weedyer weed?

[Eamon]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061220/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/mexico_drugs

What do you do for a living Bob?

"I spent the last 3 years in the lab making weed harder to kill"

 

[infotango]

I wouldn't touch the crap with a ten foot pole, but I really think that this just goes to show that it is time to legalize the crud. The criminals have gotten much more sophisticated, making them harder and harder to control.
The USA could realize tons of profits off taxes on the plant, and could better control the distribution of it. It would also take weed out of the category of gateway drug if people didn't become criminals from being caught with it.
I cannot imagine that the effects are any more deleterious than smoking or drinking, and, if anything, the people I've seen on it are more sedate than drunks.

Stepping off soapbox...

 

[SkyHog]

I wouldn't touch the crap with a ten foot pole, but I really think that this just goes to show that it is time to legalize the crud. The criminals have gotten much more sophisticated, making them harder and harder to control.
The USA could realize tons of profits off taxes on the plant, and could better control the distribution of it. It would also take weed out of the category of gateway drug if people didn't become criminals from being caught with it.
I cannot imagine that the effects are any more deleterious than smoking or drinking, and, if anything, the people I've seen on it are more sedate than drunks.

Stepping off soapbox...

You've obviously not had a friend go to the darkside of harder drugs, after speding his entire teen years preaching the same garbage about weed not being a gateway drug.

Last I heard he was bouncing between rehab centers in Arizona and Denver. But weed is a victimless crime, right?

Weed needs to stay illegal, anyone who says otherwise, for any reason is a freaking hippie (even if their arguments are as well worded as yours).

Now would be a good time to mention that I think distribution and intent to distribute should carry much harsher penalties.

 

[EdFred]

A few years back, someone said one of the reasons pot hasn't been made legal was because it was difficult to measure the amount of THC in each "batch." If there was a way to measure it and know there was a certain mg/g then it would be easier to legalize it. Whether that is true or not, I don't know.

I say legalize ALL drugs, tax the snot out of them, and control the distribution. You could have coke resorts, or heroine hotels where people can go for a night or weekend, and get drugged out to their hearts content. No leaving until you come down off the high, however.

 

[Ken Ibold]

Pot is a gateway drug in the same way as a 152 is a gateway drug, only less dangerous.

"Hey, I like this!! I wonder what else is out there I'll like better!" People hunt down opportunities that interest them, whether it's coin collecting, flying or smoking spliffs. There are those with addictive personalities who will become obsessed with just about anything ... go down to the local tattoo parlor for visible evidence.

Doesn't make it smart. Doesn't make it right. But it IS part of human nature.

 

[infotango]

You've obviously not had a friend go to the darkside of harder drugs, after speding his entire teen years preaching the same garbage about weed not being a gateway drug.

Last I heard he was bouncing between rehab centers in Arizona and Denver. But weed is a victimless crime, right?

Weed needs to stay illegal, anyone who says otherwise, for any reason is a freaking hippie (even if their arguments are as well worded as yours).

Now would be a good time to mention that I think distribution and intent to distribute should carry much harsher penalties.

Nick, I can show you ten people who have had similar bounces between rehab centers from drinking, but we agree that drinking shouldn't be illegal. Right?

People will find a way to make anything kill them if it is available. In places where illegal drugs are hard to find, people huff paint thinners, or are driven to drinking. If people want to destroy their lives, there will always be a plethora of avenues available.
Understand that I am not arguing for making pot unregulated, quite the contrary; by making pot legal, the authorities would be able to better regulate and control its distribution.

BTW, I don't think I've ever heard anybody call me a hippie before!

 

[Eamon]

You've obviously not had a friend go to the darkside of harder drugs, after speding his entire teen years preaching the same garbage about weed not being a gateway drug.

.

If pot were legal, it would no longer be a "Gateway" drug.

Those that believe it is a gate should understand that if it were legal it would be gotten at the corner store, not the seedy drug corner were a pusher can get people to step up to stronger drugs.

