Export thread

Seeing as how Conan won't stop mentioning pro-legalization movements in California, and all news sources are going crazy over Mexico's quasi-decriminalization and Argentina's recent following... the winds seems to be moving, finally, towards a more marijuana-friendly planet.

So I wondered... how many of my fellow forumites enjoy a joint or two?

I never felt the need for a joint, I never even smoked a cigarette.
Boooring me, I know.

Haven't tried it. Don't want to, but won't get in anyone's face if they do (unless they are operating heavy machinery or have access to military-grade weaponry).

Got enough vices as is.

Nope.

Lawful Good.

Damn, the thread posts before you're done with the poll, that kinda sucks.

Anyway, poll is up, please vote.

I've tried it, but it's too illegal for me. If it were legal I'd probably partake in it.

Don't smoke period. I've seen what smoking did to my Father's health and I do not wish to go through the same thing when I get to be his age.

As shocking as this may come to a few, I've never had an illegal substance in my life.
Cigarettes when I was a teen, and wine with some dinners. Otherwise, nada.

As for legalization? I'm completely for it.

Hmmmm no poll choice is applicable for me. I used to be a very regular user. However, I gave it up over 15 years ago out of choice, and now I have a job that is very persnickity about that sort of thing. What I miss? Mmmmmmm shotgunssssss. Yeeeaaaah.

Shegokigo said:

As shocking as this may come to a few, I've never had an illegal substance in my life.
Cigarettes when I was a teen, and wine with some dinners. Otherwise, nada.

As for legalization? I'm completely for it.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I used to smoke weed when I was in high school and shit, but since choosing my current vocation I live a cleaner lifestyle.

Why I quoted you? I am also completely for legalization. It would make my job much easier.

I'm not against it, and I do support legalization, but I don't want to mess up my health.

Absolutely legalize it. I run on drunks and crack heads all the time. I hardly ever see a pot head call 9-1-1.

It's healthier than alcohol... do you drink?

Eh, it causes cancer just as much as any other smoke into your lungs product, there's no need to get high (CHICA CHICAAAAH!) and mighty about how awesome pot is.

Nope. I do consume more caffeine than I should though.
I regularly exercise,so I guess it evens out.

Tried it a couple times, at no effect besides getting terrible-smelling breath.

I've since stopped.

Not if you vaporize or eat it!! :smoke:

Calleja said:

It's healthier than alcohol... do you drink?

Click to expand...

That's subjective at best. Both impair your judgment, both have negative effects on your health, some of which can be long lasting. I'd say both are about even... it's just much easier to kill yourself with booze than with your old friend Mary Jane because one it socially acceptable and cheap, while the other is illegal and expensive.

That being said, I have no problem with others smoking it or even having it be legalized. I just don't want to partake myself.

I tried it once or twice in college. Found I didn't like the effects at all. Made me feel... well, you know that feeling your brain gets when you've dove too deep into the pool and stayed down on the bottom too long, and now you're clawing for the surface because your brain is screaming for oxygen? That's how pot made me feel. It wasn't the fun, sloshy, discoordinated confidence of alcohol, or even anything similar. It just felt like stinky brain death.

I'm also in favor of legalization of marijuana. Not just for medical purposes, but the growing and selling for recreational purposes as well. There are few bigger, more expensive boondoggle fiascos than the United States' "War on Drugs."

Done it a few times, wasn't for me. I'll stick to alcohol. No issues with folks who do enjoy it or need it medical-wise, of course, as it's their choice/need. I also don't see any reason not to legalize it.

This party SUCKS!

Calleja it seems like your trying to convince people to get back on the weedz.

Shegokigo said:

As shocking as this may come to a few, I've never had an illegal substance in my life.
Cigarettes when I was a teen, and wine with some dinners. Otherwise, nada.

As for legalization? I'm completely for it.

Click to expand...

Exactly this.

Gusto said:

Calleja it seems like your trying to convince people to get back on the weedz.

Click to expand...

No, no, I'm just stating some facts, the effects of MJ is something I've done quite some research on.

It *is* healthier than alcohol, as in, literally.. the short and long term PHYSICAL effects of marijuana are nothing compared to those of alcohol. No one has EVER died of marijuana use alone, EVER. The same can not be said of alcohol, tobacco or even caffeine for that matter.

The easiest way to personally notice this is comparing your worst alcohol hangover, which is a side effect of alcohol imbibing, to your worst marijuana next day-blues. Which is a slight lazyness you sometimes get when you really blow your head off with bong hits the previous night.

Calleja said:

No, no, I'm just stating some facts, the effects of MJ is something I've done quite some research on.

It *is* healthier than alcohol, as in, literally.. the short and long term PHYSICAL effects of marijuana are nothing compared to those of alcohol. No one has EVER died of marijuana use alone, EVER. The same can not be said of alcohol, tobacco or even caffeine for that matter.

The easiest way to personally notice this is comparing your worst alcohol hangover, which is a side effect of alcohol imbibing, to your worst marijuana next day-blues. Which is a slight lazyness you sometimes get when you really blow your head off with bong hits the previous night.

Click to expand...

My first time, the Pot literally DID turn me blue. As in, the color. My lips and fingers all went purple.

Laurelai said:

Absolutely legalize it. I run on drunks and crack heads all the time. I hardly ever see a pot head call 9-1-1.

Click to expand...

Funny most people run on coffee and doughnuts, or similar product. How do you grind them up fine enough to dissolve in water?

Eh, used to smoke quite often, socially, in college/uni. Haven't really smoked since I work inmy current job, though. Don't really miss it. All in favour of legalisation, though.

Calleja said:

Not if you vaporize

Click to expand...

Yes on that. It's really much more enjoyable that way.

I'm too cheap to get a vaporizer though, plus I've almost perfected the art of rolling one up.

I tried it once, the same night I tried a regular cigarette. Didn't care for either, so never did it again.

Edit: And yes, I am aware of the irony of this sentence coupled with a Spider Jerusalem avatar.

I'm all for legalizing it. How much more money could the US garner by legalizing and taxing marijuana, versus how much money we spend every year trying to control it as an illegal substance?

Personally, however, I had the opposite reaction from what everyone always told me was the norm. Gave me crushing headaches and made me vomit, so not for me. Though, it was extremely useful when I was incredibly ill one time and had lungs so full of phlegm I could barely breathe. Getting the phlegm out of my lungs and instantly vomiting so it was completely out of my body was great. Sadly, the vomiting and headaches happened every time I tried it (ex-wife was a medical marijuana abuser and ex-mother-in-law was a grower, so I had plenty of chances to try it), not just when I was horribly ill.

Haven't tried because of the following: I don't smoke anything, it's too expensive (in the sense that it's something else to spend money on), and it's illegal.

In that order.

So if I gave you a pot brownie for free, you'd take it?

rac3r_x said:

Funny most people run on coffee and doughnuts, or similar product. How do you grind them up fine enough to dissolve in water?

Click to expand...

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8687968&type=product&id=1198286228595

There's very little a good burr style coffee grinder can't handle!

I went ahead and answered the poll as if it said "used" marijuana and not specifically "smoked".

Charlie Dont Surf said:

I went ahead and answered the poll as if it said "used" marijuana and not specifically "smoked".

Click to expand...

Well said. I haven't smoked in...wow, this month is one year since I got my Volcano. Awesome. I only vaporize or ingest (mostly very potent capsules, not so much with the baked goods) anymore.

I'm abstaining from voting since I don't think medical and recreational frequency of use are that comparable.

Eh, I only smoke it when I'm in Spain, off other people (leeching off the local Callejas is fun).

Fairly regularly in grad school, but not at all since my kids were born. One of those things that just fell off the priority list.

1. Makes me feel more sick and lazy than anything.

2. I'm paranoid about getting caught once I'm a teacher.

3. It's kinda expensive ...Well, I don't know what's typical at all.

change one or two times to a couple dozen.

Just don't do it anymore. Nothin' against it. I'm pro legalization, got lots of friends that smoke up. Just not for me.

I used to smoke weed pretty regularly about 10 - 15 years ago. I loved smoking hash. I quit when I realized how often I was losing my train of thought mid-sentence when I wasn't high. :bush:

I never ingested and only heard people talking about vaporizing since I started hanging out on this forum (in one incarnation or another).

