Fungi Forums
Miscellaneous => General Chat => Not at the Dinner Table => Topic started by: Forest Guy on November 09, 2008, 08:06:43 PM
-
There should be no laws restricting the purchase of any drugs. If you want to do crystal meth, that's your business. Rather than all these druggies depositing millions of dollars straight into the pockets of lowlifes, legalize all of them. Drug use will go down, and collecting taxes on them will raise a tremendous amount of money (something the market could really use right now)
Go go go.
-
Even though I wouldn't use them, I agree with this.
-
Even though I'd only use pot I do agree with this.
-
The only glaring downsides would be that drugs would be introduced to lots of people including kids, obviously, and the fact that tons of people would be openly trippin' in public and prolly do something stupid.
The laws for drugs to be legal should follow how beer is handled. Mario-juana, for example:
-Gotsta be 21 (or 18, I guess) to obtain it.
-If you smoke and drive, and you're driving like an idiot, it'll be the same as a DWI
-If you underage but indoors and guardians are aware of the consumption and are within property lines, it should be legal... (at least, that's how Texas' law is with underage drinking.)
-If you smoke in public it should be considered the same as public intoxication, etc.
-If you purchase it and let minors smoke it and are caught, same rules should apply for buying tobacco for minors (Texas= $500 fine and/or lose your license)
-And like Erik said, they could tax the living crap out of it and then prolly overnight the universe would explode with happiness.
-
You're such a sick capitalist freak. Perhaps raising money from drugs would generate tremendous profit, it's money that's being made from sick people. It's bad enough that tobacco companies use people's addictions to gain money, but with this idea, there would be companies making money from stronger, more dangerous addictions. Also, people using very hard drugs could hurt other people. Just imagine a mob of people on PCP. This idea would make our world a sick, anarchistic hell.
-
Alcohol is dangerous enough as it is, and people are stupid enough not to realize cigarettes are deadly, so I'm going to disagree, Meow.
Making money is not where it's at.
-
Hey remember when alcohol was legalized again and the rate of drinking went down dramatically? Legalizing a substance makes it less attractive to the masses, in case you've forgotten.
And SolidShroom, I'm a sick freak for believing in one of the central foundations our nation was founded upon? Go move to Cuba and have fun with socialism.
Puh-lease, spare me. This isn't just a matter of money. It's a matter of civil liberties. The government has better things to do than spend money and effort on drug monitoring. It's a stupid law. There's no need for it. Government shouldn't rule every aspect of our lives. That's why the drinking age should be lowered to 18, as well as the smoking age (in some areas it's 19).
obviously like Trainman stated (by the way man, don't call me Erik here. Or Meow.) it wouldn't just be a big giant free for all. There would be restrictions. A drug age just like a smoking age would be enforced. Even so, the majority of drug users do so in their own homes, not in public. I SINCERELY doubt we would see mobs of users roaming the streets. Do you ever see mobs of drunkards roaming the streets? No. People drink either at home or at bars. Set up specialized outlets, like drug dens, where users are free to do whatever. (Not to mention, your inhibitions are more released and your brain is more dangerous while under the influence of alcohol than when you're high)
And give me a break. Get off your high horse. People being too stupid to not smoke is their business. The government isn't here to babysit us and constantly watch over every single thing we do. As citizens, we're supposed to be informed rather than having Uncle Sam hold our hands everytime we have to make a decision. Tobacco companies don't force you to smoke. If simply don't care or you're ignorant enough to take it up, so be it. That's your problem, not everyone else's.
-
Yeah, I agree, but marijuana would be borderline okay if it was regulated like I explained above. I wouldn't be surprised is marijuana is actually legalized in our lifetimes.
-
Any drug-dealing crime drop caused by legalizing all drugs would be nullified by the fact that we'd have people:
driving stoned
getting high on PCP and killing each other
throwing their lives away since they're content to sit on their couch smoking pot day after day
etc. etc. etc. etc.
Really, it'd just make everything way worse. Of course, one alternative is making commercial variants of hard drugs that are less potent, but all that'd do is just make addicts go poorer buying more drugs to get the same fix.
-
Also, breathing second hand smoke is actually more dangerous than smoking, so it is everyone's problem. I sure don't want to have to breathe the stuff.
-
Well I don't know about you, but New York has a public smoking ban. I don't ever have to worry about second hand smoke. Do the same with other drugs.
And Glorb, try reading my post again and then we'll talk.
-
I'm for legalizing drugs like marijuana, which have medicinal properties. They should be available through prescription, in addition to having an age limit, and an advisory to use the drug responsibly, because it's the idiots who abuse the substance that screws over those who actually need it.
Iowa has banned smoking from public buildings! :)
-
And Glorb, try reading my post again and then we'll talk.
I read it again, and it's got the same crap in it.
Making something legal doesn't make it go away or remove its negative influences from society. Say you've got a cousin who had never touched drugs before due to fear of legal intervention. But one day, she decides to buy some meth, and, of course, gets hooked on it. Next time you see her, she's half-dead, missing most of her teeth, emaciated, and wearing them same clothes she's been wearing for the past week since she's broke.
I'd rather not have to go through all that again, myself.
-
And this is why legalizing all drugs works only in theory.
Wouldn't the rest of the economy suffer if those who previously would avoid dealers were to be purchasing quantities of mind altering drugs? Only the government would benefit from money people aren't spending to make their lives easier. But even then, the government would have to care for the maintenance that would have to be conducted to clean up after people making poor decisions, such as vandalism, public indecency, vehicular damages to public property... You can't just think that people are going to quarantine themselves to partake of such dangerous compounds. The government saves money by scaring people into not using drugs, from aforementioned clean-up and income taxes.
We'll never get universal health care if people want to pay taxes for it "through the nose." It's not reliable, and it's a circular flow of money that probably ends up being more expensive on the health-care side.
-
-If you purchase it and let minors smoke it and are caught, same rules should apply for buying tobacco for minors (Texas= $500 fine and/or lose your license)
What license? Don't tell me you would need a license for the drugs.
-
Apparently whether you buy cigarettes for minors affects how well you can drive.
-
I agree with Glorb and Suffix. Legalization of drugs works in theory... but that's it. You can prance about all you want, proclaiming that people will have self control and lose interest in mind-numbingly addictive substances the instant they become legal. Seriously?
If anything, it would provide the innocent never-tried-it bystander with even more opportunites to get hooked. All of a sudden, the people who are too poor to afford pot from dealers will be able to get it anywhere, and for cheaper, which increases the potential for other people to be exposed, spreading the virus. People don't do things because it's illegal, they do it because it's fun or they're addicted.
I sincerely hope illegal potent drugs are never legalized. In fact, I hope cigarettes and other tobacco products are made illegal eventually. Sure, it'll probably never happen, but the world would benefit infinitely from it.
-
I agree that all highly addicting drugs should stay illegal, for obvious reasons. However, I think that the strict laws on pot, and other, non-addicting drugs should definitely be lifted, if not significantly reduced. Someone who gets high occasionally should not be considered a criminal.
-
pot
non-addicting
Ha.
-
Yes, only those who are addicted and no longer voluntarily choose to do drugs should be considered criminals.
In a class on Social Problems we read a book about selling crack in East Harlem and how Puerto Ricans are institutionally marginalized because of cultural, stereotypical and bureaucratic barriers that prevent them from being able to easily enter the legal business. At the conclusion of the book, he says that the first step towards reducing bureaucratic racism and marginalization of these ethnic groups would be to legalize drugs such as cocaine. The profit for selling these drugs would diminish, the money would enter the legal economy, and marginalized youth would no longer aspire to sell drugs; they also would not be bombarded by drug dealers in their community looking for new clients.