 

[Dave Krall CFII]

Everything is a "gateway drug".
Less illegal stuff and harsher penalties for behavoir dangerous to others, regardless of the chosen venue, would be better for all concerned.

 

[SkyHog]

If pot were legal, it would no longer be a "Gateway" drug.

Those that believe it is a gate should understand that if it were legal it would be gotten at the corner store, not the seedy drug corner were a pusher can get people to step up to stronger drugs.

Poppycock, it would still be a gateway drug, it just wouldn't be called one anymore. If someone can be lured to smoke marijuana, they can be lured to do other drugs. At that point, its a test of willpower. What we need is stricter enforcement, to the point of really not making it worth trying.

You know anyone that just smokes weed socially and doesn't get stoned? I don't think so. I know plenty of people that drink beer without getting drunk. One joint = stoned. One beer = "I just drank a beer." The point is that marijuana users are getting doped up. Its even easier to get doped up by shooting heroin or smoking crack, it doesn't even take a whole joint to do that!

So - to your second point - lets say it is legalized. Now you'll have people buying it legally, still moving to harder drugs and still ruining their lives and getting stupid. For proof, look at Amsterdam. They have a heavy rate of use of more intense drugs as well as marijuana.

 

[Eamon]

Poppycock, it would still be a gateway drug, it just wouldn't be called one anymore. If someone can be lured to smoke marijuana, they can be lured to do other drugs. At that point, its a test of willpower. What we need is stricter enforcement, to the point of really not making it worth trying.

You know anyone that just smokes weed socially and doesn't get stoned? I don't think so. I know plenty of people that drink beer without getting drunk. One joint = stoned. One beer = "I just drank a beer." The point is that marijuana users are getting doped up. Its even easier to get doped up by shooting heroin or smoking crack, it doesn't even take a whole joint to do that!


So - to your second point - lets say it is legalized. Now you'll have people buying it legally, still moving to harder drugs and still ruining their lives and getting stupid. For proof, look at Amsterdam. They have a heavy rate of use of more intense drugs as well as marijuana.

LOL OK... so people dont do stupid things when they are drinking?

lured above is a good word you used. that wouldnt happen if it were legal.

Pot is no way worse than booze.

I know a lot of people that have used pot their whole life and would never go to coke or heroin. Is it too much money, too strong & doesn't last long enough. Even the ave pothead burnout knows that coke & heroin ruin lives while pot just makes you layed back, giddy and hungry.

Oh yea... what we really need is more enforcment??? We need 100,000 more people in jail being fed and housed? Who is gonna pay for that?

 

[mikea]

Everything is a "gateway drug".
Less illegal stuff and harsher penalties for behavoir dangerous to others, regardless of the chosen venue, would be better for all concerned.

A new study says that 100% of drug addicts and serial killers started out with milk! LET'S BAN MILK!

 

[SkyHog]

LOL OK... so people dont do stupid things when they are drinking?

lured above is a good word you used. that wouldnt happen if it were legal.

Pot is no way worse than booze.

I know a lot of people that have used pot their whole life and would never go to coke or heroin. Is it too much money, too strong & doesn't last long enough. Even the ave pothead burnout knows that coke & heroin ruin lives while pot just makes you layed back, giddy and hungry.

Oh yea... what we really need is more enforcment??? We need 100,000 more people in jail being fed and housed? Who is gonna pay for that?

You didn't even bother to address the fact that there are no "casual" pot smokers. Either you're getting high, or you're not. You can't compare pot to alcohol, they're totally different, and that is one of the reasons.

And no - we won't have 100,000 more people in jail being fed if we make the penalty harsh eough that people stay off the stuff.

 

[wbarnhill]

I'm with EdFred. Legalize, tax the snot out of it, have the government make it cheaply and less dangerous, you get tax funding, the junkies get their fix cheaper and safer, and all of a sudden drug dealers are out of business.

Top it all off by saying that employers have the right to a drug free workplace, and there ya go.

