Will they ever pander to me?

Fash · Post by **Fash** » August 23, 2007, 1:25 am

It's always something... they're vying for the female vote, the minority vote, or the fundy vote, etc.

What of the tens of millions of drug supporters/users? What could a politician stand for that would truly garner my interest and even investment in his success? Drugs... Regulated, Taxed, and Safer... Support of Free Will and greatly expanded Drug Education.

Deem Marijuana to be no more harmful than cigarettes or alcohol, regulate it and tax it as such. Take a year or so to refine the research and dogma away from demonizing drugs to understanding and explaining what they do and what the dangers are, and phase them in to legality.

When are they going to light our fire?

Zaelath · Post by **Zaelath** » August 23, 2007, 2:15 am

There's too many grey/wowser votes to lose to ever pander to the recreational drug lobby. And while the disaffected/rationalist/libertarians support your right to be stoned even though they never do, that doesn't mean they'd vote for it...

Somali · Post by **Somali** » August 24, 2007, 2:27 pm

Agreed. I think the common perception by middle America is that when we open the door to additional drug hobbyists, we allow ourselves to move down a slippery slope. You could argue that we have done so already by allowing alcohol and cigarettes, but they would return that allowing for more recreational drug use, opens doors to allow more significant drugs to be the next rung on the ladder. Once we allow pot, people would ask for X.(pun intended) Once we allow X people would ask for whatever is next in line.
I do agree that it would be safer to regulate pot, and that they gov't could make money by taxing the sale. But I think it will be quite some time before we do so because of the argument I stated above. Out of curiosity, what is the risk of "bad pot" on the black market? I really haven't known anyone that got pot laced with anything seriously toxic. Is it that common?

Fash · Post by **Fash** » August 24, 2007, 2:39 pm

I've also never heard of anyone getting bad pot (unless it was just fake, that has happened to my friends once) Some people do lace pot with stronger drugs, but not for sale because it wouldn't be cost effective and would be basically pointless. I've smoked pot that had opium on it once, didn't notice a difference except the taste (which was my first clue it wasn't just pot, otherwise I would've passed)

I understand your slippery slope argument, but I was only speaking to the large constituency that has yet to be tapped, regardless of the possible consequences (which i don't agree with your assessment of). I think the drug lobby would be bigger than anyone could estimate and have the power to change the country for the better.

Education would obviously be a key factor of the approach and I feel that if people were in possession of the facts they would make the correct choices and avoid harder drugs in favor of pot. Regardless, it is their decision and free-will to go the wrong path and possibly die while doing so... just like it's my decision if I want to go home and chug bleach.

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » August 24, 2007, 2:56 pm

I personally think that pot should be legal as well, I'm not a big "legalize it" activist or anything, cause I can get it with ease now and really could care less if the cops catch me with it, but the "war on drugs" is a joke - and things could really be a lot safer if the shit was legal and regulated.

However, a politician taking this stance alone would be a pretty damn risky thing. I honestly think there would be a ton more people that would vote AGAINST said person than there would be that would vote for them. IMO, it's going to take a lot more than one person to get that ball rolling any faster than it is now.

Aardor · Post by **Aardor** » August 24, 2007, 2:59 pm

Somali wrote:Out of curiosity, what is the risk of "bad pot" on the black market? I really haven't known anyone that got pot laced with anything seriously toxic. Is it that common?

It is my understanding that marijuana is generally not laced with anything.

As far as lacing with other drugs, this would never happen because the dealer could sell the individual drugs separately, and make more money. I have heard rumors / fables of people saying they got pot laced with cocaine, but no dealer, in their right mind, would do this without letting the person know, and therefore charging them more (not to mention cocaine and heroin have a much lower absorption rate when ignited and inhaled, compared to other methods of dosage).

And with other chemicals: since pot is actual plant matter, and easily identifiable (by people who use it), it would be much harder to lace/cut it with anything. Other drugs like cocaine and heroin are easier to cut with other chemicals because they come in powder, not plant buds. Additionally, if it was cut with anything, you would most likely be able to taste it when smoking it.

In conclusion, it's not out of the question that at some point someone has laced/cut pot and sold it, but because of the difficulty in doing it and the financial issues, it seems to me that it would be very rare.

Zaelath · Post by **Zaelath** » August 24, 2007, 3:02 pm

I think all drugs should be legal, but I wouldn't vote for or against a politician based on their drug platform. Well, actually, I would vote against them if they ran on a "tough on drugs" platform that included tougher sentencing for users.