The name of the book is "In Search of Respect: Selling Crack in El Barrio" by Philippe Bourgois. It's more informative than my post, and it gives more in depth information regarding the possible legalization of drugs than any of us can know as of now.
EDIT: marijuana is psychologically addictive, but not physically.
-
The somatic symptoms of psychological addiction are physical.
-
Purely psychosomatic.
That boy needs therapy.
Purely psychosomatic.
That boy needs therapy.
-
Let's ban everything that is addictive, physically or psychologically.
-
Any drug-dealing crime drop caused by legalizing all drugs would be nullified by the fact that we'd have people:
driving stoned
getting high on PCP and killing each other
throwing their lives away since they're content to sit on their couch smoking pot day after day
etc. etc. etc. etc.
Really, it'd just make everything way worse. Of course, one alternative is making commercial variants of hard drugs that are less potent, but all that'd do is just make addicts go poorer buying more drugs to get the same fix.
-There are people driving drunk too. Have you read my post about restrictions? (marijuana only; screw other stuff, keep it illegal) When you smoke pot, you are not thrown in this dream world where crap's changing colors and you just have no control overself as some of you seem to think... so I mean, I don't believe that thousands of people are just going to rampage in their car if they smoke. I don't see hoards coming out right now although people are smoking as we speak. How many collisions have you heard of that are caused directly by marijuana vs. how many collisions directly related to drinking?
-I agree.
-If they want to waste their lives away blowing all their money on green, well, then that's DEFINITELY their problem, not yours. Smoking weed does not make you turn into a zombie with teeth falling out and bruises all over you like meth would do. Worse on your lungs, I'll add, but not going to straight kill you.
I'm for legalizing drugs like marijuana, which have medicinal properties. They should be available through prescription, in addition to having an age limit, and an advisory to use the drug responsibly, because it's the idiots who abuse the substance that screws over those who actually need it.
You've never heard of medical marijuana that follows virtually the same guidelines you just mentioned?
What license? Don't tell me you would need a license for the drugs.
.....no, seriously, what license do you think I'm talking about? A military license or CDL? It's your DRIVER's license that can be taken away.
-
Obviously there is no way to know unless you test it, but the fact that "people are already smoking it" does not mean "no one else will smoke it if it becomes legal". I don't think I have problems with it being legalized, but I don't think "people are already driving drunk" is a good justification. And no, it might not make you see crazy stuff but it will make you slow and euphoric, which is not advisable for anything but laying on the couch.
-
Point I was trying to make is that some people are assuming if you legalize it, thousands of people will go mad and traffic collisions will soar although thousands are already smoking it and I see no mobs of people under the influence causing major trouble... and that marijuana-related traffic accidents have not really gone anywhere in relation to alcohol-related accidents (that being why I said, "People are already drinking" as in no one seems to be worried about alcohol which is legal and causes more accidents but are so freaked out about something illegal for a long time being legalized) ....so..... point deeper than that: people need to stop freaking out so much about it.
-
And you foresee no increase in the people smoking it and their possibility of traffic accidents. Interesting.
-
Regarding marijuana being called psychologically addictive; remember, you can be psychologically addicted to anything.
-
Oh, the irony; we're talking about psychological addiction on a video game forum.
-
I think the point is (at least for me) that someone who does drugs should not be considered a criminal.
Yes, only those who are addicted and no longer voluntarily choose to do drugs should be considered criminals.
I didn't say that.
-
Drugs shouldn't be legal. Although the economy is doing horrible in the United States right now, that's not the point. The government is supposed to provide security to the people and ensure that they're being protected against harmful substances. Legalizing drugs would violate this idea and create conflicts in other countries because some people there might want drugs legalized too.
Why would anyone want to do drugs anyway? You're fine without them.
If drugs become legal, then that's basically saying that anything else harmful can become legal. Soon enough, people will be walking through the streets with bombs in their hands and that will be fine...
-
Why would anyone want to do drugs anyway? You're fine without them.
That arguement could be used for anything
-
Why would anyone want to eat? You're fine without eating.
-
This is my opinion:
It'll only be the stupid people's problem.
-
Why would anyone want to eat? You're fine without eating.
(https://themushroomkingdom.net/board/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fthemushroomkingdom.net%2Fboard%2Findex.php%3Faction%3Ddlattach%3Btopic%3D6575.0%3Battach%3D4277%3Bimage&hash=2be43e3aba8c9215c5f9d2002a310a11)
-
It's witty, and not stupid. You need to consider the consequences when you use absolute statements.
-
absolute statements
This thread is full of absolute statements that are quite biased. That's not the problem.
Beside he knew what I meant before; your taking this too seriously
-
I guess the real reason I decided to grunt my disapproval was the use of a 'motivational poster.' On further consideration, I realized that what could have been said was that the poor argument made previously could apply to any leisure-type activity.
Rather than saying "You're fine without it," it would have have been better to say "You're better off without them," but then somebody would surely assert the health benefits of a certain depressant and then that same person would come to define drugs as "really bad drugs" and we wouldn't be getting anywhere.
-
This thread is full of absolute statements that are quite biased.
You say they're quite biased!
-
Only a Sith deals in absolute. *Whips out lightsaber* I will do what I must.
-
I know I'm 3 years late on this, but Obi-Wan and Anakin's conversation at the end of ROTS makes absolutely no sense.
1- "Only a Sith deals in absolutes" - I shouldn't have to point out the obvious contradiction, that this statement itself is an absolute.
2- Was Obi-Wan disputing Anakin's labelling of him as an enemy? After he just told Padmé that he'd probably have to kill him?
3- If he said he wasn't his enemy because he wanted to win him back, then he just called Yoda a Sith.
4- Then again, Yoda did contradict his "A Jedi never uses the Force for attack" thing pretty flagrantly.
5- If he was trying to win him back, insulting him like that might not be the best way to win his affection.
6- "Anakin, the Chancellor is evil!" "From my point of view, the Jedi are evil!" "Well, then you are lost!"
Obi-Wan is the one dealing in absolutes! Anakin is dealing in relativism! This makes no freaking sense!
7- I'll give Lucas the benefit of the doubt and assume he only thought "if you're not with me you're against me" was a Bush quote, and he wasn't actually trying to say Jesus is a Sith.
-
This makes me remember how poorly done Anakin's transition to the dark side is.
-
This is my opinion:
It'll only be the stupid people's problem.
Except it wouldn't be. Secondhand smoke is a problem for the non-smoker.
-
A bit of second-hand smoke from marijuana will not kill you or make you high. Not trying shove anything down your throat, BP, but you can't tell me you haven't inhaled second-hand cigarette smoke by accident *somewhere* in your life.
-
What if you live around smokers? Trust me, you won't be inhaling it somewhere, you'll be inhaling it almost everywhere.
-
A bit of second-hand smoke from marijuana will not kill you or make you high. Not trying shove anything down your throat, BP, but you can't tell me you haven't inhaled second-hand cigarette smoke by accident *somewhere* in your life.
I don't give a crap if it's not harmful--it's still bothersome. And in this valley the air pollution's bad enough to simulate a life of secondhand smoking as it is, so I don't need to take any more bad air than I have to breathe to live.
