Get your Marijuana Card Here...

[vraiblonde]

but too say one is less destructive than the others is hypocritical.

Most people drink alcohol in moderation and are not addicted, nor do they cause drunk problems. Drugs like meth and heroin are highly addictive and very few people can use them recreationally. If you use those drugs, you almost certainly *will* become addicted. Having a couple of beers on the weekend or a glass of wine with dinner isn't the same as shooting up several times a day. One has only to take a quick trip about an hour north to see the devastation of drug addiction on communities. It's demonstrably false that shooting heroin has the same effect as drinking a beer or smoking a cigarette.

And again, they can OD and die if they want to - not my business. Unfortunately our government makes it my business when they want me to pay for these people's health care, and the druggies themselves make it my business when they steal my #### to sell for drug money. It gets made my business when some clueless do-gooder or money grubbing opportunist decides that they can turn these folks into responsible citizens, and wants to use my tax dollars to do it.

 

[Weems]

Most people drink alcohol in moderation and are not addicted, nor do they cause drunk problems. Drugs like meth and heroin are highly addictive and very few people can use them recreationally. If you use those drugs, you almost certainly *will* become addicted. Having a couple of beers on the weekend or a glass of wine with dinner isn't the same as shooting up several times a day. One has only to take a quick trip about an hour north to see the devastation of drug addiction on communities. It's demonstrably false that shooting heroin has the same effect as drinking a beer or smoking a cigarette.

And again, they can OD and die if they want to - not my business. Unfortunately our government makes it my business when they want me to pay for these people's health care, and the druggies themselves make it my business when they steal my #### to sell for drug money. It gets made my business when some clueless do-gooder or money grubbing opportunist decides that they can turn these folks into responsible citizens, and wants to use my tax dollars to do it.

I’m not aware of a single person who argues for legalizing drugs like meth or heroin.

Your entire argument is fallacious.

 

[vraiblonde]

I’m not aware of a single person who argues for legalizing drugs like meth or heroin.

Then you need to get out more. There are quite a number of people who don't think we should have laws regulating personal behavior that "doesn't affect anyone else". Some of them are right here on this forum and they have laid out their argument many times over the years.

 

[Weems]

Then you need to get out more. There are quite a number of people who don't think we should have laws regulating personal behavior that "doesn't affect anyone else". Some of them are right here on this forum and they have laid out their argument many times over the years.

I think you’re lying. Again.

 

[vraiblonde]

I think you’re lying. Again.

And I think you should look into a good rehab facility.

 

[Weems]

And I think you should look into a good rehab facility.

Please introduce me to these people, some of whom are right here on this forum, who are in favor of legalizing drugs like meth or heroin.

Outside of that, you’re welcome to your own imagination.

 

[Chris0nllyn]

Anyway, Chris, you are not going to get me to believe some "study" over what I have personally experienced. You're just not.

Shocker. I'm not trying to discredit what you experienced, I'm just saying it took six people smoking joints in a non-ventilated box before non-smokers even came up positive with THC in their system in a study.

I'm not about to believe that you somehow got high in an open-air market. I blame the placebo affect, but hey, if you got high, so be it.

Most people drink alcohol in moderation and are not addicted, nor do they cause drunk problems. Drugs like meth and heroin are highly addictive and very few people can use them recreationally. If you use those drugs, you almost certainly *will* become addicted. Having a couple of beers on the weekend or a glass of wine with dinner isn't the same as shooting up several times a day. One has only to take a quick trip about an hour north to see the devastation of drug addiction on communities. It's demonstrably false that shooting heroin has the same effect as drinking a beer or smoking a cigarette.

And again, they can OD and die if they want to - not my business. Unfortunately our government makes it my business when they want me to pay for these people's health care, and the druggies themselves make it my business when they steal my #### to sell for drug money. It gets made my business when some clueless do-gooder or money grubbing opportunist decides that they can turn these folks into responsible citizens, and wants to use my tax dollars to do it.

Justy to make sure I've got this correctly; you don't want your tax dollars spent on health care for druggies, but you don't mind much more of your tax money go to making sure that druggie doesn't take those drugs or punishing them for taking the drugs?

You would rather your tax dollars be used to lock people up, have no demonstrable impact on drug use or potency, then bitch if those same tax dollars get used to rehab someone and turn them into a productive member of society.

Please introduce me to these people, some of whom are right here on this forum, who are in favor of legalizing drugs like meth or heroin.

Outside of that, you’re welcome to your own imagination.