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » August 24, 2007, 3:08 pm

I have had weed laced with opium a few times. Everyone is correct in assuming that someone would not lace weed with anything unless they told you about it and charged more for it. While you probably wouldn't be able to look at it and notice that it was, if you smoke weed at all, you are going to notice that it doesn't taste the same.

As for lacing it with anything like coke or heroin, I've never heard of that. I don't see coke even being a possibility because people don't smoke coke, they smoke crack which is in rock form. I would hope to hell that if you looked at weed and saw white powder on it you would know the difference between that and weed that has white "hairs" on it.

That and it would be of no benefit to the person selling it, they would lose money, and if you are going to smoke weed, you are going to smoke weed - they don't need to HOOKERWHORESLUT crack on it to get you addicted or something

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » August 24, 2007, 3:10 pm

Drug laws/sentencing are a whole different issue for me. There are way too many people in jail for way too long because of drugs. And what do you think most of those people do when they get out of jail? They sure as hell aren't going to apply at the local McDonald's and flip burgers.

Aardor · Post by **Aardor** » August 24, 2007, 3:16 pm

Funkmasterr wrote: As for lacing it with anything like coke or heroin, I've never heard of that. I don't see coke even being a possibility because people don't smoke coke, they smoke crack which is in rock form. I would hope to hell that if you looked at weed and saw white powder on it you would know the difference between that and weed that has white "hairs" on it.

It is possible, and has some effect, but it's extremely degraded through the process of absorption, so it is almost never done (and is partially the reason why crack was created).

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » August 24, 2007, 3:28 pm

Fash wrote:Will they ever pander to me?

No. Most sucessful people beyond the age of 35 have given up pot smoking. Add in those ADULTS who are married and have children to raise.....real responsibilities....that's more folks who both don't drink as much as they did when they were younger and who don't smoke weed as much or at all. Sure there are plenty of folks who continue to smoke weed, but it is such a small percentage, it is not worth pandering to them. Most pot smokers are from the ages of 15-35. You'll eventually grow up. The government shouldn't waste it's time passing laws for a period of time when you are young, immature and without a sense of responsibility or consequence.

If you never marry or have children, maybe you will never feel the need to grow up and grow beyond such things like drugs. Maybe.

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » August 24, 2007, 3:33 pm

Midnyte, you are stating opinion, so try not to be too condescending about it. I think the numbers (of older people that smoke) you are speaking of are a lot higher (lol) then you seem to think, and saying that people that are older and still smoke never grew up is ridiculous. I know plenty of people who are 40+ that smoke, and all of them are at least average, if not successful people.

EDIT: besides, we all know what you think about black people, criminals and drug users,no need to revisit the issue.
*sigh* indeed.

Fash · Post by **Fash** » August 24, 2007, 3:37 pm

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:
Fash wrote:Will they ever pander to me?
No. Most sucessful people beyond the age of 35 have given up pot smoking. Add in those ADULTS who are married and have children to raise.....real responsibilities....that's more folks who both don't drink as much as they did when they were younger and who don't smoke weed as much or at all. Sure there are plenty of folks who continue to smoke weed, but it is such a small percentage, it is not worth pandering to them. Most pot smokers are from the ages of 15-35. You'll eventually grow up. The government shouldn't waste it's time passing laws for a period of time when you are young, immature and without a sense of responsibility or consequence.

If you never marry or have children, maybe you will never feel the need to grow up and grow beyond such things like drugs. Maybe.

Maybe you'll stop pulling 'facts' out of your ass. Maybe.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » August 24, 2007, 3:55 pm

Maybe. Then again, I'm stating what my experiences in life have shown me.

Let's use another exmaple of dumb youth. When you go to the mall you will be a ton of goth idiot teens. Where are there folks at age 35 and up? You don't see them do you? They eventually clean up, grow up, and live normal responsible lives. Not all of them, most of them.

Same with pot. Most, not all, will grow up and stop the use of recreational drugs. Not all, most. Depends on your lifestyle, marital status and parental status. I don't think my opinion on this topic is all that crazy and far-fetched.

masteen · Post by **masteen** » August 24, 2007, 4:08 pm

State and federal agencies spend over 60 BILLION dollars a year "fighting the war on drugs." They've lost this war every single year since its inception; at no point have government seizures exceeded supply on the street.

Almost 1 million people a year are arrested for selling or possessing pot. Add the costs of their prosecution and incarceration to the bill.

