More Patients at ERs Citing Pot Use

Las Vegas Sun ^ | 23 August 2002

[dmz]

well, you make an interesting point. If, as you seem to indicate, behaviors that produce an increasing burden on society should be against the law, please share where you stand on the prohibition of the following:

(1) cigarettes
(2) alcohol
(3) fast food

each of these substances is responsible for putting a burden on our society. Each of these substances is ingested by choice.

It seems you are posting to the wrong group. I think Democratic Underground is where people who believe in the almighty power of the federal government to make our lives better congregate and share their thoughts.

[metesky]

Friend here in Maine had the same thing happen to him, only it was game wardens on the other side of the river checking his catch through binoculars!

[robertpaulsen]

What's interesting is the doper's challenge to the title of the article.

If it read, "More Physicists Citing Pot Use", or "More Pulitzer Prize Winners Citing Pot Use", the dopers would be going, "See! See! Pot is good!".

Give me a break.

[robertpaulsen]

"They're forced into treatment for simply using the drug."

There are many on this board (excluding myself) and elsewhere that promote the idea of treatment over incarceration. My understanding is that they're given a choice. Maybe I'm wrong.

[SkyRat]

What treatment do you give someone who uses a non-addictive drug?

The only reason not to take pot, is the goverment saying so. There are no valid reasons to ban pot.

I guess "treatment" in that case is "reducation".You get put in a room with a bottle of booze and some pot in front of you. You choose the booze you see your family, you choose the pot and 2 wards come in and beat the crap out of you.

If pot smoking is a "mental health" problem (if you dont belive the goverment, you must be crazy!) a mental assylum is the best place to treat their insanity.

[robertpaulsen]

Excellent point. If marijuana is not addictive, why do we need treatment centers? Why are judges offering treatment instead of jail? Lock 'em up, I say.

[SkyRat]

Excellent point. If marijuana is not addictive, why do we need treatment centers? Why are judges offering treatment instead of jail? Lock 'em up, I say.

Yes, it is non-addictive and yes, therefor you don't need treatment centers. However, I cant see how you reach the conclussion that locking them up is better.

If it is non-addictive why should it be regulated? After all, many adults can live with alcohol, wich is addictive, without becoming a junkie. Why should the use of a substance with a smaller addictive potential than alcohol result in a jail term?

[realpatriot71]

My thoughts are, and I think any thinking person can see this, that it's the simple report of reccreational use at the ER that's up, NOT emergencies related to MJ. The governemnt has taken what is a simple medication report to a physician in the ER, and has taken whole thing out of context to show that emergencies involving MJ are up? These's no such thing as a MJ emergency. This is like asking someone if they take advil, tylenol, alieve, etc. and then trying to link analgesics to ER vists. That's about the silliest 3rd grade logic I've ever heard, but what do you expect out of the drug warriors? Logic and reason are not part of the debate . . .

[realpatriot71]

Yeah, don't they realize that druggies have a Constitutional right to create an ever increasing burden on society!

Hey smart guy, losers are losers whether their poison of choice is legal or not. Those that are going to have to be taken care of on "our dime" are already being taken care of. Legalization changes nothing as far as how much money is going to be spent in ER's. Those who are using drugs to the point where they need an ER visit are already using them. It's the responsible law-abiding types that are paying the price for this unconstitutional WOsD.

Take your straw man some place else

[Ken H]

"Lock 'em up, I say."

What will the voters of Nevada say? Last survey I saw had it at 48 for, 48 against, and 4 undecided.

My guess is that the result wil be 52 to 48 in favor of the referendum.

Or should that be reeferendum?

[realpatriot71]

Excellent point. If marijuana is not addictive, why do we need treatment centers? Why are judges offering treatment instead of jail? Lock 'em up, I say.

It's flawed circular reasoning. For the most part, you don't need treatment centers for MJ. Here's the problem: Someone caught with a joint is not somehow an "addicted abuser" just because they happen to smoke in the first place, now needing a treatment facility - talk bout a non sequitur. I support the legalization of all drugs, but I have a hard time understanding why you woddies don't just "let it go" and concentrate on more addictive and or destructive substances. At least if I were a drug warrior that's what I'd advocate, much more cost and time efficient. You're not doing yourselves any favors by spending so much police time busting college kids with a bong and a 1/4 "O" of mexican dirt weed.

[Mr. Mojo]

"They're not talking about marijuana emergencies," Rogers said. "Nobody has died from an overdose of marijuana."

Some people can read this (true) sentence over and over and over, and it still won't register. They just don't want it to.

[realpatriot71]

I've read that "they've" estimated an OD level for MJ (I don't know how strong the weed was they tested), but the estimate I read was that one would have to smoke 4 lbs per hour for three days straight. Not gonna happen.

[Mr. Mojo]

Potheads tend to do other even more dangerous drugs in combination with their smokes

It appears that all the public elementary school anti-weed propaganda films left quite an impression on your fragile, eggshell mind. I'd imagine that you also believe that marijuana leads to heroin?

[Mr. Mojo]

smoke 4 lbs per hour for three days straight. Not gonna happen.

A physical impossibility, as I'm sure you're aware. Even Bob Marley himself couldn't have smoked a quarter ounce per hour for three days straight, let alone 4 pounds.

[realpatriot71]

A physical impossibility, as I'm sure you're aware.

Yep :-) But I wouldn't mind having a day off and the money to give it a try, or would that be a "fry" :-)

[Mr. Mojo]

At today's prices for good weed, that experiment would cost you almost $20,000. .....all because of prohibition.

I wonder if the majority of the WOD JBT's know that the dealers are on their side (as far as keeping drugs illegal is concerned)?

[Dakmar]

How does it benefit anyone to to take a peaceful, tax-paying, and otherwise law-abiding citizen like myself and put them in prison? Not only do you pay the tab for keeping them there, you lose the taxes they were paying and the productivity they are adding to the economy. Does drug war idealogy take precedence over common sense? I guess you will answer with a resounding "Yes".

If you smoke cigarettes, eat fast-food, or homeschool your kids, I suggest you rethink your position, because they will be coming after you next.

[Dakmar]

They don't care what slime they crawl into bed with, they are focused on that elusive dream of a drug free America (except for alcohol, tobacco, caffiene, ritalin...) Utopians have not had a good track record thus far, but like all good socialists, they take that as a sign that they just aren't trying hard enough.

[headsonpikes]

Are you trying to say that the government would manipulate statistics for its own ends?!?

YIKES!!! ;^)