Never have, never will. Don't see what the appeal for it is and I'm honestly convinced I'm allergic to it. Any time I even get a whiff of it, I cough near to the point of choking.

Because of said possibly allergy, I'm not for legalization, as that would just make it more common in public. And I hate cigarette smoke as it is.

never have. not against it, just never been in a situation where I felt like I wanted to try.

Legalize and tax the shit outta it though.

ThatNickGuy said:

Because of said possibly allergy, I'm not for legalization, as that would just make it more common in public.

Click to expand...

Nice worldview you have there.

It's very simple: I wholeheartedly supported the by-law passed here in Canada to ban smoking indoors. I hated going to restaurants, bars, etc, and inhaling all that secondhand smoke. HATED it.

So, it pot was legalized, people would be doing it more openly and freely in public, just like cigarettes. To that, I say, no thanks.

ThatNickGuy said:

It's very simple: I wholeheartedly supported the by-law passed here in Canada to ban smoking indoors. I hated going to restaurants, bars, etc, and inhaling all that secondhand smoke. HATED it.

So, it pot was legalized, people would be doing it more openly and freely in public, just like cigarettes. To that, I say, no thanks.

Click to expand...

...So you are in favor of restrictive laws with negative impacts just as long as you are not inconvenienced?

It's not just inconvienence, it's health, too. I don't like being upwind of people smoking and I sure as hell don't want to be near someone who even SMELLS of pot (because cripes, that shit reeks). As I said in my first reply, just getting a whiff of it sends me gagging.

I have nothing against people that smoke or smoke pot, as long as I'm not around it. If legalized, it'd be around more.

TNG, just wear a rebreather and a shredder mask. You'd avoid the smoke *and* look awesome.

Plus you get a +5 to damning ninja turtles.

Silvanesti said:

...So you are in favor of restrictive laws with negative impacts just as long as you are not inconvenienced?

Click to expand...

That was my impression.

Among my issues is that eye disease that is the same one that makes Barbara Bush look like this:

Luckily my eyes only swell up inside my head so I don't look like that, but I get grand headaches, blurred vision, and other fun when the disease acts up. Know what does it? Cigarette smoke. Do I avoid it? Whenever possible. Would I support making it illegal for this reason? Fuck no.

ThatNickGuy said:

It's not just inconvienence, it's health, too. I don't like being upwind of people smoking and I sure as hell don't want to be near someone who even SMELLS of pot (because cripes, that shit reeks). As I said in my first reply, just getting a whiff of it sends me gagging.

Click to expand...

No, that doesn't sound like health, it sounds like an inconvenience. I don't like being upwind of smoking and don't like the smell either, but cigarettes are not going away any time soon.

seems like your main complaint is that it smells and you don't like it so it should be illegal (in fact all smoking should be). But lets weight the advantages of you not having to smell pot every once in a while to legalizing pot.

cons:
You might have to smell pot smoke occasionally
cheetos and funions might be harder to find (har har cus of da muchies)

Pros:
Increased tax income
end prison overpopulation
stop the unnecessary imprisonment of thousands of people
decrease the impact and expense of the 'war on drugs'
stop a source of funding for illegal activities
and probably more things then I am thinking of right now.

but yeah, that doesn't matter, as long as you don't have to smell some nasty pot smoke.

You forgot the con: A bunch of fucking stoned-ass dipshits everywhere.

Having been around friends that absolutely suck when they're high, no thanks.

Medicinal, whatever, fine.

aaaah Potland, i used to know Maastricht better than my own city.

yeah, well i've smoked ALOT and i agree completely with Ame.

Can't vote on the poll tho since i have smoked what, 1 joint, in the last 2 years.

Pot is bad. you may not feel it at first but it WILL screw your memory if you do it long term.

At least it won't give you hallucinations or cause dementia... alcohol is one hell of a drug. Also lowers your risk of heart failure if used moderately.

BTW, does it count if i had no idea how to inhale the only time i got the chance to try it?

alcool is far worse than pot tho. don't get me wrong

I never really thought of pot as "expensive". Sure, if you're a daily "wake and bake" user, but I've never been that. When I used to buy, an 1/8th would last me a month. I really didn't hit it that hard. Once I got more of a career job, and a house, I slowly stopped doing it at all. Now with a kid, it's not worth the risk. If it ever becomes legal, I'd probably smoke again, but probably not frequently.

As to the pot mentioned above mixed with tobacco, that sounds awful. I guess if I smoked normal cigarettes, that'd be a way to get both in one little package - however, I like the effects of pot, don't like the effects of nicotine.

Have you guys seen "Super high me?" What are your thoughts on that "documentary?"

ThatNickGuy said:

It's very simple: I wholeheartedly supported the by-law passed here in Canada to ban smoking indoors. I hated going to restaurants, bars, etc, and inhaling all that secondhand smoke. HATED it.

So, it pot was legalized, people would be doing it more openly and freely in public, just like cigarettes. To that, I say, no thanks.

Click to expand...

You could you know not be an asshole and fuck everyone else over and not be a patron of those establishments, go somewhere that doesn't allow smoking. They just banned smoking in all indoor places except Casinos(because they fucking bribe the shit out of the local gov) and it's bullshit, people bitch that they don't want to smell the smoke... then don't go to that bar or that restaurant. I kind of enjoyed going to IHOP or Village Inn with my friends and just smoking and shooting the shit till 5AM but now I can't do that.


As for your allergy and pot shouldn't be legal because of it? Should flowers that create pollen, peanut butter, latex, citrus, shellfish all be banned? Those are things that a lot of people are allergic to.

Smoking bans are usually more about protecting workers than patrons.

It's not just smell. It's the same thing with secondhand smoke in that it's bad for my health. I actually enjoy breathing fresh air, as opposite inhaling something bad for my lungs. When someone comes into the store that reeks of freshly smoked pot, I'm coughing enough to cough up a lung.

I notice in all the pros you mention, not a single HEALTH benefit, which is the same as smoking. You could say a stress reliever, but there are dozens of better, healthier ways to do that (exercise, yoga, meditation, etc). Medicinal purposes, maybe, but I question how many people REALLY need it for medicinal purposes as opposed to just having a legal source (like that episode of Scrubs with Turtle...or was it Johnny?)

And like I said, HoboNinja, it's not just the smell of the smoke. It's the health of it. Hey, is smoking good for your heath? No, of course not. Even people who smoke know that. So why can't someone go to a restaurant and enjoy their food, maybe even enjoy the smell of it without having to worry about secondhand lung cancer?

---------- Post added at 03:11 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:02 PM ----------

Frick, when I go to save my edit, it's taking forever and a half. Ignore the above post and refer to this, instead. If one of the mods wants to fix it, I'd be grateful.

It's not just smell. It's the same thing with secondhand smoke in that it's bad for my health. I actually enjoy breathing fresh air, as opposite inhaling something bad for my lungs. When someone comes into the store that reeks of freshly smoked pot, I'm coughing enough to cough up a lung.

I notice in all the pros you mention, not a single HEALTH benefit, which is the same as smoking. You could say a stress reliever, but there are dozens of better, healthier ways to do that (exercise, yoga, meditation, etc). Medicinal purposes, maybe, but I question how many people REALLY need it for medicinal purposes as opposed to just having a legal source (like that episode of Scrubs with Turtle...or was it Johnny?)

I'm all for a reduction in crime, but really, marijuana isn't the only drug out there. Do we legalize cocaine, next? Speed? Esctasy? Cocaine, if anything, is the most profitable drug from crime. Of course, I don't have any statistics to back that up, but that's just a guess.

And like I said, HoboNinja, it's not just the smell of the smoke. It's the health of it. Hey, is smoking good for your heath? No, of course not. Even people who smoke know that. So why can't someone go to a restaurant and enjoy their food, maybe even enjoy the smell of it without having to worry about secondhand lung cancer?

ThatNickGuy said:

It's not just smell. It's the same thing with secondhand smoke in that it's bad for my health. I actually enjoy breathing fresh air, as opposite inhaling something bad for my lungs. When someone comes into the store that reeks of freshly smoked pot, I'm coughing enough to cough up a lung.