I'm sorry, but I can think of much better ways to spend $100 billion/year than arresting darkies for hustlin weed.

Somali · Post by **Somali** » August 24, 2007, 4:14 pm

As for the laced comment. The rumors I'd heard I thought were lacing the pot with LSD. Personally, I'm not sure how the hell that would work. I suppose the effect would be reached on contact when taking it out of the bag? Or can you actually get a noticeable affect from burning and inhaling fumes from LSD.

Fash · Post by **Fash** » August 24, 2007, 4:16 pm

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:Same with pot. Most, not all, will grow up and stop the use of recreational drugs. Not all, most. Depends on your lifestyle, marital status and parental status.

That is completely irrelevant to the discussion. Of course free will to USE drugs also includes free will to NOT use drugs or decide at some point that you no longer want to. I have stated many times that I expect my personal usage to decline sharply or cease completely when in a serious relationship... The issue is the legality and morality of forbidding individual free will.

As masteen put it, it would be far from a 'waste of time' to take another look at national drug control policy.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » August 24, 2007, 4:17 pm

masteen wrote:State and federal agencies spend over 60 BILLION dollars a year "fighting the war on drugs." They've lost this war every single year since its inception; at no point have government seizures exceeded supply on the street.

Almost 1 million people a year are arrested for selling or possessing pot. Add the costs of their prosecution and incarceration to the bill.

I'm sorry, but I can think of much better ways to spend $100 billion/year than arresting darkies for hustlin weed.

Now, that I agree with. That's a reasonable and logical approach. Legalization and government control of drugs could prove to be a very viable source of income for the government, which could allow for national healthcare and even a reduction or elimination of income taxes. But, I don't see it ever happening. Nice to think of though.

In addition....It could reduce a lot of crimes which eminate from the drug world.

Post by **Sylvus** » August 24, 2007, 4:18 pm

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:
Fash wrote:Will they ever pander to me?
No. Most sucessful people beyond the age of 35 have given up pot smoking. Add in those ADULTS who are married and have children to raise.....real responsibilities....that's more folks who both don't drink as much as they did when they were younger and who don't smoke weed as much or at all. Sure there are plenty of folks who continue to smoke weed, but it is such a small percentage, it is not worth pandering to them. Most pot smokers are from the ages of 15-35. You'll eventually grow up. The government shouldn't waste it's time passing laws for a period of time when you are young, immature and without a sense of responsibility or consequence.

If you never marry or have children, maybe you will never feel the need to grow up and grow beyond such things like drugs. Maybe.

For a moment, let's ignore the fact that your statement is nothing more than your (misguided) opinions and address some of them. You state that there are successful people over the age of 35 that have smoked pot. People at that age also drink less (according to you), so it sounds like legislation aimed at alcohol (including the safe use of, taxation of, etc) are laws that are passed for a period of time when you are young, immature and without a sense of responsibility. The precedent has been set for making those kinds of laws. Eventually people grow up beyond such things as drugs.

Looking at it from that perspective, I can't understand why you wouldn't encourage the legalization of it. If it's just a phase that the young and immature go through, why not legalize and regulate it, and use the (in my opinon, vast amounts of) tax money brought in to increase government programs that you agree with, pay off national debt, or lower your income taxes? Not only that, less of the taxes that you pay would be going toward the incarceration of those people that are currently in jail for possession offenses; it would create legitimate jobs in the farming, marketing, distribution and sale of Marijuana that those people would then have to file a W-2 for and pay taxes on; drug crimes associated with marijuana (specifically) would disappear...

Why is pot bad? That's a serious question. What makes it inherently worse than cigarettes or alcohol? Can anyone provide any actual scientific data, and not just anecdotal or propagandical (I just made that word up for fun - I think) evidence? In my opinion, the only detrimental effects that it has are on a personal level, and most of the effects on society as a whole would be more beneficial if marijuana were legalized than they are with it being illegal. I think an individual should have the right to choose for themselves what they want to put in their body.

Somali · Post by **Somali** » August 24, 2007, 4:28 pm

masteen wrote:State and federal agencies spend over 60 BILLION dollars a year "fighting the war on drugs." They've lost this war every single year since its inception; at no point have government seizures exceeded supply on the street.

Almost 1 million people a year are arrested for selling or possessing pot. Add the costs of their prosecution and incarceration to the bill.

I'm sorry, but I can think of much better ways to spend $100 billion/year than arresting darkies for hustlin weed.

What will them thar darkies do if they can't sell pot? You'll take away their livelihood.

