This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Americans Just Want To Get High
For the first time (in the 44 years of polling), the majority of Americans favor legalizing marijuana. As Gallup notes, from a low of 12% in favor in 1969, the latest poll shows a clear majority (58%) now believe the drug should be made legal.
Perhaps not so surprising, given the prospects for much of today's youth (67% of 18 to 29 year olds in favor), Gallup adds that a sizable percentage of Americans (38%) this year admitted to having tried the drug, which may be a contributing factor to greater acceptance.
Those who identfied themselves as Democrats were almost twice as 'in favor' of legalization as Republicans.
Via Gallup,
It has been a long path toward majority acceptance of marijuana over the past 44 years, but Americans' support for legalization accelerated as the new millennium began. This acceptance of a substance that most people might have considered forbidden in the late 1960s and 1970s may be attributed to changing social mores and growing social acceptance. The increasing prevalence of medical marijuana as a socially acceptable way to alleviate symptoms of diseases such as arthritis, and as a way to mitigate side effects of chemotherapy, may have also contributed to Americans' growing support.
Whatever the reasons for Americans' greater acceptance of marijuana, it is likely that this momentum will spur further legalization efforts across the United States. Advocates of legalizing marijuana say taxing and regulating the drug could be financially beneficial to states and municipalities nationwide. But detractors such as law enforcement and substance abuse professionals have cited health risks including an increased heart rate, and respiratory and memory problems.
With Americans' support for legalization quadrupling since 1969, and localities on the East Coast such as Portland, Maine, considering a symbolic referendum to legalize marijuana, it is clear that interest in this drug and these issues will remain elevated in the foreseeable future.
»
- 16446 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
420 BLAZE IT FAGET!
"Life's a bitch, and then you die - that's why we get high, cuz you never know when you gonna go..."
-NaS
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnKUUBKLygE
"Marijuana dependecy"....lol.
Did the Poll ask if you were high when answering the Poll?
Well look, a person who gets high EVERY single night of their lives is going to have issues, very much like a person who gets DRUNK every night is going to have problems.
The REAL reason that “authorities” want to keep cannabis illegal is that people who use it properly quickly realize that the status-quo is a pack of lies. The contrast between sober consciousness and cannabis altered consciousness can be quite educational.
“Proper use” means having a small amount a few times a week in the evening, then just relaxing and thinking about life, the universe, and everything in between.
Dude, that is deep....if everyone smoked we could, what was I saying, oh yah, you should just, wait, for some reason I'm having a problem finishing my ummm, what's it called, those things that come in your head....
Good thing Bubba never inhaled and got to be a Rhodes Scholar. Now, Barry , on the other hand ..
Can't help but think God meant for him to be a road kill.
"Years of Heavy Marijuana Use"
Call it what you will.
Your on the WRONG side of this one bro.........
how about i call you stupid...
One can only hope
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACF4XDznGEs
Maybe if you would light up once in a while, you would learn something, you arrogant condescending dumbfuck. Go read your fucking bible, asshole. Something about the flowers and wonders of the Earth. What next--you'll go on a rant about psilocybin mushrooms?
Search for "Cocaine-crazed Negro", then you'll find out WHY drugs are prohibited!
"Dependency" is a pretty poor way to describe this, and is much more accurate for caffiene, which is physically addictive.
The Koch brothers and George Soros agree, marijuana should be legalized.
me too!
If you own your personel sovereignty then ALL drugs should be decriminalized.
The war on drugs is a war on you. It's a war on the people. It has little to do with whether they're "good" or "bad". By making drugs illegal they jack the price and control the market. Ask why did huge drug money lauderers like Wachovia and HSBC avoid jail? Because they've always known about these illicit profits; profits so big they can't hide them without complicity.
"It's not a war on drugs, it's a war on personal freedom is what it is, ok? Keep that in mind at all times, thank you."
- Bill Hicks
"War On Consciousness" - Graham Hancock's TED talk (Removed from TED archives by "inexplicable" reasons)
"Today a young man on acid realized that all matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration. That we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively. There is no such thing as death, life is only a dream, and we are the imagination of ourselves...
And now, here's Tom with the weather."
- Bill Hicks
groovin' on the post, TWDude
dream on, my friend
Ah but this is not a site for libertarians. This has become a site for Lipservice Libertarians™, who merely pretend to espouse personal freedom.
This explains the proliferation of scare stories on ZH about weed, porn, immigration, blacks, etc etc.
My guess is that this move from libertarianism to de facto republicanism is a premeditated and deliberate move by ZH.
