Study: Early Marijuana Use May Increase Brain Damage

I guarantee that the vast, overwhelming majority of people who choose to use 'hard' drugs started off by using alcohol and tobacco as gateway drugs.

lol that gssg

I was a heavy skunk smoker (about an ounce a week) for 8 years, all through college and uni. I got good grades, a degree and a decent job after but I don't feel I ever reached my true potential. Skunk messed my head up big time mentally and I still feel the effect 3 years later. Just my experience.

I used to smoke weed a lot when i was in uni but now that i'm out of the uni, i hardly find time to smoke it. But whenever i find time to roll me a fat spliff, man i feel so gooood! and hungry that i eat a whole pack of cereal in less than 10 mins Still i love the buzz i get from smoking a fat spliff.... On a side note, have u ever smoked weed with a police officer on duty? Cool things happen where i'm from..

GreyWolf said:

The argument that marijuana is a gateway drug suggests that by using marijuana you are at a high risk of proceeding on to harder drugs. But that's not what the statistics show. The fact is that most people who use marijuana never progress to harder drugs.

Somewhere I read something that had the actual statistics, but I don't have time to find it right now. Here is one study though disputing the idea that marijuana leads to other drug use. Safety for Use: Cannabis as a Gateway Drug



The lung cancer debate is a totally different topic, and there are actually many other studies disputing that it causes lung cancer. There are actually even studies that some of the components in marijuana actually help prevent some forms of lung cancer. Also that debate is only involved as far as smoked marijuana is concerned. That still doesn't mean that marijuana itself is dangerous since there are many other ways of using marijuana. Vaporizers, poultices, teas, edibles, etc. are all very good methods for ingesting marijuana and getting positive health benefits without the concern of lung cancer.

Click to expand...

Well the thing is that these "educators" fuckers who do it for their own agenda and own gains can pull most ridicilous stuff from their ass to tell you that something is not good for you. If they get caught lying the shit just gets swept under carpet and then they come up with next thing.

I made a study that Life is not good for you. so far ive seen 100% death rate, how about that.

I used to smoke weed all day everyday, I used to have a half a pound at all times, i would sell most of it but i could smoke as much as I wanted
I havent smoked in almost 2 years but I can still tell I have bad memory and a tiny bit slowerer to observe things

OK, to show my bias, I am a cannabis user, but even if I wasn't and hadn't had my brain damaged (sic), I'd have to have issues with this whole thread.

First off, a study of less than 60 people can't show anything of any statistical value. This is clearly motivated by the increasing acceptance of cannabis usage, and the 'powers that be' fearing that if they revamp their stance on this issue, people might question the other draconian measures that government forces on people on a daily basis.

The main question I have when seeing studies like this is who funded it? Since the FED effectively stopped any study on MJ in the '70s, there is no way to know what other causes might be behind the 'damage' that they measured...did the participants drink as well? Live next to powerlines? Eat alot of fish?

Second, the 'gateway' drug argument is ridiculous on a scale that is almost immeasurable. How do they know it's a 'gateway' drug? The nature of man is such that it is immpossible to say with any certainty that one thing causes another...sure there are corralaries, but causation is almost impossible to prove.

Third, which is better - keeping a drug illegal so that there is no oversight as to the production or distribution or legalizing it and being able to control who and how they can get it? Ask any teenager under the legal age for purchasing alcohol which is easier to get their hands on...I can almost guarantee that they would say that getting weed is a hell of a lot easier to get.

Fourth, from a purely financial aspect, it is irresponsible of the government to outlaw something that would provide as much revenue as the tobacco industry. They should legalize it and tax the hell out of it...

Finally, and hopefully, we can move past the scaremongering of the last century that is associated with 'weed' and come to the rational conclusion that, whether good or bad for the individual, marijuana would be a boon for the US and the world. I really doubt it though, but I said the same thing about a black president, so I've been surprised before...

ND

antsaoo said:

Well the thing is that these "educators" fuckers who do it for their own agenda and own gains can pull most ridicilous stuff from their ass to tell you that something is not good for you. If they get caught lying the shit just gets swept under carpet and then they come up with next thing.

I made a study that Life is not good for you. so far ive seen 100% death rate, how about that.

Click to expand...