Hopefully no one actally takes that seriously.

Asheran Mojomaster · Post by **Asheran Mojomaster** » August 24, 2007, 4:36 pm

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:Maybe. Then again, I'm stating what my experiences in life have shown me.

Let's use another exmaple of dumb youth. When you go to the mall you will be a ton of goth idiot teens. Where are there folks at age 35 and up? You don't see them do you? They eventually clean up, grow up, and live normal responsible lives. Not all of them, most of them.

Same with pot. Most, not all, will grow up and stop the use of recreational drugs. Not all, most. Depends on your lifestyle, marital status and parental status. I don't think my opinion on this topic is all that crazy and far-fetched.

Its not that older people grow up and stop smoking, its that they are more careful with who they let know they smoke. Based on what I know of you, it doesn't surprise me that from your experiences you dont know many older people who smoke weed. Its because people you know that do smoke probably DONT TELL YOU. They probably do it to relax at night in the comfort of their own homes.

And on the subject of lacing weed...I don't think I have ever smoked laced weed. I THOUGHT weed was laced once but I've now learned what was really happening. Some lower quality weed (aka scwag or swag or schwag however you spell it) is somewhat moldy. Moldy weed is really bad for you and will often cause paranoid \ panic attacks much more often than good non-moldy weed. And if you are a teenager without a lot of experience, as I was, you often will not notice as swag rarely smells good anyway. Its pretty easy to notice if you know what to watch out for though. Mold usually gives the weed an ammonia smell. Its not always strong, but I've smelled some where it is VERY strong. Never smoke weed than smells like ammonia (not that many older, experienced people would, but lots of kids do when they cant get anything else).

But my stance on all of this is that all drugs should be legal. You should be able to buy them at any pharmacy\club\head shop and they should all come with papers detailing all of the dangers and medical benefits (if they have any) listed on them. There is no reason for me to not be allowed to do coke or heroin if I really want to. I mean I could get either of them tonight if I wanted, but I don't because I know what they can do to me and I know thats not something I want to do. But if I did I should be able to. Its my body, no one else should ever be able to tell me what I can do with my own body.

Now, if you are a parent and have children or other people dependent on you and you want to become a heroin or coke addict then maybe you shouldn't be responsible for your children. Maybe they should live with someone who truly cares about them. But thats just as likely to happen with alcohol as it is with other hard drugs (and yes alcohol is a hard drug).

Fairweather Pure · Post by **Fairweather Pure** » August 24, 2007, 4:40 pm

I agree that booze is worse than pot. Anyone that disagrees with that is either ignorant or trolling.

I know a couple of people that never seemed to "grow out" of smoking weed and partying every weekend. They still get shitfaced like a highschool freshman every Friday and Saturday night. I think it's pathetic. Moderation is your friend.

These same people have fallen significantly behind the curve in terms of career, and personal relationships. Same old friends. Same shit jobs. They just failed to progress in life when compared to all of their peers that grew out of that phase.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » August 24, 2007, 4:46 pm

Fairweather Pure wrote:I agree that booze is worse than pot. Anyone that disagrees with that is either ignorant or trolling.

I know a couple of people that never seemed to "grow out" of smoking weed and partying every weekend. They still get shitfaced like a highschool freshman every Friday and Saturday night. I think it's pathetic. Moderation is your friend.

These same people have fallen significantly behind the curve in terms of career, and personal relationships. Same old friends. Same shit jobs. They just failed to progress in life when compared to all of their peers that grew out of that phase.

No! This couldn't be. How could you say such a thing.

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » August 24, 2007, 4:53 pm

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:
Fairweather Pure wrote:I agree that booze is worse than pot. Anyone that disagrees with that is either ignorant or trolling.

I know a couple of people that never seemed to "grow out" of smoking weed and partying every weekend. They still get shitfaced like a highschool freshman every Friday and Saturday night. I think it's pathetic. Moderation is your friend.

These same people have fallen significantly behind the curve in terms of career, and personal relationships. Same old friends. Same shit jobs. They just failed to progress in life when compared to all of their peers that grew out of that phase.
No! This couldn't be. How could you say such a thing.

No! This couldn't be! Midnyte is clutching onto something someone else said that kind of agrees with him instead of defending his ridiculous opinions himself!

Aardor · Post by **Aardor** » August 24, 2007, 4:55 pm

Somali wrote:As for the laced comment. The rumors I'd heard I thought were lacing the pot with LSD. Personally, I'm not sure how the hell that would work. I suppose the effect would be reached on contact when taking it out of the bag? Or can you actually get a noticeable affect from burning and inhaling fumes from LSD.