Post sigh-op letdown? <psys>
a shame, really
"Advocates of legalizing marijuana say taxing and regulating the drug could be financially beneficial to states and municipalities nationwide."
Why of course. Treat the personal use of something that grows naturally as a potential revenue source. Even some so called 'libertarians' (Gary Johnson as an example) use this argument. It seems that the default position of just about any politician, regardless of where they are within the democrat-republican paradigm, is to tax anything that moves. I agree with @Ignatius, the "war on drugs is a war on you." It's a mechanism of control.
I'm avoiding all this medical marijuana, seedless, tax base crap like the plague. If you people keep going down this road you'll end up paying $$$, 90% of it taxes, for prefabbed generic crap, just like cigarettes. They'll be consolidating, running any independent operators out of business, monopolizing...
Legalize medical cocaine!
Drug laws are based on the false premise that you can commit a crime against yourself which is a violation of the very premise of liberty. What you choose to drink/smoke/snort/shoot into your body is YOUR choice. If you want to commit suicide that is YOUR choice. Now when it comes to distribution that is a trickier area as regards to the question of harm to others, but simple possession or use should never be a crime.
I disagree, and so does the FDA and Nanny State.
What you choose to drink/smoke/snort/shoot into your body increases the collective National healthcare costs and therefore SHOULD NOT and WILL NOT BE YOUR OWN CHOICE. Nothing is Free bitchez.
@Harbanger - What a bunch of horseshit. If that is the case then outlaw eating at McDonald's. Reinstate prohibition and stop selling alcohol. Outlaw any tobacco products. And for God's sake shut down the internet because people use it for unhealthy purposes. Why not tax the hell out of everything because everything can cause health problems? I mean, if you eat hydrogenated fats then you could die of a heart attack. If you eat too much sea food you could die of mercury poisoning. Let's go ahead and monitor the number and quality of calories that people ingest because if you overeat it will inevitably lead to weight gain. If you sit for too long in front of your computer you could die of hypertension brought on by reading bullshit like that comment. I don't give a flying fuck about the collective or what they think. Furthermore I don't expect (or want) the collective to support whatever bad habits I choose to adopt of my own accord.
Progressives tried banning Booze before, who do you think was behind prohibition? It didnt' work because they didn't have enough control, it was premature. Look it up. Everything you say they should do is incrementally coming to our promised utopian society. Bloomberg and Moochele's concern over what you do and eat are small examples of your future. Baby steps fool.
Maybe so, but lovers of individual freedom DO NOT support "Big Brother!"
Good point! But most sheep choose "fairness" over equal justice. That's why they are SHEEP.
Have any of you drug use fans ever considered the damage that drug use does to others? I bet you haven't. You probably never even thought about it, in your one-eyed pursuit of cerebral and physical self-gratification.
And if you're using stimulants there's a very good chance that the personality changes that occur have already lead you to not give a damn about anyone else, and in fact, you will act unreasonably violently to anyone who might interfere in any way.
OK, let's put in terms you might actually comprehend;
If you want open slather and to pretend taking drugs is a faux core 'libertarian' right, a free personal choice, with no rules, anything goes, suit yourself, take whatever you want, however and whenever, and fuck everyone else as you don't care if everyone else doesn't like the result, and/or what you do to where we live, and those that we care for ...
Then you won't mind if we blow your head off to be rid of you?
Responsibility is implicit in your choices.
"Responsibility is implicit in your choices."
Really? I predict certain peeps are going to have a very very hard time with the World they created. Justice will be served.
Isn't that the clear meaning in the line you've quoted?
I agree with much of what you said, but then you said.
"Then you won't mind if we blow your head off to be rid of you?"
As if you can somehow contain the beast created. No. There's a greater purpose. What was created will justly be used against you to teach the next generation.
The point is saying that maybe jogs the self-absorbed addled brain to examine why some free 'libertarian' individual or community might do that to problematic obnoxious drug users. It's not hard to comprehend the implications of gas-gangrene either.
Justice, violence and mass-murder are the monopoly of dysfunctional criminal controlled super-violent states who endlessly say don't use violence, then do all they can to bomb cities.
... oh wait ... I see your point
Anyway, I learned a long time ago not to place any faith in authorities to solve issues of importance and consequence. It's been the same wherever I go. The great saving grace is that most humans are quite orderly people, affable and harmless, unless infringed on. The problem with drug and also alcohol users (I've found) is they routinely infringe on people, and create conflict, usually without a second thought, and expect nothing to happen.
