Posted on 07/20/2009 11:11:12 AM PDT by cryptical
A New York Times article on Sunday discussed the debate over whether more and more potent types of cannabis affect the levels of addiction to the drug. This particular issue has become part of the larger debate over whether marijuana should be legalized or decriminalized.
Antidrug activists say that if the drug is legalized, more people will use it and addiction levels, made worse by the increased potency, will rise too. Legalization advocates note that pot addiction is not nearly as destructive as, say, abuse of alcohol. What would be the effect of legalization or decriminalization on marijuana abuse and addiction?
(Excerpt) Read more at roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com ...
“All pot smokers are idiots...”
Star Traveler, if you include all people who use ANY intoxicating drugs whatever, I might agree with you.
Your comments do your otherwise good reputation on this forum no justice. Pot is simply no worse than alcohol. For the record I do not smoke it anymore.
Yep..., I’ve seen enough dumbos smoking weed and getting nothing done in their lives
_______
We have all seen plenty of people who make nothing of their lives. Some drink. Some smoke reefer. Some do none of the above.
You are viewing a symptom as a cause, IMO.
just think the tax justification is rediculous. In alaska it used to be legal to raise 5 plants for your own use wich is fine but when the politicos are talking about the revenues I don’t think they will allow it.
If legalized, I think you would see stronger marijuana come out to get people really addicted to it. It’s also called a gateway drug for a reason.
***********************************************
Marijuana is not physically addictive ... it might be psychologically addictive ,, calling it a “gateway” drug is VERY deceptive ,, the governments mislabeling/scheduling of marijuana forces people that wish to buy it to deal with dealers that sell the dangerous drugs ,, meth/speed/various pills/heroin/opiates,cocaine and derivatives.
Don’t pay ST any mind. He is in love with the word retard and it just trying to get a rise out of saying silly things.
ANd I was relating my personal experience as well, YYZ. The author of your study admits that her findings are “controversial.” Indeed they are, as the virtual consensus is that the drug is NOT physically addictive. An example:
http://www.spencerrecovery.com/marijuana-addiction.html
Well, of course, I would include heroin and crack and other such illegal drugs. I thought that went without saying. What seems to *require saying* (these days) is that pot smokers are *idiots* and retards... LOL...
I love the use of the word THEM in your post...as if you are not one of those that would be tested...just “them” as is everyone else in the room, just not me...
You said — Don’t pay ST any mind. He is in love with the word retard and it just trying to get a rise out of saying silly things.
—
Do a google search on Free Republic and see that it’s only *pot smokers* who are *retards* — per my comments. In other words, it’s appropriate on *this thread* to use that description.
You won’t find it on any other thread... LOL...
I find rich the irony of ST’s repetitious refrain.
I’m not against legelization. I’m against gov’t picking who will prosper in this. They will allow a few large contibutors to charge exorbitant prices, take their cut and come down hard on all others.
You'll be able to spot them, they'll be the ones going 15 MPH in the fast lane on the freeway.
I’m going to make a YouTube video demonstrating how to make your own Nachos in the microwave oven. I bet it gets a million hits.
Only pot smokers get defensive for being identified as retards... LOL...
[... there is not a more fitting description for them...]
Yeah, we get it, Star Traveler.
I just say, “If the shoe fits, wear it...” LOL...
My point is that if drugs are legalized, employers should still have the choice not to hire those that use them. Many pro-legalization advocates also want employment protection. I say, give them the choice to use marijuana but do not take away the choice of employers to not hire those that use it.
Clear?
Agreed.
Many pro-legalization advocates also want employment protection. I say, give people the choice to use marijuana but do not take away the choice of employers to not hire those that use it.
Hell, it was only a few years ago that Delta Airlines started allowing their employees to have facial hair, i.e. beards.
“Do you consider Alcohol evil?”
Let change the word evil to addictive substance.
So we have one Addictive Substance out there that is evil, so we should make ANOTHER Addictive substance legal.
Yeah, that will help.
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.