Posted on 11/21/2004 9:15:23 PM PST by april15Bendovr
"The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration Intelligence Division December Report 2000 states that a form of marijuana called BC Bud (British Columbia), with Canadian growers using sophisticated cultivating techniques, has increased THC levels from 15 percent to 25 percent, compared with 2 percent in 1970."
Okay, are you claiming that the average marijuana on the street in America today is 15%, or just that BC Bud averages 15% in THC? If so, why would you say "compared with 2 percent in 1970" when that was the average of commercial marijuana in the U.S. in 1970 and not "BC Bud?" That's an apples to oranges comparison.
If you are claiming that the average marijuana on the street in the U.S. is 15%, you are making a false claim. According to the ONDCP, it's closer to 5%, or at least it was in 2001. NIDA gets their data on marijuana potency from the same place the ONDCP gets theirs.
And SRV is also very high on my list!
Your argument is hogwash. If MJ is as bad as the article you posted makes it out to be, why in the world would you favor legalizing it?
How about this: I am in favor of your right to free speech, freedom of religion, right to keep and bear arms, BUT only if you sign a waiver holding me personally non-liable for any stupid acts you commit in the exercise of the aforesaid rights. Will you gladly sign the waiver so that decent folks like myself are protected against you frying your synapses singing too many hymns in chruch, or shooting yourself in the foot while hunting?
This kind of anti-drug propaganda comes from those with a vested interest in 'solving problems' -- self-styled 'experts', half-baked therapists, counselors and some in the medical establishment. They see only one side of drug issues, and that is the very worst side, because people who are happy and successful don't often talk to therapists and counselors. A good example is this Hazeldon Foundation whose video you tout. Don't they have a vested interest in portraying MJ and all 'street drugs' as dangerous?
And of course, you talk about 'the kids'. Always the kids.
PAGING ART LINKLETTER AND HILLARY RODHAM!
I'm changing my tagline just for you...
The "stoned" effect produced by said joint NEVER subdues my profound dislike... nay, HATRED... for the satanic death cult that masquerades as a "peaceful religion" while its Muzzle-em believers fiendishly decapitate Jews, Christians, other Infidels and Apoatates !!!
I am a Right Winger, a Republican, a Conservative, a Musician (believe it or not), and I am also a Pot-Head. Though I can agree with many views on this thread, I do not believe legalization would benefit the the government or the user. The user would be taxed to the nth degree on a substandard product (compared to what we have today) and the government would have so much work to do that the cost of man power would negate a good deal of the revenue. Paper and lumber costs would go down, but there is no way to control intoxication levels. Chances are that most of the revenue created would have to fund a program to control the production and regulations of the drug. The breathalizer test won't (or can't(no research to back that up))detect concentration, and the blood test cannot provide on-the-spot levels needed to regulate DUI offenses. If pot were legal, the crack and heroin junkies would infest our cities like they have in Amsterdam and some places in Canada. Not pretty places either!! Legalization would only mean that I (along with millions of people in America) wouldn't be supporting my local gangsters and we'll be helping them pay for there six kids (tax-free) who are sucking up my tax dollars through welfare and food-stamps.. what to do, what to do?? It was also mentioned earlier to keep it at home. That's what I do. My wife told me to, and she's usually right! She's not a user, she just loves one.
It isn't? I suppose in one sense it's not, in that it's conditioned Americans to sacrifice their Constitutional rights so that law enforcement can use invasive methods to stop victimless crimes. Plenty of government officials are quite pleased about that.
"hey, booze is legal and it's a lot worse than pot!". Now just try and follow the logic: ALCOHOL=BIG PROBLEM & LEGAL, POT=SMALL PROBLEM & ILLEGAL.
Alcohol under Prohibition=EVEN WORSE PROBLEM. Do the math
I wouldn't want people growing marijuana since it would make it easier for teenagers to get to. I want people to have to buy it for the taxation too. Yeah its a lot of government control but its better than just being illegal IMO.
Um, I thought this country had learned the opposite lesson from our experience with alcohol Prohibition. But I could be wrong, because I have smoked pot more than a few times so my brain synapses are fried.
I understand perfectly.