Hence my comment. Stuff will happen in a libertarian society.
The US government deals drugs. It uses the so-called "War on Drugs" to artificially inflate its profits.
The US government invaded Afghanistan in October 2001. The planting season began in November.
The US government restored the world's opium supply.
"On July 28, 2000, Taliban leader Mullah Omar issued a ban on the cultivation and trafficking of opium and repeated this ban in October, ordering the Taliban to plow up fields planted to poppy" (Source).
"Pakistan's Foreign Secretary Inam-ul Haq's claim to have eliminated all opium plantations in Taliban controlled territories — reported by Agence France-Presse — seems to have been confirmed by a U.N. survey" (March 1, 2001).
"U.N. drug control officers said the Taliban religious militia has virtually wiped out opium production in Afghanistan - once the world's largest producer - since banning poppy cultivation in July" (February 16, 2001).
"A 12-member team from the U.N. Drug Control Program spent two weeks searching most of the nation's largest opium-producing areas and found so few poppies that they do not expect any opium to come out of Afghanistan this year. 'We are not just guessing. We have seen the proof in the fields,' said Bernard Frahi, regional director for the U.N. program in Afghanistan and Pakistan" (February 16, 2001).
"Last year, 75 percent of the world's opium crop was grown in Afghanistan... . But something astonishing has become evident with this spring's harvest. Behind the narrow dikes of packed earth, the fields are empty of their most profitable plant. Poor farmers, scythes in hand, stoop among brown stems. Mile after mile, there is only a dry stubble of wheat to cut from the lumpy soil" (May 24, 2001).
"Last July, the ruling Taliban banned the growing of poppies as a sin against the teachings of Islam. Almost every farmer complied, some grudgingly, some not. 'Even if it means my children die, I will obey my amir,' said Nur Ali, sitting in his fields, sipping tea" (May 24, 2001).
"But American narcotics officials who visited the country confirmed earlier United Nations reports that the Taliban had, in one growing season, managed a rare triumph in the long and losing war on drugs" (May 24, 2001).
This post is excellent. If it was exposed that the military or CIA was involved in the drug trade in Afghanistan, it wouldn't be the first time USG was caught running drugs.
now do that same test with television as the drug
i feel dumber every single time i watch network news
To get the full effect, try watching NBC Nightly News. It's like mainlining government propaganda.
I'd like to see that analysis with alcohol.
For some enlightening information regarding Cannabis "toxicity" see: http://www.drugwarfacts.org/cms/Causes_of_Death
I'd like to see it for tobacco (it might explain Ayn Rand's devolution)
Re: among those who were marijuana dependent at 3 or more of the 5 assessment timepoints.
Sounds like yer advocating a nanny-state to keep people from hurtin' themselves.
I don't think Ayn OR Verner von Mises would approve of the slippery-slope of socialism you're walking down. First you regulate Hemp, and the next thing you know there's socialists telling you what football team you've got to support.
You also get nonsense like "Ban Big Gulps! It's for the children!"
Blah Blah Big Hemp, Big Dope, Big Chronic, Big Weed, Big lol.
If you are a Libertarian you must believe that people are capable of making their own choices and taking responsibility for them.
Except for minor children, or those who are mentally incapable by nature or due to injury or disease.
The law also recognizes diminished responsibility due to drug or alcohol.
So, if you are impaired by drugs or alcohol you are not responsible therefore it is not unreasonable for the government to regulate drugs and alcohol for the same reason they keep firearms, driving licenses and other dangerous things out of the hands of children and the metally handicapped.
More importantly, you've left out the effect of drug users on other people which is a far worse problem than some wretch regularly taking drugs to physical and mentally-impairing excess.
There is a difference between pushing for fact based decision making and outright illegalization. Conservatives are still hoping for some salvation of our civilization where as liberal progressives are in full acceptance of the decline and collapse and just want to enjoy the trip. One is deluded while the other is completely fucked up!
That's an untruth.
Our citizens are encouraged to cheer for any team of their choice from the state-approved list:
All fans of the New England Patriots or the Philadelphia Silver Eagles are required to meet with their Community Coordinator for resettlement.
You pussy!
Great chart, HH.
Have you got one for alcohol, so we can compare? Or... breast implants?
He asked what the same study would show for alcohol. He didn't ask if they controlled for alcohol in the MJ study.
You obviously don't know what control means. Neither do you know what freedom means, you Lipservice Libertarian™ dickhead.
hedgeless_horseman, having caught his daily limit of red herrings, throws another one our way:
And this has precisely what to do with legalization? Most people here are already aware of your personal dislike for marijuana, so there's really no need to restate it. If you have a point, feel free to make it.
