Questions on Decriminalization/Legalization movement

[KevinWestern]

Is the problem of alcoholism helped or hurt by adding thousands of pot addicts to the legions of drunks?

A drunk can always sober up. There is nothing a pothead can do.

Then why don't you make Alcohol illegal? Why are you ok with this substance that kills 50,000+ a year in the US being available on every street corner?

Consistency Katz. There's nothing worse than a hypocrite.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Then why do you care if they have marijuana prohibition? Can't you say "I don't smoke anyway"? Again, you are MUCH,




But why do you accept that "raft of problems"? Why not just ban alcohol too? Why add to the problem of addiction by keeping alcohol legal, with liquor stores on every street corner, and bars everywhere you look?

I don't care if they have alcohol prohibition. I don't drink anyway.

Then why do you care if they have marijuana prohibition? Can't you say "I don't smoke anyway"? Again, you are MUCH,



its called being a fucking hypocrite.....

Because even though I do not use marijuana, the effects of other people's use of marijuana impacts me. If a drunk brings a bottle of scotch to a party everyone knows its scotch. They can drink it or not. A pothead might bring a plate of cookies and no one knows whether its poisoned or not.

and if that drunk gets drunk and drives home and gets in an accident and kills someone.....that does not affect anyone?.....if a "pothead" brought cookies he will let the people there no what they are.....once again Katz you bring up the 1% of pot smokers who do shit like that hoping it makes your point look good.....most people who have actually been to parties know better....

 

[Harry Dresden]

Is the problem of alcoholism helped or hurt by adding thousands of pot addicts to the legions of drunks?

A drunk can always sober up. There is nothing a pothead can do.

you mean if you are drunk you can sober up just like that?...once again Katz....clueless....

 

[Harry Dresden]

Is the problem of alcoholism helped or hurt by adding thousands of pot addicts to the legions of drunks?

A drunk can always sober up. There is nothing a pothead can do.

Then why don't you make Alcohol illegal? Why are you ok with this substance that kills 50,000+ a year in the US being available on every street corner?

Consistency Katz. There's nothing worse than a hypocrite.

because even though she claims she does not drink....she does when she is at a "party"....she knows it,i know it and everyone else knows it.....so its ok....

 

[Pogo]

Is the problem of alcoholism helped or hurt by adding thousands of pot addicts to the legions of drunks?

A drunk can always sober up. There is nothing a pothead can do.

There's no such thing as a "pot addict". You're a liar. And there's nothing a liar can do.

 

[BlindBoo]

Is the problem of alcoholism helped or hurt by adding thousands of pot addicts to the legions of drunks?

A drunk can always sober up. There is nothing a pothead can do.

There is no such thing as a pot addict, period. Opps, already point out by Mike.They're already there, all around you, in everyday life.

Meh, most people I've known like both, and I have no problems with either. Nor do I care to outlaw tobacco.

 

[thanatos144]

Is the problem of alcoholism helped or hurt by adding thousands of pot addicts to the legions of drunks?

A drunk can always sober up. There is nothing a pothead can do.

There's no such thing as a "pot addict". You're a liar. And there's nothing a liar can do.

Sure and there are no people who smoke pot everyday for decades too

tapatalk post

 

[emilynghiem]

Is the problem of alcoholism helped or hurt by adding thousands of pot addicts to the legions of drunks?

A drunk can always sober up. There is nothing a pothead can do.

There's no such thing as a "pot addict". You're a liar. And there's nothing a liar can do.

Do people really get addicted to marijuana? | Scope Blog

This issue reminds me of the pitbull fights,
where why is it that people who want to defend pitbulls always cite studies that back them,
and people who don't want to take risks with pitbulls always cite studies that back them up.

And both sides dismiss each other's resources as biased and having conflicts of interest.
Don't both sides have conflicting biases and interests?

What are the chances that pot ALWAYS poses a risk of addiction or NEVER poses a risk.
As long as there are some cases that go either way, neither side's bias is 100%.

 

[emilynghiem]

Is the problem of alcoholism helped or hurt by adding thousands of pot addicts to the legions of drunks?

A drunk can always sober up. There is nothing a pothead can do.

There's no such thing as a "pot addict". You're a liar. And there's nothing a liar can do.