I notice in all the pros you mention, not a single HEALTH benefit, which is the same as smoking. You could say a stress reliever, but there are dozens of better, healthier ways to do that (exercise, yoga, meditation, etc). Medicinal purposes, maybe, but I question how many people REALLY need it for medicinal purposes as opposed to just having a legal source (like that episode of Scrubs with Turtle...or was it Johnny?)

And like I said, HoboNinja, it's not just the smell of the smoke. It's the health of it. Hey, is smoking good for your heath? No, of course not. Even people who smoke know that. So why can't someone go to a restaurant and enjoy their food, maybe even enjoy the smell of it without having to worry about secondhand lung cancer?

---------- Post added at 03:11 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:02 PM ----------

Frick, when I go to save my edit, it's taking forever and a half. Ignore the above post and refer to this, instead. If one of the mods wants to fix it, I'd be grateful.

It's not just smell. It's the same thing with secondhand smoke in that it's bad for my health. I actually enjoy breathing fresh air, as opposite inhaling something bad for my lungs. When someone comes into the store that reeks of freshly smoked pot, I'm coughing enough to cough up a lung.

And like I said, HoboNinja, it's not just the smell of the smoke. It's the health of it. Hey, is smoking good for your heath? No, of course not. Even people who smoke know that. So why can't someone go to a restaurant and enjoy their food, maybe even enjoy the smell of it without having to worry about secondhand lung cancer?

Click to expand...

+1

I consider smoking in a restaurant as undesirable as your cook shitting on your plate next to your steak before the server brings it out to you. For all of the whining about "Business lost because of banning smoking in bars/restaurants", it completely misses the side of "Business gained because more people go out to bars/restaurant and enjoy it".

Sitting at a restaurant and smoking and shooting the shit doesn't exactly make that business money. And I won't go to a restaurant/bar that allows smoking in it - I'm fairly certain I'll spend more between my wife and I than some punk kid will sitting with 4 friends.

I live in BC, Canada. Believe me, if anyone knows pot, it's us. BC Bud is our #1 export around where I live.

ThatNickGuy said:

Do we legalize cocaine, next? Speed? Esctasy?

Click to expand...

Yes.



Don't know what to say now, do you? (insert appropriate snarky emoticon here, because I haven't figured out how to do so yet on this new board)


edit --

Adammon said:

For all of the whining about "Business lost because of banning smoking in bars/restaurants", it completely misses the side of "Business gained because more people go out to bars/restaurant and enjoy it".

Click to expand...

That's the thing, though. The restaurant owner should be able to decide whether or not to allow smoking in his or her establishment. And you, the patron, should also be able to decide whether or not you want to go to an establishment that you know allows smokers, or choose one that does not.

Across the board banning is heavy handed and all around stupid. And this coming from someone who fucking hates cigarette smoke.

libertarian?

Non-affiliated, though I lean just left of center.

Or maybe left of left-center.

In most things, anyway.

ThatNickGuy said:

I'm all for a reduction in crime, but really, marijuana isn't the only drug out there. Do we legalize cocaine, next? Speed? Esctasy? Cocaine, if anything, is the most profitable drug from crime. Of course, I don't have any statistics to back that up, but that's just a guess.

Click to expand...

Why not? Legalize them and tax them. Takes revenue from the drug cartels, takes heat off the police, the government gets money to fund rehab/social programs and (iirc, don't make me google for the links now) consumption of the hard drugs wouldn't go up.

For more reasons, http://www.leap.cc/

Ravenpoe said:

That's the thing, though. The restaurant owner should be able to decide whether or not to allow smoking in his or her establishment. And you, the patron, should also be able to decide whether or not you want to go to an establishment that you know allows smokers, or choose one that does not.

Across the board banning is heavy handed and all around stupid. And this coming from someone who fucking hates cigarette smoke.

Click to expand...

Except the issue around 'banning smoking in restaurants' isn't prevalent because of the economics of the patrons but the health and safety of the workers. As an employer, you don't get to choose which legislation you get to follow around health and safety. If your employees are exposed to environments which will significantly affect their health, you are required by law to ensure that those risks are mitigated and/or removed completely. As a patron of smoking establishments, I feel gross. As an employee of a smoking establishment, I can only imagine what spending 8 hours a day in that environment would do. It's no less damaging than slight exposure to asbestos, and we certainly wouldn't be arguing "It's up to the company whether or not to use Asbestos in their establishment."

All of this said, there are many, many ways around this legislation including having designated, well-ventilated smoking rooms, comfortable patios, etc.

I always found it curious that most serving staff at restaurants were smokers. Then I realized that at least when they're personally smoking, they are breathing in the smoke through a filter.

Let's add some stats here too:

Heavily exposed service industry employees, such as bartenders, inhale the equivalent of smoking 1.5 to 2 packages of cigarettes a day, according to a fact sheet prepared by British Columbia's Capital Region District.

Food service workers are 50 per cent more likely to develop lung cancer than the general population. Waitresses have the highest mortality of any occupational group, with four times the expected deaths from lung cancer and 2.5 times the expected mortality from heart disease.

Now there's evidence that smoking bans can improve the lung health of hospitality industry workers. When California passed a law prohibiting smoking in bars and taverns effective January 1 1998, University of California researchers launched a study. Examining 53 San Francisco bartenders, they found that 59 per cent of those reporting respiratory problems before the ban went into effect were symptom-free less than two months after the prohibition began.

Source: http://www.sk.lung.ca/ca/articles/smokingbans.html

A significant body of scientific research has been accumulated on the economic impact of smoking bans on hospitality business, particularly bars and restaurants. The only research that shows any long-term negative effect on bar or restaurant sales is unscientific research that has been sponsored by the tobacco companies.
All independent published studies conducted in the US and Canada that used tax data in the analysis concluded that "smoking restrictions do not impact negatively on hospitality sales, employment, or tourism activity in the long run."
* An analysis of restaurant sales in 235 Massachusetts communities before and after the implementation of a smoking ban found no difference in aggregate sales.
* A study of the impact of no-smoking ordinances on hotel revenues and international tourism in 3 states (California, Utah, and Vermont) and 6 cities (Boulder, Flagstaff, Los Angeles, Mesa, New York and San Francisco) found that tourism increased in four localities, and stayed the same in four others.
* A study on the impact of New York City's smoke-free ordinance on restaurants found that real taxable sales from eating and drinking increased over levels two years earlier. Restaurant sales increased 2.1% in NYC, while decreasing 3.8% in the same time period in the rest of the state.4 Another study of the NYC smoking ban found that although smokers were eating out less, non-smokers were eating out much more and restaurant revenues increased.
* A study of bar patronage conducted 2.5 years after smoking was banned in California bars found that 91% of bar customers were either going to bars more often or had not changed their behaviour as a result of the law. Furthermore, support for the ban among smokers increased dramatically from 24% to 44%.
* A study of the economic impact of the short-lived province-wide ban on smoking in bars and restaurants in BC found a short term decline in alcohol sales in hotels, pubs, and dining establishments. By the second month of the ban, however, the impact was no longer statistically significant.
* To assess the impact of the smoking ban on the Capital Region District in BC a study was conducted using liquor purchase data. A short-term statistically significant decline of 6.4% was found. The long-term impacts were not statistically significant. A separate analysis of establishments in the CRD but outside the City of Victoria was done to eliminate the impact of tourism. The results likewise showed that the long-term impacts were not significant.

Source: http://www.tobaccotoolkit.ca/Tobacco_toolkit/Economicimpact.html

Honestly, I'm just wondering why people hate being upwind of smoke (pot or cigarette) as smoke blows downwind, not up it.

Gared said:

Honestly, I'm just wondering why people hate being upwind of smoke (pot or cigarette) as smoke blows downwind, not up it.

Click to expand...

I guess we don't all have Karl Rove weather machines and so cannot control the direction of the wind. I suppose we could all move in circles as the wind changes direction but that would look awfully strange to an outsider.

Adammon said:

A significant body of scientific research has been accumulated on the economic impact of smoking bans on hospitality business, particularly bars and restaurants. The only research that shows any long-term negative effect on bar or restaurant sales is unscientific research that has been sponsored by the tobacco companies.
All independent published studies conducted in the US and Canada that used tax data in the analysis concluded that "smoking restrictions do not impact negatively on hospitality sales, employment, or tourism activity in the long run."