Just because a prohibited substance becomes legal, DOES NOT mean that EVERYONE now has to toss away their prejudices and get stoned. I wonder how much dinero Colorado is gonna save in prison costs...
It's not 'legal' as such, it's decriminalized and prison sentences eliminated. Fines often remain, just like they do for drinking in public places, and drunk and disorderly, etc.
Growing 10 plants in your garden for personal use has been decriminalized in South Australia for most of my life (and most people don't). In the 1980s growing the same amount of plants to maturity in neighboring state Queensland got you mandatory life in prison. You would actual get a lower sentence if you just shot and killed the arresting police.
Hey, don't leave out television in these graphs
dude, calm down. i happen to like alcohol, and breast implants in fairly heavy doses. so i might lose an eye.
That's cool and all- and probably true, but the war on marijuana has nothing to do with saving a few American IQ points.
How about a war on illiteracy?
http://www.dosomething.org/tipsandtools/11-facts-about-literacy-america
99.7 TO 93.9?
I DONT BELIEVE IT.
Nor do I need that extra 7.3 in my IQ
If that's the New Zealand study then it has been refuted already. Socio-economic factors account for the difference. That written, I don't think teens should be smoking up. Let your brain develop before basting it in the lovely herb.
As always, correlation is NOT causation.
But I wouldn't expect someone who's brain has gone dinosaur to EVER change their opinion.
Thank you for this great post.
My stepdad has been using pot since he was 13...
He is now hitting 50 and can't remember a damn thing. There are little post-it note sticky notes everywhere. Conversations are bazzar with him, even his parents won't speak to him anymore...
Oh well...
Being healthy and keeping your brain stimiulated is what keeps your IQ up. If you take some drugs and expand your mind a little bit that too can raise your IQ. Being lethargic, eating hot cheetoes, and smoking weed all day ya that will kill you and your brain pretty quickly but that's what happens when you go about life like an idiot. Trust me, I know!
What is intelligence. Good question to start with before charts and conclusions. Are the people who designed Fukushima intelligent?
hedgeless_horseman posted a chart with some words:
Seems like a red herring as it has nothing to do with marijuana legalization. Did you have a point?
Change in IQ from reading this propaganda....
Well, H-H:
It is pretty well impossible not to drown in junk science whenever anything about "marijuana" is at issue. Furthermore, there is practically never a fair comparison of the real relative dangers from everything else. Instead there is routinely a range of grossly irrational risk assessments, especially as promoted by the mass media.
Anyone who is interested could skim through the following stories about the alleged Youth psychosis excuse: for why to keep cannabis criminal. NONE OF THAT EVER MAKES SENSE, EXCEPT AS MANIFESTING SOME EVIL ULTERIOR MOTIVATIONS!
You must be one of those "Cocaine-crazed Negroes", or Chinamen, plying our young white girlz with opium to turn them into white sex slaves! Mebbe even one of those lazy Mehhicans in the throes of "Reefer Madness!"
This is pure bullshit. I know a guy who is 50 who has been smoking for over 30 years. He took an IQ test and it was only 1 point less than when he took it in high school. Hell, I was smart enough to load up on gold and silver when it was less than half today's price LOL. And that was after quite a few pounds.
Sorry HH, for every negative study you dig up I can find one that refutes it. Chronic pot use will cause problems. Just using here and there is not. Simple as that. The "studies" you cite are all hogwash. When they don't give the methods, its all BS.
Alcohol, not pot, has caused all the destruction among my family and friends. If you really want your government to get serious about banning a substance based on its cost to society or how it lowers the IQ scores of the consumer, start with vodka.
"life's a bitch and then you die that's why we puff lye." Illmatic is a classic.
Legalized Marijuana in the non medical format will never happen in a meaningful way, look at all the losers if this occurs:
Big Pharma
Big Tobacco
DEA
Drug Cartels that are in bed with .gov
How do you explain WA and CO?
easy targets enabling federal prosecutors to meet their quotas
From what I've heard, Marlboro bought a gazillion acres (not really that much) in Humbolt County CA, home of one of the best climates for outdoor growing. I think we can all be assured that if marijuana becomes legal the government will regulate it in a way to further enrich the wealthy and to stymie any attempts from small timers of making a good lives for themselves growing dope.