Do people really get addicted to marijuana? | Scope Blog

This issue reminds me of the pitbull fights.
"Why is it" that people who want to defend pitbulls always cite studies that back them,
and people who don't want to take risks with pitbulls always cite studies that back them up.

And both sides dismiss each other's resources as biased and having conflicts of interest.
Don't both sides have conflicting biases and interests?

What are the chances that pot ALWAYS poses a risk of addiction or NEVER poses a risk.
As long as there are some cases that go either way, neither side's bias is 100%.

NOTE 1: I am biased toward pot posing more of a risk than not smoking at all.
All the things I have seen pot used for can be done without smoking or risking addiction.
that doesn't mean it shouldn't be an equal choice for those willing to take full responsibility.
but I am generally not impressed with someone's "responsibility" if they act like there are not more risks involved with smoking pot than not smoking at all. that seems irresponsible.

NOTE 2: I will backtrack later and thank everyone for contributing to this thread.
I believe all your input is important. i support people on all sides of the legalization
and enforcement/health policy issues to form teams and networks to collaboration on solutions
we can all support with good conscience. if we need to separate different levels of law, I think
we do need another level separate from civil or criminal to deal with health and abuse since
this inevitably involves personal, religious and political beliefs, and I believe everyone
should have equal freedom to take responsibility for their own without imposing on others.

Thank you!
I do believe this is part of the health care controversies and solutions that
involve separating parties and beliefs, and quit trying to impose past people's limits
of what they are willing to believe, pay for or support as a public law for all people

 

[Harry Dresden]

Is the problem of alcoholism helped or hurt by adding thousands of pot addicts to the legions of drunks?

A drunk can always sober up. There is nothing a pothead can do.

There's no such thing as a "pot addict". You're a liar. And there's nothing a liar can do.

Sure and there are no people who smoke pot everyday for decades too

tapatalk post

i smoked for quite a while.....and i did not smoke everyday.....and there were times when you had no pot for weeks because it was dry.....did not go nuts just resigned myself to the fact...there was no pot around....you would know this if you had some experience with pot....but you dont ....so you cant relate to that....

 

[Harry Dresden]

Is the problem of alcoholism helped or hurt by adding thousands of pot addicts to the legions of drunks?

A drunk can always sober up. There is nothing a pothead can do.

There's no such thing as a "pot addict". You're a liar. And there's nothing a liar can do.

Do people really get addicted to marijuana? | Scope Blog

This issue reminds me of the pitbull fights,
where why is it that people who want to defend pitbulls always cite studies that back them,
and people who don't want to take risks with pitbulls always cite studies that back them up.

And both sides dismiss each other's resources as biased and having conflicts of interest.
Don't both sides have conflicting biases and interests?

What are the chances that pot ALWAYS poses a risk of addiction or NEVER poses a risk.
As long as there are some cases that go either way, neither side's bias is 100%.

its already been agreed by most in these pot threads that Pot can be Mentally addictive.....i believe the figures were around 3-5% of the regular smokers will get mentally addicted to were they have a problem....

 

[Pogo]

There's no such thing as a "pot addict". You're a liar. And there's nothing a liar can do.

Do people really get addicted to marijuana? | Scope Blog

This issue reminds me of the pitbull fights,
where why is it that people who want to defend pitbulls always cite studies that back them,
and people who don't want to take risks with pitbulls always cite studies that back them up.

And both sides dismiss each other's resources as biased and having conflicts of interest.
Don't both sides have conflicting biases and interests?

What are the chances that pot ALWAYS poses a risk of addiction or NEVER poses a risk.
As long as there are some cases that go either way, neither side's bias is 100%.

its already been agreed by most in these pot threads that Pot can be Mentally addictive.....i believe the figures were around 3-5% of the regular smokers will get mentally addicted to were they have a problem....

There is no "pot addiction", therefore there is no risk, Emily.

"Mental addiction" is a bullshit psychobabble phrase. Every one of us that posts here regularly is "mentally addicted". Watching a regular program on TV or following a baseball team or going to the movies habitually on a Friday night is "mental addiction". We're talking about nothing more than habit, and cheapening the concept of "addiction".

Real addiction carries physical consequences, such as those posted earlier about alcohol. No such thing occurs with cannabis. Doesn't exist.

So no, Harry, I see no such agreement.