Pretty sure that is propaganda (I have also heard it many times before). I actually meant to address this before, but forgot to in my initial post. LSD is not a very stable chemical, and I don't know how readily it would attach itself to the plant matter. I am pretty positive that igniting LSD would totally destroy the chemical and thus remove all effects it would have.

Additionally, what would be the point of adding LSD? LSD is difficult to make and find, and if it did have an effect on the person who got the laced pot, they would definitely notice it, and most likely not buy from that person again.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » August 24, 2007, 4:57 pm

Funkmasterr wrote:
Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:
Fairweather Pure wrote:I agree that booze is worse than pot. Anyone that disagrees with that is either ignorant or trolling.

I know a couple of people that never seemed to "grow out" of smoking weed and partying every weekend. They still get shitfaced like a highschool freshman every Friday and Saturday night. I think it's pathetic. Moderation is your friend.

These same people have fallen significantly behind the curve in terms of career, and personal relationships. Same old friends. Same shit jobs. They just failed to progress in life when compared to all of their peers that grew out of that phase.
No! This couldn't be. How could you say such a thing.

No! This couldn't be! Midnyte is clutching onto something someone else said that kind of agrees with him instead of defending his ridiculous opinions himself!

What the fuck are you talking about? She said the same exact thing I said. Are you trying to get people to like you by trashing me? Try not to make it so transparent next time, mmmkay? What a fucking asshole.

Fash · Post by **Fash** » August 24, 2007, 5:03 pm

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:
Funkmasterr wrote: No! This couldn't be! Midnyte is clutching onto something someone else said that kind of agrees with him instead of defending his ridiculous opinions himself!
What the fuck are you talking about? She said the same exact thing I said. Are you trying to get people to like you by trashing me? Try not to make it so transparent next time, mmmkay? What a fucking asshole.

I'll defend him because of your sarcastic surprise about something that NO ONE DISPUTED.

Even though it doesn't deserve a response... There are an equal number if not more "ADULTS" who have completely thrown their lives away with Alcohol.

As ted nugent said.... "FREEEEEEEEDOMMMM!!!!"

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » August 24, 2007, 5:04 pm

Yeah dude, I mean - if you look at my posting history and peoples opinions of me here, it's obvious I'm trying to get them to like me. You stated your ridiculous opinions (once again) on this subject in a way that was insulting to more than one person (assuming here), including your own brother, saying that they are immature failures because they do something you don't agree with - and you haven't given any solid reasons that you think that way (not only this time around, but anytime this conversation has been at hand.)

Bottom line is I'm sick and fucking tired of your constant discriminatory bullshit and I'm sure I am far from the only one. How often have I said something to you? I don't mind you (or say anything negative to you) when you are doing something other than being exactly what you claimed Ted Nugent is.

Nick · Post by **Nick** » August 24, 2007, 5:05 pm

This old discussion again.

People should be allowed to fuck themselves up if they want to as long as they don't hurt anyone else in the process, but the fact is, this isn't an important issue for anyone other than stoners and drug addicts, who no one gives a shit about anyway.

And um, horribly enough although somewhat irrelevant to the discussion, Midnyte is right when he says most people grow out of these vices. Anyone who fails to acknowledge that fact is a fucking idiot who should shut the fuck up.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » August 24, 2007, 5:05 pm

Fash wrote:
Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:
Funkmasterr wrote: No! This couldn't be! Midnyte is clutching onto something someone else said that kind of agrees with him instead of defending his ridiculous opinions himself!
What the fuck are you talking about? She said the same exact thing I said. Are you trying to get people to like you by trashing me? Try not to make it so transparent next time, mmmkay? What a fucking asshole.
I'll defend him because of your sarcastic surprise about something that NO ONE DISPUTED.

Even though it doesn't deserve a response... There are an equal number if not more "ADULTS" who have completely thrown their lives away with Alcohol.

As ted nugent said.... "FREEEEEEEEDOMMMM!!!!"

Yes, but was this conversation about alcohol or pot?

Fash · Post by **Fash** » August 24, 2007, 5:07 pm

No, this conversation was about free will and the possible constituency of drug supporters (of which alcohol is included, except its legal already)

You were the first person to bring up drinking in this thread, and used it the same way I did, as a comparison to support a viewpoint.