No, I think it will most likely turn up like home brewers and beer. You will be able to grow a little for your own use. It's the youth growing up, things are changing...
agree with both of you. anyone looking for legalization for a get rich quick scheme is going to be blindslided and regulated to death by the BigCorps(e) and their lobbying firms.
ganja and FeRNs don't mix. it's just one (of many) magic plants on the personal path to self-sufficiency and disintermediation frpm the Great Pyramid. and honestly, it's not the female that holds the most potential in this case, but the male.
got rope? or paper? or fuel? or resin?
etc etc etc
I was gonna stop QE, but then I got high.
I was gonna take responsibility, but then I got high.
I was gonna stop fucking up, the economy...
But then I got high, but then I got high, but then I got high.
Ignorance is way more damaging than getting high.
It helps you forget... or remember... I can't remember which one...
You can't forget whih one either. ;)
That statement confuses me... or makes me hungry... yeah... hungry....
After putting up with this admin, a BUNCH of teetoatlers have gone to the dark side.Anything to escape reality,when your sleeping and have a really bad nigthmare, and wake up your relieved.This one when you wake up, it only BEGINS anew.
Now we all know the war on drugs aint nuthin but another closed loop ponzi so the law enforcement side can get theirs, to create moar government job's an get moar funding.
So, back in the day there wasn't any war on drugs.
There were however, quite a few private funeral homes that created job's too.
Jus sayin'. Hey, some shit takes care of itself.
Well.....in the world today.....when there are no more High Hopes......all you can do is Hope to get HIIIIIIIGGGGGHHH !!!!!!
The effect under marijuana is analogous to effects in visual and sound modalities. Visual scenes often have more depth, sounds are heard with more dimension; so too with time-there is an expansion of the fabric of time so there is a feeling of depth instead of the usual two dimensional flow.
The explanation of this sometimes given by marijuana users is that more is happening: they are thinking faster or more thoughts are occurring in the same time period. This could cause external time to be relatively slower. Although it need not be the case that internal processes change at a faster rate it is possible that a person is aware of more perceptions in a given amount of time as a result of the enhancement of sensory data. With visual enhancement more details of the movements of the self and others are attended to. This means that more information is perceived in the same amount of time. This is also true of proprioceptive and tactile responses. Time is somewhat conditioned to a normal rate of information input in particular contexts. One has a "standard rate of intake" and if the amount of information is increased for a unit of time, then one of the responses may be that time is going slower. To be conscious of any change in experience there must be a comparison with previous similar situations. Thus if the time experience while high is compared with a similar normal experience, or with a time pace constructed from normal experience, it may be perceived as slower.
A more important cause for time distortion under marijuana can be found by noting how persons normally judge the passage of time, then investigating the changes in these criteria caused by marijuana. This is rather difficult because no one knows how we judge time. [source]
I upvoted you 'cause I got high just reading this!
trader1, you are aware of as much time as you are present to. The more present you are, the more time. That's the linear aspect - point A to B. Check out P.D. Ouspensky or Rodney Collin on the subject.
i will check that out. cannot disagree with your statement.
"Be Here, NOW!"
P.D. Ouspensky:
Do not identify.
Do not consider.
Do not tell lies.
Do not express negative emotions.
it's about time...
Moar THC and EBT!
Barry is baked right now.
ill blow an ounce to that....g's up, GOVT down.....
Beyond the Yellow Brick Road: Revised
Bob Meehan, $ 20.00
All teenagers are going to be exposed to drugs, most are going to try drugs, many will become addicted, some will want help for themselves or others. This book can help.
http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2013-01-24/will-you-pay-kid-read-12...
The chapter on marijuana is a must read for every parent.
Amazon reviews of that book are telling.
I'll say. 54 votes for "5" and 31 votes for "1" and nothing in between. You either love or hate this book apparently.
Oh, wait... you believe in the devil known as "addiction?"
Look, drug abuse (as well as ALL other forms of self-abuse) are merely coping mechanisms to overcome the otherwise overwhelming cognitive dissonance.
Blaming a drug is nothing but a complete failure to observe the real problem at hand.
Same is true with the idiots who call depression a disease.
Just shut up, wear your magic underwear, and post pictures of meat and vegetable platters with big glasses of cow pus. And don't forget to pretend your do-as-I-say conservatism is actually do-as-you-will libertarianism.
I agree, NotApplicable!
My favourite little article on the issue of Drug Addiction:
http://www.marijuanaparty.ca/article.php3?id_article=440
Radical Marijuana - excellent article "Rat Trap". Thanks for posting.
hedgeless_horseman, posting even more red herrings, said:
How is your personal dislike for marijuana relevant to the issue of legalization?