And this has been established for a long long time:
>> A person may be a confirmed smoker for a prolonged period, and give up the drug voluntarily without experiencing any craving for it or exhibiting withdrawal symptoms. He may, at some time later on, go back to its use. Others may remain infrequent users of the cigarette, taking one or two a week, or only when the "social setting" calls for participation.

From time to time we had one of our investigators associate with a marihuana user. The investigator would bring up the subject of smoking. This would invariably lead to the suggestion that they obtain some marihuana cigarettes. They would seek a "tea-pad," and if it was closed the smoker and our investigator would calmly resume their previous activity, such as the discussion of life in general or the playing of pool. There were apparently no signs indicative of frustration in the smoker at not being able to gratify the desire for the drug. We consider this point highly significant since it is so contrary to the experience of users of other narcotics. A similar situation occurring in one addicted to the use of morphine, cocaine, or heroin would result in a compulsive attitude on the part of the addict to obtain the drug. If unable to secure it, there would be obvious physical and mental manifestations of frustration. This may be considered presumptive evidence that there is no true addiction in the medical sense associated with the use of marihuana. << -- LaGuardia Committee Report, 1944

 

[thanatos144]

There's no such thing as a "pot addict". You're a liar. And there's nothing a liar can do.

Sure and there are no people who smoke pot everyday for decades too

tapatalk post

i smoked for quite a while.....and i did not smoke everyday.....and there were times when you had no pot for weeks because it was dry.....did not go nuts just resigned myself to the fact...there was no pot around....you would know this if you had some experience with pot....but you dont ....so you cant relate to that....

I am.sure you can quit anytime right? All addicts say the same


tapatalk post

 

[KNB]

Sure and there are no people who smoke pot everyday for decades too

tapatalk post

i smoked for quite a while.....and i did not smoke everyday.....and there were times when you had no pot for weeks because it was dry.....did not go nuts just resigned myself to the fact...there was no pot around....you would know this if you had some experience with pot....but you dont ....so you cant relate to that....

I am.sure you can quit anytime right? All addicts say the same

tapatalk post

Dude, just shut the fuck up. You know less than shit about absolutely nothing and want your fucking opinion to rule the world.

Marijuana is medicine. Fuck you and the DEA.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Do people really get addicted to marijuana? | Scope Blog

This issue reminds me of the pitbull fights,
where why is it that people who want to defend pitbulls always cite studies that back them,
and people who don't want to take risks with pitbulls always cite studies that back them up.

And both sides dismiss each other's resources as biased and having conflicts of interest.
Don't both sides have conflicting biases and interests?

What are the chances that pot ALWAYS poses a risk of addiction or NEVER poses a risk.
As long as there are some cases that go either way, neither side's bias is 100%.

its already been agreed by most in these pot threads that Pot can be Mentally addictive.....i believe the figures were around 3-5% of the regular smokers will get mentally addicted to were they have a problem....

There is no "pot addiction", therefore there is no risk, Emily.

"Mental addiction" is a bullshit psychobabble phrase. Every one of us that posts here regularly is "mentally addicted". Watching a regular program on TV or following a baseball team or going to the movies habitually on a Friday night is "mental addiction". We're talking about nothing more than habit, and cheapening the concept of "addiction".

Real addiction carries physical consequences, such as those posted earlier about alcohol. No such thing occurs with cannabis. Doesn't exist.

So no, Harry, I see no such agreement.

And this has been established for a long long time:
>> A person may be a confirmed smoker for a prolonged period, and give up the drug voluntarily without experiencing any craving for it or exhibiting withdrawal symptoms. He may, at some time later on, go back to its use. Others may remain infrequent users of the cigarette, taking one or two a week, or only when the "social setting" calls for participation.