-
Regardless, it is harmful. I guess second-hand pot smoke isn't as toxic as cigarette smoke, but they both smell bad, and the heavy particles in cigarette smoke never leave your lungs once you breathe them.
-
Well yeah, I'll agree it is extremely bothersome. Even when I had smoked a bit (cigarettes) back then I hated the second-hand. Now I REALLY hate the smell of cigarettes now that I haven't smoked in a long time.
-
I strongly disagree.
I see the effects of drugs every freaking day. They kill you. It's bad enough that cigarettes are legal. Cigarettes kill you slowly. Using drugs just speeds up the process and also messes up your head. Drugs are addictive and expensive. I don't think that them being illegal would cut the cost and so people would still go to drastic and unmentionable means to get the money for drugs.
I don't give a crap if it's not harmful--it's still bothersome. And in this valley the air pollution's bad enough to simulate a life of secondhand smoking as it is, so I don't need to take any more bad air than I have to breathe to live.
I've got to agree with BP. I live in a big city and the air is very polluted and when I go to public places, I don't like choking on cigarette smoke and it burns my nostrils. I also used to live next door to these kids who smoked weed. Their window was right by our door with the smoke coming into our home through the screen door. They smoked a lot and it resulted in a minor contact high.
-
Wouldn't it be great if it was simple enough to just take all the smokers to one city, where they can kill themselves and others, and all the healthy people to one city?
SUPER LOCKDOWN!
-
And every ten years people from both cities are hauled off to fight each other in a no-holds barred deathmatch.
-
George Carlin had something like that in mind...
-
I agree with everything Forest said here. If all drugs weren't prohibited, we'd have far less crime and there would be less people finding new ways to get high. There are tons of new, disgusting drugs out there (Jenkem anyone?) and they're just going to keep piling up unless the drugs we already have are legalized.
And I agree with Trainman that marijuana should already be legal (it actually is in Colorado from what I've heard).
-
Jenkem
It's not technically a drug, it's more getting high off poop-gas.
-
Unfortunately I have been surrounded by second-hand Jenkem my whole life. :(
-
Me too and I'm worried it somehow affected me years later.
-
http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/weblog/comments/4891/
Sounds like some kind of puzzle game...
-
Instead of marijuana, why doesn't everyone who wants to trip out just smoke Salvia?
-
I don't give a crap if it's not harmful--it's still bothersome. And in this valley the air pollution's bad enough to simulate a life of secondhand smoking as it is, so I don't need to take any more bad air than I have to breathe to live.
No one seems to read what I write. There are a lot of places like New York that have public smoking bans. I never, ever get caught up in situations where I'm stuck indoors with cigarette smoke. Impose this concept onto legalized drugs and bam. No more whining about OMG MY LUNGZ.
The ideal situation is that you have drug "bars" so to speak. People go in, do what they gotta do, and then regulate it so that they can't leave until they are suitable to drive.
And if you're concerned about your stupid cousins killing themselves from drugs, then your cousin is an idiot. Innocent bystanders who don't do drugs now wouldn't run out and do it just because it's legal. They don't do it because they know its bad for you. Seriously, find me one person who is like lol i wuld luv 2 do coke but i dont wana cuz its ilegal lmao. Drugs are ridiculously easy to obtain in today's day and age. It's not a matter of its legality, its a matter of the fact they're bad for you.
As for the subject of marijuana, it's more or less been decriminalized in most states.
See what I don't understand is that people constantly baww about the government infringing on their rights. People who want to do drugs should have that right. It's a key idea of capitalist, darwinian philosophy. We should have the liberty of free will. It's our own bodies and we should have the right to do what we want to them. Sound familiar? I don't see how you can advocate abortion as a natural right but not the choice of doing drugs or not.
As I said, the government has better things to do than hound people over drug activity. There would be LESS crime with the legalization of drugs because then it becomes less of a turf aspect as well. Drug dealers can no longer claim an area for themselves since it's a piece of the market at that point. Because they're competing with a nonexistant figure, they physically can't fight with it and produce crime.
And a similar concept to this, prostitution should also be legalized for similar reasons. Of course I bet a lot of you will turn coat instantly and ZOMG YESS PROSTISTUES and immediately love the idea due to, ahem "personal" interests.
-
You're still comparing mind-altering/danger-creating situations to things that aren't dangerous to other people around you. These are not the same things.
-
Do explain. I feel I've made my point pretty clear as to how legalized drugs could be regulated in a fashion that would not cause this widespread chaos you claim it would.
-
I'm not one of the widespread chaos people. I'm one of the we already have drunk drivers that aren't controlled so why make it easier for more people to be dangerous even if that means only one more person people. You wouldn't be able to regulate everything so exactly. Just because only a few extra people would get hurt doesn't justify it.
-
How would it work then, Chup? Something like 60% of people in jail are serving time for drug-related charges. It needs to be legalized to some extent, the problem is how
-
Making something illegal legal because too many people are getting busted for it? That's the silliest thing I've ever heard.
-
Something like 60% of people in jail are serving time for drug-related charges. It needs to be legalized to some extent, the problem is how
That's the same logic that made public schools lower their required passing grades so that they could say that more of their students were passing without having to actually improve anything.
-
*sigh* I guess what I forgot to say is that a lot of those people aren't, and shouldn't be considered criminals. (I'm talking about pot only, by the way)
-
Hate to break it to ya, but a criminal is someone who commits a crime, and a crime is anything illegal. Non-medicinal pot is illegal. They're not hardened bank robbers, but there's a reason it's a crime.
-
Hate to break it to ya, but a criminal is someone who commits a crime, and a crime is anything illegal. Non-medicinal pot is illegal.
I'm saying that those laws are wrong and you're saying "o ya well its illegal hurf durf"...
there's a reason it's a crime.
...and this is what this thread is about, but you have no evidence there so we're back to square one.
-
a crime is anything illegal.
Such as same-sex marriage.
Not that I'm on the druggie-liberator side, just pointing out how I wouldn't use that argument. Drugs are actually something that's harmful whether you're a cultist or not.
-
What I was trying to point out is that drugs are illegal for a good reason (yeah, gay marriage, not so much, but that's a different topic). Making something legal to get criminals out of jail is a ridonkulous idea. Sure, for every child-murdering heroin fiend there's ten harmless, good-intentioned dope-smoking high school dropouts, but that's still eleven people right there whose lives have been pretty much flushed down the pooper.
See, this is going to make me look like some kind of pro-fascist nut, but, by and large, people are pretty stupid. They'll do things that give them pleasure by messing with their brain chemicals, regardless of how bad it messes up their life or the lives of others. So we try to discourage that by making it illegal. You could argue that just makes drugs more alluring, but then all you'd be showing is that it's a lose-lose situation.
-
I will attest to the messed-upness of people fried out on drugs, since people have come into my store and babbled incoherently and stutteringly about rather unmentionable things along with being possessed and stuff, while trying to sell things. I am of the opinion that people should not have the increased opportunity to turn themselves into such a great nuisance.
-
Sure, for every child-murdering heroin fiend there's ten harmless, good-intentioned dope-smoking high school dropouts, but that's still eleven people right there whose lives have been pretty much flushed down the pooper.
I totally agree that herion, and all addicting drugs should stay illegal. I, however am talking about Marijuana. It's not going to totally destroy your life if you smoke pot. I know many, many very successful people who used to smoke/smoke weed, and are not brainwashed lunatics like some of you suggest.
-
Do you personally know any? I have two ex-friends thanks to pot.
