Research helps dispel marijuana myths

Sober Talk ^ | Thursday, August 1, 2002 | By BECKY CLARK, MSW, CSW

[Behind Liberal Lines]

As we endeavor toward a more lucid and informed discussion of substance abuse, let's deconstruct the mystique of marijuana and recognize it for the dangerous drug that it is.

Marijuana is a substance that's worthy of our concern. It is the most prevalent of all illicit drugs used in the country. The 2000 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse reported that 34 percent of Americans have used marijuana in their lifetime and 5 percent are current users.

[Dakmar]

Maybe if they tried adjusting their dosages of lithium...

[vin-one]

Again the real question is, If you or I can have a beer and a cigarette, anytime of the day. Why can't I take a toke? Wahhhhhh, life's not fair. Maybe you all can try to get an amendment to the Constitution saying "the right to toke shall not be infringed".

Dane I have so missed your witty, and brilliant posts on these threads.
Again avoid the question and call me a cry baby,
I know that MJ is less harmful than alcohol, I also know that it can benefit some sick people,
But if my gov't says I shouldn't do it then so be it,
my gov't also tells me it is ok to kill a fetus.
and by God my gov't is never wrong.....

[4Freedom]

Sounds like you've got a hit there, knighthawk. ;^)

[Hemingway's Ghost]

Your putting the right to toke and the rights of the unborn on the same moral plane just shows how whacked out you are in your political priorities, IMHO.

Not really, IMHO. Both were trampled on by misreadings of the Constitution. In the case of the unborn, it was a liberal take on "privacy." In the case of grass, it was a liberal take on the Commerce Clause.

[sweet_diane]

"99 times out of a hundred an impartial jury would decide that the person minding their own business at home while smoking pot did not harm the person that filed the charge. "

My concern is legal issues that lead up to being in front of that impartial jury. One would have had to have been arrested and gone thru all that encompasses. Jail,fines, electric monitoring (they don't give away monitoring, it's costly), in many cases loss of job, embarassment to family, more fines and the every popular and often expensive drug courts/counseling. And the eventual years of drug testing, probation officers and court referral officers...each with their hand out for $$.

9 times out of 10 when I ask a group addicts in rehab how their addiction effected their loved ones they always say financially... from burning money in the years of use to the government taking it (money and property) away from the user and his family as punishment. So our population of single parent homes and welfare rolls grow accordingly. Addicts who could use AND pay their bills find themselves trying to recover while their family suffers financially.

Just seems to me there has GOT to be a better way to deal with these issues.

[newcats]

well then you and your smoking buddies go ahead and keep on doing what you are doing.

We will...and will continue to hold down our jobs...raise our kids...and pay our taxes.
Sorry to make fun of your experiences, they just reminded me so much of the propaganda I heard growing up about the evils of the Devil's weed.

[DJ MacWoW]

I went to church with a guy who had only smoked pot because he was led to believe it was a "safe" drug. What it had done to him was awful, slowed speech, lower IQ, very slowed physical reactions. It was sad. He lectured kids on it's use and usually was listened to because of his condition. He was only in his late 20's and about as "burned" as you can get. And all from a "safe" drug.

[Nate505]

I thought it caused Mexicans to rape white women....

[freedomcrusader]

A resident of a Southwestern state would have a better 'feel' for what number was closer to the truth than someone from the East coast. Wouldn't you agree?

Sure, but are there competing statistics for crime/drug use in the Netherlands? Is there one set of statistics that shows an increase in crime/drug use in the Netherlands, and another set that shows the opposite? I haven't been given ANY numbers yet, just assurances that knight-hawk's feelings are all I need to know, because he lives there, which is crap.

[jayef]

Cute. Here's mine:

I busted my wife in the mouth, because i got drunk
wouldn't let her leave the house, because i got drunk
I'm pickling my liver and I smell like a skunk,

because I got drunk
because I got drunk
because I got drunk

Got in a fight at the bar, because i got drunk
went right out and wrecked my car, because i got drunk
now i lost my licence and i am such a punk

because I got drunk
because I got drunk
because I got drunk

I was gonna go to work, but i got drunk
can't wait to tell my boss he's a jerk, when i am drunk
can't get of the government sauce and i'm hooked on this junk

because I got drunk
because I got drunk
because I got drunk

[ravingnutter]

The American Psychiatric Association classifies marijuana as an addictive drug, one that can foster a dependency among users.

