It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: pteridine
I don't buy your answers. What is a nutrient? Does it support hormones? Metabolic process, is it a catalyst for nutrients etc...
Is there a way to check for pain pill levels? Does a police officer have a codine breathalyzer?
There would literally be no drugs on the market at all if your suggestion was the case.
Why do pharmaceuticals get a pass? Including synthetic Marijuana
How many cups of coffee are too many? Is there a point you can get dizzy or angry?
Where do you draw the line?
What about smoke in your eyes while smoking and driving?
Do all the psychotropics get tested by police? How many of those creates a psychotic reaction?
My point is Marijuana has an insane standard compared to every other drug on the market. As soon as the money started rolling in the politicians came on board. Had nothing to do with safety.
The aderol all the kids got, not tested for long term effects. Fabricated drug trials etc...
So yes I agree safety should be tested.
None of that has to do with Marijuana being illegal. It is illegal for an entirely different reason.
originally posted by: AnonyMason
snipped by anony.
originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: pteridine
Your showing your true bias here.
Are you saying there is no way to judge a drugs toxicology?
Or are you saying that all drugs have the insane standard given to Marijuana?
You seem to have some serious flaws here in your argument.
By the way these studies are being done. You should look at the independent ones with both pro and con scientists on the team.
Can you show me evidence for a safety standard for xanax?
Do you not believe that prescription drugs kill more people than any other source?
Why does Marijuana have a standard no other drug has?
And by the way many states are making standards. Using cotton swabs in the field and blood work if the field test is positive for dui.
Where is the xanax test?
Oh I guess that one doesn't matter even though it kills more people.
Dope and booze waste many lives; not necessarily end lives but waste them. I have known dopers and boozers who have, after many years, had epiphanies and said something to the effect that they had wasted their lives with the stuff...and they had. After some lucidity, they submerged themselves back in their intoxicant of choice because they couldn't handle the reality of what they had done. It is said that addictive behavior has to do with immaturity and that many seem to come out of it around age 30. I don't have the reference but it is out there somewhere.
Legalize away. Tax it and control it as though it was smokable booze.
originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: pteridine
What your doing is creating a genetic falacy and anecdotal falacy.
For someone who has to use ad hominem attacks to prove an argument you have a lot to say about what you personally feel is reality about this situation, ad refuse to use any data, research or common sense.
Most people want marijuana regulated, it's in fact it's illegality that prevent any of the measures your talking about. As it is researchers a have to jump through hoops to have access to it legally.
Your argument is as week as they come
It's a strawman (everyone here has said it should be regulated), you use ad hominem, genetic fallacy, and anecdotal evidence to support your claims.
Typical superstitious hysteria.
Like I said marijuana is relatively minor compared to all the legal available options. This is a toxilogical fact, as well as epidemiologicaly proven.
Regardless of what potheads say the studies aren't in your favor. All the potheads in Israel have been studying this for years.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: pteridine
Dope and booze waste many lives; not necessarily end lives but waste them. I have known dopers and boozers who have, after many years, had epiphanies and said something to the effect that they had wasted their lives with the stuff...and they had. After some lucidity, they submerged themselves back in their intoxicant of choice because they couldn't handle the reality of what they had done. It is said that addictive behavior has to do with immaturity and that many seem to come out of it around age 30. I don't have the reference but it is out there somewhere.
Legalize away. Tax it and control it as though it was smokable booze.
So what's your point? There are plenty of people who admit to wasting their lives without any intoxicants. And besides, you get out of life what you put into it. You don't have to be successful, famous, or even well off to consider your life to not be wasted. If you are happy with what you've done with your life, that is all that is needed. You are the sole critic of your success in life. No one else.
Drug detractors are always quit to point out all the people who "waste their lives" doing drugs, but always fail to mention the types who benefit from its usage. What about the many artists who smoke pot or do other drugs because it expands their perception to deliver higher quality art? What about scientists like Carl Sagan who swear that pot helped him realize truths that he never would have realized otherwise? What about the drug/alcohol entrepreneurs who like the products so much they start businesses selling it to others? The microbrewery market is CLEARLY a product of beer lovers helping other beer lovers; and the way pot is distributed right now is a very similar approach.
If you are going to bring up the casualties of drug use, you shouldn't do so at the expense of the success stories. It paints a lopsided picture that narcotic usage is only negative and has no positives. And this is the narrative that the government enjoys to continue keeping drugs illegal. Thus it is flawed and wrong.
originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: pteridine
That's stupid and looks like you didn't even read what I said, let alone contemplate it versus what you were saying.
originally posted by: pteridine
I thought free dope would be all the rage.
I did read your post. You want success stories from drug use other than apocryphal stories about Sagan, et al. Measurable success stories are better than 'taking psilocybin helped me realize the meaning of the Universe' and other such. Maybe the same thing would have happened without the drug. How about numbers of diseases cured or prevented? Chronic conditions managed? These are drug related.
I think the question is still how MJ is proposed to be legalized. Is it to be a prescription drug in the form of a THC concentrate or smokable plant matter that is an intoxicant used in a social setting? I was under the impression that it was to be the latter but maybe not.