From time to time we had one of our investigators associate with a marihuana user. The investigator would bring up the subject of smoking. This would invariably lead to the suggestion that they obtain some marihuana cigarettes. They would seek a "tea-pad," and if it was closed the smoker and our investigator would calmly resume their previous activity, such as the discussion of life in general or the playing of pool. There were apparently no signs indicative of frustration in the smoker at not being able to gratify the desire for the drug. We consider this point highly significant since it is so contrary to the experience of users of other narcotics. A similar situation occurring in one addicted to the use of morphine, cocaine, or heroin would result in a compulsive attitude on the part of the addict to obtain the drug. If unable to secure it, there would be obvious physical and mental manifestations of frustration. This may be considered presumptive evidence that there is no true addiction in the medical sense associated with the use of marihuana. << -- LaGuardia Committee Report, 1944

A person may be a confirmed smoker for a prolonged period, and give up the drug voluntarily without experiencing any craving for it or exhibiting withdrawal symptoms. He may, at some time later on, go back to its use. Others may remain infrequent users of the cigarette, taking one or two a week, or only when the "social setting" calls for participation.

you are pointing out 95% of Pot smokers Pogo with this.....i smoked for about 30 years and when it got to be a pain in the ass to get it.....i quit.....i was as you described up there...BUT....if you cant put the joint down,you have a mental addiction to it.....if you cant go a day or two without toking up....if you are trying to stay away from your stash....but cant,you have a mental addiction......the great majority of Pot smokers dont have these problems.....but some do....

 

[thanatos144]

i smoked for quite a while.....and i did not smoke everyday.....and there were times when you had no pot for weeks because it was dry.....did not go nuts just resigned myself to the fact...there was no pot around....you would know this if you had some experience with pot....but you dont ....so you cant relate to that....

I am.sure you can quit anytime right? All addicts say the same

tapatalk post

Dude, just shut the fuck up. You know less than shit about absolutely nothing and want your fucking opinion to rule the world.

Marijuana is medicine. Fuck you and the DEA.

No it isn't... If you didn't fry most of your brain cells you might see that.

 

[thanatos144]

its already been agreed by most in these pot threads that Pot can be Mentally addictive.....i believe the figures were around 3-5% of the regular smokers will get mentally addicted to were they have a problem....

There is no "pot addiction", therefore there is no risk, Emily.

"Mental addiction" is a bullshit psychobabble phrase. Every one of us that posts here regularly is "mentally addicted". Watching a regular program on TV or following a baseball team or going to the movies habitually on a Friday night is "mental addiction". We're talking about nothing more than habit, and cheapening the concept of "addiction".

Real addiction carries physical consequences, such as those posted earlier about alcohol. No such thing occurs with cannabis. Doesn't exist.

So no, Harry, I see no such agreement.

And this has been established for a long long time:
>> A person may be a confirmed smoker for a prolonged period, and give up the drug voluntarily without experiencing any craving for it or exhibiting withdrawal symptoms. He may, at some time later on, go back to its use. Others may remain infrequent users of the cigarette, taking one or two a week, or only when the "social setting" calls for participation.

From time to time we had one of our investigators associate with a marihuana user. The investigator would bring up the subject of smoking. This would invariably lead to the suggestion that they obtain some marihuana cigarettes. They would seek a "tea-pad," and if it was closed the smoker and our investigator would calmly resume their previous activity, such as the discussion of life in general or the playing of pool. There were apparently no signs indicative of frustration in the smoker at not being able to gratify the desire for the drug. We consider this point highly significant since it is so contrary to the experience of users of other narcotics. A similar situation occurring in one addicted to the use of morphine, cocaine, or heroin would result in a compulsive attitude on the part of the addict to obtain the drug. If unable to secure it, there would be obvious physical and mental manifestations of frustration. This may be considered presumptive evidence that there is no true addiction in the medical sense associated with the use of marihuana. << -- LaGuardia Committee Report, 1944

A person may be a confirmed smoker for a prolonged period, and give up the drug voluntarily without experiencing any craving for it or exhibiting withdrawal symptoms. He may, at some time later on, go back to its use. Others may remain infrequent users of the cigarette, taking one or two a week, or only when the "social setting" calls for participation.

you are pointing out 95% of Pot smokers Pogo with this.....i smoked for about 30 years and when it got to be a pain in the ass to get it.....i quit.....i was as you described up there...BUT....if you cant put the joint down,you have a mental addiction to it.....if you cant go a day or two without toking up....if you are trying to stay away from your stash....but cant,you have a mental addiction......the great majority of Pot smokers dont have these problems.....but some do....

so your a junkie is what you're saying

 

[ABikerSailor]

Your fucking kidding about kids not getting high right???? How old were you when you first smoked pot?

Can kids get it today? Do you know of any street dealers who check for f**king IDs?