Click to expand...

MY mom does the books for a couple bar/restaurants, and when they put the ban into effect in Mn they saw an increase in food sales and the booze sales stayed about the same.

AmorousEyes said:

Smoking (or ingesting even if you will) that stuff can definitely damage your brain. I know you'll disagree with the following statement but smoking marijuana can most definitely hurt you on the long term.

Click to expand...

No, I'm sorry but your saying so isn't enough. I've researched this, there are NO conclusive studies that say Marijuana has damaging effects to the brain. None. Can you produce any that weren't sponsored during the Reefer Madness and killed monkeys by suffocating them with smoking machines? Can you link me to a pot-induced death? A study in the adverse reaction of neurons to THC?

Or is your first-hand experience all you have? Just because you see stoners acting like they have brain damage, it doesn't mean they have brain damage.

That being said, read what I said.. I never said pot was GOOD for you, I just said it's healthier than ALCOHOL. The long term effects of alcohol are NOTHING compared to those of pot, but booze is still legal.

Calleja said:

No, I'm sorry but your saying so isn't enough. I've researched this, there are NO conclusive studies that say Marijuana has damaging effects to the brain. None. Can you produce any that weren't sponsored during the Reefer Madness and killed monkeys by suffocating them with smoking machines? Can you link me to a pot-induced death? A study in the adverse reaction of neurons to THC?

Or is your first-hand experience all you have? Just because you see stoners acting like they have brain damage, it doesn't mean they have brain damage.

Click to expand...

Everything when it comes to pot is observational. It has been outlawed for generations in most industrialized nations. It is a little difficult to test a Schedule I narcotic.

...right.

They don't do controlled tests with ANY illegal to the public substance? Really? Is that what you're saying? EVERYTHING when it comes to illegal substances is observational? Please say yes so I can crit you with a wall of links 2 pages long proving you wrong.

I grew out of that phase of my life.

i can't stand smoke anymore. But unlike NickGuyver, I just exit the immediate area.

Tobacco smoke makes me a bit nauseous and I LOATHE having my clothes/hair (well, beard now) reek of cigarettes after a night out. So no, I never, ever, ever add tobacco to my joints.

I also just exit the immediate area of heavy smokers, although the few friends I have that still smoke are quite considerate and blow the smoke away from where we are.

Crone said:

i can't stand smoke anymore. But unlike NickGuyver, I just exit the immediate area.

Click to expand...

Sometimes, it's unavoidable, though. Ex.: Restaurants before the by-law was passed. Or when I'm walking into a building and a number of people are outside smoking. Or just passing someone on the street and I see a big whaff of smoke in front of me. I pretty much have to hold my breath until I pass by.

---------- Post added at 05:40 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:39 PM ----------

Also...NickGuyver? *scratches his head*

And is holding your breath for a few seconds more important than all those pros legalization has, dude? Really?

I think the main problem with the idea that there are NO pot induced deaths is because the most likely cause (Cancer of the Lung or mouth) can happen naturally in humans or be mistakenly linked to tobacco. It would be next to impossible to tell if it was caused by marijuana unless the person came in with a sky high THC count, and even then you couldn't rule out the possibility of the victim simply ingesting it instead of smoking it. The reason people think pot doesn't kill is because you could attribute anything it causes to much more common sources.

I think you manipulating statistics to make it sound safer than it actually is, Calleja. Any drug is going to have lasting, long term side effects if you use enough of it. This is indisputable: There is no such thing as a drug without side effects.

I never said it DOESN'T have side effects, any combusted material you inhale is gonna be unhealthy for your lungs, reduce their capacity, a risk for cancer, etc. But that's not an inherent risk of Marijuana itself... it's not the plant's properties that are damaging to the lungs, you would get the same effects from smoking earl grey tea or grass (real, actual grass) or whatever.

And, again, it's impossible to overdose on THC. The same can not be said of alcohol, tobacco or even caffeine.

People, I'm not there trying to "promote" pot, I'm not saying it's GOOD for you... it's a drug, you have to realize this before taking the rational decision to partake. What I'm saying is that, given our society's "accepted" and legal drugs, pot is very minor in comparison in ill effects.

After I did my research on the effects of pot the biggest decision I had was to reduce to almost nil my alcohol consumption. Booze is whack, yo. Pot.. not as much.

We get it, you like weed.

Not as much as you guys apparently think I do, though. I only smoke on weekends and the occasional insomnia emergency. I'm not high everyday like you people keep implying I am.

Everything has side effects. Breathing undetectable smog, drinking mass amounts of water, riding a bicycle, taunting a bobcat with licorice... almost everything can kill you in some way, shape, or form.

Just use your best judgment and try not to harm others in the process. And if you can't even accomplish that, at least you won't pass on your genes!

*this lighthearted post brought to you by the letter Splunge*

but does he like tacos?

Calleja said:

Not as much as you guys apparently think I do, though. I only smoke on weekends and the occasional insomnia emergency. I'm not high everyday like you people keep implying I am.

Click to expand...

Dude, every time I've been on Vent with you, you've been high.

all of both times? Wow.

That was also during vacation, though, when I had parties at my house almost everyday. Joints and baggies were left over almost every time, so I partook a few days and watched a movie or something. Not during school/work days, though.

Really? Most? You showed me NONE.

I'm sorry if "because I say so" is not enough of an argument for me, Ame.

---------- Post added at 01:52 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:51 PM ----------

Crone said:

but does he like tacos?

Click to expand...

I looooove tacos

I was prepared to open my saved research firefox session and post the links I have saved up there.... but before I go all JCM on you, which I'd rather not do.. let's get something out of the way.

You said: "marijuana DOES cause brain damage". As a matter of fact. Fair enough.. can you cite any sources for that?

And please have in mind that saying "just because it hasn't happened doesn't mean it CAN'T happen" like you did in your previous to last post is logical fallacy that doesn't help the argument.

Oh.. so you were saying the HAIRSPRAY and other shit some coffee houses include can cause brain damage?

I read that wrong, then, I apologize, the sentence structure confused me a bit. So yes, we agree pot has detrimental effects on your health, even if these DON'T include brain damage. Do you also agree these are LESS than those of alcohol which was MY original point?

Yeah... when you stand side by side to each substance and realize that the less harmful is the illegal one, you start questioning everything a bit.

There are three big "accepted" substances that are not colloquially considered "drugs" even though they ARE, in every negative definition of the word: Alcohol, Tobacco and Caffeine. I wonder how many people have actually sat down and researched how harmful each of the three are and not just gotten used to it cause everyone else uses them and it's "no big deal".

Sorry i've been asleep and couldn't back you up calleja

I smoke daily and life is a blast.

Koko said:

Sorry i've been asleep and couldn't back you up calleja

I smoke daily and life is a blast.

Click to expand...

No pee tests at your place of work?

Adammon said:

No pee tests at your place of work?

Click to expand...

Just finished the eight-week internship working on unmanned systems for the government (robots).

$1,500 richer & test-free.

Koko said:

Just finished the eight-week internship working on unmanned systems for the government (robots).

$1,500 richer & test-free.

Click to expand...

So you're a student then? Making $750 a month?

Senior in high school, summer work.

Although I do free-lance writing during the school year, made quite a few pretty penny last year.

ThatNickGuy said:

I notice in all the pros you mention, not a single HEALTH benefit

Click to expand...

I could write a novel, but I'm not gonna waste it on you.

How about a reader's digest version, then? Because we've discussed (and even Calleja admits) that it's not exactly good for your health.

Condemnation based on ignorance is no way to hold a set of beliefs

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=the+union&emb=0&aq=f#

ThatNickGuy said:

How about a reader's digest version, then? Because we've discussed (and even Calleja admits) that it's not exactly good for your health.

Click to expand...

Sorry, I'm not putting forth the effort for someone whose mind is made up. Too much effort and I have other things to do.

I'm not ignorant, I just don't want to fuck up my lungs.

Koko said:

http://www.reddit.com/r/Marijuana/comments/715n1/how_to_make_the_perfect_firecrackers/.mobile

Click to expand...

Yeah, I prefer having my senses about me at all times.
Except when I am posting in the wee hours of the morning.
Sleep deprivation and all that.