 

[wbarnhill]

Either you're getting high, or you're not. You can't compare pot to alcohol, they're totally different, and that is one of the reasons.

Either you're getting drunk or you're not? Impaired is impaired, is it not?

 

[SkyHog]

Either you're getting drunk or you're not? Impaired is impaired, is it not?

No, its not. Drinking a beer, a single beer, does not get you drunk. It doesn't even affect the demeanor of most adults. I can, and have drank only one beer in a social setting. One can't say that a joint or a bowl will not influence someone, unless that person is a BIG ol' pothead.

 

[wbarnhill]

No, its not. Drinking a beer, a single beer, does not get you drunk. It doesn't even affect the demeanor of most adults. I can, and have drank only one beer in a social setting. One can't say that a joint or a bowl will not influence someone, unless that person is a BIG ol' pothead.

Bzzt. Wrong answer. A single beer consumed by an individual even weighing 240 lbs is detectable by blood alcohol analysis. If the individual weighs 140 lbs, you're looking at approximately .03% BAC from that single beer. Considering most states have a limit of .08% BAC, would you consider that an effect?

By the way, drunk and impaired are two different statements.

 

[SkyHog]

Bzzt. Wrong answer. A single beer consumed by an individual even weighing 240 lbs is detectable by blood alcohol analysis. If the individual weighs 140 lbs, you're looking at approximately .03% BAC from that single beer. Considering most states have a limit of .08% BAC, would you consider that an effect?

By the way, drunk and impaired are two different statements.

Yes, I'd consider it an effect. The effect is that the BAC went up slightly, but the demeanor is not effected. The person is just as sharp as without having consumed a beer. The legal limit of .08% is intentionally low. One can be safe and not suffer any mental impairment beyond .08% but with Drunk Driving being a problem, they have no tolerance.

So lets do it this way. Legalize weed, but make sure that Drunk Driving is legal as well. Both are judgment calls for the individual. Both are dangeous to society as a whole. And before I get jumped for "compaing Muder to a parking ticket" they're not that far off from each other. Both ruin lives. Both stem from a desire to get messed up. Both are often "victimless."

Legalize drunk driving, and you'll have less criminals, and less people in jail. Its a war we're losing anyways.

 

[wbarnhill]

Yes, I'd consider it an effect. The effect is that the BAC went up slightly, but the demeanor is not effected. The person is just as sharp as without having consumed a beer. The legal limit of .08% is intentionally low. One can be safe and not suffer any mental impairment beyond .08% but with Drunk Driving being a problem, they have no tolerance.

So lets do it this way. Legalize weed, but make sure that Drunk Driving is legal as well. Both are judgment calls for the individual. Both are dangeous to society as a whole. And before I get jumped for "compaing Muder to a parking ticket" they're not that far off from each other. Both ruin lives. Both stem from a desire to get messed up. Both are often "victimless."

Legalize drunk driving, and you'll have less criminals, and less people in jail. Its a war we're losing anyways.

Whoa whoa whoa. WAY off the mark. Mental impairment can begin as low as .02% BAC, regardless of how different a person may think when he/she is at .02, .04, .08, or any other number. It is the result of the breakdown of alcohol by the body and cannot be considered negligible even with the consumption of a single beverage. .08 is considered the legal limit because regardless of the many factors (such as weight, tolerance, genetics, etc), for the majority of individuals .08 is a considerable impairment, and while many people may be able to drive by focusing REALLY hard on the road, their faculties are quite hindered.

Impaired is impaired. If someone smokes pot and gets busted, they get locked up for driving under the influence, just as an individual who is drunk driving. Different drugs, same result. You cannot take two mind altering drugs and say "Oh, this is safer because I can take a smaller dose and it won't affect me one bit". Why not? Because it's a lie, pure and simple. The drug has an effect, and to claim any different is simply naive.