As always, the real questions are about how criminalizing cannabis makes it any safer? The obvious answers are that criminalizing cannabis only makes things worse!
(Except for the banksters that launder the drug profits, and all the other people who profit from the black market, and/or the attempts to suppress that black market.)
I posted this years ago:
For all of those that believe that MJ should remain illegal, I just have one
question: "Are you still that racist?" You only have to google "cocaine-crazed
Negro" to find out why drugs are illegal. It's the White man's way of being
able to arrest anyone at anytime and placing them in prison for a long time
(by the way, I'm a 56-year old White male). Everyone that thinks the Govt will
legalize it for tax revenue are missing one important fact: It's called weed
because that's what it is . And as such, if it becomes legal and taxes on it
become too steep, people will grow their own. Let's say for the sake of argument
that it finally does become legal -- what are the consequences?
1. The Police will have to spend their time and effort actually going after
DANGEROUS criminals -- that have guns and aren't afraid to use them!
2. Church attendance won't necessarily go down, but how can a good Reverend
preach about looking for rewards in Heaven when users are having such a good
time here on earth? When one looks at the history of drugs vs. religion, one
notices that almost every mind-altering substance known to mankind has been
condemned by organized Religion (they can't stand the competition!).
3. Users will actually have to admit that they're responsible for their actions,
while stoned and while straight. Lawyers are going to lose out on an impressive
revenue stream of excuse-making for their clients misbehavior.
4. Doctors will finally have to face the end principle that they are no longer
in charge of DECIDING what is good for their patients -- they will have to admit
what's been going on all along -- that patients will only follow recommendations
from the Medical Establishment, when it's not too inconvenient for the patient!
5. For everyone currently in Jail for using weed, well I would say that they should
be released -- but they have to acknowledge the fact that they knew they were
breaking the law, and that's a crime that cannot be excused so readily.
6. All of the Puritans and Politicians that think that somehow, vices can be
prohibited, will have to recognize the hard truth that there are 10
Commandments in the Bible. After all this time, even those prohibitions are being
violated on a daily basis. Even God has found out that forbidding a choice doesn't
lead to righteousness, and trying to force someone to believe as you is a total non-starter.
7. Children will suddenly have more respect for Govt, Church, Law, Medicine and
other Established Institutions once they give up on the Hypocrisy that's been
the so-called war on drugs.
8. Govt will have to find Honest work for the FDA, the DEA and Customs.
In short, this argument should not be about right-wing conservatives vs left-wing
liberals, or Decepticrats vs Republicons, it should be about Stupidity vs Common
Sense.
Great post, #2 was hilarious, #3 also.
When I was a kid I gave my mom a really tiny ball of hash in her mid-morning coffee, without her knowledge. I promptly forgot about doing that until she giggled herself to bits watching the Dick Van Dyke Show (that I remembered very clearly). Then I remembered giving her the hash coffee. I've never told anyone about that, it seemed like a terrific gag and a damn good idea at the time, but it could have gone very badly if she'd tried to drive, etc.
The point is, I'd never have considered doing that if I wasn't already ripped, and thinking it was going to be a great laugh. The other thing was I didn't realize, even after that, that I'd done something wrong. I didn't care, or take it seriously at all. The drug use produced this attitude in me and it was not until I stopped using it and reflected on things like this that I realized how completely out of line I was behaving.
Fortunately I didn't have someone else (authorities or otherwise) teach me a hard lesson about what I was doing, I was able to learn from it myself.
I also had a friend I'd not seen for a few years and I'd started smoking hash since. And when I introduced him to it it really screwed him up. He went from being a working technician with a pretty good job, the car, the abode, furniture, "a life", so to speak. In about a year he was drinking heavily and smoking often and abandoned his job and spent a lot of time wasted, and eventually burned through his many friends.
In the meantime I'd started a business, had the life, a very beautiful partner and all the trappings, I'd grown right out of it. But he didn't. The last I heard from his sister, he was living in a caravan in his parents backyard, flat broke and screwed up. I can't help wondering how he'd have turned out if I'd never given him a joint or made it seem cool. Prior to that he was the model citizen.
I learned from all of that, it was the least I could do, so I suggest that people who are strongly pro-drug use should maybe honestly consider the behaviors and outcome, and unexpected consequences of it, before encouraging any others to follow their lead, or to portray it as harmless.
I don't see anybody urging others to start using drugs. The comments are mostly against using the drug laws to create more tyranny.
I agree, point #2 was hilarious, wicked truth!
