Pot legalized in MD

[garyt27]

Back when I used to drink and smoke pot, I could drive stoned but I could not drive worth a shiate drunk. I was lucky I did not kill someone or myself when I drank and drove. Never had a problem when smoking pot.

 

[PsyOps]

that is one of the most ignorant arguments i have ever read. And i mean ignorant as in coming from someone with out knowledge.

Just like alcohol, most weed smokers do not use with the intent to over induldge. catching a buzz is what they call it, its different from being stoned, just like having a beer is different from getting drunk.
why would you think that alcohol and weed are so different? they are both recreational drugs.

You call my statement ignorant then go on to use terms that I never used. If you’re going to make it up as you go along, I really don’t what you think is ignorant. I did NOT say pot smokers – by and large – ‘over indulge’. You folks are really exaggerating my point and putting all sorts of terms in here that I’m not even remotely trying to imply. All I am saying is the sole intent of smoking pot is to get high. Call it a buzz or relaxation, you are still getting high. Having a beer or two does NOT constitute being drunk.

I’m not making a judgment against smoking pot. I’ve advocated that I think it should be legalized. I don’t care if you want to get high. I’m just making a distinction between the use of the two substances.

 

[Hank]

Back when I used to drink and smoke pot, I could drive stoned but I could not drive worth a shiate drunk. I was lucky I did not kill someone or myself when I drank and drove. Never had a problem when smoking pot.

Let's see....

Most people that get #### faced drunk are belligerent, nasty, obnoxious and violent.

Most people that get baked are hungry, humorous and chilled out.

I rest my case.

 

[PsyOps]

I just stopped talking to him because his mind is closed. His view is everyone who uses marijuana is getting stoned off their ass.

Sorry Psy. I have both friends and family that use low amounts legally to cope with pain. Again, legally and prescribed. They aren't getting high, they aren't smoking until their brains are fried. But yea, keep arguing that people who know how to manage marijuana don't exist.

Again, that's as silly as saying nobody has one beer to relax; everyone drinks to get drunk, because that's the point of it.

You see this is the kind of thing that makes my head spin. You guys are posting all sorts of things I never said. Because you disagree with me you have to exaggerate my point. Now, for my own entertainment, please go back and find where I posted “everyone who uses marijuana is getting stoned off their ass”? You are not providing any sort of better argument by taking what I am saying at its basic level and blowing it out of proportion.

I don’t care what your friends and family use pot for. You do not use for any other reason than to get high. You can define ‘high’ however you want to (buzz, relaxation, coping, etc…) however you want to; it’s still the same thing.

From a legal standpoint if you are caught driving under the influence of pot you are DUI. From a legal standpoint if you drive under the influence of one beer you will NOT be considered DUI.

Now if you’re truly done talking to me, then I suggest you don’t say you’re done talking to me then address me in the same post. I’m more than willing to continue this discussion. I’m approaching this in a respectful and non-hostile fashion. You (and others) are taking it personally and getting belligerent about it. This is not personal for me.

 

[Hank]

You see this is the kind of thing that makes my head spin. You guys are posting all sorts of things I never said.

Dude, everyone in this thread is stoned.... What do you expect?

 

[Chris0nllyn]

You see this is the kind of thing that makes my head spin. You guys are posting all sorts of things I never said. Because you disagree with me you have to exaggerate my point. Now, for my own entertainment, please go back and find where I posted “everyone who uses marijuana is getting stoned off their ass”? You are not providing any sort of better argument by taking what I am saying at its basic level and blowing it out of proportion.

I don’t care what your friends and family use pot for. You do not use for any other reason than to get high. You can define ‘high’ however you want to (buzz, relaxation, coping, etc…) however you want to; it’s still the same thing.

From a legal standpoint if you are caught driving under the influence of pot you are DUI. From a legal standpoint if you drive under the influence of one beer you will NOT be considered DUI.

Now if you’re truly done talking to me, then I suggest you don’t say you’re done talking to me then address me in the same post. I’m more than willing to continue this discussion. I’m approaching this in a respectful and non-hostile fashion. You (and others) are taking it personally and getting belligerent about it. This is not personal for me.

You say the intent of smoking is to get high.

Yet, the intent of drinking isn't to get drunk?

What is the intent then?

 

[Hank]

You say the intent of smoking is to get high.

Yet, the intent of drinking isn't to get drunk?

What is the intent then?

