That's right, we did it! We kicked the crap out of the rest of the world (minus a few other third world/developing countries).

800,000 Canucks have a criminal record because of prosecutions due to possession of marijuana

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dead_Letter:
16.8% of Canadians are complete losers. I would've thought it higher (no pun intended)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:

I actually consider the losers in Canada to be the whacked out religious right who would deprive others of their rights and freedoms, combined with the fascist corporations.

---

The religious wrong certainly are losers. But they don't seem to be indicated in this thread.

I don't want anybody thrown in jail for using marijuana, but I can see how it would become a real public nuisance if it were totally legal, no strings attached. Having to inhale other people's cigarette smoke walking down the street is bad enough; marijuana smoke is about 100x more noxious. And I don't mean chemically, although that might also be so. I mean pungent and unpleasant and disorienting, even. It would be a horrible world if every five metres you encountered another gang of kids smoking weed on the sidewalk, or the remainder of the last ones who did. Or if your neighbour had impunity to invite his buddies over and poison your airspace all night. Or if smoking lounges in bars and restaurants were overtaken by pot smokers. Blech.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Vansterdam Kid:
No, I think DL is right. Those two times I used pawt in 2006, holy hell it scarred me for life. My relationships, my job, my education...down the drain. Fuck, I got to get back on track because that and the one other time I did it probably will lead to a life long addiction and utter looser-dom.

---

The right wing idiot says we'll reduce opium in afghanistan and make our streets free of heroin....They have increased it.

Who would of thought there is such a big gaping hole in the underground security world that pot use would go up. What does that tell you about the big gaping hole in security called the underground.

Pot use will continue to go up as well as everything else no matter what they do as they are a minority in the planet. The majority of the planet smokes pot and in a democracy the majority rules. Suck it up neocons as yer policy's go up in smoke.

I would like to know if pot smoke can protect the lungs from the noxious toxic compounds our government allows industry to poison us with. Maybe this is a factor in the illegiality of marijuana. Perhaps the intention of government is to poison us with toxic compounds or at the very least dummy us up...and pot interferes with that process....hmmmm.

It is well known that pot increases neuron production in the brain and that leads to more intelligence..could that be a factor in it's illegality. It's beginning to look that way as there are no known reasons for the illegiality except for that.

And the fact that black market pot could be laced with crytal meth and could find it's way into the genetic spawn of the neocon child. There is only one solution...legalize the damn thing before you kill us all ya bastards.

These bastards ( sorry there isn't any other word to describe sensless prosecution of innocent people) must face the fact that there security system is only as strong as it's weakest link..and they have failed miserably..they have lost the war...the underground is flourishing and if terrorists want them dead they will be dead.

If they want to close that gapeing hole THEY CREATED ..they must make all drugs available to all people period. If not we can all suffer the consequences when biological compounds are introduced into black market items in the future.

It's not rocket science..continue on the prohibition path and the underground will continue to flourish and quite possibly in the future we will all be done in by these miserable bastards and there paranoid policy's.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dead_Letter:

I don't want anybody thrown in jail for using marijuana, but I can see how it would become a real public nuisance if it were totally legal, no strings attached. Having to inhale other people's cigarette smoke walking down the street is bad enough; marijuana smoke is about 100x more noxious. And I don't mean chemically, although that might also be so. I mean pungent and unpleasant and disorienting, even. It would be a horrible world if every five metres you encountered another gang of kids smoking weed on the sidewalk, or the remainder of the last ones who did. Or if your neighbour had impunity to invite his buddies over and poison your airspace all night. Or if smoking lounges in bars and restaurants were overtaken by pot smokers. Blech.

If, for some reason, people would like to incinerate their lungs with marijuana in the comfort of their own homes or in an area with a reasonable expectation it would affect nobody unwilling, I'm cool with that. Go ahead. But if it goes any further than that, it becomes very oppressive for other people, which is not okay.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dead_Letter:

The religious wrong certainly are losers. But they don't seem to be indicated in this thread.