-
Ya, I personally know a few. It shouldn't really matter though.
-
I haven't really personally known any druggies but I sometimes have to be in the same (class)room with some of these guys and... I don't know. Honestly, I'm not sure why the teachers don't snag these kids right when they start loudly going off on how much of this or that they did, and yet I think I know the reason: There's always the benefit of the doubt they're making up tales to impress their stoner peers. I can see that, though, because I know some kids who "do drugs" and are, well, as good as a kid who carries on long conversations about acid can be, and then there's the ones that lurk around just outside the campus handing something white to somebody. I'm not suggesting illegal drugs are fine in some cases; I'm just saying the problem is all around us and, in the end, calling a solution to it complex would be putting things lightly.
-
I've lost many friends due to pot and other drugs. But looking back on them, that's their personal choice and reflects on what kind of person they really are. Because of that, I don't feel bad about it because I don't want to be friends with weak minded imbeciles who can't control themselves.
It's the same logic with anyone else. Why should you care if people will harm themselves doing drugs? It doesn't concern you. If they're foolish enough to try it, then there should be no room for compassion.
-
So you're saying they're immediately idiots the minute they try any kind of drug?
-
Furthermore, idiots deserve no love.
-
I thought one of the precepts of Christianity was to have compassion for like everybody.
-
The fine print being "unless the bible says when you shouldn't".
-
Eh, the Bible says a lot of things. Humans aren't perfect. Another big theme in Christianity is accepting the fact we aren't perfect (because we sin and don't have compassion for drug-addicts) and then repenting for it. So you're allowed to hate people and it's all good if you realize it's wrong.
-
My memory on this subject isn't as great as it used to be, but the general message, Glorb, is both "don't be like those people" and "care for everyone."
Five minutes later...
Surprisingly enough, it appears that messages of "don't judge" appear in both the Old and New Testament: "Do not show partiality in judging; hear both small and great alike. Do not be afraid of any man, for judgment belongs to God. [Deuteronomy]," "A man who lacks judgment derides his neighbor, but a man of understanding holds his tongue. [Proverbs]," "Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother's way. [Romans]"
And on compassion, Chupperson was completely correct: "Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as in Christ God forgave you." [Ephesians 4:31-32] In context, however, this comes immediately after saying "don't be like the Gentiles."
What does this indicate for abusers of drugs? People who appreciate Christian ethics should neither scold nor imitate them, but help those willing to quit.
-
...And then those "Bong Hits 4 Jesus" kids show up and bring the whole arguement full circle.
-
I'm not sure what you're talking about, but it sounds stupidly amusing.
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bong_Hits_4_Jesus
-
All drugs should not be legal because if they were, everybody would be smoking something, car crash deaths would rise, things just wouldn't be done properly and our world would soon become the sun's wife (a mini sun) if that happened. But seriously, drugs should not be legalize if they can't help our society in a positive manner.
-
I really think they should legalize marijuana because it's not a drug, it's an herb. Not that I use it or plan to use it, just that it's dumb to outlaw a plant. I also think it's dumb to outlaw mushrooms.
-
Then they should make cocain legal because it's a stimulant, not a drug.
And they should make PCP legal because it's a narcotic, not a drug.
And they should make killing someone legal because it's killing someone, not murder.
-
While I hardly agree with either of the above posts, Glorb's comparisons are sadly lacking in logic.
-
I think your sarcasm detector needs new batteries.
-
I think it's amazing that people give a crap about what someone does in their own basement or in fact, anywhere on their own property without harming anyone but themselves.
-
Marijuana should be legal. It can't kill you and it isn't addictive. Tobacco should be illegal. Tobacco can kill anyone. And Alcohol should remain legal. Alcohol doesn't kill anyone as long as you don't drink too much.
-
I agree with the tobacco part of the above statement. Tobacco is addictive, and secondhand smoke will kill other people. Plus, it'll kill yourself. Maijuana, however, should stay illegal. I've seen a kid gotten high on it, and from the secondhand smoke, became partially high on it myself. The next morning, he smoked the ENTIRE load he had, and we were suprised he didn't fall down the stairs on our bus.
-
Then they should make cocain legal because it's a stimulant, not a drug.
And they should make PCP legal because it's a narcotic, not a drug.
And they should make killing someone legal because it's killing someone, not murder.
...I'm guessing that Globe is being sarcastic. Any type of drug that can kill you, or slowly rot your brain to death
should be illegal because, uh, it can kill you.
-
I said comparisons right? That means comparing the pot argument to the "ideas" presented in Glorb's post. I never said I thought he meant them. I just said the comparison was illogical.
-
I think it's amazing that people give a crap about what someone does in their own basement or in fact, anywhere on their own property without harming anyone but themselves.
Whether drugs are illegal or not, I just can't think of any reason why you'd want to do them in the first place.
-
First off:
Marijuana should be legal. It can't kill you and it isn't addictive.
lololololol. Show me people shelling out absurd sums of money daily for pot and shirking all their other needs, and I'll show you an addict.
And the point of my post was that dc804 said pot was a plant, not a drug. Well, you can call pot a plant, and you can also call it a rubber duck or a smeerp. It doesn't mater what it's called when its effects are still harmful.
Just like cocaine is scientifically classified as a stimulant; that's right, it doesn't get you high, it just shoots a dangerous amount of stimulants into your bloodstream immediately. So it must be safe, right?
-
I'm with ShadowBrain.
-
I agree with Chupperson.
-
I agree with Rao, who agrees with Chupperson, who also agrees with ShadowBrain.
-
I agree with Chup and FBM, but not with Rao.
-
I agree with the following statement: I disagree with the previous statement.
-
Show me people shelling out absurd sums of money daily for pot and shirking all their other needs, and I'll show you an addict.
Show me "people" that surround themselves with a particular video game character, shelling out absurd amounts of money on games, stuffed dolls, T-shirts and other merchandise and I'll show you "an addict".
-
Then again, videogames don't cause hallucinations and cancer.
-
Neither does weed.
-
Smoke some and see what happens.
-
Not that good of a suggestion, Glorb. But thats probably the only way he'd learn.
-
Do your "research". Cannabis isn't a hallucinogen.
Furthermore, the smoke probably gives you cancer, but smoking it isn't the only way to consume it.
-
Buying things that don't artificially alter your brain chemistry is better than buying things that do. Therefore, buying toys and posters of things you like is better, because all it does is stimulate endorphins naturally. Your brain is making you happy, not some external stimulus.
-
Whether drugs are illegal or not, I just can't think of any reason why you'd want to do them in the first place.
I agree with you but you should still have the right.
-
Buying things that don't artificially alter your brain chemistry is better than buying things that do. Therefore, buying toys and posters of things you like is better, because all it does is stimulate endorphins naturally. Your brain is making you happy, not some external stimulus.
You're right, and my post was kind of stupid in a few ways, but the point I was trying to make was that for some people, drugs can do just as much damage to their life as other things (ie. videogames)
-
Drugs can do as much damage as video games? You have that backwards at the very least.
-
(https://themushroomkingdom.net/board/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi97.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fl230%2Fzac38606%2Ftokemon_-_weed.jpg&hash=ff5e3933d43437fb3a0e913824db458f)
-
Drugs can do as much damage as video games? You have that backwards at the very least.
lol yes that was obviously a mistake.
Anyway I'm dropping out of this argument. I've said enough.
-
I want to do something rather bad to that pokem... videogames can make you fat like pot.