The American Psychiatric Association? The same American Psychiatric Association that makes millions every year treating this so called addiction? Follow the money...

The national Drug Enforcement Agency has determined that marijuana is a Schedule I illegal drug.

Based on the bogus studies done by the APA, no doubt. And don't forget this is the agency that profits through seizures of assets. Again...follow the money...

In many parts of the country, more people are admitted to treatment for marijuana dependence than for heroin.

Voluntary admission or forced into treatment? Are they including people who are arrested for cannabis offenses and then are given the chance of going into treatment as an alternative to prosecution, as well as workers who test positive for cannabis in random urine tests and opt for rehabilitation rather than being fired? It DOES make a difference.

Clearly, we can take from this that marijuana is, in fact, a dependence-fostering drug, a dependence that an increasing number of people are seeking help to address.

Clearly? Based on the twisted "facts" they presented above?

[William Terrell]

Quite the contrary, seeing I am a pastor.

I understand your tunnelvison now. Where in the Bible does smoking a herb become immoral or unGodly?

Let's take a smoke-less view of the Scripture you mentioned, shall we?

Why? Because of the term "meat". The usage is allegorical, not literal, like much of the Bible imagery. To use it to limit the usage of herbs to eating is intellectual dishonesty. Cannabis has been known since ancient times, and not as clothing and rope making hemp, either, but as a relaxant and herbal remedy. Besides, you can ingest it orally. Does that count?

There is no reference to "smoking" a plant in order to get high.

There is no reference to not smoking a herb either. Pipes were used during those times; archeological digs have uncovered them. What did they smoke in them, tobacco?

So, cannabis is a result of cursed ground? What else is, wheat?, as mentioned in that chapter also? Do you eat bread? (laughter)

I'll bet you're goingt to tell me that cannabis is evil because of "sorcery" as related to pharmaceuticalia, and not because of the practice of sorcery in poisoning others, as was rampant at that time.

[jayef]

Uh, sure you did!

[KDD]

Post 99

[Behind Liberal Lines]

Rumor has it that these two may now be libertarian FREEPERS:

Officials at the Cartoon Network deny it, however.

[FreeTally]

I simply prefer that people not f### up themselves with happy-weed all their lives so that someday I and other taxpayers will have to take care of them.

What on earth does your "preference" have to do with the moral authority to kill those who resist being imprisoned for possessing the evil weed you do not like? Have all the preferences you want, just understand that everyone else can have THEIRS too. Thats the funny thing about freedom - its a two way street buddy. Too bad you don't see it that way.

[Hemingway's Ghost]

Exactly what is your point with all the cutsey pictures?

[freedomcrusader]

Thanks, I was responding to A2J's post #100, where he made the distinction between percentage of users current, versus whether that percentage has risen or fallen. I see now that post #99 did address the change in rates on usage, and found them to have fallen as of 2000.

But of course, since I don't live there, I can't "feel" that those statistics actually mean an increase in usage as of 2000 (/sarcasm).

[jayef]

They may not be Libertarians, but they sure are my heroes. I'm sure the subliminal cues from Scooby-Doo is why we all became dope heads in the first place.

[sweet_diane]

"i dont agree with incarceration for users. i am more of a libertarian than republican in that i beleive in limited government and personal repsonsibilty, so i guess my answer is i don't thikn the governemt has any responsibilty to handle my pot addiction."

You didn't mention any run ins with the law in your story (and again I celebrate your sobriety with you!). Had you been 'caught' then you'd have no choice in the matter and the government would probably still be playing a major role in yours and your families daily life even after all these years.

Pot is something you have to avoid... alcohol is something my Husband has to avoid. All alcohol could evaporate off the face of the earth and I could honestly care less. Were pot legal, I would probably enjoy it occasionally. I think that were I 'wired' to be addicted to pot it would have surfaced back when I was a daily user (college and post college years) and would be an addict today.

What I don't like is what the WOD has done to our society.