A lot of marijuana laws were based on promoting lies in order to advance monopolies that could profit from having legally wiped out their competition.
First let it have it's real name back. It's hemp.
marijuana is an entirely fabricated name from the early 20th century that was designed to paint it as a dirty foreign drug.
Hemp is an awesome commodity: fuel and clothing being 2 of its highest quality derivatives. The fuel side of which would really eat into TBTF's profit margins with big oil. Which means it obviously wont be legalized.
As always: fuck you JPM.
I want to up-vote you moar than just once, but alas, it is not allowed.
Feed, food, fuel and fiber all in one easy to grow pest-supressing and soil-improving plant. So useful it's illegal.
And the last thing you want to do is smoke it.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p52Epx6lJes
Actually, the Genus name is Cannabis, of which there are at least three species: indica, sativa, and ruderalis.
You left out kush, purple haze and cheese.
Those are strain names, not species names. Kush is an indica, Purple Haze is mostly indica, and Cheese is roughly a 40%/60% sativa/indica hybrid.
Actually, it was a mistake to call Cannabis a genus, with three species. Cannabis is actually one species, which has the equivalent of different races, the same as human beings are one species with different races.
(I could easily fill several pages explaining all the different ways that one can compare different races of hemp plants to different races of human beings.)
that would actually be an interesting essay, doc.
Well, tip e. canoe, I have already written that kind of essay several times, over the course of several decades, which I why I did not bother to do so again here. However, anybody interested could listen this:
https://soundcloud.com/doomstead-diner/monsta-of-doom-blair-longley-2/s-...
My understanding is that the classifications have been, and continue to be much debated (wiki actually has a pretty decent summary for those interested). Unlike humans, nature hates bright-line divisions and hard classifications - so there will always be difficulties when we try to define fuzzy edges. I've listed the current taxonomy - which as you point out, is certainly open for revision in the future.
The current taxonomy of cannabis reminds me of the Dredd Scott USA Supreme Court case, which decided that African Americans could not be human beings, as the only way to reconcile the plain language of the Declaration of Indedepence, etc., with the fact of the then existing slavery.
The thing that makes human beings ONE SPECIES is that all the different races can interbreed. That is also what makes cannabis plants ALL ONE SPECIES.
The current taxonomy was based on the mistaken impression that Cannabis sativa and Cannabis indica looked different, and surely the evolved in differnt parts of the world. (The working analogy is between melanin in human skin, and THC resins on marijuana flowers, which act as sun screens.)
Your understanding of what determines a species is incorrect. See "Ring Species" for an example of one of the "gray areas" I'm talking about.
Also see: "Hybrid" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_(biology)) for a pretty thorough explanation:
"Examples of plant hybrids
The multiplication symbol × (not italicised) indicates a hybrid in the Latin binomial nomenclature. Placed before the binomial it indicates a hybrid between species from different genera (intergeneric hybrid):-
Interspecific plant hybrids include:
Some natural hybrids:
Most crop species, btw, are actually hybrids of different species.
"Beefalo" are an example of a common animal hybrid of two species (that happen to be fertile, unlike mules). The Savannah cat (Serval X Domestic Cat) is another example of a common animal hybrid that can be fertile.
I don't think that is true, but will admit that I'm only reciting what I've read. Hemp supposedly is very low in THC levels and you'd have to smoke a wheelbarrow full of it to get a buzz. Marijuana, on the other hand, is very potent. Especially the different varieties they've managed to cultivate over the years, very potent where a couple of hits will send you flying.
Hemp is a great crop for all the listed reasons above and for many more, it got a bad name by being associated with potent pot.
Smoking pot makes the pain of being smarter than the average sheeple easier to bear.
And it doesn't hurt the sex life, either. Win-win situation, in my estimation.
Weed is the only thing keeping me from snapping on a daily basis. They can keep their prozac and zoloft, just give me a spliff.
So, if I am understanding you two, it keeps one from having to deal with the real world, and in doing so, it is easy to see how it prevents developing minds from learning how to effectively deal with life's inevitable ups and downs? That is exactly what I have witnessed, too.
I smoke and deal with the real world at the same time, not sure why you are assuming it keeps one from having to deal with the real world. My production actually increases with work in the yard and around the house and I have fun doing it too. If you don't like it don't smoke it, but to keep it illegal is retarded because its a fucking weed that grows all over the world.
I suppose people don't think that being locked up against their will where they will be raped in the ass for smoking these herbs is a civilized thing to do, and that's why it should be legal and left alone. If you don't like it, don't smoke it, simple as.
