Posted on 09/05/2006 8:16:10 AM PDT by tang0r
Generally, there are two types of marijuana users. First is the most commonly stereotyped “stoner,” depicted in the media of movies (e.g. Spicoli from Fast Times at Ridgemont High) and television (e.g. Shaggy from Scooby Doo). These are the dead-end job, ambitionless abusers who ingest marijuana to escape their already dismal lives. They represent the image which is most often associated with marijuana use. Certainly, the average American high school is teeming with similar directionless pot-smoking losers, further cementing this public perception.
(Excerpt) Read more at prometheusinstitute.net ...
> Smoke some pot sometime, then come tell me that.
No thanks. As I pointed out, I'm underwhelmed by the idea of mind-alterring substances. (When I had my tonsils carved out last year - a procedure I don't hesitate to heartily recommend to those looking for harsh screeching agony - the narcotics they gave me to dull the pain ticked me off.)
> I can "pound back" quite a few brewski's before I get as stoned as I do from 1/2 a joint.
People vary. I'm a big guy. A sip of wine makes me need to sit down. Do not make the mistake of assuming that how things work for you is how they work for everyone.
> Now consider a regular pot user, who is stoned 24 hrs a day
Now, consider the *actual* pot user, who smokes maybe once a day.
Prevalent in every level of society.
LMAO! Kaki slacks and a Polo shirt? We professionals wear at the very least a suit without a tie. Little people have casual fridays and cubicles. We have offices with doors.
Meaning, in other words, that if marijuana was legal, its use would have no negative impact on society. Do you really believe that? Or do you wish to modify your statement?
And you forgot to mention your sandals with socks.
In every survey, teens have said that pot is easier to get than alcohol.
Yet teens use alcohol 2:1 over pot. Why do you think that is?
It doesn't MATTER WHAT I BELIEVE.
I'm not a fascist and don't want to force MY views on everybody else.
What matters is that, according to the constitution and Bill of Rights, the Feds have no right to regulate drugs. If they and you WANT to regulate these things, then pass a constitutional amendment as they did for alcohol.
On top of that, your arguments are ludicrous, self-righteous, crap - as they always are. Please don't respond to any of my posts as I find you offensively purile. It's like speaking with a 4-year old.
I prefer spirited debate based upon reason and logic.
Don't let your anger consume you, FRiend.
No such thing. "actual" pot users light up several times a day. Once a day would be showing considerable restraint in the pot users world.
The reason I tried pot a year or so ago was because I suffer from cronic pain, and didn't like the narcotics the doc was giving me. It made it difficult to go to the office. So, It tried a pot study through the doc s office. turns out it's "pain killing " qualities are bogus, not one in the group claimed benefit. In fact, being stoned like that makes one even more useless, worse than the Fentynol patches I was on. Finally I was given Oxycontin, which not any made it possible to return to work, but get out of the wheelchair as well.
Pot is pot, and everyone smokes it for the same reason- to get stoned. Its effect is about the same for everyone, and the length of the stone depends on the rate of metabolism of the THC.
Alcohol's effect depends on your bodies metabolism, the rate at which it absorbs converts and expells alcohol. That as you state varies person to person.
"Illegal" being the operative word. Seems to me that if an individual is willing to break the law to get one drug, they'd be willing to break the law to get another.
Who's more likely to "gateway" to robbing liquor stores: a teen who works for a living or a teen who shoplifts? Now, you can certainly make the case that not all shoplifters go on to rob liquor stores. Or even that some shoplifters are actually well-to-do.
But that, of course, misses the point. The point being who's more likely.
Keeping teens away from illegal soft drugs (marijuana, Ecstacy, nitrous, GHB, etc.) helps to keep them away from illegal hard drugs.
Mean? Not at all. Seems to me that you're the one who is angered for some reason, hence the personal attacks you started.
> Pot is pot, and everyone smokes it for the same reason- to get stoned.
The experience of many even on this thread argue agaisnt that.
Even "stoned" is a vague and slippery term. There are those who get well and truly baked, and then there are those who just get lightly buzzed. Neither appeals, but it's not my job, nor yours, nor the governments, to say that someone shouldn't be allowed to get all tore up at home.
"Yet teens use alcohol 2:1 over pot. Why do you think that is?"
Because alcohol is a more social drug. Pot isn't for everyone.
I find that hard to believe when you make statements such as, "the Feds have no right to regulate drugs". Seems to me that you prefer the debate to be limited to feelings and emotion with no connection to reality.
"Please don't respond to any of my posts"
Oops. Too late.
But it should be legal, right? I mean, the government has no more authority to regulate cocaine as they do pot.
Wrong. When your supplier also peddles his wares into my kids or grandkids hands, it is my business what you do. Society, yes even free ones like this, depend on basic laws and societal standards to exist. The reason this country is falling apart is because we are becoming a lawless, anything goes society, and like Rome and any other society before it, unless we stick to our foundational laws and standards, this one will fall too.
Say, like US federal law before 1937?
750,000 marijuana arrests last year. How many do you think were arrested while getting "all tore up at home"? Maybe 4?
I know you'd like us all to think that marijuana users are bothering no one, responsibly smoking a half-joint every other day "just to relax" in the privacy of their living room.
Obviously I, for one, don't.
Sorry, rp. You won't read any of the studies and discuss them. You just argue and I'm not into that. I prefer posters who are willing to add to the research, pro or con.
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.