I don't want anybody thrown in jail for using marijuana, but I can see how it would become a real public nuisance if it were totally legal, no strings attached. Having to inhale other people's cigarette smoke walking down the street is bad enough; marijuana smoke is about 100x more noxious. And I don't mean chemically, although that might also be so. I mean pungent and unpleasant and disorienting, even. It would be a horrible world if every five metres you encountered another gang of kids smoking weed on the sidewalk, or the remainder of the last ones who did. Or if your neighbour had impunity to invite his buddies over and poison your airspace all night. Or if smoking lounges in bars and restaurants were overtaken by pot smokers. Blech.

If, for some reason, people would like to incinerate their lungs with marijuana in the comfort of their own homes or in an area with a reasonable expectation it would affect nobody unwilling, I'm cool with that. Go ahead. But if it goes any further than that, it becomes very oppressive for other people, which is not okay.

---

I think this is pretty alarmist. Alcohol is legal but I don't recall being harassed by cliques of drinking youths in the street. Presumably our natural Canadian modesty would circumscribe its use even if legalized.

As for smell, where do you draw the line? I have a hard time with automobile exhaust.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jacob Two-Two:
Actually, I imagine my neighbourhood might fill up with lit joints pretty fast if there was no reason not to, probably less than every five metres.

But it's a moot point. Drinking in public spaces isn't legal, I doubt smoking weed would be either, were it to be legalised. We're not talking about what people do in the streets, but what they do in the privacy of their own homes.

---

No no no. Next thing - dogs and cats living together! Before you know it we'll have blood in the streets and children talking back to their parents. ALL IS LOST! RUN TO THE HILLS!

[ 13 July 2007: Message edited by: marzo ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dead_Letter:
It would be a horrible world if every five metres you encountered another gang of kids smoking weed on the sidewalk

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:

I don't, and frankly, but not to make light of what could've possibly happened to you with your using pot twice, I have a very hard time believing it to be so.

---

Yeah, my post was sarcastic. So, uhh...*whoosh*.

[ 14 July 2007: Message edited by: Vansterdam Kid ]

quote:

---

I don't want anybody thrown in jail for using marijuana, but I can see how it would become a real public nuisance if it were totally legal, no strings attached. Having to inhale other people's cigarette smoke walking down the street is bad enough; marijuana smoke is about 100x more noxious. And I don't mean chemically, although that might also be so. I mean pungent and unpleasant and disorienting, even. It would be a horrible world if every five metres you encountered another gang of kids smoking weed on the sidewalk, or the remainder of the last ones who did. Or if your neighbour had impunity to invite his buddies over and poison your airspace all night. Or if smoking lounges in bars and restaurants were overtaken by pot smokers. Blech.

---

This is not only alarmist, it's hateful. Why single out "gangs of kids" as smoke problems?

I can accept - very reluctantly! - that someone might not like the smell of pot. But I think it's heavenly, and I already can't walk anywhere without smelling it at least once. It's usually not a "gang of kids" either.

Also, cigarette smokers and those who drink alcohol have public places they can go, hang out, socialize and indulge their habits. These places are licensed and government sanctioned and approved, there's lottery shit everywhere. Marijuana smokers have to create their own space to do that.

quote:

---

Originally posted by marzo:
Here's something for Dead Letter to think about:
How many people are prematurely killed or maimed because of marijuana?
How many people are killed or maimed because of cars?
Does marijuana cause air pollution?
I think marijuana goes well with chocolate, that's what I think. It grows really well in all the provinces of Canada. With some care, early ripening Indica varieties can even grow in the Yukon!

[ 13 July 2007: Message edited by: marzo ]

---

I've thought about it.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Vansterdam Kid:

Yeah, my post was sarcastic. So, uhh...*whoosh*.

[ 14 July 2007: Message edited by: Vansterdam Kid ]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boze:

This is not only alarmist, it's hateful. Why single out "gangs of kids" as smoke problems?

Finally, one way to challenge the fascist drug laws is to act as if one does have the impunity to smoke in public, and that includes having one's buddies over for some joints and smelling up the back porch.

---

To the first, because they are. Are you taking the word 'gang' in a way I didn't mean?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dead_Letter:
of course you should be able to, but why would you want to?

---

For example, people who order anything but coffee in the Tim Horton's drive through, and similar time bandits.

People who wear too much cologne or perfume.

Portable signs. (London issue only, perhaps) I mean, if we don't like the aesthetic of certain smells, then we have to open the door to the aesthetic of certain visual stinks, like billboards and the like.