 

[glhs837]

Well, you - a stranger on the internet - would certainly know more about my experiences than I would.

Anyway, Chris, you are not going to get me to believe some "study" over what I have personally experienced. You're just not.

Why put study in quotes? Do you think that the science was weak in some way, the studies were poorly conducted? Nobody cant say you didn't experience a high. But it can reasonably be said that it's impossible for you to ingest enough second hand smoke on stroll through a market, unless someone was walking next to you blowing hits in your face the whole time.

 

[vraiblonde]

Why put study in quotes? Do you think that the science was weak in some way, the studies were poorly conducted? Nobody cant say you didn't experience a high. But it can reasonably be said that it's impossible for you to ingest enough second hand smoke on stroll through a market, unless someone was walking next to you blowing hits in your face the whole time.

I think many of these "studies" are skewed to a predetermined outcome. And when one of them insists that something I have personally experienced doesn't exist, I'm calling bull#### on it.

How can they say that secondhand cigarette smoke causes cancer, then turn around and say that secondhand pot smoke is completely benign? I mean, come on.

 

[vraiblonde]

Somewhere on here there is at least one post by Larry Gude describing the "ganja market" in Negril and our experience when we walked through it. We called it the ganja market because it reeked of pot smoke and made us both lightheaded and somewhat disoriented - in actuality it was just an outdoor marketplace with wares and whatnot. And a #### ton of Jamaicans getting their smoke on.

Now you can accuse him of being a liar, too.

 

[Wishbone]

How can they say that secondhand cigarette smoke causes cancer, then turn around and say that secondhand pot smoke is completely benign? I mean, come on.

The most amusing part is the same asshats that will create a scene over cigarette smoke are most often the same ones that want to be able to get baked, anytime, anywhere.

 

[Chris0nllyn]

I think many of these "studies" are skewed to a predetermined outcome. And when one of them insists that something I have personally experienced doesn't exist, I'm calling bull#### on it.

How can they say that secondhand cigarette smoke causes cancer, then turn around and say that secondhand pot smoke is completely benign? I mean, come on.

The Johns Hopkins study we've been discussing was funded by SAMHSA. Not exactly a pro-drug agency. They certainly aren't going to go into the study in hopes their workplace standards are too low, are they?

The study was supported by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), an agency in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services that sets standards for federal workplace drug testing. Information about the effects of secondhand smoke on drug test results were being sought to support different ways of measuring drug use or drug exposure, Vandrey says. Funding came from SAMHSA and the National Center for Research Resources of the National Institutes of Health. The cannabis used in the experiment was provided by the National Institute on Drug Abuse.

Just because it's not a study you agree with doesn't make it skewed.

The most amusing part is the same asshats that will create a scene over cigarette smoke are most often the same ones that want to be able to get baked, anytime, anywhere.

"Most often"? Do you just go around making #### up willy-nilly?

 

[glhs837]

Somewhere on here there is at least one post by Larry Gude describing the "ganja market" in Negril and our experience when we walked through it. We called it the ganja market because it reeked of pot smoke and made us both lightheaded and somewhat disoriented - in actuality it was just an outdoor marketplace with wares and whatnot. And a #### ton of Jamaicans getting their smoke on.

Now you can accuse him of being a liar, too.

There's a difference between being mistaken and being a liar. The placebo effect is a real thing. And it's true, studies can be set up to give you the outcome you desire. I post about those sorts of studies regarding automated enforcement all the time. But when I dispute those studies findings, I use hard verifiable facts, I don't just say "Well, I don't do X, therefore the study is flawed". Can you find factual analysis that shows how the studies in question were flawed? I went to a DeadMau5 concert, about 30 feet back from the stage. Trust me, if being a cloud of secondhand pot smoke could get you high, I would have been Yet, I was not.

 

[Weems]

"Most often"? Do you just go around making #### up willy-nilly?

Yes, she does.

 

[Wishbone]

Yes, she does.

Smoke up Chelsea!

 

[Wishbone]

"Most often"? Do you just go around making #### up willy-nilly?

Same as you, cupcake.

 

[Gilligan]

 

[Chris0nllyn]

Same as you, cupcake.

No backup. No facts. No evidence.

Offering absolutely nothing to conversations; you're the forum equivalent of "I know you are, but what am I?".

Now, go off to your list of 5 edgy one-liners that are more repetitive than radio advertising.

 

[Weems]

Smoke up Chelsea!

Careful, you might cut yourself on that edge!

 

[glhs837]

View attachment 120041

Devils Lettuce, I love it The term, I mean, I don't smoke