Post by **Sylvus** » August 24, 2007, 5:15 pm

Nick wrote:People should be allowed to fuck themselves up if they want to as long as they don't hurt anyone else in the process, but the fact is, this isn't an important issue for anyone other than stoners and drug addicts

That's not true. It should be important to anyone who pays taxes on a drug "war", at least as it pertains to pot. I don't care if someone is pro- or anti-legalization, it still should be an important issue to them. The thought that I'm paying taxes for something I think is totally wrong just because of apathy from people who don't care one way or the other is irritating to say the least.

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » August 24, 2007, 8:01 pm

Sylvus is right. Not only do we pay massive amounts of money for the drug war, but we also allow it to determine our foreign policy in places like Colombia, Afghanistan, etc. And anti-drug rhetoric is used to go after various privacy/civil liberties issues that stretch beyond the interests of drug users. And the drug war feeds the massive militarization of police, which in turn destroys citizen/police relations and makes law enforcement unecessarily violent. And the drug war furthers racist persecution in a variety of contexts. And...

The drug war touches plenty of issues beyond whether druggies will be allowed to get high in peace.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » August 24, 2007, 8:03 pm

Having no interest whatsoever in smoking pot, I'll vote for and support any legislation that supports legalizing it. I might even slap on some liberal pussy sandals and participate in a march if I knew it would matter.

There are few American laws on the books more asinine than the law making a naturally growing (non predatory) plant illegal to grow or consume.

Wulfran · Post by **Wulfran** » August 25, 2007, 3:35 pm

Fairweather Pure wrote:I agree that booze is worse than pot. Anyone that disagrees with that is either ignorant or trolling.

I know a couple of people that never seemed to "grow out" of smoking weed and partying every weekend. They still get shitfaced like a highschool freshman every Friday and Saturday night. I think it's pathetic. Moderation is your friend.

I'll bite on this. To me, pot is worse than booze. I stopped smoking weed in college because I found that getting stoned would put me in a brain dead zone for about 3 days after whereas with booze the hangover was gone in 24. I could afford (and still can

) to lose a day now and then but not 3. I'm not ignorant, or trolling. I liked getting stoned now and then, I LOVED the smell of hash, but it is something my life (for professional reasons) can simply not afford on more than some very rare occasions. I agree moderation is always a good thing but for me, moderation means maybe on a vacation or something... and I was never big on buying from people I didn't know, especially some place where the laws/enforcement may be different from what I am used to.

And back in the late 80s, at some parties, I did smoke what some guys claimed were "coke laced" joints but I never noticed much difference in the buzz or taste which led me to think it was a) bullshit and just good ole whack and/or b) a waste of time and money

Some of the guys I worked with had more money than brains and this may have just been an example of it.

Finally, as far as decriminalization, I'm in favour of it but it is also something (as I've said on many occasions) that I think needs a lot more hard science to back up, in terms of long term effects (and thus possible costs to the health care system).

Asheran Mojomaster · Post by **Asheran Mojomaster** » August 25, 2007, 10:31 pm

Wulfran wrote:
Fairweather Pure wrote:I agree that booze is worse than pot. Anyone that disagrees with that is either ignorant or trolling.

I know a couple of people that never seemed to "grow out" of smoking weed and partying every weekend. They still get shitfaced like a highschool freshman every Friday and Saturday night. I think it's pathetic. Moderation is your friend.
I'll bite on this. To me, pot is worse than booze. I stopped smoking weed in college because I found that getting stoned would put me in a brain dead zone for about 3 days after whereas with booze the hangover was gone in 24. I could afford (and still can ) to lose a day now and then but not 3. I'm not ignorant, or trolling. I liked getting stoned now and then, I LOVED the smell of hash, but it is something my life (for professional reasons) can simply not afford on more than some very rare occasions. I agree moderation is always a good thing but for me, moderation means maybe on a vacation or something... and I was never big on buying from people I didn't know, especially some place where the laws/enforcement may be different from what I am used to.

And back in the late 80s, at some parties, I did smoke what some guys claimed were "coke laced" joints but I never noticed much difference in the buzz or taste which led me to think it was a) bullshit and just good ole whack and/or b) a waste of time and money Some of the guys I worked with had more money than brains and this may have just been an example of it.

Finally, as far as decriminalization, I'm in favour of it but it is also something (as I've said on many occasions) that I think needs a lot more hard science to back up, in terms of long term effects (and thus possible costs to the health care system).

