a single activity that wouldn't be made more engaging and fun when stoneddriving is surely more engaging when stoned.
**** drugs and their users
/thread