“I don't, but Galton sure is clamoring for one. He's making it worse by dividing us. I'm not sure what you mean by the ultimate truth, but if i'm judged for treating all people with respect and dignity, bring it on.”
“The problem is that not everyone was implicit in the oppression of blacks, and by suggesting it, only divides us. We need to combat institutiinalized racism and ensure that everyone grows up colorblind. Beyond that, it's about instilling the value of education in anyone who doubts it, and making it possible to achieve your goals despite any economic hurdles.”
“I don't know, because the gateway theory is a crock? Who says booze isn't a part of the problem? Marijuana only gets attention because it is the most widely used illegal drug. Keep in mind that MJ was not prohibited for the health risks it poses, so the claims about it being a gateway drug were feeble grasps at the proverbial straw. There is nothing chemically unique about pot that makes people want to go on to try other drugs. Pot's legal status just puts it in the same illicit scene as other drugs.”
“I don't know, because the gateway theory is a crock? Why else? Who says booze isn't a part of the problem? Marijuana gets attention because it's the most widely used illegal drug. Keep in mind it was never made that way because of the health risks. There's nothing chemically unique about pot that makes people want to try new things - prohibition just keeps it in the same illicit scene where other drugs are available.”
“So the sentences that say research says "for most people it isn't true" disproves my point? And the following paragraph that implicates other factors (being poor, unemployed, and subject to severe psychological stress) is conclusive in that pot is the cause? How about the last paragraph? What about the link I didn't post that show that most people who smoke pot do not go on to other drugs?
"In other words, the path to other drugs is not necessarily the pot, but rather the potholes young people encounter on the road."
That's a far cry from contradicting my point. AT BEST, it is a combination of several things, including pot's current legal status, which would make it more likely that people who are selling pot also have access to other substances. If you want to humor the gateway theory at all, why not implicate alcohol or tobacco, since almost everyone starts there?
I never said pot was benign, and would be naive to think that using it is utterly risk free. Your link highlights the risks that come into play for young people and those who abuse the drug, but none of the data that exists currently portrays marijuana as being more toxic or harmful than alcohol. (Here's that link BTW, minus the period that screwed it up http://www.niaaa.nih.gov/alcohol-health).
EVEN if pot were as toxic to the body as alcohol AND MJ usage one day rivaled it, would those costs be as terrible as prohibition has been?”
noaxe397 on May 21, 2014 at 11:15:48
“Why isn't booze then viewed the same way; not as the problem but as part of the problem encountered riding through or coping with the potholes.”
“It's not an assumption: I don't operate on those. It's a fact. You can't overdose on pot; it doesn't poison your body or cause a host of cancers; you don't become aggressive and violent. What does pot do?
“>We do not yet know the cost benefit of pot use if/when it becomes as widespread as alcohol.
We already know how much it has cost to enforce prohibition, and we have a good grasp of its effects on the human body, or at least enough to know alcohol is much worse. Consider that prohibition has not prevented people from using it, and even if usage were to equal that of alcohol, they would be consuming a far less dangerous substance. I won't deny that it will negatively effect some people, but it's still the best choice out of limited options.
>Do you really think, as time goes on and more places legalize pot, there isn't going to be a demand that people using pot be allowed to now use it more openly and more freely since it is a legal substance? That brings in the second hand smoke issue, which does not exist with booze.
They might, but that is just conjecture. I see no reason why regulations similar to those on tobacco smoking wouldn't be implemented to account for second-hand exposure.
As for the risks, I'm assuming you're asking about cancer risks. So far evidence isn't conclusive, but edibles and vaporization would remove any if it were proven, as would the above mentioned regulations to ensure that people who don't want to be exposed wouldn't be.”
noaxe397 on May 20, 2014 at 13:21:45
“What is this assumption that alcohol is a more dangerous substance than pot? All I ever read about is that alcohol used in moderation actually has proven health BENEFITS. To what other drug is alcohol a gateway?”
“The reason people compare them is because alcohol, while much more toxic and having a higher risk of causing dependency, is legal. The cost/benefit ratio of trying to prohibit alcohol was, like MJ prohibition, not in favor of society. Beyond your concerns about driving under the influence of marijuana (which is already illegal despite inconclusive studies about how it effects driving), are you against legalization and regulation? If so, why?
As to how they test, you'll have to use old friend Google for that, but I'd like to know what you intend to prove with that question.”
noaxe397 on May 20, 2014 at 09:25:25
“We do not yet know the cost benefit of pot use if/when it becomes as widespread as alcohol. And that is my point; stoner comparisons at this time between the two trying to show how benign pot is are absurd. Do you really think, as time goes on and more places legalize pot, there isn't going to be a demand that people using pot be allowed to now use it more openly and more freely since it is a legal substance? That brings in the second hand smoke issue, which does not exist with booze. BTW, what about the effects of second hand smoke from pot? ”
May 18, 2014 at 01:43:25
“I enjoyed all of the films so far, but the Fellowship was what made me into a fan. I'm not sure if it was reading the books or just a lower level of quality that made me less enthusiastic about the second and third movies, but it's probably a combination of both.”