That is understandable. Weed does that to some people. But some people are like me and can smoke weed then go do Calculus. As long as I dont smoke some heavy indica or something, but a good sativa is a big upper. Not that I do smoke before doing math or science, I try to avoid that...but I'll smoke all night if I have to write a paper. Never smoke before class though, too hard to take notes.

Nick · Post by **Nick** » August 26, 2007, 2:23 pm

I agree that booze is worse than pot. Anyone that disagrees with that is either ignorant or trolling.

Yeah, this is nonsense, pretty much for the reasons Wulfran stated.

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » August 26, 2007, 5:28 pm

How about we stop making categorical statements like "this is worse than this?"

Some people can shrug off a joint and go run a marathon while solving complex physics problems. Others sit on their ass for 3 days after. Others don't even get high.

Some people can drink whiskey til they're totally obliterated, pop up 5 hours later, and skip down to work. Others puke the whole next day and are hung over the day after that.

Saying that one is "better" than the other-- regardless of which one you're claiming as superior-- is what is really nonsense.

IT ALL DEPENDS IT ALL DEPENDS IT ALL DEPENDS

Talking about how these things affect you and generalizing to the entire population = retarded

Fairweather Pure · Post by **Fairweather Pure** » August 26, 2007, 6:26 pm

Sueven wrote:How about we stop making categorical statements like "this is worse than this?"

Saying that one is "better" than the other-- regardless of which one you're claiming as superior-- is what is really nonsense.

IT ALL DEPENDS IT ALL DEPENDS IT ALL DEPENDS

Talking about how these things affect you and generalizing to the entire population = retarded

The effects may vary from person to person, but the existing data shows overwhelmingly that drinking has contributed to more deaths and social issues than pot. Drunk driving, alcohol poisoning, liver disease, domestic violence, the list goes on and on.

I code at least 3-4 alcohol poisonings a week that come through our ER. That number can triple after finals week at the local collage. Our OP psych center is overflowing with alcholics. If you've read one alcoholic chart, you've read them all. They've all lost jobs, spouses, and friends due to alcohol. Several weeks ago in MI, a pregnat woman who was driving drunk caused a 20 car pile up, killing at least 5 people, 2 of them children in her vehicle. She walked away.

Alcholol is one of the leading causes of death in the United States (3rd leading cause in 2000, from a google search I did). Pot isn't even on the map because no one has ever overdosed on pot, and when an accident involves the drug, it is either incidental, or 9 out of 10 times, alcohol is involved as well.

I don't feel there is a need to go on. Alcohol is worse than pot. In other news, water is wet and fire is hot.

Sueven · Post by **Sueven** » August 26, 2007, 7:07 pm

I guess I should rephrase.

It makes sense to talk about "which one is worse" from a general social point of view (which is what you're doing).

It doesn't make sense to talk about "which one is worse" from the subjective point of view of an individual person who is not you.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » August 26, 2007, 9:01 pm

Sueven wrote:I guess I should rephrase.

It makes sense to talk about "which one is worse" from a general social point of view (which is what you're doing).

It doesn't make sense to talk about "which one is worse" from the subjective point of view of an individual person who is not you.

You're right Sueven.

Zaelath · Post by **Zaelath** » August 27, 2007, 1:25 am

Fairweather Pure wrote:
Sueven wrote:How about we stop making categorical statements like "this is worse than this?"

Saying that one is "better" than the other-- regardless of which one you're claiming as superior-- is what is really nonsense.

IT ALL DEPENDS IT ALL DEPENDS IT ALL DEPENDS

Talking about how these things affect you and generalizing to the entire population = retarded
The effects may vary from person to person, but the existing data shows overwhelmingly that drinking has contributed to more deaths and social issues than pot. Drunk driving, alcohol poisoning, liver disease, domestic violence, the list goes on and on.

I code at least 3-4 alcohol poisonings a week that come through our ER. That number can triple after finals week at the local collage. Our OP psych center is overflowing with alcholics. If you've read one alcoholic chart, you've read them all. They've all lost jobs, spouses, and friends due to alcohol. Several weeks ago in MI, a pregnat woman who was driving drunk caused a 20 car pile up, killing at least 5 people, 2 of them children in her vehicle. She walked away.

Alcholol is one of the leading causes of death in the United States (3rd leading cause in 2000, from a google search I did). Pot isn't even on the map because no one has ever overdosed on pot, and when an accident involves the drug, it is either incidental, or 9 out of 10 times, alcohol is involved as well.

I don't feel there is a need to go on. Alcohol is worse than pot. In other news, water is wet and fire is hot.