ZenMonkey said:

Sorry, I'm not putting forth the effort for someone whose mind is made up. Too much effort and I have other things to do.

Click to expand...

You likely won't convince me, but I'm curious as to your side of the argument about it. Seriously, enlighten me. No sarcasm at all, here.

ThatNickGuy said:

You likely won't convince me, but I'm curious as to your side of the argument about it. Seriously, enlighten me. No sarcasm at all, here.

Click to expand...

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=the+union&emb=0&aq=f#

http://www.pastedump.com/paste/516

ThatNickGuy said:

You likely won't convince me, but I'm curious as to your side of the argument about it. Seriously, enlighten me. No sarcasm at all, here.

Click to expand...

You've been here longer than I have, and yet you have to ask that? Sorry if this comes out snarky; whoaaaaa. . . .

If you still haven't watched The Union documentary, at least give it a chance.

If you really think D.A.R.E. was giving you the whole picture, spend at least 10-15 minutes and listen to the voice of reason & humanity.
http://video.google.com/videosearch?...on&emb=0&aq=f#

I've started watching The Union, from your first posting of the link, actually. Won't be able to finish watching it before work, but I will. I fully admit to not being informed about it because, honestly?

I don't see the NEED for it. I don't understand why people would want to lose control of themselves so much. Now, this is speaking as someone that has a beer once in awhile, BUT, I've never gotten drunk to the point of stumbling, puking, forgetting, etc. I did post drunk once and I feel like an ass about it.

...ugh, this is making me sound like a hypocrite. I rarely drink, however. Maybe once every two months, if that. And I've only even started drinking at all in the last year or so.

Of course, I also don't drink caffeine (don't drink pop anymore and hate coffee).

I don't remember where I was going with this, now. My argument's basically killed because I admit to drinking.

I guess my point is that I don't lump pot in with alcohol; I lump it in with cigarette smoking. There's no secondhand smoke from drinking. Unless they're behind the wheel of a car, someone drinking in front of me has no direct effect on me. Someone smoking in front of me, regardless of what it is, hurts my ability to breathe.

Time to go to work. Flame away. I can already tell I'm not making any sense.

---------- Post added at 09:41 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:39 PM ----------

I meant her side of the argument, as far as talking about what the health benefits are for smoking pot.

*sigh* Never mind.

A wildly drunken guy is 10x more likely to attack you than a sober guy, agreed? Alcohol brings forth some nasty shit in people. People have murdered, raped, looted, cheated on spouses... the list goes on. You get my point... there's a reason why there's such a crime as "drunk and disorderly".

A pot smoker, aside from that oh so dangerous second hand smoke, won't harm you. On that documentary Koko linked they interview a retired Police Chief, and he said he could not recall ONE incident of someone comitting a crime while only high. Frankie, a police officer himself, posted in the first page of this very thread something he's said before... legalization would make his job much easier. It's just an effect of marijuana.. it mellows you out, violence is like.. the last thing on your mind.

So, there, a reason why alcohol consumers pose more of a threat to you than pot.

Should alcohol be prohibited now? Again?

Calleja said:

So, there, a reason why alcohol consumers pose more of a threat to you than pot.

Should alcohol be prohibited now? Again?

Click to expand...

Yes.

Calleja - it'd perfectly possible to overdose on marijuhana. It's hard to do so based on just smoking, but eating or ingesting it are great ways of putting way too much MJ in your body before it has time to react. I've had to ship off friends to the hospital for poisoning, and it was purely because of brownies. Ask AmE if you see her next time; quite a few people in the Netherlands have been hospitalized because of overdosing. It's rarely lethal (though it's happened), but saying you can't overdose is silly, especially for one who has looked into it.

Also, I can understand where Nick'ds coming from. I'm a left libertarian and all that, but I'm a strong believer in "your freedom ends where mine begins". It's illegal to play music so loud it damages the ears of passers-by; it's illegal to burn noxious substances in the open air because the smoke can cause health issues; it's illegal to do plenty of things because of their effects on others. Smoking (weed or tobacco) in some places IS a bad thing because of the effect on others. Ho far you tihnk this should go is another matter, but I, for one, am glad smoking tobacco's illegal in train cars, at work, in hospitals,... over here, and I'm a fan of making it illegal to smoke in bars and restaurants, as well, except for designated areas. *shrug*

P.S.
The documentary is avaliable on Netflix's list of online streaming movies.
It has a 4.8/5 rating :clap:

Calleja said:

A wildly drunken guy is 10x more likely to attack you than a sober guy, agreed? Alcohol brings forth some nasty shit in people. People have murdered, raped, looted, cheated on spouses... the list goes on. You get my point... there's a reason why there's such a crime as \"drunk and disorderly\".

A pot smoker, aside from that oh so dangerous second hand smoke, won't harm you. On that documentary Koko linked they interview a retired Police Chief, and he said he could not recall ONE incident of someone comitting a crime while only high. Frankie, a police officer himself, posted in the first page of this very thread something he's said before... legalization would make his job much easier. It's just an effect of marijuana.. it mellows you out, violence is like.. the last thing on your mind.

So, there, a reason why alcohol consumers pose more of a threat to you than pot.

Should alcohol be prohibited now? Again?

Click to expand...

It isn't actually "Drunk and Disorderly". The real charge is typically Public Intoxication.
And Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intoxication)
include Cannabis Intoxication as part of its definition.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intoxication

still illegal to drive while high.

This is going no where fast, alcohol is bad for the system but by saying that since that is legal marijuana should be is silly.

Also: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/02/090202175105.htm

May not mean much but I am pretty sure everything in excess can be damaging, whether or not it is any more than say massive hairspray usage in the 80's?

Also I am for legalization assuming it and tabacco smoke bans pass, I really don't want to smell that shit when i am out.

K.
Study:
http://www.alternet.org/drugreporter/142271/smoking_marijuana_does_not_cause_lung_cancer/

Smoking marijuana does not cause lung cancer. It shows how the other studys were manipluated to fit a political bias.

Smoking pot doesn't cause lung cancer. In fact, the study found that cigarette smokers who also smoked marijuana were at a lower risk of contracting lung cancer than tobacco-only smokers.

Click to expand...

Federal Research in 2007
Marijuana prevents cancer
http://www.smokedot.org/blog/07/10/11/marijuana-prevents-cancer-(federal-research)

The Government provided funding to Federal researchers to study the effect of THC on Cancer induced rats. These rats were treated for Leukemia and lung cancer with canaboids and THC found in Marijuana that increased their life span and decreased the size of the tumors. (Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Sept. 1975. p. 597-602)

Click to expand...

Oh, so now THC could be a possible lead for curing cancer?


Marijuana is healthy for you.

Did I just defeat arguments here? or did I just defeat arguments here.

AmorousEyes said:

With a 30+ year old case study? Hardly.

Click to expand...

Did you read the first one?
It corresponds with the other. Also, using fire to keep yourself warm is also an old idea. I'm sure it's wrong too.

A single study does not disprove the results of hundreds of others, Quack. If it did, the peer review process of Science wouldn't be necessary. When you can bring up another hundred cases to counter the thousands upon thousands of studies that say Marijuana has severe negative effects, then you can arrogantly claim to "defeat arguments". Besides, most of the negative effects that we associate with Marijuana is caused by inhaling it. That's because your BREATHING IN SMOKE, which damages the microscopic air sacs in your lungs. You may potentially have less of a chance of getting Cancer from smoking MJ, but you still have a great chance of getting emphysema.

Also, don't fucking call it a possible cure for cancer. At best, they can claim that THC can help reduce the effects of said disease. There will NEVER be a cure-all for an illness that has so many different causes, symptoms, and can manifest in so different ways. The simply call things like this "cures for cancer" because it sounds better than "a potential treatment to stop this very specific type of cancer."

AshburnerX said:

A single study does not disprove the results of hundreds of others, Quack. If it did, the peer review process of Science wouldn't be necessary. When you can bring up another hundred cases to counter the thousands upon thousands of studies that say Marijuana has severe negative effects, then you can arrogantly claim to "defeat arguments". Besides, most of the negative effects that we associate with Marijuana is caused by inhaling it. That's because your BREATHING IN SMOKE, which damages the microscopic air sacs in your lungs. You may potentially have less of a chance of getting Cancer from smoking MJ, but you still have a great chance of getting emphysema.