Thats how the prohibition propaganda has been since it started. MArijuana prohibition had it's roots in the Jim Crow era with propaganda like:
"There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the US, and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz and swing, result from marijuana usage. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers and any others."

Then when the Jim Crow laws were being overturned the propagandists switched gears and focused on stories like: "An entire family was murdered by a youthful addict in Florida. When officers arrived at the home, they found the youth staggering about in a human slaughterhouse. With an axe he had killed his father, mother, two brothers, and a sister. He seemed to be in a daze? He had no recollection of having committed the multiple crime. The officers knew him ordinarily as a sane, rather quiet young man; now he was pitifully crazed. They sought the reason. The boy said that he had been in the habit of smoking something which youthful friends called ?muggles,? a childish name for marijuana."

When it was proven that marijuana is the least likely drug to induce someone to violent behavior they changed the stance to: "well it's a gateway drug. If we let people use it they'll inevitably turn to harder drugs."

When the medicinal benefits started getting more widespread exposure they added there own claims that according to their own studies (which are seldom unbiased) they've determined that there is no known medicinal uses for marijuana.

When a government policy relies on propaganda, misrepresentations, and outright lies the citizenry should really take notice. If it really was in the publics best interest to prohibit marijuana then they wouldn't need to resort to such tactics.

There's enough evidence that marijuana may actually have properties that can be used to develop cures for some cancers. Can you imagine a rational unbiased person standing in the way of research that might have that much potential? If it turns out that they ever can create cancer treatments based on substances in marijuana, then those politicians that have contributed to the propaganda machine and stood in the way of real research should be considered guilty of crimes against humanity.

(do you think I might need a coat of paint on my soap box, or does it look pretty good as it is?:cool2

nesterdwarf said:

They should legalize it and tax the hell out of it...

Click to expand...

They don't even need to tax the hell out of it. It's such a huge market that even a reasonable tax would bring in significant revenue to the government. Add to that the money that would no longer be spent trying to prohibit and it amounts to a landfall increase in cash for the national and state budgets.

In fact if they do legalize it and then over tax it, they'll just be providing an incentive for the blackmarket to continue. Legalize it, regulate it and tax it at a reasonable rate and almost all the negatives being attributed to marijuana will disappear.

Like I said earlier the only ones that benefit by marijuana prohibition are those agencies who get the funding to enforce it and the criminal organizations that control the black market.

The ones who lose are the citizens who's best interests are supposedly being looked after. It's so sad that so many people are hoodwinked by the propaganda.

GreyWolf said:

When a government policy relies on propaganda, misrepresentations, and outright lies the citizenry should really take notice.

Click to expand...

You mean that there are government policies that don't?

GreyWolf said:

(do you think I might need a coat of paint on my soap box, or does it look pretty good as it is?)

Click to expand...

Looks pretty good to me, but could use some bitchin' flamin' bunnies just to jazz it up a bit...

ND

been smokin since I was like 12 or 13, dont plan on stopping....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubAmTB5lans

Propaganda:
"Marijuana has no accepted medical use."

Facts:

As clinical research into the therapeutic value of cannabinoids has proliferated - there are now an estimated 20,000 published papers in the scientific literature analyzing marijuana and its constituents — so too has investigators' understanding of cannabis' remarkable capability to combat disease. Whereas researchers in the 1970s, 80s, and 90s primarily assessed cannabis' ability to temporarily alleviate various disease symptoms — such as the nausea associated with cancer chemotherapy — scientists today are exploring the potential role of cannabinoids to modify disease.

Of particular interest, scientists are investigating cannabinoids' capacity to moderate autoimmune disorders such as multiple sclerosis, rheumatoid arthritis, and inflammatory bowel disease, as well as their role in the treatment of neurological disorders such as Alzheimerʹs disease and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (a.k.a. Lou Gehrig's disease.) In fact, in 2009, the American Medical Association (AMA) resolved for the first time in the organization's history ʺthat marijuanaʹs status as a federal Schedule I controlled substance be reviewed with the goal of facilitating the conduct of clinical research and development of cannabinoid-based medicines.

