Yes on that statement

Hah, oh yeah. I usually end up replaying the intro 'cause it looks so damn good.

1024x768 with 4xAA and 8xAF max details, makes my eyes cream themselfs.

Yeah, thank god for my sexy *** computer that can handle the greatest of graphics!!

I wonder... if the Government legalized pot and such, and then taxed the hell out of it like they are with cigarettes now, do you suppose the "legalize!" people would rally to re-illegalize it?

No we'd just begin to grow it :p

I'm glad, but I'm afraid I bitterly oppose the "ohh no, extremeists, I'd better recede back to mediocrity to not make anyone unhappy! ohh, all extremeists are the extreme and therefor the same and also bad because they're extreme and extreme is bad for some reason!"

Lack insight into seeing the other's side's view? I have to know the other side's view, otherwise I don't know what I disagree with. But I have no intention of making a 'compromise'. The whole oh both sides must be right, everybody be awesome to eachother 'Bill and Ted' style thinking just doesn't flow. I think any sort of drug legislation is nonsensical. If that makes me an extremist, which it probably does, then I'm damn happy to be an extremist. 'Closed-minded' is not the same as 'extremeist'.
And I'm not some whiney libertarian "oh no, government POWERS!!" either.

Sorry if that whole thing was a bit harsh, I suppose stat started the ball rolling.

I hardly think artificially induced synaesthesia counts as spirituality. :p

I'd say that's exactly what spirituality is.

Why don't we just focus on marijuana, since the general international consensus is that "weed" has no negative effects on your health. It's probably one of the most harmless drugs out there, unless you're one of the roughly 15% of overweight people who gain weight from genetic defects and are suspectible to eating binges. In fact, I'm sure many of you would be fascinated to learn that marijuana was made illegal in the United States only to discriminate against Hispanics, who had come to this country and were (at the time) the largest group using the drug. So, happy with your discriminatory drug legislation?

Please drop the "drugs are bad, mmk?" mindset that's been brainwashed into you from years of pressure from society, DARE, and who knows what else. Not all drugs are bad, and sometimes the government does stupid things for no logical reason, and maybe, just maybe, when faced with a good argument, one should consider revising his/her viewpoint instead of ignoring the other person or simply spouting non-sequitur or repetitious statements over and over until a thread is locked.

Oh, and though I find this hardly relevant - because the arguments should stand on their own - I don't use drugs, unless you count Tylenol and Dynotap (or however it's spelled).

No, that's just wrong. It's damaging physically and mentally, just as bad for your lungs as smoking cigarettes, etc. The reason it seems harmless is that it hasn't been extensively researched until very recently--all the research money was going into research on harder drugs like cocaine. They're finding out new things every day about marijuana. I myself am in favor of legalizing it--the money spent going after pot smokers could be put to far better use. But to say that it's harmless is terribly uneducated and silly.

Now, give us a hug.



Touche. :p

One joint contains the same amount of tar as 10 cigarettes.

It's not harmless. Not physically. Mentally...it's completely harmless.

And Thrawn--it's not just a synaesthesia. Most often trips do not have any trigger, the really great ones don't. Of course outside stimulus does help quite a bit, but when you 'see god' as it's referred, you're probably not focusing on anything in the real world.

It's something you have to experience, before you judge.

lets do this math again..
Its actually 1 joint to 5 cigarettes.. not 10.


The average marijuana smoker smokes about 1-2 joints a day (aside from the obvious few chronics that smoke a lot). Thats about 5-10 cigarettes. The average smoker smokes a pack (20-25 cigs) a day. Which ends up being worse in the long run? Marijuana smokers dont smoke as constantly as nicotine smokers because it isnt addictive.

What's your point? That, since marijuana users are a little bit less-exposed to carcinogens, that it should be legalized?

Right, but pot smokers hold it in their lungs as long as possible.

And marijuana is addictive. That it isn't is a myth.

Thrawn--it's not addictive. I did it heavily for a period of three months, quit, haven't done it but once since (3 months ago, 6 months since I quit).

And Temp--what's your point? Even if you are right, I said nothing about it being more harmful than cigarettes...just that it IS harmful. You act like I've never done weed. I know where you're coming from man, I just don't like people to get the wrong idea. Pot is harmful to your health.

Poink

Me: not to mention how do these people know that said 'addiction' is physical
Thrawn: And South Carolina
Me: mental addiction shows much the same signs as physical
Thrawn: Probably because of the physical effects of withdrawal, it's not that hard to figure out dude
Me: the physical effects they state are bull**** ones
Me: irritability?
Me: restlessness?
Me: insomnia?
Me: nausea?
Me: intense dreams?
Me: 4/5 of those can be explained via lack of seratonin
Me: that's not withdrawal
Me: and nausea, hell half the people I know who smoke marijuana said they got nauseaus the first time. It's a side-effect, not a symptom of withdrawal

Yeah.

And the Supreme Court will now decide the DJ Yoshi versus Brown University case...

:p

Damn dirty hippies!

You think you proved something? What's more reliable, some bull**** info on a university website, or the personal accounts of thousands who smoke weed and have not experienced addiction. The point is that most people don't get addicted to it in the slighest. Not anymore then one gets addicted to delicious cake or whatnot.

I'm going with the university right now :/

A friend of mine tries to quit regularly (like every six months). It never worked. It's gotten so bad to the point that he can't sleep anymore without having smoked a joint (!!!). He agrees with you though: not addictive at all.