People who talk too loud in public on their cell phones irk me to no end. An auditory stink.

We must pass laws. Many laws.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dead_Letter:

Was your misspelling of "loser" also sarcastic?

---

Yes. As you could tell I was spelling things phonetically to help get that point across. For instance instead of saying 'pot' I used 'pawt'. Cause as we know Marijuana is just so bad that I thought it would be more fun to spell it the way that characters on the average US-ian sitcom say it. After all your position seems to be similarly fictional.

But maybe Tommy really picked up on something good that you were trying to get across. Speaking of bad smells, and the need for laws to deal with that problem, maybe the homeless could be gotten 'rid off' because they stink too, right? Maybe instead of allowing them to wonder around, all the while offending our nasal sensibilities, we should arrest them for smell pollution or something? That would have the added bonus of getting them off our streets AND preventing their icky smell from being so yucky. Oh, and we'd have the added advantage of giving them a home in our correctional facilities - so they uh...wouldn't be homeless anymore.

[ 15 July 2007: Message edited by: Vansterdam Kid ]

quote:

---

that anybody would be organizing to fight for their right to smoke marijuana is a puzzle ... of course you should be able to, but why would you want to?

---

What a remarkably ill-informed query. How about, for starters, all the individuals who smoke it because they have AIDS, cancer (and the concomitant effects of chemotherapy), glaucoma, epilepsy, asthma, arthritis?

As for why anyone would smoke it just for kicks? Gee, I dunno. For kicks? To alleviate anxiety and depression? To be social?

While I personally find it makes me a little bit shy and inhibited, I've had a couple of romantic partners who would bring a little of their own on a date because it would have the opposite effect for them. The resultant effects of my exposure to them were not ones I would describe as deleterious.

Perhaps that too would fall under "kicks." I had one galpal who only smoked it twice a year as she felt it was a sacrament and not to be used habitually or carelessly. That's a pretty interesting reason.

Perhaps these are all silly reasons. Perhaps you have never had a drink, never eaten an eclair, never fooled around with somebody just because you felt a little lonesome, never idly played a video game or checkers, never told a joke, stayed up too late, gone fishing, or played the air guitar. Perhaps you float in a Calvinist bubble of toil and focus and asceticism. Bully for you!

As for the chaotic nihilist dystopia you envision, well, that's just dopey. It's not illegal for me to go to the bathroom in Canada, but you wont find me doing so while standing at the corner of King and Bay, or while I sit in the mezzanine of my accountant's office. Digg-eh vous?

[ 17 July 2007: Message edited by: minkepants ]

quote:

---

maybe the homeless could be gotten 'rid off' because they stink too, right?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TemporalHominid:
what concerns me is the needless prosecution of thousands of Canadians. A waste of tax payer money and resources.

800,000 Canucks have a criminal record because of prosecutions due to possession of marijuana[/QB]

---

The legislature is often the last refuge of the intollerant control freak.

One thing we can be sure about when it comes to stinks.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Makwa:
Because it is grossly unjust that anyone should be jailed for the personal use of any substance, especially one as benign as marijuana.

---

As I stated already. Catch up.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boze:
I think Dead_Letter is wondering why one would ever smoke marijuana. Well Dead_Letter, it is because marijuana is awesome. If you don't understand this Dead_Letter I won't be able to convince you, but take my word for it.

Incidently I've never claimed to be agitating for the right to smoke in my own home. I'll do that and a lot more in the privacy of my own home whether it's illegal or not. Smoking pot, however, is something that a lot of stoners do in the car, on the job, and yes on the sidewalk. We're not hurting anyone, so yes tolerance would be nice. And there are already a lot of us. Sometimes even we forget that. I think we need a "wear green on Cannabis day" campaign.

---

Yes, you won't be able to convince me. And I don't need to take your word for it, I know what it's like. Take my word for it ; there are much better things in life.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tommy_Paine:
You know, I think Dead Letter is on to something here. While the smell of someone else smoking whaterver it is they want to smoke doesn't bother me, there's a lot of other things that do.

For example, people who order anything but coffee in the Tim Horton's drive through, and similar time bandits.

People who wear too much cologne or perfume.

Portable signs. (London issue only, perhaps) I mean, if we don't like the aesthetic of certain smells, then we have to open the door to the aesthetic of certain visual stinks, like billboards and the like.