I agree that adults should be able to do as they please in their own home.
like all drugs mj reuires some guidance, ideally from medical professionals, most people don't understand the variances in strains, etc...basic education helps.
Anybody who works in a high stress or commission-based business that requires 50-60 hours per week knows what a beautiful thing it is. After 8 hours at the desk, I smoke a little joint and I'm good for another 4-5 hours.
HIgh stress commision based business relys on selling. If I had to sell to make a living selling, I would likely want to be stoned too! It makes the job of having to lie my ass off to convince someone to buy something they probably don't need and can't afford a lot easier.
All business is selling. You only have to lie to the stupid ones.
That makes no sense. Quality products and services sell themselves. The stupid folks fall victim to the worse liars. The best work in government and for wall street. BTFD.
Informed consent is almost always the best idea.
agree that it requires guidance, especially with all the strains floating about grown with synthetic estrogens, etc., but guidance from medical professionals seems a bit less than ideal, don't you think?
that is unless you wanna ride the choom wagon to your own private death panel :)
but, it's ok for adults to go drinking out in the town/bar?
hedgeless_horseman said:
That's the first comment of yours which is actually relevant to the topic of legalization.
I'm glad to see that you favor legalization, as opposed to the current unregulated, uncontrolled black market.
Do you have any idea how many people think they drive better and enjoy it more after downing a few beers?
If they don't want you to drive while you are drinking, why do they ask you for your drivers license when you go to buy beer?
Its racism, like voter photo ID's.
When full auto-drive is available, I will buy a new car or the retrofit set.
Why is this not standard already? The amount of hours lost to driving and traffic is a catastrophic waste of productive time. If I could be sleeping, reading, or drinking beer during all the time I typically spend driving, the improvement to my quality of life would be dramatic.
Make the roads safer, the public happier and more productive, and eliminate the jobs of so many public-oppressing parasite-pigs. Win-win-win!
We all have our own crutches hedgeless, IMO weed is much less destructive than many others. We all have some really low downs we would much rather forget. My problem is not being able to let them go and just keep replaying in my head. Weed is much cheaper and safer than therapy and big pharma pills.
HH I am very disappointed that you seem to be against Cannabis, marijuana is a MADE up name BTW. If we are all for Real Freedom here at ZH, seem kinda hypocritical to be against a PLANT, that the research is OVERWHELMINGLY in support of its benefit[s] vs a bunch of made up drawbacks that are routed in the racism of the 30's and 40's when cannabis prohibition started to protect big pharma and the rayon industry. Just my 2c....
The research is overwhelming that marijuana use is very harmful for the developing mind.
I support your right as an adult to act as you please in your own home.
Do you support my right to set boundaries for my children, and enforce the consequences when my children break those boundaries? If you do, then we are in alignment.
Peace.
No one's telling you what to allow your children to do.
I think the main issue here is that weed is a pretty minor threat compared to other legal vices (see Cannabis v. Alcohol related injury/death stats).
Another issue is that, among naturally occurring plants/animals, we'd probably get a bigger public health benefit if we spent all the money trying to eradicate weed on other crusades like eradicating mosquitoes.
Is it Bush was OK because Obama is worse or Obama is OK because Bush was worse? I can't recall. I do know however that the best excuse for doing what you are doing is that it could ALWAYS be worse, right? Don't get me wrong, I'm all for personal freedom to fuck yourself up all you want. I just want honesty and facts and not some lame ass excuse for why you want to do it. Just do it! Just take the consequences and don't come whining about how thngs are just too damn hard and getting high should be a right...like healthcare, or is it mental healthcare? Isn't there something in the constitution about right to life, liberty and happiness?
I think you summed up another main issue quite nicely.
We don't know what to allow our children to do, and what not to do. We don't know how to respond when our children inevitably break the boundaries we do set.
In my experience, what works is when we do set clear boundaries, and enforce the consequences.
Too frequently, parents either:
Well put.
However, I think parents also need to prioritize/rank their messages to make sure the rules match reality.
Many well-meaning parents have told their kids not to smoke pot because it will turn them into psychotic deviants - then the kids try it with some friends who don't seem to be psychotic, and then say "Hey, that wasn't that bad!" which compromises the parent's perceived integrity when they tell their kids not to do other shit that's really bad like Meth and Heroin.
Not saying we should be getting our kids high - and obviously raising kids is/should be a personal endeavor (within limits: abuse etc.) but it's a tough balance that may require adaptive methods/strategies for different kids/environments.