 

[SkyHog]

Whoa whoa whoa. WAY off the mark. Mental impairment can begin as low as .02% BAC, regardless of how different a person may think when he/she is at .02, .04, .08, or any other number. It is the result of the breakdown of alcohol by the body and cannot be considered negligible even with the consumption of a single beverage. .08 is considered the legal limit because regardless of the many factors (such as weight, tolerance, genetics, etc), for the majority of individuals .08 is a considerable impairment, and while many people may be able to drive by focusing REALLY hard on the road, their faculties are quite hindered.

Impaired is impaired. If someone smokes pot and gets busted, they get locked up for driving under the influence, just as an individual who is drunk driving. Different drugs, same result. You cannot take two mind altering drugs and say "Oh, this is safer because I can take a smaller dose and it won't affect me one bit". Why not? Because it's a lie, pure and simple. The drug has an effect, and to claim any different is simply naive.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=3748750&dopt=Abstract

Unless you consider driving as intense as, say, surgery, you'll see that small doses of alcohol cause very little impairment.

One beer vs. one joint or one bowl is a huge difference either way. Even if it turns out that a beer does impair you, you're still manageable. One joint gets you STONED....not just slightly impaired, stoned. And that is the difference, weed is not consumed for any reason other than to get ****ed up. Beer is different. You CAN get messed up, but that's not the only reason one drinks it.

 

[Eamon]

Yes, I'd consider it an effect. The effect is that the BAC went up slightly, but the demeanor is not effected. The person is just as sharp as without having consumed a beer. .

Ok Great.. Now I can fly after having a beer.... being just one doesnt effect people.

People that drink one beer think that are fine. The booze it telling you that & that is why i think it is more dangerious than pot.

If you smoke a 1 hit bat & you know you are stoned


Not that I would know

 

[ScottM]

Help I seem to have become color blind. The red board is looking blue to me right now. Is there a teenager about to post about how pot is ok to smoke as a pilot? Heeellllppp!!!!!

 

[wbarnhill]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=3748750&dopt=Abstract

Unless you consider driving as intense as, say, surgery, you'll see that small doses of alcohol cause very little impairment.

One beer vs. one joint or one bowl is a huge difference either way. Even if it turns out that a beer does impair you, you're still manageable. One joint gets you STONED....not just slightly impaired, stoned. And that is the difference, weed is not consumed for any reason other than to get ****ed up. Beer is different. You CAN get messed up, but that's not the only reason one drinks it.

http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/aa25.htm

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] The most sensitive aspect of driving performance is the division of attention among component skills. Drivers must maintain their vehicles in the proper lane and direction (a tracking task) while monitoring the environment for vital safety information, such as other vehicles, traffic signals, and pedestrians. Alcohol-impaired subjects who are required to divide their attention between two tasks tend to favor one of them. Therefore, alcohol-impaired drivers tend to concentrate on steering, becoming less vigilant with respect to safety information. Results of numerous studies indicate that divided attention deficits occur as low as 0.02 percent BAC (12).[/FONT]

Emphasis added.

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif](12) Moskowitz, H., & Burns, M. Effects of alcohol on driving performance. Alcohol Health & Research World 14(1):12-14, 1990.[/FONT]

You cannot spin it. One beer does impair you. Just as one hit from a joint impairs you. The breakdown of alcohol will ALWAYS result in an effect on your body, including the .6 oz of ethanol you imbibe from that 12 oz beer. It doesn't simply disappear.

And Scott, no Cheech and Chong airlines for you. All I am getting at is both marijuana and alcohol hinder individuals, even in small doses for both.

 

[SkyHog]

You are mistaking "Slight Hinderance" with "****ing Stoned, man." I've never, ever, seen someone smoke weed without getting high. If they're not high, they keep going until they are.

Say that about a casual beer drinker....I would be the proof that its wrong.

Oh - I've also never seen a beer drinker scrape days old beer out of their glass and consume it to get a little bit of a buzz going.

The two are totally different in that part alone, and that has nothing to do with the legality of the substance.

 

[Frank Browne]

Everything is a "gateway drug".
Less illegal stuff and harsher penalties for behavoir dangerous to others, regardless of the chosen venue, would be better for all concerned.