Also, don't fucking call it a possible cure for cancer. At best, they can claim that THC can help reduce the effects of said disease. There will NEVER be a cure-all for an illness that has so many different causes, symptoms, and can manifest in so different ways. The simply call things like this "cures for cancer" because it sounds better than "a potential treatment to stop this very specific type of cancer."

Click to expand...

Its not just a single study, but what it does prove is that you can't trust the studies. Therefore you can't say its harmful to your health. Nobody knows.


Also, I am only acting self righteous because you are. Who are you to come in and say that you are right and everyone else is wrong? There's just as much evidence that it can help reduce sypmtoms of cancer, and doesn't cause it. Yet, you choose to ignore those and just reffer to the "thousands of other studies." I can find just as many studies that say I'm right and you are wrong. Does that make me right?

Its not just the smoke that makes tobacco dangerous, it is all the other carcinogens in tobacco. There might be traces of those chemicals in MJ, but they aren't anywhere near dangerous cancer causing levels like that of tobacco.

I even read a study that said marijuana improves cell regeneration in lungs, which means repairing of the microscopic air sacs.

Stick that in your pipe and don't smoke it.

Just because you were brain washed and choose to believe crazy right wing government fear monger info, and I don't, doesn't mean you have a license to ride me down. You are in the wrong here. Marijuana is a valuable plant to the human race, and it's cousin the hemp plant has many MANY more productive uses that marijuana has. Legalization would make college campuses safer and remove all dirty black market connections.

The drugs didn't make the laws and give the social stigmas that they carry today. The Laws making MJ illegal made it bad for you. The laws made MJ only something stupid burnouts do. The laws are what make you biased.


Don't give me none of your bullshit about pot, because your shit doesn't smell like roses.

Le Quack said:

Its not just the smoke that makes tobacco dangerous, it is all the other carcinogens in tobacco. There might be traces of those chemicals in MJ, but they aren't anywhere near dangerous cancer causing levels like that of tobacco.

I even read a study that said marijuana improves cell regeneration in lungs, which means repairing of the microscopic air sacs.

Click to expand...

Emphysema is an irreversible degenerative condition. Air Sacs do not regenerate once collapsed, and if you are honestly going to claim that breathing in SMOKE is GOOD for your lungs, you need to do more research. Perhaps ingesting it has that effect, but any positive effects the smoke would have had would have been negated by the damage the smoke itself caused.

At best you can try to manage the symptoms, but once the damage has been done, it's done. My father is living proof of this.

Le Quack said:

Just because you were brain washed and choose to believe crazy right wing government fear monger info, and I don't, doesn't mean you have a license to ride me down. You are in the wrong here.

Click to expand...

I'm not claiming that pot smoking is going to lead into people into scenes straight out of fucking Reefer Madness here. I'm merely pointing out that your wrong when you claim the Marijuana is some magical plant that doesn't cause illness in those who use it (at least as far as smokers go). You are patently wrong in this regard, for very obvious medical reasons.

Le Quack said:

Marijuana is a valuable plant to the human race, and it's cousin the hemp plant has many MANY more productive uses that marijuana has. Legalization would make college campuses safer and remove all dirty black market connections.

Click to expand...

Once again, I point to my earlier statements in the thread: I'm actually for legalization and exactly for the reasons you posted. I don't care if people smoke it in the privacy of their own homes and think the current state of the drug laws are asinine. I only got self righteous when you were claiming to have defeated an argument on flimsy evidence at best, by showing a study that wasn't just out of date, but goes against the majority of similar studies from around the world. When a study gets results that aren't repeatable by others consistently, THAT is a sign of a fraudulent or flawed study.

But you go ahead and claim bias and conspiracy...

All I would like to say here is that there tends to be a bias in the news towards studies that come from government institutions (which in and of itself isn't necessarily a bad thing), and the government still has cannabis classified as a Schedule 1 drug. These inevitably negative results are then fed to the AP, CNN, etc.

This isn't a conspiracy theory. This is just the way it happens; it's the same for stories about the NIH making breakthroughs in cancer research. It just so happens that in this case, the government does have a vested interest in keeping people educated mainly or solely on the negative effects of cannabis. Studies that take place in other countries that point to positive effects just don't tend to be as widely reported upon in general news. (I'm not talking about the kind of news we Internet info junkies get.)

So when you consider how many studies there have been, please also consider the sources you are or aren't hearing about. And when you read a study, think about the methodologies used. There was a recent one that supposedly proved one thing or another, but if you read more about it, it turns out you'd have to be someone who smoked something like 10 joints a day every day for years in order for it to be relevant. That kind of thing.

Keep an open mind and apply critical thinking to both sides of the argument, is my advice. Thank you. You may have this soapbox back now.

Thank you Zen, I was hoping you would poke your finger on that one.

I think atleast for me that it hardly is a null drug or postive, but isn't anywhere close to what has been told and said. With several studies and the general fact that anything in excess is bad for you, i would naturally assume that it is also bad for you in some way or form, even if it isn't as bad as other things. They do need to lower it off of being a cat 1 drug, i was slightly suprised when i saw how high it is. The real question is whats more likely legalization, decriminalization or some sort of step down to legalization.

Also I don't get why people are like cops wish it was legal, they are hardly a moral compass, to judge it by, and more than likely prefer not having to do paperwork over something some of them consider menial and either harmless or only self destructive.

crono1224 said:

Also I don't get why people are like cops wish it was legal, they are hardly a moral compass, to judge it by, and more than likely prefer not having to do paperwork over something some of them consider menial and either harmless or only self destructive.

Click to expand...

Nah, cops prefer to not be shot dead in a drug war that they don't even believe in.

Also, since when does copper morality have anything to do with taking drugs?

Denbrought said:

Nah, cops prefer to not be shot dead in a drug war that they don't even believe in.

Also, since when does copper morality have anything to do with taking drugs?

Click to expand...

I was merely stating using them as a reference for legality is pointless cause i don't think they carry any more weight than anyone else.

I figured they were just more lazy about something they see as either a victimless crime or harmless, since I'm not sure on the number of murders from purely marijuana drug sales.

Been high once. Was a pretty fun sensation, but I avoid it for certain reasons... I have an addictive personality, and tend to avoid stuff that I know I could so easily get hooked on.


Still don't see any good reason not to legalise it.

crono1224 said:

I was merely stating using them as a reference for legality is pointless cause i don't think they carry any more weight than anyone else.

I figured they were just more lazy about something they see as either a victimless crime or harmless, since I'm not sure on the number of murders from purely marijuana drug sales.

Click to expand...

They're good for use as reference because they are organized (leap, etc.) and look into studies, statistics, etc. It's a good source of information.

I haven't heard of a cop movement for the legalization of marijuana only, but rather of all drugs.
No idea on the statistics for kills related to marijuana (maybe a halforumite policeman can has?) but with stuff like this you'd never know--traffic stops hardly sound like risk situations, but they are.

Been high once. Was a pretty fun sensation, but I avoid it for certain reasons... I have an addictive personality, and tend to avoid stuff that I know I could so easily get hooked on.


Still don't see any good reason not to legalise it.

Click to expand...

Cannabis is habituating, but not technically physically addictive.

Which goes to say a heavy user can stop cold turkey with no physical detrimental effects.

Long term use can cause detrimental mental effects from stopping cold turkey, but are strictly temporary and does no long term damage.


The "all things in moderation" saying applies to everything

---------- Post added at 08:24 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:17 AM ----------

Denbrought said:

They're good for use as reference because they are organized (leap, etc.) and look into studies, statistics, etc. It's a good source of information.

I haven't heard of a cop movement for the legalization of marijuana only, but rather of all drugs.
No idea on the statistics for kills related to marijuana (maybe a halforumite policeman can has?) but with stuff like this you'd never know--traffic stops hardly sound like risk situations, but they are.

Click to expand...

140,000 men and women are killed every year directly from cigarettes, alcohol, and prescription pills, while, "…there is no record in the extensive medical literature describing a proven, documented marijuana induced death” (DEA Judge Francis Young).