People who talk too loud in public on their cell phones irk me to no end. An auditory stink.

We must pass laws. Many laws.

Last one not in jail, turn out the lights.

---

Please.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Vansterdam Kid:

Yes. As you could tell I was spelling things phonetically to help get that point across. For instance instead of saying 'pot' I used 'pawt'. Cause as we know Marijuana is just so bad that I thought it would be more fun to spell it the way that characters on the average US-ian sitcom say it. After all your position seems to be similarly fictional.

But maybe Tommy really picked up on something good that you were trying to get across. Speaking of bad smells, and the need for laws to deal with that problem, maybe the homeless could be gotten 'rid off' because they stink too, right? Maybe instead of allowing them to wonder around, all the while offending our nasal sensibilities, we should arrest them for smell pollution or something? That would have the added bonus of getting them off our streets AND preventing their icky smell from being so yucky. Oh, and we'd have the added advantage of giving them a home in our correctional facilities - so they uh...wouldn't be homeless anymore.

[ 15 July 2007: Message edited by: Vansterdam Kid ]

---

More silly false parallels, thanks.

quote:

---

Originally posted by minkepants:

What a remarkably ill-informed query. How about, for starters, all the individuals who smoke it because they have AIDS, cancer (and the concomitant effects of chemotherapy), glaucoma, epilepsy, asthma, arthritis?

As for why anyone would smoke it just for kicks? Gee, I dunno. For kicks? To alleviate anxiety and depression? To be social?

While I personally find it makes me a little bit shy and inhibited, I've had a couple of romantic partners who would bring a little of their own on a date because it would have the opposite effect for them. The resultant effects of my exposure to them were not ones I would describe as deleterious.

Perhaps that too would fall under "kicks." I had one galpal who only smoked it twice a year as she felt it was a sacrament and not to be used habitually or carelessly. That's a pretty interesting reason.

Perhaps these are all silly reasons. Perhaps you have never had a drink, never eaten an eclair, never fooled around with somebody just because you felt a little lonesome, never idly played a video game or checkers, never told a joke, stayed up too late, gone fishing, or played the air guitar. Perhaps you float in a Calvinist bubble of toil and focus and asceticism. Bully for you!

As for the chaotic nihilist dystopia you envision, well, that's just dopey. It's not illegal for me to go to the bathroom in Canada, but you wont find me doing so while standing at the corner of King and Bay, or while I sit in the mezzanine of my accountant's office. Digg-eh vous?

[ 17 July 2007: Message edited by: minkepants ]

---

Show me the science. Marijuana is totally not indicated in the treatment of cancer or AIDS. And ... will burning up your lungs really soothe your asthma? I'm doubtful.

But we have a medical marijuana program. Fine by me, I guess.

It's more likely that marijuana will CAUSE depression or anti-social behavior than the converse.

Your gal pal is an idiot. It's a stupid plant. Nothing reverential about it.

I'm no Calvinist, and no Puritan and no ascetic. If people want to smoke pot, whatever. I just don't want to have to smoke pot because THEY do. So keep it off the streets.

I'll tell you a story.

Yesterday, there was a gang of kids loitering outside my apartment building with their skateboards and stupidity. They didn't show a lot of NATURAL CANADIAN MODESTY when they started smoking weed from a pipe (as I later discovered, they were too inept to roll a joint). How do I know they were smoking weed? Why, BECAUSE I COULD SMELL IT FROM INSIDE MY THIRD FLOOR APARTMENT!!!!! Yes, it's THAT strong and THAT offensive. Anyway, they left before I could get dressed and come down and strangle all six of them with my bare hands , but they left us all a lovely present. A wack of cigarette papers, receipts and other garbage strewn about our flower beds. Thanks, punks!

And this was in broad daylight, in the late afternoon, in a nicer part of town.

quote:

---

Originally posted by quelar:
All I can say is that the only GOOD argument I've heard against decrim/legalization is that by doing so, and regulating it, you would be putting tens of thousands of honest hard working pot dealers out of a business they have potentially been in for decades.