Hrmm, but does that data hold up on a per-user basis? There are a lot more people using alcohol than dope, and I doubt we have good data on usage patterns from those that do. You hear a lot of theories about long term dope usage, but you can't really study it scientifically in the states because it's a prohibited substance.

But yes, ban alcohol I say, or at least make people who have the occasional drink as much a pack of pariahs as the people that have the occasional smoke.

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » August 27, 2007, 9:01 am

Will they ever pander to me?

No

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » August 27, 2007, 11:35 am

No one will pander to a group of people that care enough about society to break laws regularly. It is not even about whether I think one should or should not be able to smoke pot. It is that you are a miscreant that cannot control yourself enough to obey the laws that society has in place here. There are many laws that can vary from city to city and you can expect to either adjust to where you live, move, or be arrested. The U.S. says no to pot and you choose to disregard that because you have to get high.

Fash · Post by **Fash** » August 27, 2007, 11:45 am

Oh, so you never break the speed limit or roll through a red light, and you always wear your seatbelt, right? It's the law you miscreant scumbag. Get off your high horse thank you very much, I'm sure you break plenty of laws.

There are laws which are unjustified, laws that are not right, and laws that are positive yet should not be enforced. One should be more intelligent than simply following the letter of the law, especially now as it is getting more and more restrictive.

The spirit of the law > the letter of the law.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » August 27, 2007, 11:50 am

I am also not crying for no speed limits, the removal of red lights and all other traffic laws, or other stupid repeals of laws put in place. If I do speed and get hit with a ticket, I pay the fine and go about my day. Generally speaking though, I obey the speed limits....I don't run red lights...and I do wear the stupid ass seatbelt that I HATE wearing because it is indeed the law and I prefer to not be cited and fined.

Fash · Post by **Fash** » August 27, 2007, 12:01 pm

I meant stop signs, but anyways... no, you're not crying for repealing those laws, but you are demonizing someone for breaking one law when you admit you break one too. If it being signed into law is the only reason, then they must be equally weighted.

Just because you pay a speeding ticket and move on doesn't make it any better... Funk said before he doesn't even care if he gets caught in possession... I don't either. I've been so close so many times, it doesn't affect my tension level. Not only am I calm in the presence of the authorities, I would not be ashamed. I would be honest and confident that there's nothing wrong with it. I would accept whatever penalty (though I don't expect any... enforcement is so lax) and pay any price, to protect what I think is right. That my good sir is an example of patriotism and what America was built on.

Post by **Sylvus** » August 27, 2007, 12:25 pm

Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:No one will pander to a group of people that care enough about society to break laws regularly. It is not even about whether I think one should or should not be able to smoke pot. It is that you are a miscreant that cannot control yourself enough to obey the laws that society has in place here. There are many laws that can vary from city to city and you can expect to either adjust to where you live, move, or be arrested. The U.S. says no to pot and you choose to disregard that because you have to get high.

That's kind of a silly position to take. Do you feel that alcohol should have remained under prohibition, black people should be viewed as property, women shouldn't be able to vote, abortions should be illegal or people of different races shouldn't be allowed to marry? Because if people didn't question and ultimately break those laws, the laws would still exist. Do you feel that you should unquestioningly support all laws that have been passed in the United States, or do you think it's reasonable to question the validity of a law? Personally, I go with the latter, and think this is a healthy discussion to have.

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » August 27, 2007, 12:26 pm

Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:No one will pander to a group of people that care enough about society to break laws regularly. It is not even about whether I think one should or should not be able to smoke pot. It is that you are a miscreant that cannot control yourself enough to obey the laws that society has in place here. There are many laws that can vary from city to city and you can expect to either adjust to where you live, move, or be arrested. The U.S. says no to pot and you choose to disregard that because you have to get high.

That is just way too much of a Republican poster-boy response for me to even acknowledge.. Do you really truly believe that yourself or did your parents just say it to you so many times when you were young that you started believing it?

Fairweather Pure · Post by **Fairweather Pure** » August 27, 2007, 12:51 pm

Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:No one will pander to a group of people that care enough about society to break laws regularly. It is not even about whether I think one should or should not be able to smoke pot. It is that you are a miscreant that cannot control yourself enough to obey the laws that society has in place here. There are many laws that can vary from city to city and you can expect to either adjust to where you live, move, or be arrested. The U.S. says no to pot and you choose to disregard that because you have to get high.

Creepy. Just plain creepy.