Make sure to thank the Trump supporters for the upcoming War on Weed

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.

You are confused. I am not talking about MJ being illegal. I am saying that if you wish to allow legalization of a drug that will be [and already is] a common intoxicant, the public should be protected. Maybe I should start a thread on the advantages of free drugs for the addicted.

a reply to: pteridine

I already established I agree.

However, it doesn't seem to be a concern with other intoxicants. Pretty sure it's well known barbiturates, sedatives, stimulants, etc are all used as intoxicants. Prescription drugs lead the death rate.

The opioid crisis came from the medical system itself and government corruption. I am just telling you its unlikely it will be handled correctly. The pharmaceuticals haven't been. And based on the normal protocol weed should be legal and never should have been made illegal in the first place based on other available legal intoxicants. Like your local xanax dealer/dr. Dr I feel nervous about flying can I get some pills. Sure..

Greed my friend. Now that Marijuana is a cash cow the government will forget all about public safety like everything else.

More than 36,000 people die from drug overdoses annually and most of these deaths are caused by prescription drugs.

More people die by far with prescription drugs than street drugs. Yet where is the concern for the children?

drugabuse.com...

Over the past two decades, deaths from drug overdoses have become the leading cause of injury death in the United States. In 2011, 55 percent of drug overdose deaths were related to prescription medications; 75 percent of those deaths involved opiate painkillers. However, researchers found that opiate-related deaths decreased by approximately 33 percent in 13 states in the following six years after medical marijuana was legalized

originally posted by: AnonyMason
snipped by anony.

And liberals judge people they know nothing about

a reply to: jidnum

That whole rant you posted looks like it was written under the influence of marijuana. It makes no sense at all.

a reply to: jtma508

Hears the truth about weed. If it were all fine and dandy like so many people (on the left) want to think it is then how come the military doesnt allow it?

If it were healthy then soldiers would be encouraged to do it.

a reply to: FuggleHop

That makes no sense. They are by the way when they come home with ptsd. It's part of treatment.

www.armytimes.com...

www.healthaim.com...

a reply to: luthier
"MJ is harmless and everything else is evil" type of pothead argument has been made many times. Statistics are trotted out to reinforce the benefits of smoking dope and the innocuousness of THC while everything else is much worse. The Hemp Society writes about the bennies of hemp and so on.
The reality is that if general legalization is to occur, public safety will have to be addressed and the general public will press for the issue to be resolved. There will be some sort of field sobriety test and people will be detained for driving while impaired. Excuses and whining by the detainees will be similar to those stopped for drunk driving about how they could ingest so much and it doesn't affect THEM at all, because they are special and "can handle it, man." Legalization would remove some of the legal problems people get themselves into unless they went for a low-priced high though an unlicensed dealer. A trip to the drunk/doper tank may even wake a few up.
Long term effects could be more readily studied with a larger population not only volunteering for the program but paying for the privilege of incidental participation. If there is a significant effect on the brain, such as induction of schizophrenia or slowing the rate of dementia, it will become obvious with so many test subjects who would have no stigma about admitting to use of THC. This experiment may even lead to determining the best employment options for burnouts so they are not a drain on society.

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.

In Michigan drugged driving is up 26% drunk driving is down like 27% and fatalities are up 10% . Do what you want with those numbers.

a reply to: mikell

Prescription drugs? You have a pretty big opioid problem, one of the nations worst, and it's the largest cause of car accidents nationally.


Heroin, opioid deaths up 10 times in Michigan over 15 years, search by county

www.google.com...

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.