You're right of course. I suspect that most healthcare professionals would agree that the biggest gateway drug is actually alcohol. But because it's legal, it seldom has that label attached to it.

 

[Frank Browne]

You know anyone that just smokes weed socially and doesn't get stoned? I don't think so. I know plenty of people that drink beer without getting drunk. One joint = stoned. One beer = "I just drank a beer."

The fact that you're not drunk from one beer doesn't mean you're not impaired to some extent. Would you believe it OK to fly an airplane after drinking even just one beer?

The point is that marijuana users are getting doped up. Its even easier to get doped up by shooting heroin or smoking crack, it doesn't even take a whole joint to do that!

Just like with alcohol, it's possible to get a little buzz from a couple of tokes without getting "doped up".

So - to your second point - lets say it is legalized. Now you'll have people buying it legally, still moving to harder drugs and still ruining their lives and getting stupid. For proof, look at Amsterdam. They have a heavy rate of use of more intense drugs as well as marijuana.

All true. Just as it is with alcohol. And just as it is with alcohol, many, many people just use a little. If a person wants to have a joint and putter in the garage after work, I have no problem with that. But would NOT want anyone operating a car, motorcycle, or aircraft after a few tokes...or even a beer.

 

[SkyHog]

The fact that you're not drunk from one beer doesn't mean you're not impaired to some extent. Would you believe it OK to fly an airplane after drinking even just one beer?

No, because it is illegal. If it weren't illegal, then yes, I could do it with no problem. I've driven after having a few beers with no problems (even went through one of our DWI checkpoints without issue)

Just like with alcohol, it's possible to get a little buzz from a couple of tokes without getting "doped up".

Sure, its possible, but no one does it. No one smokes weed unless they're getting high. I can GUARANTEE that. Its not like a cigarette. People don't smoke weed because they're addicted, they smoke because they want to get messed up.

All true. Just as it is with alcohol. And just as it is with alcohol, many, many people just use a little. If a person wants to have a joint and putter in the garage after work, I have no problem with that. But would NOT want anyone operating a car, motorcycle, or aircraft after a few tokes...or even a beer.

All I have to say is LOL. You wouldn't ride with someone after they've had ONE beer? I don't buy it. You've got to be just overemphasising to make a point.

And like I said before, no one smokes just a little weed without getting high. The whole point of smoking weed is to get stoned.

 

[wbarnhill]

The whole point of smoking weed is to get stoned.

So... you drink beer for the carbs? (Note: If you said for the relaxation, guess what, relaxation from beer means you're affected by the alcohol.)

 

[Frank Browne]

And like I said before, no one smokes just a little weed without getting high. The whole point of smoking weed is to get stoned.

I agree with the essence of what you're saying, but I disagree with the notion of everyone that smokes is smoking to get "messed up". As I said before, it's possible, and I suspect common, for many people to smoke just enough to get a little buzz going. Yes, I've driven after a couple of beers, or a couple glasses of wine. But I've done so with the knowledge that I was impaired and altered my driving accordingly (extra vigilance, watching speed). And in my youth, done the same with pot. Even today, I know people that smoke a little from time to time, and they are perfectly normal, happy, productive members of society.

 

[wbarnhill]

Even today, I know people that smoke a little from time to time, and they are perfectly normal, happy, productive members of society.

Wink wink, nudge nudge, say no more say no more

 

[Frank Browne]

Wink wink, nudge nudge, say no more say no more

LOL! No no, not me dude! That was a loooong time ago. No place for that anymore.

 

[SkyHog]

So... you drink beer for the carbs? (Note: If you said for the relaxation, guess what, relaxation from beer means you're affected by the alcohol.)

I drink beer because I like the taste, and because when in a social setting, its ok to have an adult beverage with other adults.

edit: FWIW - Drinking is just as illegal as marijuana use. In many places, being drunk in public is a crime, just as being stoned is.

 

[CJones]

Sounds like they cross-bred the stuff with kudzu (folks from the south will know all about kudzu).