Very few people get addicted, i'd say one out of every 10 people who smoke pot.



Not always, sometimes yeah. Depends on the pot smoker, people hold them in longer because it gets you higher. I ususally hold it in for barely a fraction of a second, yet i get high.

And marijauna isn't physically addictive. It produces no withdrawl symptoms. They even use Marijuana to get people unaddicted to heroin and nicotine in some places. Point is, Marijuana isn't any more addictive than cake, as was pointed out.

[Just fixed your quote tags. -JG]

Try reading the post right above yours. This may clear some things up.

It doesn't get you higher. It makes you seem higher because you're light headed. The THC is released from the smoke within a fraction of a second.

About the "cigarette's are worse than weed" thing; you're forgetting that a good deal of people who smoke pot, also smoke regular tabacco.

When it comes down to it, they're about the same for most people.

Well, just joints. I forgot bowls aren't as bad, bongs aren't nearly as bad, and vapes have almost no residue of tar or any other harmful chemicals (just the THC). So joints and blunts are bad. Vaporized not. Bongs not so much. Bowls still bad, but not as bad.

Actually, it does. I've even experimented it on my own time. I took two bowls of the exact same pot of the exact same weight and ammount, smoked it on two separate days. The day that I held it in longer, I got more high. I did it several times to be sure, and it was true. Ive also had several friends try the same exact same witht he same exact results. Holding a draw in longer does make you more high.

I didn't mean to say that. I'm talking more along the lines of people that vote Repbulican JUST because they are Republican, don't do ANY research on any of the canidates and believe anything they hear from conservative news sources. Perhaps I worded it poorly. I meant the kind of people that won't LISTEN to anything else. But I suppose that can include moderates as well.

Anyway, enough derailing...although I'm afraid I can't contribute anymore (did I ever?) since this is out of my sphere of competence.

I also have tourette's syndrome as well but I rather be damned than to smoke pot to treat it. I'm not sure how bad the disorder is for you but I'm perfectly capable of dealing with my disorder without the aid of a drug. Tourette's syndrome isn't life threating at all and it just takes a bit of dicipline and practice to be able to minimize your ticks, especially for public outings. If you have vocal ticks, "masking" them with a cough or clearing your throat is the best way to deal with that. If you have bad motor ticks, stretching and doing a bit of exercise usually helps covers those up. What I'm trying to say is that it is possible to deal with TS without having to rely on a drug. This is just a suggestion and I'm not damning you for using a drug. Just my thoughts from one TS suffer to another.

Even if cannabis is terribly bad for my health, why should it be illegal?

I agree Mort. It should be just like cigs, a huge warning label saying its bad for your health, and telling you not to smoke and drive, etc.

One joint of what?
male, female, hermaphrodite?
bud, leaf, stem?
hydro, bushies?
what strain of plant?
has it been cultivated with what?

All the research I've seen wouldn't pass as a 1st year University report. Worst case scenario would be smoking unfiltered joints with LSD-cultivated hydro sprayed with flyspray by a dodgey dealer. But the 'research' isn't about to go into details like that.

Marijuana is not chemically addictive. I've been smoking it on and off for 6 years and I find Orange Juice to be more addictive.

I wouldn't be surprised if people who smoke it day in, day out have minor withdrawal when trying to quit. For the past 6 months I've been trying to change over from 22 years of sleeping on my front to sleeping on my back. It's not been easy and some nights have even resulted in a bad nights sleep(withdrawal, shock! horror!).

We either fear it or we don't like it. Thus it is made illegal. In this case, it's more so that we don't like it.

I dont have bad tics, but tey are motor tics. Mostly with my eye blinking and movements. But still I dont need weed to control them, I was just pointing out that that was one of the many benefits.




Thats not a good enough excuse to lock out the many many millions of peopole who arent against it fgrom smoking it. If you dont like it, dont be around it. Its as simple as that. Its not like we sit in restaraunts smoking up or anything near a non-smoking designated only area...Like most used to be with cigarettes.

Let's ban cigarettes and legalize pot.

Seriously, that could be so much better for everyone (might make them stupider though).

Again, why bring up cigarettes? That point is as valid as, "Marijuana doesn't kill as many as automatic weapons." Who has advocated cigarettes as somehow better than marijuana?

Because cigarettes are legal. (and so are automatic weapons, apparently)

And, because something that is (at the least) equally dangerous is legal, marijuana should be legal? Why not simply outlaw the thing that's equally dangerous?

Perhaps I might have been a bit harsh, but I, my choices, and my lifestyle were insulted.

So what a person gets some inspiration while on a drug? The drug has no sentience of its own. How often do you go to an art gallery and see "Nude Descending Down Staircase" by Psylocibe Cubensis? It's not the only form of inspiration, but it is a kind. I'd say a person who takes advantage of it is much more fit than someone who denies it.

Or, you could go the opposite direction and say only true inspiration comes from a person who is being denied of sleep, flayed by red-hot knives, and forced to endure distracting noises and lights. I mean, I'm not going to stoop to allow meditation to grant me insight. To do otherwise is pathetic. In fact, I'm allowing someone to drill into my back right now. You people sicken me, allowing your ideas to come from concentration.

Also, most primieval people and cultures (i.e. shamans) used substances to gain a spiritual edge. Unless, of course, you want to be extremely Protestant-centric and deny that any other form of spirituality is false.