Mexico alone has had over 4,500 deaths related to illegal drug dealing last year (with mexcio being the largest foreign source of marijuana), 700 of which in the border town of Tijuana, making it one of the most dangerous cities in the world

:uhhuh:

crono1224 said:

Also I don't get why people are like cops wish it was legal, they are hardly a moral compass, to judge it by, and more than likely prefer not having to do paperwork over something some of them consider menial and either harmless or only self destructive.

Click to expand...

Denbrought said:

Nah, cops prefer to not be shot dead in a drug war that they don't even believe in.

Also, since when does copper morality have anything to do with taking drugs?

Click to expand...

Yes.

Also paperwork thing. I've made no bones about admitting that I'd prefer marijuana to be legal for the fact that I wouldn't have to arrest people nearly as often. Luckily most people usually have little enough of it on them that all I have to do is dispose of it and let them go.

Never had a run-in with the weed. Think it should be legal, though. The drug war is a damned joke.

I do not know a god damned thing about the health impact of marijuana, other people know it better and I think they've already made the case and given the info.

But the social aspect?

As I see it, the current ban on pot is no different the alcohol prohibition in the 1920s. And how well did that end up? It funded illegal activity, caused many deaths, and fucked up the way the majority of americans consume alcohol now (getting drunk as quick as possible). And best of all, it didn't even help. People were still getting drunk.

You don't like being around pot or the smell of pot? just leave. what the hell happened to personal responsibility? Why is it the governments job to make sure nothing offends you.

---------- Post added at 10:00 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:00 PM ----------

Philosopher B. said:

Never had a run-in with the weed. Think it should be legal, though. The drug war is a damned joke.

Click to expand...

Essentially, this.

Silvanesti said:

You don't like being around pot or the smell of pot? just leave. what the hell happened to personal responsibility? Why is it the governments job to make sure nothing offends you.

Click to expand...

Yes cause its the other persons need to leave cause someone is actively creating a stinky enviroment, where is he personal responsibility and general niceness of the other person to not light up or what ever around the other person.

Its not like they moved into a house next to a tar plant. In fact it could be possible they were hanging out somewhere and the person came in and started doing it.

crono1224 said:

Yes cause its the other persons need to leave cause someone is actively creating a stinky enviroment, where is he personal responsibility and general niceness of the other person to not light up or what ever around the other person.

Its not like they moved into a house next to a tar plant. In fact it could be possible they were hanging out somewhere and the person came in and started doing it.

Click to expand...

So does farting, bad breath, and poor hygiene. Not much you can do about those.

BlackCrossCrusader said:

So does farting, bad breath, and poor hygiene. Not much you can do about those.

Click to expand...

Its so true :'(.

crono1224 said:

Yes cause its the other persons need to leave cause someone is actively creating a stinky enviroment,

Click to expand...

yes. if you don't like it, then leave or ask to stop. how hard is that? Do you honestly believe it is worth all the cost and loss of life that the current ban creates just so someone doesn't have to smell something stinky?

I hate the smell of pot. At a couple recent concerts I've been lucky enough to be right next to a bunch of stoners passing a small glass pipe. That shit smelt like a skunk fucked a pile rotten eggs. But when it started to annoy me, I just went to an area that I couldn't smell it.

crono1224 said:

where is he personal responsibility and general niceness of the other person to not light up or what ever around the other person.

Its not like they moved into a house next to a tar plant. In fact it could be possible they were hanging out somewhere and the person came in and started doing it.

Click to expand...

I agree, it is responsible and polite not to light up shit next to someone that isn't. But it shouldn't be the governments job to enforce that.

I am for legalization but banning it in public places in the same as tobacco smoke, I assumed you were saying it is ok if I am out to dinner and someone lights up that i should have to finish dinner quickly to leave.

crono1224 said:

I am for legalization but banning it in public places in the same as tobacco smoke, I assumed you were saying it is ok if I am out to dinner and someone lights up that i should have to finish dinner quickly to leave.

Click to expand...

No, of course not. If someone were to do that I would agree that they were being a prick. But there was the argument earlier that it should be banned because it smells.

Silvanesti said:

No, of course not. If someone were to do that I would agree that they were being a prick. But there was the argument earlier that it should be banned because it smells.

Click to expand...

Oh then sorry I was for banning like tobacco smoke in public places.

There is a reason why many bars and restaurants are doing away with the smoking sections and just making the whole place no smoking: A majority of the people who go to these places are fucking tired of the smell and secondhand smoke.

Agreed but luckily we get people chain smoking out front that you happily have to walk through, granted its not exactly stuck in it, but still very annoying.

AshburnerX said:

There is a reason why many bars and restaurants are doing away with the smoking sections and just making the whole place no smoking: A majority of the people who go to these places are fucking tired of the smell and secondhand smoke.

Click to expand...

So your argument shifted from a health issue to inconvenience?

Its good to know you respect small business rights, and the right of an individual to make decisions for themselves.

Le Quack, I do believe he said "smell" AND "secondhand smoke".

And I do believe that people should have the right to make their own choices.

---------- Post added at 05:14 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:08 AM ----------

and also,

fine we get it you don't like smoke. but what about all the other ways to use pot? you against those too?

For cheap, easy to make materials for hemp material like shirts and rope and such? Absolutely not. It's a shame that the plant has now been given its bad rap as a stoner planet instead of something a little more viable.

ThatNickGuy said:

For cheap, easy to make materials for hemp material like shirts and rope and such? Absolutely not. It's a shame that the plant has now been given its bad rap as a stoner planet instead of something a little more viable.

Click to expand...

Vaporizer, baked goods, loli(pops)... ?

That's not what he means. Do you object to someone using THC as a drug, in a way that does not cause smoke? Would you be OK with someone eating hash brownies? Chewing THC gum? Vaporizing? Etc etc.

Damn ninja. Dude looks like a lady! :-P

I just find the notion of setting something on fire and then inhaling what's produced to be less than desirable for any substance.

Le Quack said:

So your argument shifted from a health issue to inconvenience?

Its good to know you respect small business rights, and the right of an individual to make decisions for themselves.

Click to expand...

I was just pointing out that public opinion was going against smoking right now, where as there was a time where if you DIDN'T smoke, people looked at you funny. It's a shift in public opinion. The fact that many places are switching from smoking sections to just no smoking period (by choice mind you. I'm not talking about places where there are laws against it) is indicative of the paradigm shift.

Bubble181 said:

That's not what he means. Do you object to someone using THC as a drug, in a way that does not cause smoke? Would you be OK with someone eating hash brownies? Chewing THC gum? Vaporizing? Etc etc.

Click to expand...

This.

Yeah, you guys seen these crazy new "electronic cigarettes?"

AshburnerX said:

I was just pointing out that public opinion was going against smoking right now, where as there was a time where if you DIDN'T smoke, people looked at you funny. It's a shift in public opinion. The fact that many places are switching from smoking sections to just no smoking period (by choice mind you. I'm not talking about places where there are laws against it) is indicative of the paradigm shift.

Click to expand...

I think your imagined paradigm shift to a non-smoking culture is a little premature. Hookah lounges are springing up all over the country and doing good business.

http://health.usnews.com/articles/health/2008/01/02/the-rising-allure--and-danger--of-hookah.html

According to the ALA report, hookah bars have appeared in more than two thirds of the nation's states, in some cases operating through exemptions in new smoking bans.

Click to expand...

GasBandit said:

Yeah, you guys seen these crazy new \"electronic cigarettes?\"

Click to expand...

They look rather nifty, and thats part of my question. If the only thing people care about is that it creates smelly smoke. Then why not allow all the other ways that people can get high without smoke?

GasBandit said:

Yeah, you guys seen these crazy new \"electronic cigarettes?\"

Click to expand...

Yes a friend of mine has switched to those. It is a neat alternative to the cigarette.

Pojodan said:

I just find the notion of setting something on fire and then inhaling what's produced to be less than desirable for any substance.

Click to expand...

Much like I find the notion of perceiving myself as a feline less than desirable for any reason.

People get so up their assholes about smoking and smoke; the smoking ban--although I don't necessarily agree with--I do appreciate bars not being a cesspool of carcinogens. However, I think its ludicrous that we have to nanny state the whole operation. And I think the opponents of marijuanna legalization are simply indoctrinated to the old regime of thought that was impressed upon Americans by tobacco and alcohol lobbiest of yesteryore.