I agree... I know very few people that drink 1 just to get the taste...

If you are having a few beers, you want the buzz that goes along with it (unless you drink Coors, Miller or Bud Light)

 

[Toxick]

Are you still not getting high?

THAT is what you got from what I wrote?




Ok. Discarding ALL the other discussion fodder I wasted my time with, I don't know how to answer your question... I don't smoke the shirt.

As for your nebulous term "getting high"... It sounds really sinister. But I would posit to you that it's nothing more than a semantic device similar to someone saying "getting drunk" rather than "having a drink". And it's true - every sip of beer or wine and you are closer to being drunk, it's inevitable. And if you keep getting drunk you will find yourself in the undesirable position of being an alcoholic.


Now, with that said, I have been led to believe - and have thus far seen no evidence to the contrary - that there is graduated effect between "Perfectly Sober" and "Totally Baked" not dissimilar to "Perfectly Sober" and "Snot-Slinging Drunk"

As in: One puff and you don't fall on your face in a reefer induced coma. Much like one percocet won't knock you into a opiate induced trance. Much like one Unisom won't render you unconscious. Much like one tylonol won't turn your liver into rillettes, and back to the original comparison: much like one bottle-cap of Kahlua in your coffee won't land you in a dumpster wondering what happened.

 

[Toxick]

Never had a problem when smoking pot.

You can't do much damage when you're driving 15 MPH.

 

[rmorse]

You see this is the kind of thing that makes my head spin. You guys are posting all sorts of things I never said. Because you disagree with me you have to exaggerate my point. Now, for my own entertainment, please go back and find where I posted “everyone who uses marijuana is getting stoned off their ass”? You are not providing any sort of better argument by taking what I am saying at its basic level and blowing it out of proportion.

I don’t care what your friends and family use pot for. You do not use for any other reason than to get high. You can define ‘high’ however you want to (buzz, relaxation, coping, etc…) however you want to; it’s still the same thing.

From a legal standpoint if you are caught driving under the influence of pot you are DUI. From a legal standpoint if you drive under the influence of one beer you will NOT be considered DUI.

Now if you’re truly done talking to me, then I suggest you don’t say you’re done talking to me then address me in the same post. I’m more than willing to continue this discussion. I’m approaching this in a respectful and non-hostile fashion. You (and others) are taking it personally and getting belligerent about it. This is not personal for me.You do not use for any other reason than to get high. You can define ‘high’ however you want to (buzz, relaxation, coping, etc…) however you want to; it’s still the same thing.
Agreed. Sorry on both accounts.

So now we're talking about the legal standpoint of whether or not you're high?

This is the statement I (and others) have an issue with:

"You do not use for any other reason than to get high. You can define ‘high’ however you want to (buzz, relaxation, coping, etc…) however you want to; it’s still the same thing."

That's akin to me saying "You can define "drunk" however you want to (buzz, tipsy, smashed, toasted, etc....); it's still the same thing."

You are making the argument that one itty bitty puff of weed and you're high. However, one itty bitty sip of beer and you're NOT drunk. That doesn't make much sense now, does it?

The argument that no matter how much you smoke, you will be DUI.....well, no sh!t....it's illegal. If alcohol was illegal, then no matter how much you drink, you will be DUI. That doesn't mean that you're high or drunk. It just means that the substance you used was illegal, and it's illegal to operate a motor vehicle while you have it in your system.

 

[thatguy]

Wirelessly posted

that is one of the most ignorant arguments i have ever read. And i mean ignorant as in coming from someone with out knowledge.

Just like alcohol, most weed smokers do not use with the intent to over induldge. catching a buzz is what they call it, its different from being stoned, just like having a beer is different from getting drunk.
why would you think that alcohol and weed are so different? they are both recreational drugs.

You call my statement ignorant then go on to use terms that I never used. If you’re going to make it up as you go along, I really don’t what you think is ignorant. I did NOT say pot smokers – by and large – ‘over indulge’. You folks are really exaggerating my point and putting all sorts of terms in here that I’m not even remotely trying to imply. All I am saying is the sole intent of smoking pot is to get high. Call it a buzz or relaxation, you are still getting high. Having a beer or two does NOT constitute being drunk.

I’m not making a judgment against smoking pot. I’ve advocated that I think it should be legalized. I don’t care if you want to get high. I’m just making a distinction between the use of the two substances.