Investigators are also studying the anti-cancer activities of cannabis, as a growing body of preclinical and clinical data concludes that cannabinoids can reduce the spread of specific cancer cells via apoptosis (programmed cell death) and by the inhibition of angiogenesis (the formation of new blood vessels). Arguably, these latter findings represent far broader and more significant applications for cannabinoid therapeutics than researchers could have imagined some thirty or even twenty years ago.

Click to expand...

Prohibitionists actually have a long history of ignoring the views of the American Medical Association. When prohibition was first recommended to congress in the 1930s, the AMA sent a representative to speak out in opposition of it. At the time marijuana was used as the active ingredient in at least 20 patent medicines. In spite of the AMA's opposition based on the known science of the day, congress was swayed by the misrepresentations and propaganda presented by the prohibitionists. Most of the propaganda that was used to justify prohibition in the first place is considered outrageous and ridiculous by the average person today.

---

Propaganda:
"Marijuana is such a dangerous drug it should be completely prohibited in the interest of public safety."

Facts:

Cannabinoids have a remarkable safety record, particularly when compared to other therapeutically active substances. Most significantly, the consumption of marijuana - regardless of quantity or potency -- cannot induce a fatal overdose. According to a 1995 review prepared for the World Health Organization, "There are no recorded cases of overdose fatalities attributed to cannabis, and the estimated lethal dose for humans extrapolated from animal studies is so high that it cannot be achieved by ... users."

In 2008, investigators at McGill University Health Centre and McGill University in Montreal and the University of British Columbia in Vancouver reviewed 23 clinical investigations of medical cannabinoid drugs (typically oral THC or liquid cannabis extracts) and eight observational studies conducted between 1966 and 2007. Investigators did not find a higher incidence rate of serious adverse events associated with medical cannabinoid use compared to non‐using controls over these four decades.

Click to expand...

Marijuana actually has a better safety record than ANY over the counter medication available at your local grocery store.

I wont question any of the facts or studies in here but I have seen firsthand how weed has ruined my little brother's life (and no, I won't go into details). That is enough of a reason for me to stay away from it...He's now a rather useless member of society.

teeniegenie said:

I wont question any of the facts or studies in here but I have seen firsthand how weed has ruined my little brother's life (and no, I won't go into details). That is enough of a reason for me to stay away from it...He's now a rather useless member of society.

Click to expand...

Many people can tell similar stories about how alcohol has ruined someones life, how shopping addiction has ruined someone's life, gambling..., food addictions..., and the list can go on.

Most peoples stories about how marijuana ruined someone's life typically involves the criminal element and underground economy as a major part of the story. For those people it's actually the prohibition itself that has created the problem.

For the people who actually have an addictive personality and the marijuana use itself has a negative impact, they can be helped with the same treatment methods available for alcoholics, food addicts, sex addicts, shopping addicts, gambling addicts,etc. Even adrenaline junkies can find that the high they get from whatever activity they prefer can become such a problem for them they need to seek help.

That doesn't mean the government should prevent any of those things from everyone, just because a few people might develop problems. For physically addictive substances like opiates there's good reason for prohibition because everyone using them is likely to become addicted. For things that have no physically addictive properties there is no reason to prohibit them just because some people can become psychologically addicted to anything.

There are many people with psychological addictions for over the counter cold medicines. Does that mean the gevernment should prohibit them from the rest of us? I'd be pissed if I had a sore throat and when I went to get some cough syrup I was told that it was a prohibited substance because some people have abused it.

That's basically the argument the prohibitionists have used regarding marijuana.

I don't mean to make light of your families problems, but the prohibition against marijuana apparently didn't prevent you're little brother from finding and using the marijuana anyway. That's actually another valid argument for ending prohibition. It doesn't work. Problems like you describe are easier to get help for when the activity isn't considered criminal in the first place.

I'm not suggesting that marijuana should be completely unregulated, just that it doesn't belong in the schedule 1 list of prohibited drugs. It should be removed from the federal prohibitions and left to the states to regulate it in similar ways that alcohol or over-the-counter medications are regulated. Doing that would actually address the problems described in the study quoted in the first post of this thread. There's much evidence supporting the conclusion that limiting or prohibiting access to a substance for minors, while allowing it's use for adults results in less use of the substance by minors than a total prohibition does. You only have to look at how much easier it is for a minor to acquire marijuana than it is for them to get beer. A determined teen is likely to find ways to get either, but typically getting the alcohol takes more effort.