Also, with all the different versions of herbicide resistant crops out there today, the technology is free-flowing - all it takes is someone with a semi-deep pocket to get access to the technology and breed it into any crop you want. Get a bio-engineer from Monsanto or Dow or Bayer Cropscience down there and tell them "If you can find something to kill this stuff, the government will buy it from you" and you will have some sort of super-herbicide within a couple of months. It's just a matter of finding the salt that can overcome the rate at which the plant can metabolize it.

While working with cropdusters, I heard stories of the guys that fly the black AT-802's in Columbia with HUD's, self-sealing fuel tanks, and bullet-proof cockpits. They would fly out of quickly-made strips in the middle of the jungle. Sometimes, they would be woken up in the middle of the night and told "They found the strip, we have to get the plane out of here NOW!" Then they would move somewhere else until the cartels would find them again. They would spray at night to prevent being seen. If you could get past the guys shooting at you from the ground, you had to keep an eye out for the high-tension cables they would pull across the pot fields ~100ft off the ground.

....and that's all I got to say about that.....

-Chris

 

[gkainz]

TASTES GREAT!


LESS FILLING!

 

[jesse]

I don't like either of them when they are abused. I would rather deal with an idiot abusing marijuana though than an idiot abusing alcohol. Alcohol abuse is generally more...explosive.

That said I've never seen someone smoke marijuana without abusing it. I've seen people drink alcohol without abusing.

 

[Bill]

All I have to say is LOL. You wouldn't ride with someone after they've had ONE beer? I don't buy it. You've got to be just overemphasising to make a point.

I will not drink anything when riding the bike, not even one beer. I might just get home OK, but I might also need that slight edge that just got rubbed off. It is all cost/benefit analysis, and the benefit of having one cold one isn't worth the potential cost of being steamrollered by a BlueHair in a Buick.

 

[Frank Browne]

That said I've never seen someone smoke marijuana without abusing it. I've seen people drink alcohol without abusing.

The fact that MJ is illegal is why any use of it is refered to as ABuse. One can use a little or a lot, just as with alcohol. I'm not being an apologist for MJ use. It's just that I don't like the fact that half of the 40,000 some odd traffic deaths each year are alcohol related...but pot is illegal. It just doesn't make any sense to me.

 

[jesse]

The fact that MJ is illegal is why any use of it is refered to as ABuse. One can use a little or a lot, just as with alcohol. I'm not being an apologist for MJ use. It's just that I don't like the fact that half of the 40,000 some odd traffic deaths each year are alcohol related...but pot is illegal. It just doesn't make any sense to me.

You are contradicting yourself

but I disagree with the notion of everyone that smokes is smoking to get "messed up".

They are. It's abuse. You said so yourself.

 

[SkyHog]

The fact that MJ is illegal is why any use of it is refered to as ABuse. One can use a little or a lot, just as with alcohol. I'm not being an apologist for MJ use. It's just that I don't like the fact that half of the 40,000 some odd traffic deaths each year are alcohol related...but pot is illegal. It just doesn't make any sense to me.

I'll bet there is a very small amount of cocaine that can be used without getting high too, but I have never seen anyone do that small amount either. Face it - people smoke weed to get stoned, and they never smoke less unless they run out and have already scraped their pipes.

 

[wbarnhill]

I'll bet there is a very small amount of cocaine that can be used without getting high too, but I have never seen anyone do that small amount either. Face it - people smoke weed to get stoned, and they never smoke less unless they run out and have already scraped their pipes.

And people don't drink unless they want some of the "benefits" of doing so, one of the primary ones being relaxation. Claim taste all you want, but that's like a pot smoker saying "I like the smell of it."

 

[Eamon]

Booze has been a social lubracant for ages. For the effect.

Did anyone like the taste of beer the first time? Then why start drinking beer?

If you drink for the taste, wouldn't you rather have a milk shake, egg cream, mead, O'doul's?

Man, I am getting thirsty! Crap, 7 hrs to the next flight