Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Again I've said I support decriminalization or legalization. BUT this whole alcohol and tobacco are worse argument is silly, people need to get off that talking point.

I dont think its silly to expect our government to have a rational, and proportional approach to controlling substances.

I question things because I am human. And call no one my father who's no closer than a stranger

  • Replies 1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Posted

Again I've said I support decriminalization or legalization. BUT this whole alcohol and tobacco are worse argument is silly, people need to get off that talking point.

As a physician I think that argument is completely coherent and supportable by the evidence in every sense. The cost to society and the healthcare system from marijuana is not even on the radar compared to the cost for smoking and alcohol.

Posted

As a physician I think that argument is completely coherent and supportable by the evidence in every sense. The cost to society and the healthcare system from marijuana is not even on the radar compared to the cost for smoking and alcohol.

It's not on the radar because far fewer people are chronic users of the drug. Because cannabis is illegal there aren't generations of people that are users.

Many people can casually use alcohol and tobacco with very little social impact.

Posted

Again I've said I support decriminalization or legalization. BUT this whole alcohol and tobacco are worse argument is silly, people need to get off that talking point.

It's a good talking point in my view. Many who oppose weed are totally fine with alcohol and prescription drugs. Weed is commonly put out as a gateway drug. Well so is alcohol, throw tobacco in there as well. Such an inconsistent approach will garner questions.

If one sides uses it, don't complain when the other side uses it to completely negate the talking point.

Posted (edited)

The arguments to support legalization are the same as removing prohibition of alcohol back in the 30's. Most people can and do consume the product responsibly and you're creating criminals from participating in a rather benign activity.

The risks associated with tobacco and alcohol are irrelevant. Except for the fact you consume both those drugs in low doses without an extreme high, not so with cannabis.

Edited by Boges
Posted

Except for the fact you consume both those drugs in low doses without an extreme high, not so with cannabis.

I call BS. Cite?
"I think it's fun watching the waldick get all excited/knickers in a knot over something." -scribblet
Posted

I call BS. Cite?

Who smokes pot because it tastes good? you're looking for a high.

3 people can get a high sharing a pipe with a little budd of weed. It's a pretty potent drug.

Posted

As a physician I think that argument is completely coherent and supportable by the evidence in every sense. The cost to society and the healthcare system from marijuana is not even on the radar compared to the cost for smoking and alcohol.

Well put.

Posted

The risks associated with tobacco and alcohol are irrelevant. Except for the fact you consume both those drugs in low doses without an extreme high, not so with cannabis.

Anybody who calls cannabis an 'extreme high,' has never smoked cannabis.

Posted (edited)

Anybody who calls cannabis an 'extreme high,' has never smoked cannabis.

I guess "extreme" is a subjective term. How would you describe the high?

Edited by Boges
Posted

I guess "extreme" is a subjective term. How would you describe the high?

It ranges from barely noticeable to barely conscious, depending upon how much you ingest.
"I think it's fun watching the waldick get all excited/knickers in a knot over something." -scribblet
Posted (edited)

I would classify "barely conscious" as extreme, others might not.

Right. And that's after a high dose. You were trying to say that consuming cannibis in low doses produces an extreme high, which is total BS. Edited by BubberMiley
"I think it's fun watching the waldick get all excited/knickers in a knot over something." -scribblet
Posted

Right. And that's after a high dose. You were trying to say that consuming cannibis in low doses produces an extreme high, which is total BS.

Well....sort of can happen.

Some shit is that way.....much like 190proof booze. One shot of that and a buzz is had.

Posted (edited)

Right. And that's after a high dose. You were trying to say that consuming cannibis in low doses produces an extreme high, which is total BS.

Well what's a really low dose? A few puffs? a bud? a joint?

With alcohol they have a set standard for consumption. 12 oz of beer, 1 oz of 40% liqour, or 5 oz of wine equal a serving or "drink". Most can operate a vehicle with one or two drinks using that standard.

Is there a similar standard with cannabis?

Edited by Boges
Posted

Well what's a really low dose? A few puffs? a bud? a joint?

You can start with a few granules and work your way up, but a few granules would be mild and hardly noticeable. A joint would be a lot. A whole bud would be a very high dose.
"I think it's fun watching the waldick get all excited/knickers in a knot over something." -scribblet
Posted

You can start with a few granules and work your way up, but a few granules would be mild and hardly noticeable. A joint would be a lot. A whole bud would be a very high dose.

I don't know why you'd even bother with a few granules unless you were looking for some low level pain relief.

But juxtapose that to tobacco where I can smoke a churchill cigar over the course of an hour and achieve a buzz that lasts maybe a half hour.

Posted

I don't know why you'd even bother with a few granules unless you were looking for some low level pain relief.

Some seek a remedy to the chronic boredom of everyday life while still being fully functional.
"I think it's fun watching the waldick get all excited/knickers in a knot over something." -scribblet
Posted

Well what's a really low dose? A few puffs? a bud? a joint?

With alcohol they have a set standard for consumption. 12 oz of beer, 1 oz of 40% liqour, or 5 oz of wine equal a serving or "drink". Most can operate a vehicle with one or two drinks using that standard.

Is there a similar standard with cannabis?

Not that I am aware of.

Mary Jane does not share the metabolic rates that alcohol do.

Have a drink and X amount is metabolized in one hour. , Test after that and you could be zero BAC

Smoke some tonight and tomorrow afternoon, hell Sunday afternoon and you could test positive.

Thats why there is no reliable test for impairment from weed while driving.

Posted

Not that I am aware of.

Mary Jane does not share the metabolic rates that alcohol do.

Have a drink and X amount is metabolized in one hour. , Test after that and you could be zero BAC

Smoke some tonight and tomorrow afternoon, hell Sunday afternoon and you could test positive.

Thats why there is no reliable test for impairment from weed while driving.

Which is something that needs to be addressed. It'll be interesting to see how the states in the US that legalized cannabis will handle regulating people driving while high.

Posted

Which is something that needs to be addressed. It'll be interesting to see how the states in the US that legalized cannabis will handle regulating people driving while high.

Driving high means - impaired driving. You can get that charge from driving with Neo-Citran (the doozy stuff)
Posted

Driving high means - impaired driving. You can get that charge from driving with Neo-Citran (the doozy stuff)

After having a Neo-Citran I don't usually drive, I go to bed.

You shouldn't be driving under heavy influence of anything, but people do it. If you're taking a drug for a medical purpose I'd argue, you're more likely to follow the instructions of use.

Posted

It'll be interesting to see how the states in the US that legalized cannabis will handle regulating people driving while high.

Why would it be any different than it already is?
"I think it's fun watching the waldick get all excited/knickers in a knot over something." -scribblet
Posted

After having a Neo-Citran I don't usually drive, I go to bed.

You shouldn't be driving under heavy influence of anything, but people do it. If you're taking a drug for a medical purpose I'd argue, you're more likely to follow the instructions of use.

True, but the broader point I forgot to include.....you can be charged the same if you are merely tired....no drugs nor booze in the system.
Posted

You could argue driving tired is worse than driving drunk.

The sad part is that many people are compelled to drive tired by employers. I've driven while on the brink of nodding off, it's rather terrifying actually.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,914
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    MDP
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...