NotTheDude said:

Cannabis is called a "weed" for a reason, it is VERY easy to grow. So talk about what you know. Explain the experience that has proven these statement to be true for you.

Click to expand...

This was actually a comment made in response to someone else, but I can actually give a pretty good answer to the comment. This isn't a complete guide to growing weed, that wouldn't be an appropriate topic on this forum (I wouldn't even be discussing it at all if this thread weren't in the Lounge section) and would be much more involved than necessary to make an answer to the quoted comment.

Weed actually IS very easy to grow... IF you're allowed to plant it outdoors at the right season, in the right sunny location and give it plenty of water. If you actually want it to produce good flowers (or buds) then you need to add the element of good soil with proper nutrients. Do that and you can pretty much grow weed with no problem whatsoever.

The problem is when you have to grow the plants indoors. Just as with any other house plant it's actually not that hard to keep one alive. But if your growing marijuana you don't just want to keep it alive, you want it to produce buds. If the plant doesn't flower then your marijuana is nothing more than another pretty houseplant, (one that in many places you can go to jail for owning even if you never get it to flower. lol)

To actually get an indoor plant to thrive and flower is a much more difficult project. It needs a much higher intensity (7k-10k lumens per square foot) of light than you would normally be providing in your home and those lights need to be in the right spectrum and remain on for 18 to 24 hours a day during the plants vegetative state. You also need to make sure you can induce the plant in it's early growth state to become female. (Male plants don't flower, and without buds you don't have a drug). Once it's ready to flower you need to actually change to lights that produce a different spectrum although still producing equivalent lumens per square foot as sunlight and you need to keep those lit for 12 hours every day. You also have to worry about the nutrients in the potted soil, (outdoors the roots will grow and expand into the surrounding soil to get more nutrients), in a potted plant the roots are limited. Even if you successfully grow the plants it takes about 6 to 12 indoor plants to give an equivalent yield to one healthy outdoor plant.

If any of that goes wrong, the light schedule gets interrupted, the soil nutrients get depleted, the temperature gets too hot or too cold around the plant, or any of a dozen other problems the whole grow can become a waste of time and effort. It's not uncommon to lose a complete harvest for something as simple as a power outage.

Remember the point isn't too have a pretty plant, but rather to produce flowering buds. That actually is a lot harder than many people think. Then when it comes time to harvest, you actually kill the plant so you have to start over from more seeds or clones for your next crop. (That's another thing, not only do you want to do everything mentioned above you also want to make sure the buds don't get fertilized by any males otherwise you'll get buds that are full of seeds.)

Where I live it's currently only legal to grow indoors and only for medicinal use with a doctors recommendation, but for many people they have to add the fact that it's illegal which creates other factors that make it even harder to do.

Suffice it to say that growing marijuana can be learned, and with practice, many people can get good at it, but it isn't actually an easy thing to do and for the novice it can be even more difficult. It can be done, but it's definitely harder than growing tomatoes.

GW: I agree -- there are plenty of ruined lives from other things too, such as alcohol, other drugs, gaming, etc. I see many of these firsthand too (especially the gaming - I live in Vegas). The misery and death caused by these things is enormous. I once had lunch with Bill Boyd - Founder and CEO of Boyd Gaming (he's on the Forbes billionaire list) explain all of the great things he does to help gaming addicts. However, the fact that he raised that issue during the lunch showed me he knew of the damage his casinos cause to patrons. I find that sad. I'd rather be a pauper than make money in such a manner, but that's just me.

In the case of my brother, the prohibitive part of weed had nothing to do with it. In fact, I think legalizing it in his case would only have accelerated the damage he's already done to his life. Just this past Monday (Labor Day) he came home after driving around and was stoned out of his mind. If you talk to him he says "he's fine", but he can hardly talk straight and keep his eyes open. I'll predict that he'll end up killing someone as he drives (he's already been busted 2x for DUIs too) and spend the great majority of his life in prison. He's not alone.