All of the other arguments I've heard are either full of lies or uneducated judgments.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dead_Letter:
BECAUSE I COULD SMELL IT FROM INSIDE MY THIRD FLOOR APARTMENT!!!!! Yes, it's THAT strong and THAT offensive. Anyway, they left before I could get dressed and come down and strangle all six of them with my bare hands ... this was in broad daylight, in the late afternoon, in a nicer part of town.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dead_Letter:

Odd you would post that in a thread where no argument at all, good or bad, has been made against decriminalization/legalisation of marijuana.

---

As for citations, how about this wee list:

quote:

---

Organizations that have endorsed medical access to marijuana include: the Institute of Medicine, the American Academy of Family Physicians; American Bar Association; American Public Health Association; American Society of Addiction Medicine; AIDS Action Council; British Medical Association; California Academy of Family Physicians; California Legislative Council for Older Americans; California Medical Association; California Nurses Association; California Pharmacists Association; California Society of Addiction Medicine; California-Pacific Annual Conference of the United Methodist Church; Colorado Nurses Association; Consumer Reports Magazine; Kaiser Permanente; Lymphoma Foundation of America; Multiple Sclerosis California Action Network; National Association of Attorneys General; National Association of People with AIDS; National Nurses Society on Addictions; New Mexico Nurses Association; New York State Nurses Association; New England Journal of Medicine; and Virginia Nurses Association.

A few of the editorial boards that have endorsed medical access to marijuana include: Boston Globe; Chicago Tribune; Miami Herald; New York Times; Orange County Register; and USA Today.

Many organizations have favorable positions (e.g., unimpeded research) on medical marijuana. These groups include: The Institute of Medicine, The American Cancer Society; American Medical Association; Australian Commonwealth Department of Human Services and Health; California Medical Association; Federation of American Scientists; Florida Medical Association; and the National Academy of Sciences.

---

quote:

---

The Controlled Substances Act of 1970 established five categories, or "schedules," into which all illicit and prescription drugs were placed. Marijuana was placed in Schedule I, which defines the substance as having a high potential for abuse, no currently accepted medical use in the United States, and a lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision. To contrast, over 90 published reports and studies have shown marijuana has medical efficacy.

Source: The Controlled Substances Act of 1970, 21 U.S.C. §§ 801 et seq.; Common Sense for Drug Policy, Compendium of Reports, Research and Articles Demonstrating the Effectiveness of Medical Marijuana, Vol. I & Vol. II (Falls Church, VA: Common Sense for Drug Policy, March 1997).

---

web page

tht took about 20 seconds on Google. Before you call my bluff you might want to make sure you're holding more than 52 pick-up.

[ 17 July 2007: Message edited by: minkepants ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dead_Letter:

I'm no Calvinist, and no Puritan and no ascetic. If people want to smoke pot, whatever. I just don't want to have to smoke pot because THEY do. So keep it off the streets.

---

I'm offended by constant cigarette smoke, so I can somewhat sympathize with Dead Letter. However, pot isn't something that most people smoke constantly. You may in an evening have several joints. But chances are, you don't have several joints EVERY evening, like cigarette smokers do with cigarettes. If it is a constant problem, then it needs to be dealt with same way as tobacco abuse.

I sometimes don't like the smell of pot because it has some unpleasant emotional associations with it for me. Keep in mind though that pot can be eaten as well (a much more interesting experience, imo). Its use is not limited to inhalation, and I would guess that many medical patients are opting to ingest it rather than smoke it.

[ 05 August 2007: Message edited by: jas ]

[ 18 July 2007: Message edited by: arthur ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dead_Letter:

Please.

Do you, or do you not, support the anti-smoking laws now en vogue? Or is that just MORE FASCISM and of course people should be able to smoke in the grocery store, the bank, the office, etc?

---

I do not respond to straw man arguments.

But to return to your point.

quote:

---

I don't want anybody thrown in jail for using marijuana, but I can see how it would become a real public nuisance if it were totally legal, no strings attached. Having to inhale other people's cigarette smoke walking down the street is bad enough; marijuana smoke is about 100x more noxious.

---

You'd keep marijuana illegal to stop you from a fleeting moment of annoyance you might run into on the street.

When I moved to Vancouver, ironically, I basically forgot/didn't bother to find anyone to sell it to me. On occasion I stumble across it - i.e. at a party, but mostly I pass nowadays. It's been almost a decade since my 'chronic' years, and I honestly just don't miss it.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tommy_Paine:

You'd keep marijuana illegal to stop you from a fleeting moment of annoyance you might run into on the street.

