silly girl drinking to much water! i think you all need make your own choices dont listen to the man listen to youre heart
Well... I'm sure those of inclined to break the law will not listen to the "man" but the problem at hand is "the man" has no right to tell us what we can and can not snort or smoke or inject. What we do in our own homes is our own business. If I want to wake up in a pool of what I HOPE is my own filth, that's my problem, not my next door neighbors. Lol, auctually my next door neighbor is a preacher who used to be a heroin dealer.
"You gotta smoke, snort, inject or swallow, lets get high on God today! Smoke, snort, inject or swallow, did you forget? Let's count the ways!"
So that means if you had a variety of Cannabis that wasn't the "drug" then you could fight and win a case against the US because you weren't growing pot?The word was
first coined in the 1890s, but was adopted by the Bureau of Narcotics in the 1930s to
describe all forms of Cannabis and to this day U.S. drug enforcement agencies
continue to call the plant marijuana without regard to botanical distinctions.
The only real problem with legalizing Cannabis is the fact that people are afraid. I personally don't like the idea of people driving around high or drunk....but when you legalize a motor functions and judgment inhibitor, those are the risks. Another reasons is because Cannabis has been given such a bad name in the past due to false accusations against it, people are afriad of loosing braincells/etc. Take a wiff of city air, betch you'll lose 10x's the amt. of braincells in 1 wiff of city smog then u would smokin a joint/bowl.
The only real reason Im kind of a fence sitter is how many irresponsible pot smokers I've met in my life. I only know about 2 that I feel comfortable around when they are smoking it. The others wierd me out, esp with bowls...thats just wierd....
My .02 cents.
Nepenthes - hail to royalty
Lol, they aren't going to bite you Dustin
Unless you're hogging the Doritos that is lol
I agree that driving drunk or high is bad. A reasonable person wouldn't do that. If they do that then they deserve to be punished.
BTW, what's weird about bowls?
You guys keep talking like the user of a drug is the only person who gets hurt. Maybe it's not primarily the user that the laws are protecting? No one lives in a bubble... our actions ripple out across the planet like the wingbeats of the famous butterfly in China.
Betting that people under the influence will be self-policing is usually a losing bet. That much should certainly be obvious with any judgement-impairing drug. Their intentions may be noble before the drug usage. During, however, they may be unable to keep their promises.
And when it comes to addictive drugs, the path from use to abuse is the path of least resistance. Of course that's where most people are going to drift... momentum in the direction of abuse is chemically built into the drug. The term "addictive" means "you are more likely to get addicted than not".
Maybe you guys are responsible about it. Maybe there's no one in your immediate vicinity that gets hurt (though with some drugs, there may very well be a hidden trail of blood from its origin to your doorstep). It's easy to assume that one's own experience is the experience of the majority. In this case I don't think that's true. For every one of you, I'd bet there are at least 20 people out there who'd be better off without access to drugs.
So maybe you guys should try looking at it from another angle to see how it sits with you. Instead of all the "me, me, me" ("*I* want drugs so I should be allowed to have them, and the consequences to society are someone else's problem")... try thinking of the loss of access to drugs as a fair sacrifice. Think of it as taking one for the team. I don't really care much about legality. To me that isn't the issue. "Should we" do drugs seems a lot more relevant to me than "can we" do drugs. Try to look at the world as a whole, and ask yourself, knowing how most humans work, whether a world that supports drugs is a better place to live in than a world that attempts to eliminate them (as futile as that may be). You may find that even though you like drugs and can handle drugs, a sense of concern for humanity's future dictates that it's wiser to give them up for the greater good. Drugs don't interest me at all, but if they did I still wouldn't touch them for that reason. I couldn't sleep at night knowing I was helping to create a darker future for society, even if my own life was going just fine. I'd be disturbed knowing where my money was going, and who I'd be giving more power to.
We can't complain about the world being a dungheap and contribute to the dungheap at the same time. If our actions support decay, then we support decay, no matter what we think we support.
In short... get out of your bubbles. They don't exist. You affect the world, whether you like it or not. You can do harm whether you think you are or not. That's a burden we all have to live with.
And after high school they burst pretty violently of their own accord, so you might as well get it over with early.
The anti-libertarian in me wonders whether the marijuana or the laws against it causes more trouble. I certainly favor abandoning the war on drugs because it's been a disaster. But complete legalization would be a disaster too. Somewhere there's a line in between "The War On" and legalization that would minimize the harm to society. But, given what we see with alcohol, society is willing to accept quite a carnage in exchange for easy access to an intoxicant.
Bruce in CT
Madness is something rare in individuals — but in groups, parties, peoples, ages it is the rule. Friedrich Nietzsche
no one has yet had a good answer to my question. You cannot run a policy on the assumption that people know what they need to know. are all those 'dangers' fabricated? To tell these wouldnt we have to educate on the harfmfull effects of these drugs.... oh wait, but that would be anti drug?! So confusing...
What im saying is most of the information you guys say people need to know was put out by the war on drugs in the first place.
that makes no logic
Do you know how much crime would increase? You can't tell me that legalizing these addictive drugs that completely ruin peoples lives, even ones not using the drug, is a good idea.
People have been killed by addicts trying to get money for their fix.
And I don't know of any addict that has quit and beleives the feeling was worth the pain inflicted on them or others around them.
My neighbor across the street is a crack head that deals and is personally responsible for over 20 break ins around my neighborhood and regularly knocks on me and my neighbor's door looking for a couple bucks so he can "take the bus to work". Its sad that this jackass always seems immune to the law and the reasons for his actions are entirely to support his substance addicted lifestyle. And its never going to stop until he kills someone or someone is waiting in their house with a gun and blows his head off.
These extracts/chemicals should NOT be made available for legal use by the American people unless you want to see the country go down the drain.
However, weed is harmless and should be legal, when was the last time someone went out and robbed or killed someone cause they wanted to smoke some bud?
That propaganda I see on TV all the time about marijuana is pretty damn annoying.
Problem is people smoke weed and try to do things that they shouldn't be when high, and thats when people get hurt. Like any other thing that impairs you.
that makes no logic
Weed acts as an inhibitor and makes you less likely to do things you wouldn't normally do.
Ofcourse if its legalized it should have strict laws placed on its use, just like alcohal.