The problem is, amotivation persists when the person ISN'T high. That's the danger. I've known many bright people who smoked 'in moderation' but basically opted out of all the opportunities they could have had, in favor of a nihilistic existence. Not that they spent all the time high, remember? Just once in a while. Enough to make that inner change. That was enough to convince me, in college, to stay the hell away from pot. (fully acknowledging the manifold hazards of alcohol...hic)
I like to think i'm a pretty motivated person, and I smoke weed everyday. I lift weights with a passion and I have a 430 lb. bench press. My job is a security guard at a hotel that caters parties, and my business is investment in mobile homes.
I think the motivation issue is up to the individual.
If everyone who used it were banned from driving while I'm driving, I'd say go for it.
Personally, I didn't like it. It made me only want to sleep. I much preferred watching TV with a cold 6. That, of course, was back when I was young and stupid.
Did the marijuana cause that or were the people already like that in the first place? Was pot smoking just part of their "nihilistic existence" or was it the root of all their problems?
I know people who still smoke pot who are very successful hard working people. I also know losers who smoke it, but I imagine most of them would have been losers whether they smoked pot or not. Overall, I think people would all be better off if they left things like pot and booze alone. But I don't really care if people use either as long as they don't cause big problems for me or our community through their use. The vast majority of those who use these substances in moderation don't cause us any problems, and if it makes them happy to smoke a couple of hits off a joint or drink a couple of beers, I say let them do it.
This seems to be a little subjective if you ask me.
A persons motivations in the college years change about as often as they change their socks. One could easily blame women, work, alcohol, entering the real world etc.
Marijuana is easily defined as the reason that great guy or gal "never really amounted to anything". How many did while smoking? How many never would have, smoking or not? Impossible to tell really.
Smoking the demon weed is just to easy of an excuse. I don't deal in excuses.
This "right" to exclude the Creator from sex is the "right" which underpins both abortion and the artificial reproduction which now has California borrowing billions to get in the Human Farming business.
Especially when concern is "for the Children," some drug regimes are just more equal than others, I guess -- particularly those that provide Pharmas their monthly bread and butter funds (from nearly 46% of American women as of 1995) and for which the "Republican Congress" enacted comprehensive "contraceptive coverage" for Federal Workers in 1998.
The people you work with every day that have destroyed their lives have a whole lot more going on than smoking pot. Why can't you be honest about that?
Nice post ... I'm happy for you and your Dad.
If they could figure out a way to tax it, pot WOULD be legal. It's just too easy to grow plants -- as opposed to erecting a still for moonshine -- and the State only approves those drugs which it can tax and/or regulate as "controlled substances."
For all the talk of the addictive and "desperate" behaviors of pot smokers, I've yet to see anyone smoke themselves into a rage and beat the crap out of anyone after verbally abusing anyone who happens to be handy.
Nor have I noted "withdrawal" symptoms -- other than a spike, perhaps, in mental acuity -- to be terribly violent for pot smokers.
With those contrasts to alcohol and the fact that drunk drivers like Janklow (who got a whopping 100 days in jail for his drunken KILLING of motorcyclist ... compare that to your average Sentencing Guideline for pot, will you?) are responsible for an inordinate amount of carnage and LITTER on the byways of this land.
I for one am particularly sick of the hypocrisy. No one who is "anti-pot" has any business supporting the continued legal status of alcohol which is -- by far -- the more dangerous substance.
"Go to NIDA's web site. While your there please learn something please and stop making me do your homework."
Just for you I went to NIDA's website and looked around and finally got linked to a DEA web page where they cite NIDA's numbers. You will not that in 2001 the average commercial grade marijuana was 4.72% THC and the average sinsemilla was 9.03% THC. It looks like the ONDCP rounded up on the commercial grade and down on the sinsemilla. The DEA web page doesn't say what the average of all marijuana seized in the U.S. was in 2001, but the ONDCP link I provided you said the avaerage of all types seized was 5.02%. Mostly what is out on the streets is the cheap commercial stuff. Most people can't afford to buy the expensive "connesuoir" varieties which while they may be more potent, are much more expensive and not as widely available throughout the states.
One other thing you will note from the DEA link is that the Marijuana Potency Monitoring Project is conducted by the University of Mississippi, and sponsored by NIDA. If you ever do any research on this issue, you will see that if our government provides sources for data on marijuana potency in the U.S., they'll always cite the Marijuana Potency Monitoring Project.
Here's the link: http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/pubs/intel/02058/02058.html#6
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.