The Beginning of the End of Ridiculous Drug Laws Thats cost us Billions

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Hello, Oct 5, 2010.

  1. I think the most likely scenario would be weed becoming legal, not all drugs. Weed = harmless.

    Did the world go to hell in a handbag when alcohol became legal?
     
    #11     Oct 6, 2010
  2. It's sugar, refined carbohydrates (bread, cookies, white pasta, etc.) and high glycemic carbs (e.g., potatoes) that kids get addicted to. To make matters worse, the beef served by fast food restaurants is grain fed (very bad), low in Omega 3 fatty acids and laced with growth hormones. We keep our kids as far away from fast-food operators as possible. Food can be an addictive drug, both for children and adults.

     
    #12     Oct 6, 2010
  3. Weed harmless...? That is just a myth. The drug concentrates in the reproductive organs with relatively unknown effects. It is very likely that it causes birth defects and other genetic disorders. We know for a fact that it is a carcinogen and that it diminishes the ability to learn new things.

    Yeah... Take a look at the Coca-Cola Company...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coca-Cola

    Which began as Coca Wine sold by John Pemberton...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coca_wine
     
    #13     Oct 6, 2010
  4. Deal with it, your 50's junk science is going out the window. You can whine and cry and stomp your feet all you like, but it wont change anything. So you and your "harmful yet unknown effects" can go screw each other.

     
    #14     Oct 6, 2010
  5. All soft drugs should be legalized. For example do you know how many historical figures were regular opium users who positively influenced civilization?
     
    #15     Oct 6, 2010
  6. Lucrum

    Lucrum

    How many?
     
    #16     Oct 6, 2010
  7. Actually, the effects of cannabis are well known by non-users. The problem is that cannabis use is widespread in universities so you get a lot of controversy from people defending the drug. Therefore there is no serious consensus. Personally I suspect that it may be linked to several genetic disorders... due to the fact that it concentrates in the reproductive organs. But go ahead and try to get a study founded in the current climate. :D

    My 50's science...??? I think that you have already smoked yourself retarded judging by that comment.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marijuana#Effects


    What I find funny about drug users is that they smoke dope and rage against all of the corporations. Yet when someone points out that a large corporation like Coca-Cola actually started out dealing cocaine to the masses they quickly tell me to take my 50's science and go screw myself.

    Such a lack of consistency in their arguments.
     
    #17     Oct 6, 2010
  8. Thanks for the pro-pot link!


    study of 2252 people in Los Angeles failed to find a correlation between the smoking of cannabis and lung, head or neck cancers.

    Some studies have also found that moderate cannabis use may protect against head and neck cancers,[78] as well as lung cancer.


    Some studies have shown that cannabidiol may also be useful in treating breast cancer.


    Though cannabis use has at times been associated with stroke, there is no firmly established link, and potential mechanisms are unknown.[87] Similarly, there is no established relationship between cannabis use and heart disease, including exacerbation of cases of existing heart disease.[88] Though some fMRI studies have shown changes in neurological function in long term heavy cannabis users, no long term behavioral effects after abstinence have been linked to these changes.[89]


    Some claim that trying cannabis increases the probability that users will eventually use "harder" drugs. This hypothesis has been one of the central pillars of anti-cannabis drug policy in the United States,[95] though the validity and implications of these hypotheses are highly debated.[96] Studies have shown that tobacco smoking is a better predictor of concurrent illicit hard drug use than smoking cannabis.[97]
     
    #18     Oct 6, 2010
  9. I am a non user. I haven't used marijuana in about 7-8 years, and didn't much care for it when I did experiment with it. That doesn't mean that I can't positively identify it as being harmless, much less so than alcohol at least...

    Oh well, I guess you can appeal to your canabis defense conspiracies all you like, but it wont change the facts...

     
    #19     Oct 6, 2010
  10. It isn't pro-pot... It is simply showing that there is controversy... I already explained to you why that is.

    Do you really think that smoking a weed with THC (a relatively complex molecule) is safe or good for you? It alters your mental state... NOOOO... Nothing to worry about there...

    I like how pot users rage against "mind control" by the so called "man"... While actually smoking something that is literally changing their conscience chemically...!

    I wonder what the reaction would be if the government forced everyone to smoke pot in order to keep everyone docile!

    :D :D :D
     
    #20     Oct 6, 2010