-
What? How is that possible? You just turn on the game and BOOM! You're fat? I don't think so. If you're constantly eating while you're playing video games then yes, you will become overweight. Which is a reason why I'm not allowed to eat in my room...
-
I want to do something rather bad to that pokem... videogames can make you fat like pot.
You're sick.
-
Oh nenson. You silly goose. Inactivity and eating fatty crap make you fat, not videogames. It's true that the average gamer is a big greasy fatman because they like to feast on Cheetos and energy drinks while they sit in a puddle of stagnant buttsweat for hours on end, but videogames themselves don't make you fat.
That makes me think: Why don't they make a real game that incorporates exercise? As in, not some lame Wii Sports deal, but a legitimate, Halo-scale game-game that happens to have you working out?
But I digress.
-
They have games like that, but only servicemen are allowed to play them. They're called VR training devices.
-
This is an interesting topic. Drugs should be legalized because they are similar in smoking and alcohol, that is they are harmful, but some of them do serve medicinal properties. For example, the painkillers I take are also a common street drug. Legalization would be excellent for money, although it would be hard to get people to go along with it, but seeing smoking and drinking can encourage it I guess. A majority of people do them anyway, so why not. Having the same laws like drinking would be good too.
Now if you'll excuse me, I need a cigarette.
-
Majority?
-
I hate alcohol. It turns people into drooling, vomiting morons. If there's anything a year of living in a dorm with a bunch of 18 year old guys has taught me, it's that nearly no one (at least in my age group anyway) drinks in moderation.
That being said, passing laws on both alcohol and drugs seems to really **** certain people off. Once they lose their crutch, anything is game; furthermore, they find ways to get them illegally.
So I really don't know what to do about the problem. Should we legalize drugs to lessen violence? All I can say is that we haven't tried it yet.
EDIT: The "drooling, vomiting morons" comment was way out of line on my part and I apologize. Also, I was more or less referring to my age group.
-
If there's anything a year of living in a dorm with a bunch of 18 year old guys has taught me, it's that nearly no one drinks in moderation anymore.
*facepalm*
-
I love you too!
But seriously. You try living with a roommate who comes home at three every night and vomits all over the floor while you're asleep.
-
Nice comeback.
But seriously, who drinks more than 18 years olds?
-
You are correct to say my environment has influenced my opinion on alcohol. I live with a bunch of other 18 year olds who don't know how to handle what they drink, and who use it as a crutch to deal with the stressful college lifestyle. That doesn't really change my opinion on it though. There are plenty of other things to drink that, under the right conditions, don't have adverse side effects. Like...I dunno, water.
I was called "drunk kid" in middle school because I had really dark circles under my eyes, and I was picked on in high school simply because I didn't drink at parties. So...yeah, my environment has played a part in my opinion on alcohol. I still don't like it, sorry if I offended you, I have nothing more to say, etc.
Also, my "drooling vomiting morons" comment was rude and out of line. Sorry for that.
-
I consider myself a moderate drinker, but I'm nearly twice your age so your previous statement probably isn't meant to apply to me. I don't drink to get drunk. Some might ask, what's the point? To that I'd say, health. That may seem counter intuitive, but I'm talking about 4 to 6 oz. or red wine (cabernet sauvignon, shiraz, or pinot noir) with an evening meal. It's been shown that the three wines I mentioned are high in antioxidants and pinot noir from cool wet climates is high in reserveratrol, an anti-aging chemical. This may help explain the French paradox. The French eat a lot of fatty foods which are often high in calories, but most people in France don't have the weight and health problem associated with such diets in the United States. If you watch French films or visit a French family you may notice that the children appear to be drinking pink cool-aid, but it is more likely to be watered down red wine.
I'm not saying that children should drink alcohol, but noting a difference in culture. In the US, alcohol is associated with binge drinking, but in many European countries it is merely a beverage to be consumed with dinner. Also, alcohol consumption (read binge drinking) by teens in the US has recently been shown to have very adverse effects on the developing brain.
-
I drink almost exclusively at parties, and then, only with company (I'll admit, drinking alone makes me feel like a loser, for reasons I don't quite get). If I can't get someone to drink with me, then I just plain won't drink. I like to think I drink in moderation, though I'll admit I've gotten straight-up drunk twice (that I can remember off the bat). And I've never drank to get drunk on purpose.
-
I should've verified that I was referring to my age group when I said "No one drinks in moderation anymore." My rant was more or less how I hate alcohol as it pertains to high school and college life.
I undoubtably misled a few people with my statement and I apologize.
EDIT: You know...it's funny. My CT says "Probably Drunk" and...well, you know the rest.
-
The problem with alcoholic drinks is that people view them as a way to become "cool," and not an enjoyable beverage.
In every society except America, drunkeness is viewed as disgraceful, not "rugged" or "cool."
-
Exactly. That's why 98% of people who have fond memories of getting drunk are lying. It's like having fond memories of a car crash or volcanic diarrhea.
-
I'm so making that my sig.
-
In every society except America, drunkeness is viewed as disgraceful, not "rugged" or "cool."
Probably because most other countries don't have industries built around comestibles that induce illness. Oh, wait...
-
In every society except America, drunkeness is viewed as disgraceful, not "rugged" or "cool."
I call bull[dukar] on this
-
Man, are you gonna get the living daylights SAPPHIRA'D outta you...
-
I hope not. He has the right to say "bull[dukar]" here. It's the political board.
-
Plus, according to the rules thread swearing is not actually against the rules on this entire message board (only evading the censors is).
-
Oh, goodness, not another swearing debate.
-
Recently, Rao made me realize that all this time I had the censor thing off. We'll end the discussion at that.
(However, being that this is the political board, he should have all the less right to say it. Keep the tension to the topic and reasoning.)
-
So, when discussing our rights, we should have less rights. Alright, then.
-
No, we should exercise more restraint to avoid looking like ********s.
-
That was a more self-defeating statement than "I experimented, but did not inhale". :)
-
"Of course I inhaled. That's the point."
-
(Allegedly) Obama, right?
-
Found the video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpBzQI_7ez8).
-
"and from the secondhand smoke, became partially high on it myself."
Sorry, a little late here. Figured I'd stop on by to TMK and see what the deal was.
As for that quote: "Contact highs" are usually placebo effects. Yeah, it's smoky, it can smell like crap, and you know the effects of it, so you might be tricking yourself into thinking you're high when you're placed in that type of situation. I could say, however, that the potency of weed has just been going up and up, so depending on the 'grade' of weed, then I'm sure you could get just a tiny, tiny bit of it in your system depending on how much the person inhaled, but not enough to warrant a full-blown OMG I'M HIGH THIS IS CRAZY response.
Trust me, there have been more than a few times where my old buddy (who has fallen into the hole of smoking constantly) has lit a blunt up in his car and kept the windows up with no A/C on (read: I've been perfectly fine). I haven't smoked in ages and I vowed to myself I never would again (and haven't), but even then, whether he's just smoking some schwag, or dro, or kush, etc. etc. etc. I've never, myself, gotten high from the second-hand smoke, ever.
-
Another thing to point out would be like...the drugs I take (prescriptionly) are considered narcotics and commonly sold on the streets. So they're legal...yet illegal at the same time.
-
If you don't mind me asking, what are you taking that *is* considered a narcotic?
-
Sleeping pills.
-
Ah. I see.
-
We actually had a fairly lengthy discussion about this issue in US History today. It pretty much went the same way it's gone down here.