Now, I never, as a rule, stoop to the fascism hyperbole, but since you brought it up, if the jackboot fits...

---

Tommy Paine, that isn't even slightly a straw man argument and perhaps your mischaracterization of it as such is due to a complete misreading of my other text quoted in your post.

I do NOT wish marijuana to be ILLEGAL. I support decriminalization/legalisation. But I understand that it would be a real public nuisance if left completely unfettered. As I said, there are laws on the books which control when and where you can smoke a cigarette or consume an alcoholic beverage - similar strictures would need to be imposed upon marijuana usage to prevent it becoming a public nuisance.

What needs to be done is regulate bad behavior that some people engage in while using drugs. We don’t ban alcohol but we are (thankfully) cracking down on driving under the influence on our roads. We should do the same with drugs generally.

quote:

---

Originally posted by quelar:
So why were you seeming to argue against it when we all tend to agree with you that there should be restrictions (as with any potentially mind altering substance)?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sven:
We don’t ban alcohol but we are (thankfully) cracking down on driving under the influence on our roads. We should do the same with drugs generally.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by minkepants:
Tee hee, Dead letter. Tempertemper little one.

As for citations, how about this wee list:

web page

tht took about 20 seconds on Google. Before you call my bluff you might want to make sure you're holding more than 52 pick-up.

[ 17 July 2007: Message edited by: minkepants ]

---

I believe I asked you to show me the science, not a bunch of endorsements which may or may not mean anything.

Show me the science. Marijuana is totally not indicated in the treatment of cancer or AIDS. And ... will burning up your lungs really soothe your asthma? I'm doubtful.

Yes, those were my words. You know what works for AIDS? Nothing, really. But anti-retrovirals is the best thing we have. Marijuana? Does not help! Will not fight AIDS! More likely to induce lung cancer in AIDS patients, I'd aver.

Cancer? Call me crazy, but I think chemotherapy or surgery are better options for beating back cancer than smoking a doob. It's also probable that marijuana smoking can CAUSE cigarette smoking cancers. Lovely.

As for asthma, I do invite you to show me, or link me to something which suggests it helps. And how it helps. I'm curious, really. If it does, that would seem rather counter-intuitive.

quote:

---

Originally posted by quelar:

What I'm saying is that you've yet to come up with a good reason not to. If it was a controlled substance like Alcohol we would have LESS of the issues you're whining about (and yes, it's whining when you complain about the smell from a third floor balcony when there are thousands of other smells we deal with every day that are offensive).

---

No, not from a third-floor balcony. From my bedroom, on the third floor.

Tell me, what else is that fucking pungent? I couldn't smell a cigarette from my bedroom if someone was smoking it outside the building. Not even close. Not even if someone was smoking in the next room. And look at all the prohibitions on that.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dead_Letter:

A bit off topic, but I don't know if we are "cracking down" on drunk driving. That's a lovely term people use when nothing is really being done about anything. If we wanted to get serious about drunk driving, it would be catch-you-once-lose-license-forever.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dead_Letter:

Yes, those were my words. You know what works for AIDS? Nothing, really. But anti-retrovirals is the best thing we have. Marijuana? Does not help! Will not fight AIDS! More likely to induce lung cancer in AIDS patients, I'd aver.

Cancer? Call me crazy, but I think chemotherapy or surgery are better options for beating back cancer than smoking a doob. It's also probable that marijuana smoking can CAUSE cigarette smoking cancers. Lovely.

---

The way you're arguing this shows the fact that you didn't follow the reasoning for why these diseases are brought up. Having seen a couple of friends die of Aids, and a few others die of cancer, the ones taking the anti-viral drugs for HIV and the Chemo for Cancer who did NOT smoke pot tended to eat less, be in a lot more pain, and had a harder time functioning.

I've never seen anyone claim that Pot was a CURE for anything, simply that it dramatically increases the quality of life of people who are in serious pain.

quote:

---

Originally posted by quelar:

What I'm saying is that you've yet to come up with a good reason not to. If it was a controlled substance like Alcohol we would have LESS of the issues you're whining about (and yes, it's whining when you complain about the smell from a third floor balcony when there are thousands of other smells we deal with every day that are offensive).

