Jump to content

California Measure 19 Fails

GenzoTheHarpist

By GenzoTheHarpist
in General

Recommended Posts

GenzoTheHarpist Newbie

GenzoTheHarpist

Posted
  • Author
Posted
[quote name='Legend Zero' timestamp='1289222492' post='4771348']
All I see is that we agree marijuana is less bad than the other two, but still bad for people correct? Then why should it be legalized? Our laws [i][u]should[/i][/u] have consistency but this is America. =/

Off-Topic: Successful thread is successful. [size="1"]And we're all stubborn...[/size]
[/quote]
You don't see that banning less dangerous things over more dangerous things is a clear, obvious hypocrisy? I'm not saying marijuana doesn't have negative effects, but if you demand it be banned then you can [i]only[/i] logically insist that alcohol and nicotine be banned as well, otherwise your views would have clear logical inconsistencies.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 65
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Legend Zero Newbie

Legend Zero

Posted
Posted
[quote name='GenzoTheHarpist' timestamp='1289253384' post='4772289']
You don't see that banning less dangerous things over more dangerous things is a clear, obvious hypocrisy? I'm not saying marijuana doesn't have negative effects, but if you demand it be banned then you can [i]only[/i] logically insist that alcohol and nicotine be banned as well, otherwise your views would have clear logical inconsistencies.
[/quote]
I'm not be inconsistent at all. I do believe that cigarettes and alcohol should go away but this threads topic is marijuana. I've also stated that cigarette prices/taxes are killing the movement for them and alcohol banning has already failed.

I'm an American who you call a hypocrite and who's logic you call inconsistent.......I find this to be a compliment. @.@
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GenzoTheHarpist Newbie

GenzoTheHarpist

Posted
  • Author
Posted
[quote name='Legend Zero' timestamp='1289254433' post='4772341']
I'm not be inconsistent at all. I do believe that cigarettes and alcohol should go away but this threads topic is marijuana. I've also stated that cigarette prices/taxes are killing the movement for them and alcohol banning has already failed.

I'm an American who you call a hypocrite and who's logic you call inconsistent.......I find this to be a compliment. @.@
[/quote]
As opposed to marijuana banning, which has totally not failed. Actually, marijuana use is more widespread now than it was when it was legal. If that's not failure, I don't know what is.

You have some serious problems then.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Icy Newbie

Icy

Posted
Posted
If I may interject Genzo? My friend has been doing research on a particular Hawaiian Plant, that produces similar effects as the plant I won't name. Minus the THC or whatever, minus the addiction aspect, zero odor and clears the mind on a level similar to effective Psychological Treatment Drugs (like for me I use 10ML Lexapro).

And it can be grounded into a powder and inhaled via drinks/pills or used as common incenses. Making that plant not only useless, but completely outdated. (I haven't named the plant that my friend is researching for it's still in the researching phase).
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Icy Newbie

Icy

Posted
Posted
"Similar Effects"; ie: None of the bad... At least so far from research. I'll update you as my friend informs me. And I know my wording is off, please forgive me; but it is not an easy subject for me to control myself on.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GenzoTheHarpist Newbie

GenzoTheHarpist

Posted
  • Author
Posted
But "similar effects" is such a vague term I can't possibly discuss it. If it doesn't have THC then it uses a different chemical pathway than THC itself does, so its not like its marijuana "minus" the THC. There are plenty of plants that have psychoactive effects but labeling everything under that general phrase doesn't draw any distinction between say, THC or cocaine.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Icy Newbie

Icy

Posted
Posted

Effects are related and I described it to me as close as he told me.
- It numbs the body from pain.
- It clears the mind, similar to many psychological drugs but renders it more "hush-hush" so to speak.

It's still getting close to it. And with it being odorless, able to be ingested rather than inhaled etc. It's looking good. :D It may not be the same, but replication is the closest we can do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GenzoTheHarpist Newbie

GenzoTheHarpist

Posted
  • Author
Posted

[quote name='JoshIcy' timestamp='1289256463' post='4772451']
Effects are related and I described it to me as close as he told me.
- It numbs the body from pain.
- It clears the mind, similar to many psychological drugs but renders it more "hush-hush" so to speak.

It's still getting close to it. And with it being odorless, able to be ingested rather than inhaled etc. It's looking good. :D It may not be the same, but replication is the closest we can do.
[/quote]
But that doesn't really seem like the same thing as marijuana at all. You could just as easily say "just drink instead of smoke" because they have vaguely similar inebriating effects. Just putting two things under "psychoactive" label doesn't mean they are the same and to be honest the effects of what you are describing do not seem ever remotely like a "replication" of THCs effects. You can't take two "drugs" and have them be the same by virtue of both being drugs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CrabHelmet Newbie

CrabHelmet

Posted
Posted
Wikipedia has been found to be as accurate as any encyclopedia. It's only "unreliable" in the formal sense that its collective authorship makes it unsuitable for citations in official papers; in terms of presenting evidence, it is perfectly acceptable. Conversely, sticking one's fingers in one's ears on the grounds that "lolwikipedia" instead of presenting any conflicting statistics is intellectually lazy and acts to deny the actual facts of the matter.

In other words, Legend Zero is an idiot.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Legend Zero Newbie

Legend Zero

Posted
Posted
Why I posted in this yesterday...it didn't go through?

A Crab insult? Eh, they're real cheap by the dozen at YCM.

As for the link...this survey just says a lot of people have tried since 1960 (which doesn't mean they continued) and that 3 million odd are near daily users. Has it included the MAJOR pop increase in the US?

3.6 million are daily users in July 2009. The census reports that in July 2009 that there were approx 307,006,550 people in the US.

If my math is right then that is less than 10% of the pop.

http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/19/if-marijuana-is-legal-will-addiction-rise/

This is one of the sources used by wiki and can I get a clearer way of the sentence.
"Marijuana dependence occurs in 9 percent of Americans who have ever used the drug"

Dependence seems like an addiction....not something I want to introduce as ok.

[quote name= 'Roger Roffman']
Marijuana dependence occurs in 9 percent of Americans who have ever used the drug, and between 33 percent and 50 percent of those who smoke it daily. Approximately 3.6 million Americans are daily or near daily users. In 20 years of marijuana dependence counseling studies at the University of Washington, those who’ve sought help averaged 10 years of daily or near daily use and had unsuccessfully tried to quit more than six times.[/quote]

I believe he is saying that because addicts can't kick the habit that it's useless to resist it?

Since this thread is going as well as a religious debate (both sides have evidence supporting it), we might as well end it here....I'm out.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...