-
If you don't mind me asking, what are you taking that *is* considered a narcotic?
Opiates (Codeine) drugs like perks and T3s and straight up codeine
-
Oh yeah, codeine.
-
I think it's funny how California is in a tremendous defecit, and even after a study showed legalization of marijuana would raise over $1 billion for the state, they still flat out refuse it. Woo, go Governator Arnold.
-
Legalization of child porn would probably raise a lot of cashola too. Your point?
-
Yes, because exploiting children is exactly the same as adults purchasing marijuana.
-
Legalizing drugs would be exploiting adults with poor judgement, not to mention kids who would then have considerably easier access to the stuff.
-
In all fairness, the people with poor judgment are already finding ways to get it.
-
Poor judgement is better than not having a say period.
-
Incorrect! That's why children need parenting and America needs police and US Customs.
-
Besides, druggies already have their "say" at courthouse protest rallies and Grateful Dead concerts.
-
So you're really going to compare adults who want to have fun at the expense of their own health, to children unknowingly being raped by adults?
-
I believe that was sarcasm. However, that's rather a rather harsh word for "guidance." If you think education is brainwashing, you've got to be pretty gullible.
-
adults who want to have fun at the expense of the safety of others
Fixed.
-
What expense at safety of others are you talking about. Do you actually know anyone who smokes pot? First of all, people typically don't smoke weed then get up and go out into public. They do it at home with their friends so they can all play the Laughing Game or just generally enhance life to make it more fun. Sound familiar? It's called getting a buzz. You do the same exact thing when you have a beer or two. And if you think potheads are violent or hallucinate and try to stab you because you're invading their castle (true story), try again. Marijuana doesn't cause hallucinations to that extent. If you want awesome stuff like that, you gotta go do acid.
Second of all, alcohol is far more impairing when you drive under the influence. Should we make drinking illegal again? No. That's why driving while drunk is illegal.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Z5jkYvKscw&feature=player_embedded (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Z5jkYvKscw&feature=player_embedded)
Your entire argument of bawwing about people who smoke weed being dangerous doesn't hold water.
-
Maybe everyone thinks it'll be some type of zombie horror scenario where people who are smokin' their green are suddenly going to be lining the streets with blunts hanging out their mouths furiously chasing people who are against legalization.
People smoking marijuana isn't gonna go away anytime soon, nor is the sneaky, never-ending supply... so, might as well just legalize it and tax the hell out of it.
-
It's true, it isn't really going to affect other people and apparently alcohol has worse side effects, but I've always been against alcohol too so I don't support any of it.
-
People smoking marijuana isn't gonna go away anytime soon, nor is the sneaky, never-ending supply... so, might as well just legalize it and tax the hell out of it.
That's not really a good argument, in and of itself. Burglary isn't going away anytime soon either, but we still have laws against it.
As a libertarian-esque, I should probably be all for legalization of all drugs and have faith in personal responsibility, but I know from experience that people aren't always responsible enough and that even the best of us can be trapped by addiction.
I believe that the rights of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness are in a hierarchy -- in a bind, liberty is more important than property and life is more important than liberty. I have the liberty to raise my hand up and pull my index finger back, but not if I'm holding a gun and you're in front of me. Liberty can be restricted in order to protect the life of others (that's why I'm against public smoking, though I'd rather it didn't have to be a law). The question then is whether it should also be restricted to protect your own life. I'm not sure.
From my limited research, it does seem that marijuana is less dangerous than alcohol, but I have to wonder whether it would open up legalizing everything. Once we've legalized one drug to meet a budget shortfall, the government might get addicted to legalization. If it is legalized, it shouldn't be for money; the government's spending too much already.
-
Well yeah, if you're against alcohol as well, I can understand that viewpoint. That's fine. But I just can't understand the mentality that people think if marijuana is legalized then suddenly everyone and their mom is gonna get high and run out to White Castle six days a week.
I also realized that the original post I wrote advocated the legalization of all drugs. I can't help but think I was being a little facetious... but I think it's possible to have a double standard with something like this, since it's hard to compare a guy who's high on weed and a guy who's straight up jacked on PCP.
-
Cross-Eyed, I worded it wrong. I was meaning for it to be along the lines of drugs, not everything that is bad.
-
No matter how many posts pop up in here, the pro-weed argument is always going to remain "Let's tax it because that makes it okay."
Weed doesn't make you dangerous, or violent, or psychotic. But it does make you into a listless, ******baggy waste of space for the duration of your "buzz", if you aren't already. If you feel that killing six hours on your couch breathing in plant fumes "enhances life", you must live a pretty sad existance.
-
^
Agreed.
-
^
^
Agreed.
Legalizing weed would also inevitably beckon the gradual acceptance of increasingly more-dangerous drugs. Sure, perhaps an unprecedented increase in America's pot-addicted population mighten't spell disaster, but could the same be said for legions more cocaine/heroin/meth-loaded individuals roaming the streets?
-
Legalizing weed can't be applied to legalizing things like cocaine. The two aren't even remotely comparable. A drug that is already used widespread by mainstream society that poses longterm health risks to you but has presents no real danger to anyone around you... versus... a drug that is only abused by hardcore drug addicts that can severely harm you in just a matter of months that can literally turn you into a menace of society... It's like trying to look at a house cat and a tiger in the same line. Yeah they're both felines, but we never made it legal to have tigers as pets.
I just don't see why everyone has such a hard time grasping this concept though. If weed is legalized, it will still harbor a taboo. People who never wanted to aren't going to rush out to become potheads.
You do realize I don't smoke weed, right? I'm stating that people smoke weed for the purpose of feeling good and having extra fun in the same way that people drink alcohol. I'm not defending them or saying that they're right in smoking weed. I just believe that if they want to live their lives like that, they should have the right to do so. Do you also think the government should impose regulations on your dress code and personal hygiene as well? (Fun fact, they already are, in some places.) It's not simply "Taxes = good." It's a matter of you having the freedom to be a listless ******bag.
-
Personal hygiene? Definitely.
-
Okay, but then when the government decides long hair is bad personal grooming and violates their conduct of personal hygiene, thus forcing you to get a buzzcut, you'll be in an uproar.
-
...Or at least his avatar will be.
Likening drugs to hairstyles isn't an optimal comparison. One has been justified as harmless by society's standards, while the other must be banned for some reason or other.
-
Weed doesn't make you dangerous, or violent, or psychotic. But it does make you into a listless, ******baggy waste of space for the duration of your "buzz", if you aren't already. If you feel that killing six hours on your couch breathing in plant fumes "enhances life", you must live a pretty sad existance.
True, but it's not the government's job to force us to live fulfilling lives.
-
Ah, but it is the government's job to exploit people who happen to be stupid enough to live unfulfilling lives?
-
(yes)
Meowrik, grooming styles are not included under the heading of whether you're washed or not.
-
That's not my point Chupperson. What if some government official states that males shouldn't have hair longer than four inches or else it be considered unkempt looking? That doesn't make sense obviously, but what right does the government have telling you that? Being a dirty slob may be gross, but it's a lifestyle choice. Gay marriage is offensive to some people. Should we therefore make it 100% illegal nationwide then?
-
Granted that the government is apt to throw logic out the window, I am still not buying your argument, since I don't associate hygiene with "unkempt looking".
I'm not convinced that the dirty slobs just actually don't notice.
-
You're exactly right, the government frequently throws logic out the window. That's what I'm arguing. The government doesn't know what is best for you and me, thus they shouldn't make decisions on such personal details.