You know, the people that wanted to ban it because it made the blackies rape our pretty white women.

Tinwhistler said:

I think your imagined paradigm shift to a non-smoking culture is a little premature. Hookah lounges are springing up all over the country and doing good business.

http://health.usnews.com/articles/health/2008/01/02/the-rising-allure--and-danger--of-hookah.html

Click to expand...

It's moving into specialized locations and into the backrooms, as opposed to being something you always had to deal with no matter where you went. I think the fact that your getting "smoking speakeasys" actually does more to illustrate my point.

AshburnerX said:

It's moving into specialized locations and into the backrooms, as opposed to being something you always had to deal with no matter where you went. I think the fact that your getting "smoking speakeasys" actually does more to illustrate my point.

Click to expand...

Uhh...not at all. Tinted glasses, much? They're called "HOOKAH BARS". It's not some sheisty operation. They operate in shopping malls. There's probably one within ten miles of your current location.

ElJuski said:

Much like I find the notion of perceiving myself as a feline less than desirable for any reason.

Click to expand...

That's your right, but my perception of things can't cause you cancer if I do it right next to you.

Just sayin.

Having some on me and girls asking for a puff or two has now gotten me laid 3 distinct times.


...so it's a bit like furryism, I guess?

Pojodan said:

That's your right, but my perception of things can't cause you cancer if I do it right next to you.

Just sayin.

Click to expand...

Of course, once again, common decency applies. I'm not advocating blowing smoke in your face. Those people are assholes. What I *am* advocating is for people to take their cancer and vices at their own private will. Who gives a shit if the guy that lives next door tokes? None of my business.

Similarly, I don't give a shit if a business decides to operate with people being able to smoke inside. It's kind of like how I *choose* not to step into a gay bar, and, were I to choose so, I'd be aware of the consequences wherein.

---------- Post added at 07:36 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:35 PM ----------

Also I get really ticked at how pompous anti-smokers are, like they don't have their own various unhealthy vices. We should also monitor people's food intake, excersize, etc.

I had my ass pinched at a gay bar once.

It was awesome.

not to mention ban drinking as a whole, because drunk drivers kill people constantly.

---------- Post added at 07:37 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:36 PM ----------

Calleja said:

I had my ass pinched at a gay bar once.

It was awesome.

Click to expand...

I know you loved it baby

No, the guy who pinched it looked more like Steve Carell than a lady, so it couldn't have been you.

ElJuski said:

Uhh...not at all. Tinted glasses, much? They're called "HOOKAH BARS". It's not some sheisty operation. They operate in shopping malls. There's probably one within ten miles of your current location.

Click to expand...

Doubtful. I have to drive 30 minutes to an hour to get to an open Mall around these parts I haven't been to an arcade in years that wasn't inside a movie theater or bowling alley.

But again I point out that smoking is moving out of theaters, restaurants, bars, and other places where it was a serious problem and instead moving into smaller, specialized locations where like minded individuals can do it freely. You could also probably attribute some of the rise in hookah use to an increase of immigrants from places in the world where it's considered a social activity.

Smoking is probably never going to completely go away, but it's definitely changing from the 50's era where everyone was doing it and thus nobody cared.

ElJuski said:

Uhh...not at all. Tinted glasses, much? They're called \"HOOKAH BARS\". It's not some sheisty operation. They operate in shopping malls. There's probably one within ten miles of your current location.

Click to expand...

The Juice is right.

I live outside of Dallas in a small town called Denton, population a little over 100K

We've got a six or 7 hookah bars in the main city.
http://tinyurl.com/l6dzmb

DFW has hundreds
http://tinyurl.com/ncqhev
And those are just the ones google maps found on my quick search of "hookah bars"

I'd hardly call these little hidden backroom speakeasies. Heh.

Oh, and by the way, Galloway, Ohio has 4 nearby in the big city. The closest is about 13 miles away. Not exactly "10 miles'..but close enough to make Juski's point valid.
http://tinyurl.com/lazb5q

Hookah bars can then morph into coffee shops once California sets the example and legalizes the herb!! YAAYY!!

/delusion

AshburnerX said:

Doubtful. I have to drive 30 minutes to an hour to get to an open Mall around these parts I haven't been to an arcade in years that wasn't inside a movie theater or bowling alley.

But again I point out that smoking is moving out of theaters, restaurants, bars, and other places where it was a serious problem and instead moving into smaller, specialized locations where like minded individuals can do it freely. You could also probably attribute some of the rise in hookah use to an increase of immigrants from places in the world where it's considered a social activity.

Smoking is probably never going to completely go away, but it's definitely changing from the 50's era where everyone was doing it and thus nobody cared.

Click to expand...

Okay, so people know the risks of smoking more since 60 years ago. That's fantastic, I agree with you. What's the problem, then? Why can't smokers have their own bars?

Tinwhistler said:

The Juice is right.

I live outside of Dallas in a small town called Denton, population a little over 100K

We've got a six or 7 hookah bars in the main city.
http://tinyurl.com/l6dzmb

DFW has hundreds
http://tinyurl.com/ncqhev
And those are just the ones google maps found on my quick search of \"hookah bars\"

I'd hardly call these little hidden backroom speakeasies. Heh.

Oh, and by the way, Galloway, Ohio has 4 nearby in the big city. The closest is about 13 miles away. Not exactly \"10 miles'..but close enough to make Juski's point valid.
http://tinyurl.com/lazb5q

Click to expand...

That would be because Franklin County passed anti-smoking legislation a year or two ago. A Hookah place would be inherently violating that city ordinance. I'm not surprised to see them up on campus, as OSU is pretty strict about smoking as well. I AM surprised to see one in German Village though.

EDIT: Actually, now that I think about it, I think Columbus may have passed a similar ordinance. What are those hookah places doing, selling the actual devices?

ElJuski said:

Okay, so people know the risks of smoking more since 60 years ago. That's fantastic, I agree with you. What's the problem, then? Why can't smokers have their own bars?

Click to expand...

because fuck em, thats why. To some people smokers are less than human and dont deserve basic human respect.

Silvanesti said:

because fuck em, thats why. To some people smokers are less than human and dont deserve basic human respect.

Click to expand...

Thus is demonstrated one of the dangers of straight democracy. If 2 men and a woman are marooned on a desert island, and a vote is called about whether or not her consent is required for sex, democracy means little to her. The "Tyranny of the majority" and all that.

As Ben Franklin said so many years ago, none are so dangerous to our country as those who would control your actions "for your own good."

Tinwhistler said:

most 'anti-smoking' ordinances don't cover 'smoking lounges'..originally meant to allow cigar lounges to stay in business. Hookah lounges also would qualify for those exemptions.

Click to expand...

I'm not so sure.

Judge blocks smoking-ban exemption for private clubs - From 2007, after the ban was passed.

It looks like it's being appealed though.

Cigar Store Owners Support Appeal of Smoking Ban Enforcement Case

Oh wait... it looks like it was a state-wide ban, not just county wide.

Lawmaker wants smoking ban changes

I did try to smoke when I was younger (stupid of me) and drink rarely.

I'm too cheap to do drugs. You know how much stuff I can buy with the money I would have spent on drugs?? gaming is the legal drug for me.

Ironically enough, there is apparently a word for place that allows smoking in places it's forbidden: Smokeasy.

Anyway, here's a list of current smoking bans in the US. It does seem that most places do provide exceptions (though it's a little sad I had to prove your point for you ) and it does seem that Ohio does allow retail as an exception.

Tinwhistler said:

you didn't have to prove it for me. I stated it as fact, and you didn't ask for any citations, nor did you dispute the claim. There was no reason for me to go 'proving' anything.

Anyone who has seen me debate a point on the forum should already be aware of two points:
1) I never make a statement that I cannot back up, unless I qualify that statement with a disclaimer (such as "i heard" or "I think I read")
2) I am more than happy to back up my points with citations, if asked. But expect that I will press you to do the same with your own points once I do.

Click to expand...

He has me doing that crap too. Can't just say "This is true, anymore." gah
I'm the woman in this relationship! I'm always supposed to be right.