Do you know of any liquor dealers who check for IDs?

That's my point.

And you never answered my question on alcohol prohibition, given that it kills over 50,000 Americans per year and has no medical use.

I don't care if they have alcohol prohibition. I don't drink anyway. Alcoholism causes a whole raft of problems, but ADDING marijuana does not make alcohol problems better. It makes them worse.

You said that you don't drink, and you said that alcoholism causes a whole raft of problems.

What kind of problems does it cause, and can you show where the effects are?

I'd also ask that you would compare the problems of alcohol abuse to the problems of those who smoke marijuana, at least, if you could.

As a matter of fact, if you were to compare the two (by having a 6 pack or two, and then smoking a joint), you'd find that smoking a joint is much better than downing a couple of 6 packs.

Smoking keeps you mellow, drinking makes you rough.

I like to stay mellow.

 

[Pogo]

its already been agreed by most in these pot threads that Pot can be Mentally addictive.....i believe the figures were around 3-5% of the regular smokers will get mentally addicted to were they have a problem....

There is no "pot addiction", therefore there is no risk, Emily.

"Mental addiction" is a bullshit psychobabble phrase. Every one of us that posts here regularly is "mentally addicted". Watching a regular program on TV or following a baseball team or going to the movies habitually on a Friday night is "mental addiction". We're talking about nothing more than habit, and cheapening the concept of "addiction".

Real addiction carries physical consequences, such as those posted earlier about alcohol. No such thing occurs with cannabis. Doesn't exist.

So no, Harry, I see no such agreement.

And this has been established for a long long time:
>> A person may be a confirmed smoker for a prolonged period, and give up the drug voluntarily without experiencing any craving for it or exhibiting withdrawal symptoms. He may, at some time later on, go back to its use. Others may remain infrequent users of the cigarette, taking one or two a week, or only when the "social setting" calls for participation.

From time to time we had one of our investigators associate with a marihuana user. The investigator would bring up the subject of smoking. This would invariably lead to the suggestion that they obtain some marihuana cigarettes. They would seek a "tea-pad," and if it was closed the smoker and our investigator would calmly resume their previous activity, such as the discussion of life in general or the playing of pool. There were apparently no signs indicative of frustration in the smoker at not being able to gratify the desire for the drug. We consider this point highly significant since it is so contrary to the experience of users of other narcotics. A similar situation occurring in one addicted to the use of morphine, cocaine, or heroin would result in a compulsive attitude on the part of the addict to obtain the drug. If unable to secure it, there would be obvious physical and mental manifestations of frustration. This may be considered presumptive evidence that there is no true addiction in the medical sense associated with the use of marihuana. << -- LaGuardia Committee Report, 1944

A person may be a confirmed smoker for a prolonged period, and give up the drug voluntarily without experiencing any craving for it or exhibiting withdrawal symptoms. He may, at some time later on, go back to its use. Others may remain infrequent users of the cigarette, taking one or two a week, or only when the "social setting" calls for participation.

you are pointing out 95% of Pot smokers Pogo with this.....i smoked for about 30 years and when it got to be a pain in the ass to get it.....i quit.....i was as you described up there...BUT....if you cant put the joint down,you have a mental addiction to it.....if you cant go a day or two without toking up....if you are trying to stay away from your stash....but cant,you have a mental addiction......the great majority of Pot smokers dont have these problems.....but some do....

Again ... "mental addiction" is a bullshit psychobabble term. Has no meaning. Anything anyone does regularly can be considered "mental addiction". Going to work could be a "mental addiction" if you do it every day. That's not what an addiction is so let's stop stretching the meaning to accommodate assholes like TheNutHouse.

 

[Pogo]

i smoked for quite a while.....and i did not smoke everyday.....and there were times when you had no pot for weeks because it was dry.....did not go nuts just resigned myself to the fact...there was no pot around....you would know this if you had some experience with pot....but you dont ....so you cant relate to that....

I am.sure you can quit anytime right? All addicts say the same

tapatalk post

Dude, just shut the fuck up. You know less than shit about absolutely nothing and want your fucking opinion to rule the world.

Marijuana is medicine. Fuck you and the DEA.

That's what he's after exactly. That's why I keep saying, this issue separates the left, right and center (on one side) from the authoritarian fascists on the other.