People Are using terms you haven't in an attempt to educate you. You continue to post from the ignorant position that pot smokers only smoke to get high, while making the claim that the same is not true of alcohol. That is an ignorant position. Alcohol and weed are both recreational drugs, if the only reason to smoke weed is to get high, then The only reason to drink is to get drunk.

 

[PsyOps]

People Are using terms you haven't in an attempt to educate you. You continue to post from the ignorant position that pot smokers only smoke to get high, while making the claim that the same is not true of alcohol. That is an ignorant position. Alcohol and weed are both recreational drugs, if the only reason to smoke weed is to get high, then The only reason to drink is to get drunk.

YOU are going to educate me?

The only answer you have to everything - because facts continually fail you - is to call people ignorant.

 

[Misfit]

Can I use Beer in my water bong?

 

[Hank]

YOU are going to educate me?

The only answer you have to everything - because facts continually fail you - is to call people ignorant.

Yeah, but you're wrong on this issue.... Are you a know-it-all at home? That would annoy me.

 

[PsyOps]

You say the intent of smoking is to get high.

Yet, the intent of drinking isn't to get drunk?

What is the intent then?

I guess what's getting lost here is definition.

What does 'high' mean?

What does 'drunk' mean?

If you deny that the state the mind that people are trying to get themselves into when smoking pot is a 'high' state of mind, then there's no sense in going on with this discussion.

If you deny that you can drink alcohol without the intent of getting into the state of mind of 'drunk' (which the vast majority of people that drink do) then there is no reason to go on discussing this.

We simply disagree that there is a different intent in what a person wants in their state mind when smoking pot and drinking alcohol.

 

[Toxick]

If you deny that the state the mind that people are trying to get themselves into when smoking pot is a 'high' state of mind, then there's no sense in going on with this discussion.

I think the discrepency may (in small part) be definitions. But I think it's your refusal to acknowledge that one can smoke the pot without the intention of getting stoned.

But you staunchly stand by this:

If you deny that you can drink alcohol without the intent of getting into the state of mind of 'drunk' (which the vast majority of people that drink do) then there is no reason to go on discussing this.

Why can't someone just smoke enough to take the edge off, or unwind after 8 hours of work - y'know, the same reasons someone would have 1 or 2 beers.

 

[Misfit]

Can I use Beer in my water bong?

Nederminf, i answered mi ont qeutsion.

 

[thatguy]

Wirelessly posted

You say the intent of smoking is to get high.

Yet, the intent of drinking isn't to get drunk?

What is the intent then?

I guess what's getting lost here is definition.

What does 'high' mean?

What does 'drunk' mean?

If you deny that the state the mind that people are trying to get themselves into when smoking pot is a 'high' state of mind, then there's no sense in going on with this discussion.

If you deny that you can drink alcohol without the intent of getting into the state of mind of 'drunk' (which the vast majority of people that drink do) then there is no reason to go on discussing this.

We simply disagree that there is a different intent in what a person wants in their state mind when smoking pot and drinking alcohol.

You are insisting on semantics that aren't there. If you drink it is to alter your mood, same if you use weed. Any differences thaT YOU make beyond that are your own.

BTW, since you claim you are not ignorant on the subject, where did you gain your knowledge of what EVERY PERSON who smokes pot and their intentions when they do?

 

[PsyOps]

You are insisting on semantics that aren't there.

And once again you're going to educate me on semantics when you admit that you purposely exaggerate and twist what I say in order to try to prove me wrong.

Wow ………. Simply wow. And you call me ignorant.

 

[Chris0nllyn]

I guess what's getting lost here is definition.

What does 'high' mean?

What does 'drunk' mean?

If you deny that the state the mind that people are trying to get themselves into when smoking pot is a 'high' state of mind, then there's no sense in going on with this discussion.

If you deny that you can drink alcohol without the intent of getting into the state of mind of 'drunk' (which the vast majority of people that drink do) then there is no reason to go on discussing this.

We simply disagree that there is a different intent in what a person wants in their state mind when smoking pot and drinking alcohol.

You can, and many people do, smoke, not to get HIGH, but to simply "take the edge off", or take the pain away, etc. Which is essentially what people who don't "drink to get drunk" do.

You are trying to equate these substances into two seperate realms, when, in reality, the objective of doing both in moderation is to simply get buzzed.

By basically saying that all people who smoke, smoke to get 'high', then it's the same thing saying people who drink, only do it to get 'drunk'.