---

Emphysema

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emphysema

My friend was just diagnosed with Emphysema,he smoked weed and cigarettes for 20 years.
He's only 45.

Cut out all smoking of any kind,better to eat the shit Imo.
Btw I smoked Moroccan/hash oil/sensimilian and many other types of grass for years up until I reached 30 then I quit.Miss it sometimes but beer will do instead.

At least we smoked quality grass back in the late 70s and early 80s.The garbage you get now must just fry those lung tissue's.

[ 23 July 2007: Message edited by: Frisko ]

quote:

---

The fact that "grit weed", as it is being called, is so widespread suggests that contamination is happening at an early stage in the production process. "It seems to be being done on an industrial scale," said Harry Shapiro of Drugscope.

The dealers' motivation seems to be to bump up the weight of their product. They appear to be doing this by spraying plants with the reflective element from the paint used on road lines. The tiny reflective glass beads become imbedded in the leaves.

---

quote:

---

I believe I asked you to show me the science, not a bunch of endorsements which may or may not mean anything

---

endorsements by Mick Jagger, Paul McCartney and High Times magazine would be "a bunch of endorsements"

Endorsements by:The American Cancer Society; American Medical Association; and the National Academy of Sciences, are, respectively, endorsements by:

THE Cancer research,advocacy, and funding organization in America (you know, the ones who spent the last 50 years battling the cigarette companies and the government over cancer warnings and increasing the prohibition on cigarettes).

THE national organization for medical doctors in the United States

THE most esteemed and respected scientific organization in the United States

Further I provided citations to an entire compendium of articles buttressing my position and hyperlinks. At this point who cares if you don't buy it. I'll put my chips with the AMA,NAS, and ACS, thanks. You are incapable of doing research, provide NO citations of your own, and are incapable of arguing a point without degenerating into an undisciplined child. This has nothing to do with the pot debate anymore, it has to do with your bullheadedness, intellectual sloth, and constant vigilence for an opportunity to have a temper tantrum.

You sound like a rage-aholic. Pot has nothing to do with it. If you couldn't be annoyed at the minor inconvenience of kids smoking weed 50 feet away, it would be something else. It doesn't matter what other people do, what matters is that you give yourself a pretext to lose your shit and act like a belligerent pompous blowhard. I know someone like you. I suspect JUST like you. I used to be his friend. I introduced him to a lot of people who tried to be his friend. Now none of us are. Comments kept getting made like "he's wrapped pretty tight, eh?" and "he's pretty intense, eh?" And he's pushing 40 with no friends.

quote:

---

they left before I could get dressed and come down and strangle all six of them with my bare hands

---

Why would you write something like this on a political board, dude? Don't you realize you're embarassing yourself? Are you emulating someone from whom you learned this nasty behaviour? If so isn't it time to stop emulating them and carve out a path of at least a little resistance?

Born in 84, eh? tick.....tick.... tick

[ 24 July 2007: Message edited by: minkepants ]

No noxious odour and everyone happy.

quote:

---

Eating & Drinking
The active ingredients in cannabis, being fat and alcohol soluble, can be extracted and added to foodstuff entering the system through the digestive tract rather than through the lungs. This type of consumption of marijuana tends to be both slower and more efficient than smoking it. Further the noxious effects of consuming heated smoke are completely eliminated. For this reason, ingestion is the favored method of marijuana consumption by many people.

Eating
Marijuana must be heated before being consumed to activate the cannabanoids so one cannot simply eat raw grass. The traditional method of eating it is to cook it in a brownie, especially when it is in the form of hashish, though it can be used in any number of things. The recommended method of eating marijuana is to saute it in butter or margarine over medium heat, then to strain the remaining solids out and use the butter to cook with. One can use this marijuana butter to make brownies, cook vegetables, or however else one might use butter to cook with, one can even spread it on a slice of bread. Many people will mix the the residual solids in with whatever they are cooking in hopes of making use of whatever cannabinoids might still be in them, but this is not generally valuable. A typical ratio for making the marijuana butter is one stick of butter to one eight of an ounce of marijuana, and heated for fifteen to twenty minutes.