-
Well I sure as heck know it's better for me not to encounter horrible smelly people with disease on their hands who sell me stuff daily.
-
Just because someone doesn't like to wear deodorant doesn't make them disease-ridden. A lot of people don't wear it because they think it can cause health complications.
-
Dude you seriously have no idea of the magnitude of terribleness I am talking about. I don't mind someone not wearing deodorant... mostly.
-
A lot of people don't wear it because they think it can cause health complications.
Man that's retarded.
-
We should cook and eat anyone who doesn't wear deodorant.
Back me up here, sadib.
-
Man that's retarded.
Well, sort of. Deodorant, that's nothing. However, I've read some studies which suggest that antipersperants are kind of bad for you since they contain aluminum and stuff, which is lodged into your skin and locks toxins and stuff into your skin.
But of course, that's just antipersperant. Deodorant is cool.
-
... Yes. Antiperspirants don't let you sweat out the stuff your body is trying to get rid of through sweat. I'm pretty sure deodorant can't cause health problems and I doubt the people you mentioned think it does either.
-
Whoa easy there Captain Literal. When I said some people don't wear deodorant because they think it can cause health problems, I meant antipersperant, so calm down. Even so, deodorant doesn't always work on incredibly sweaty people.
-
You can't deny that deodorant and antiperspirant have distinctly different functions. Forgive me for thinking you said what you meant.
And once more, you brought up sweat out of nowhere when that is only one of many disgusting contributors to the problem I'm describing, which you have also made clear by this point that you have never witnessed.
-
Chupperson's extreme repulsion to these people leads me to believe that the Zombie apocalypse has already reached his town.
-
!!! you may be right
-
Zombie Apocalypse: Half-dead drones with virtually no remaining awareness of their existance roaming throughout devastated cities worldwide.
Long-term effects of Drug Legalization: Half-dead drones with virtually no remaining awareness of their existance roaming throughout devastated cities worldwide.
-
[citation needed]
-
Correction: Half-dead drones with virtually no remaining awareness of their existance sitting at their couch watching Boomerang reruns worldwide.
-
I just read that as "church" instead of "couch" and thought of this comic (http://russellsteapot.com/images/comics/2007/Image069.jpg). It's not really related unless you consider "opiate of the masses" and all.
-
That comic is frustrating on numerous levels.
-
Two angels taking human form, one of which talked. Next.
-
Thank you, Luigison. A debate on the veracity of the Bible is just what this thread needed.
-
I just read that as "church" instead of "couch" and thought of this comic (http://russellsteapot.com/images/comics/2007/Image069.jpg). It's not really related unless you consider "opiate of the masses" and all.
Posting comics like that will only serve to **** most Christians off. Is that what you were going for by any chance?
-
By the way, questions like that are the atheistic equivalent of "If we evolved from monkeys, how come monkeys still exist?" We've had answers for most of those questions for a long time. Also, that comic is at least as hamfisted, contrived, and obnoxiously preachy as any low-budget Christian movie I've ever seen. More than most, actually.
-
^
This.
And everybody knows there ain't no debate like a religious debate because a religious debate don't stop.
-
Sorry guys. I didn't intend to upset anyone or start a debate, but I should have known better. It was just a comic I'd seen earlier in the day that I'd thought of when misreading Glorb's post. I like CE7's first response though there will be no next. There should have even been the first. After viewing the comic now that I'm awake and clearheaded I realize it was in poor taste no matter which side one is on.
So, how about those opiates?
-
I'm not exactly an expert on prohibition, but who's to say use of the currently illegal drugs will spread much if they're legalized? When alcohol was illegal, it wasn't just shady gangsters who kept drinking. It was shady gangsters who made/imported/distributed it, yeah, but higher-class people drank if they got their hands on wine. I don't think I'd have to worry about, say, my dad or my friends becoming weed addicts; legal or not, it's just not the sort of thing they (or I) would do.
-
But who's to say it wouldn't eventually take on an alchohol-like status once legalized? I don't know about you, but legal or no, I'd be ****in' ****ed if I came home and found my dad or whatever stinking up the place with a joint.
-
Cigarettes smell worse than weed and couldn't he just go outside and smoke?
-
Congrats, nenson, you just won this year's Completely Missing the Point Award.
-
I will wholeheartedly agree to not wanting marijuana smoked anywhere around me, and the illegality of the drugs we're talking about keeps them underground. Maybe it should be legal to distribute them but not to use them, forcing users to do it in secret? It's still in a sort of zone of oppression I hinted at before, but it'd be easier to do that than to have every facility list the drugs they don't want used on or near their property, and would keep people concerned with the law away from them.
All I'm saying is, wine was fancy before, during, and after the prohibition of it, so it was fancy to drink. It's not fancy to use meth (no hard feelings to anyone reading this who uses or wants to use meth). How much are you wagering that will change? If you think it will, then that's fine and you can disagree, so long as we're on the same page.
-
Well, it's true, various drugs have various images associated with them; even if meth were to be legalized, no one would go out and brag about it since everyone else would visualize them as horrible-toothed twitchy kleptomaniacs. However, pot has this cool, laid-back image, and it's that part that grates on my nerves. It's the same [dukar] as cigarettes but with hallucinagenic properties, but you're seen as subtly edgy when you bring up smoking pot in front of your peers (assuming your peers are between the ages of ten and thirty). Refuse to smoke pot with someone on any grounds other than that you're busy? Suddenly you're a prudish moralizing nerd. It's practically the same thing with shrooms, too, at least where I live.
Trust me, when you're the one sober person in a room full of stoned people, your respect for them will take a hell of a hit.
-
I made that same argument as Bird Person a few pages ago, but he's still right. Marijuana is decriminalized in most areas, and vastly available to the masses. More or less anyone who would ever want to try it can and already has done so. Using the argument that "it COULD become as popular as alcohol" is kind of arbitrary, since arguing a hypothetical outcome is hard to do without proof. Even so, alcohol impairs your judgement more than weed, so it'd actually be less dangerous to have someone smoking weed than drinking.
-
You seem to be around some of the types that are actually huuuuge potheads, Glorb.
Where I live, everyone tends to have respect for each other, no matter who you encounter or whatever personality type you encounter. I've never met one person in my life here that disrespects you for not smoking. Typically, the opposite is heard when I say I don't smoke: "[dukar], man, hell yeah, least you ain't drugged out like me." (I say "drugged out" because weed, bars, lots of Vicodin, and lots of alcohol are favorite picks down here, not just weed, and everyone usually combines any of those 4 nine times out of ten.)
If someone notices I'm not smoking or notices that I'm not asking someone to pass the blunt over to me (keep in mind I only run into these people with my friend Jon), they'll look at me slightly puzzled and ask, "Hey, man, do you smoke?" I say, "Nah," and then I hear plenty of apologies from people saying, "Ah, my bad, man, I didn't know... that's cool that you don't smoke, though. You don't care if we smoke, right? The smoke's not bothering you, is it?" I never mind it, and we just go about our lives. No zombie potheads, nothing like that.