What I am showing is a level of practicality and reality that potheads don't want to accept. If you want to treat MJ like alcohol, it will have similar rules and regulations applied to it. In this case, you have the equivalent of smokable booze. If you wrap it into a pill and call it a prescription drug, it has other rules and regulations applied to it. Those that want legalization may have to accept such controls to get what they want. If the compromise seems burdensome, a new piercing or tattoo will help ease the pain.
As to bias, it is you who is trotting out all the old pothead arguments for legalization. Don't try to convince me of the wonders of pot with false comparisons and logical fallacies. I am neutral. Frankly, I don't have the time to worry about dopers and boozers other than to try to make sure they do not kill me on the highways and don't run up my health insurance by needing too many trips to the ER that I eventually pay for.
People take dope or drink for one reason; it makes them feel better. In the case of opioids, some take dope so as not to feel bad. Street drugs are risky and some OD. Some OD on alcohol or die of liver failure. If it is really a disease, it is sometimes fatal like other diseases.
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.

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.

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.

And I don't consider studies with agenda funding on either side valid.

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.

Maybe reading comprehension is not your strong point. What I said was that if you want to treat it like alcohol, regulate it and tax it like alcohol.

You stated: "Like I said marijuana is relatively minor compared to all the legal available options. This is a toxilogical fact, as well as epidemiologicaly proven."
This doesn't make any sense, even when the spelling is corrected. Are you smoking it now?

Did you read my post at all? I said legalize it and treat it like alcohol. The studies aren't in my favor? So you believe it shouldn't be legalized and treated like alcohol because of some studies. OK, don't legalize it. Your studies have saved the world.

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.

OK. Free dope for everyone who wants it. This would unclog the courts, reduce crime, eliminate or greatly reduce drug gangs, and stop the flow of US dollars out of the country. All confiscated dope would be free and administered by medically trained individuals. You get whatever dose you ask for at doper central. All you need do is to turn in your driver's/pilot's license and voter registration card and be signed in as a registered doper. Go to the locker room, change into a disposable paper suit, and go to the 'hit' area. You get whatever dose you demand. If it is fatal it is fatal. You have signed a release accepting that possibility.
That works for me.

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: 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.

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.

originally posted by: pteridine
I thought free dope would be all the rage.

And I thought you were approaching this topic seriously.

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.

Scientists Explore Hallucinogen Treatments for PTSD, Sex Abuse Victims
‘Acid Test’: The case for using psychedelics to treat PTSD, depression

Don't like hallucinogens?
MDMA for PTSD? How Ecstasy Ingredient Works in the Brain

Of course psychiatrists were discovering this in the 60's, but Nixon's racism clamped down on that when he instituted the War on Drugs as a government policy to jail blacks and hippies (who Nixon saw as a threat to his administration).

But it's hard to answer these questions when schedule 1 status in the government is a self-fulfilling prophecy. The government declares that the substances have no benefits and then shuts down most to all attempts from science to try to demonstrate otherwise. VERY unscientific way of doing things.

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.

Why is that a question? Colorado and Washington have already figured it out just fine. At this point they are ironing out the finer details.

a reply to: jtma508
Why do you care so much about weed?

a reply to: pteridine

I see your not capable of thinking through and your mind is made up.

You want legislate based on the perception of a situation rather than reality.

Whether or not a drug was or was not intended for recreational use should have no bearing on reality.

The fact of the matter is the vast majority of drug related deaths from recreational use are prescription drugs.

The stats don't care what you consider or the adjectives used.

Marijuana is a drug. It should be controlled.

It just happens to be one of the most benign drugs.

No hysteria of opioids....hmm mm must be a wag the dog.

Are you paid by pharmaceutical companies to glaze over the real killer?

If you have a ten percent chance of dying on a bike, 50 percent in a car, and 75 percent jumping off cliffs into unknown water which event should you try and control first if the same number of people will try each....

Go ahead and try and figure that one out and get back to me..

I am sure it will be more hyperbole.

By the way my point with Sagan that you misunderstand is that Marijuana isn't the problem. People are. There are many people succeful using Marijuana with huge ambition and goals. Just like there are people who are lazy who don't smoke pot.

A lazy person smokes pot they get lazy, a motivated person smokes pot they get motivated.

Addictive personalities get addcited whether it's Jesus or drugs.