Drinking
One may extract the active ingredients from marijuana using alcohol and then use this tincture to make a potent drink. The highest proof alcohol available should be used, preferably 190 proof grain alcohol, since the water in the alcohol will dissolve other chemicals in the marijuana that one wishes to avoid. Some suggest soaking the grass in warm water for a period to remove those chemicals but that presents a whole host of other and is not really recommended. One may simply place the marijuana into a bottle of grain alcohol and let the canabanoids leach out, but this takes 2-3 weeks of time. A faster method is to heat the alcohol to sub-boiling and stir in the marijuana. Great deal of care should be taken if this method is chosen as the alcohol is highly flammable. The resulting tincture, often called "Green Dragon", is a light to emerald green liquid, which can be drunk straight, but this is not recommended. Highly lauded is a drink of 3 parts lemon lime soda, 1 part green dragon and a dollop of honey served over ice.

---

http://www.truthtree.com/marijuana_eating.shtml

It's a start and maybe the baby boomers might go for it.

[ 24 July 2007: Message edited by: Frisko ]

Most of the cops I've worked with in the last few years have, when pressed and in private, expressed a desire to see marijuana, and most drugs, legalized and taken out of the hands of criminals.

quote:

---

Originally posted by arborman:
People routinely idle their noxious bricklefritzin cars outside my bedroom window. Frankly, I'd prefer they shut the car off and smoked a joint. Then walked home.

Most of the cops I've worked with in the last few years have, when pressed and in private, expressed a desire to see marijuana, and most drugs, legalized and taken out of the hands of criminals.

If we sell it in the 7-11, or perhaps only in the liquor stores, at least the bikers won't be killing each other (and bystanders) in competition for the market. Honestly, we have bigger problems than marijuana, yet piss billions into the bottomless pit of enforcing a stupid and futile law.

---

I agree.

Edit: and whatever, I smoke cigarettes too and as long as I keep my smoke away from others nobody has any business telling me to butt out.

[ 24 July 2007: Message edited by: Boze ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boze:
Cigarettes cause cancer, pot doesn't. But more importantly, people can smoke whatever they want regardless of what you or the pigs say.

Edit: and whatever, I smoke cigarettes too and as long as I keep my smoke away from others nobody has any business telling me to butt out.

[ 24 July 2007: Message edited by: Boze ]

---

If you want to help legalize weed,eliminating the smoke would help.

[ 26 July 2007: Message edited by: Frisko ]

quote:

---

The risk is doubled among regular users who smoke the drug daily or weekly, according to the review of 35 studies published in The Lancet.

The findings will add to pressure for the drug to be re-classified from class C to class B, which carries tougher penalties, in a review, promised by Gordon Brown, of the 2004 decision to downgrade it.

But the research was challenged by experts who said that there had been no increase in schizophrenia over the past 40 years, despite the explosion in cannabis use by young people. An estimated 6.2 million people take the drug.

---

A decade or so ago, there was a study which said middle aged married guys were less likely than middle aged single guys to have criminal records, suffer from serious mental illness, be alcoholics or drug addicts or be unemployed.

The immediate interpretation at the time was that this proved the positive effect that marriage had an men.

However, another interpretation would be that women are less likely to choose a mate who is an unemployed alcoholic in and out of jail on smack.....

quote:

---

Originally posted by minkepants:
So this study they're trotting out makes me wonder about its presumptions and methodology... To say that pot, therefore "causes" schitzophrenia is bullshit. Its deliberate torture of stats to fit their agenda.

---

Well, I checked the stats in Canada on schizophrenia and found that like Britian, 1% of the population suffers from schizophrenia, and that it is a stable figure, also like Britian's.

If we smoke x 4 the amount of pot, than does the rest of the world, our schizophrenia numbers should correlate with that, if the studies were in anyway accurate. They do not, says much, eh?!

quote:

---

the main obstacle to recognizing schizophrenia as PTSD was because of pharmaceutical company interference in case studies.

---

Hmmmm, interesting. I don't know if every person I've ever known who was schitzophrenic or delusional went through extreme trauma. Some of them sure did.

What I do know is that anyone I know who has ever been diagnosed with a mental illness was prescribed pills and therapy. They got their pills right away. Not a fucking one of them ever got anybody to talk to.

[ 31 July 2007: Message edited by: minkepants ]