I think the oldest argument with weed is that it's a "bad thing, but portrayed to be the cool thing to do." I've always had a hard time believing it because, again, I've never met a person that glorifies it.... you know, that walks down the street smoking or smokes with a group of people saying something like, "AHHHH YEEEHHH MAN LOL1 IF YOU DONT SMOEK W33D YOUR'E' 'TARDED"
I've personally never seen it idolized. I usually see everyone roll what they want up and smoke in private, or if they're outside with friends in a semi-public or public place they kinda just do their own thing before returning to the group and keep it to themselves. They don't mention it, they ask people around them if they're offended by them smoking and go away or put it out if so, or just wait to smoke another time, etc. People just go out of their way to not bother anyone with it, but they still can have their fix. You know, like, I dip tobacco every once in a while like I've said before, but I sure don't walk around nudging people with my elbow, leaning over, and saying in a low voice, "Hey man, I'm dippin' tobacco.... pretty cool, huh? Hey, you should try it :) :) :)"
I dunno, showing that type of respect (especially with more controversial and/or taboo things) where I'm from is just a given. It's just something you grow up with and utilize if you feel it needs to be.
Not to say Texans are always up your ass asking if anything offends you every 2 seconds and apologizing for everything, but if we sense something, or it's a touchier subject we're dealing with, we'll more than likely just be cautious, but go ahead and ask about it. You will never be called a nerd for not smoking, you will not be accused of being a raging pothead if you smoke weed, you won't be called a jock if you happen to play football, you won't be called an old man if you play golf, and you'll never be called a video game nerd if you play any type of video games whether it be the stereotypical "Kiddy Nintendo," "Shooter fanboy Microsoft," or "Jap Crap Sony."
Where you from, Glorb?
-
Refuse to smoke pot with someone on any grounds other than that you're busy? Suddenly you're a prudish moralizing nerd. It's practically the same thing with shrooms, too, at least where I live.
Yeah Glorb, I dunno who you're hanging out with but I've never had that problem. Anytime I've ever been asked if i wanna smoke it I usually just say "Nah I'm good." and that's the end of it. If you play it cool then there's no reason for these potheads to call you a 'prudish moralizing nerd.' If worse comes to worse, grab a beer and use that as your excuse.
-
Don't get me wrong, if everyone around me decides to break out a bong in my personal bubble at a party I won't start evangilizing, I'll just go to another room or outside or whatever (unless it's my house, in which case I'll kindly request that they put it away or git tha **** out).
But yeah, any time I mention that I don't smoke weed because of my own personal morals, people suddenly gets this big stick up their ass and act like I'm trying to convert everyone or whatever (excluding longtime friends of mine who know not to ask in the first place).
-
Well apparently you're just hanging out with the dumbest people on earth then.
-
Because all potheads except where I live are saints.
-
Well apparently you're just hanging out with the dumbest people on earth then.
Yes, every time I log in to the Fungi Forums
-
(https://themushroomkingdom.net/board/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.chupnet.com%2Fthumbs_up.png&hash=a221e13f040af154a8a89b48af8e72f9)
-
As sightly as those little red X's are, I feel obliged do something.
Picture (http://www.wpclipart.com/sign_language/thumbs_up.png)
-
Okay man, I don't know what you just did, but I'm willing to bet you didn't fix it for anyone but yourself. Since you looked at the image and now it's in your cache.
-
I was doing it more for those who aren't aware of the old "quote the post with the red X to find the image's URL which can then be pasted into your adress bar to view the actual picture" trick, but whatever.
-
Interestingly enough, Chupperson's picture loads and Weegee's link gives me a "Access not allowed."
-
That's to be expected, now.
-
In this topic: People pretend they're on 4chan by posting image responses.
On topic, I'm not saying potheads everywhere are saints, I'm just saying they're not all like the ones you seem to be around. I've hung out with many people who do pot regularly who don't impose it on you and then bite your face off if you don't want any. Not all are like that either. It's a mix.
-
Every other time I go to a party, I get a joint shoved up in my grill. Every other time I refuse, the response is either HAY WHY YOU GOTTA BE A NARC BRA or HAY ITS HEALTHIER THAN ALL THAT BOOZE YOU DRINK.
But either way, great, not all potheads are dicks. I'm just really tired of people hyping weed as some kind of incredible wonderplant when all it does is make you boring to everyone else who's not smoking.
-
(Off-topic. There's an advertisement above me that says "Super Mario Dating.")
Anyway, yeah man, I would suggest you not go to those parties again...? You know, if they're gonna pull that BS with you.
(Weed is not that great, by the way.)
If anyone does anything past giggle a little bit more, they're acting. It's not a mind-trip drug that you have no control over... it all depends on how YOU wanna act while on it... therefore, when you see a dude at a stupid party that's like... singing in front of everybody while he's high, but hides in a corner when sober, then you can point and laugh at him and call him your choice of derogatory terms.
-
Trainman is right. Weed is a lot like alcohol. Anytimes I've been drunk, I haven't made an ass of myself simply because I already possess a metric ton of self-control. So when I am drunk, yeah I might throw in a few more expletives and slightly cruder jokes, but it's not like I'm stumbling around half naked while trying to make out with the nearest piece of furniture. Weed and alcohol are actually incredibly similar if you think about it...
-
There should be no laws restricting the purchase of any drugs.
Emphasis on last two words. As mentioned before (but never properly countered), while marijuana mighten't necessarily have tremendously ill effects on the user, the same can't honestly be said about meth, PCP or that drug that makes you eat your own face.
-
Well, we already deviated from my original statement which I'll admit was a little stupidly hyperbolic, pages and pages ago so... No one is really arguing that anymore.
-
"All weed should be legal"
-
Around last winter, my friend told me he does "just weed". I wonder whether or not I should feel obligated to try to convince him to drop the stuff, seeing as he's never done it around me or offered it me at all.
-
Well, it wouldn't hurt to ask him about it.
-
Trainman is right. Weed is a lot like alcohol. Anytimes I've been drunk, I haven't made an ass of myself simply because I already possess a metric ton of self-control. So when I am drunk, yeah I might throw in a few more expletives and slightly cruder jokes, but it's not like I'm stumbling around half naked while trying to make out with the nearest piece of furniture. Weed and alcohol are actually incredibly similar if you think about it...
I disagree. Alcohol is much more dangerous than weed, considering all the deaths related to drunk driving accidents and alcohol poisoning. There is no recorded deaths related directly to overconsumption of weed; overdosing is impossible. Sure some poor sucker has probably had weed spiked with acid or crack and jumped off a building, but if we're talking straight marijuana, it's not a dangerous thing. Not to mention the vastly different effects. Alcohol is more of a social party drug that is more likely to lead to unwanted decisions (violent or sexual) and weed just makes you a little more giggly and lethargic, more appreciative of Little Debbie snack cakes.
-
Well, yes, drinking insane amounts is uber dangerous, but both alcohol and weed in small concentrations isn't going to hurt you at all. What I was getting at was that if you're already a responsible person, you're not going to have a problem in the first place.
-
Well, it wouldn't hurt to ask him about it.
It's just that the only way I think I could phrase it would be "hey, remember that time eight months ago that you casually mentioned you do weed? Well..."
And besides, like I said, I never had any indication up until that point--I mean, I had my suspicions, though. He's nice, and I've known him since second grade, but the guy's weird as hell.
-
Well, you could just ask him if he ever thought about quitting before if it seems it's really affecting his life. Past that, if he smokes and everything seems normal with him, then, eh, I'd just let him do his own thing.
-
Yeah, that's what I figured. I mean, the other thing I forgot to mention is that he goes to a different school than me now (has for last few years), so I only ever see him when I'm inviting him over for parties or something.
-
Invite him over for a party, but have it really be an intervention. That should get his attention.
-
When a problem is solved, a new one comes out! =D