I do agree that having an addictive personality will "hook" people to bad things quickly, but I have no doubt that individuals who don't normally have an addictive personality can get just as hooked on drugs/alcohol/gaming/sex/whatever...Who says who has an addictive personality and who doesn't anyway? I feel bad for people who are addicted to things like drugs/alcohol/smoking - it must be terrible to have to try and break that addiction. I don't want to find out.

For me, I don't see why it's worth the risk of being that guy who has his life ruined over drugs/gaming/alcohol etc. If I don't do illegal drugs I won't become addicted to them (like my little bro). Same goes for alcohol. The drawbacks far outweigh any benefits from these things IMO. Yes, it is "fun" but, in all, the death and misery from these things is massive throughout the world.

GW - you certainly seem feel differently, and that's cool.

Beyond all these arguments the bottom line for me is that I have moral beliefs that doing these things is bad/wrong and counterproductive to a peaceful life. Certainly, others around here don't share those beliefs. More power to them. I certainly don't feel like I'm missing out on anything by not drinking/smoking/gambling, etc. Don't take all this as if I think I'm better than others. I'm an average peon, nothing more. Everyone has to find the path that they think will make them the most happy.

In the end, you're right GW, even if the gov't outlaws weed/alcohol or whatever, people will find a way to still do it. I just don't find that a convincing reason to legalize everything.

My two cents...

GreyWolf said:

Many people can tell similar stories about how alcohol has ruined someones life, how shopping addiction has ruined someone's life, gambling..., food addictions..., and the list can go on.

Most peoples stories about how marijuana ruined someone's life typically involves the criminal element and underground economy as a major part of the story. For those people it's actually the prohibition itself that has created the problem.

For the people who actually have an addictive personality and the marijuana use itself has a negative impact, they can be helped with the same treatment methods available for alcoholics, food addicts, sex addicts, shopping addicts, gambling addicts,etc. Even adrenaline junkies can find that the high they get from whatever activity they prefer can become such a problem for them they need to seek help.

That doesn't mean the government should prevent any of those things from everyone, just because a few people might develop problems. For physically addictive substances like opiates there's good reason for prohibition because everyone using them is likely to become addicted. For things that have no physically addictive properties there is no reason to prohibit them just because some people can become psychologically addicted to anything.

There are many people with psychological addictions for over the counter cold medicines. Does that mean the gevernment should prohibit them from the rest of us? I'd be pissed if I had a sore throat and when I went to get some cough syrup I was told that it was a prohibited substance because some people have abused it.

That's basically the argument the prohibitionists have used regarding marijuana.

I don't mean to make light of your families problems, but the prohibition against marijuana apparently didn't prevent you're little brother from finding and using the marijuana anyway. That's actually another valid argument for ending prohibition. It doesn't work. Problems like you describe are easier to get help for when the activity isn't considered criminal in the first place.

I'm not suggesting that marijuana should be completely unregulated, just that it doesn't belong in the schedule 1 list of prohibited drugs. It should be removed from the federal prohibitions and left to the states to regulate it in similar ways that alcohol or over-the-counter medications are regulated. Doing that would actually address the problems described in the study quoted in the first post of this thread. There's much evidence supporting the conclusion that limiting or prohibiting access to a substance for minors, while allowing it's use for adults results in less use of the substance by minors than a total prohibition does. You only have to look at how much easier it is for a minor to acquire marijuana than it is for them to get beer. A determined teen is likely to find ways to get either, but typically getting the alcohol takes more effort.

Click to expand...

teeniegenie said:

I do agree that having an addictive personality will "hook" people to bad things quickly, but I have no doubt that individuals who don't normally have an addictive personality can get just as hooked on drugs/alcohol/gaming/sex/whatever...Who says who has an addictive personality and who doesn't anyway?

Click to expand...

Well the way to say who has an addictive personality is by it actually happening. Basically if someone gets psychologically addicted to something that isn't of itself physically addictive then by definitition that person has an addictive personality. Unfortunately it's very difficult to identify it in a person until it manifests as an addictive behavior.

I feel bad for people who are addicted to things like drugs/alcohol/smoking - it must be terrible to have to try and break that addiction. I don't want to find out.

For me, I don't see why it's worth the risk of being that guy who has his life ruined over drugs/gaming/alcohol etc. If I don't do illegal drugs I won't become addicted to them (like my little bro). Same goes for alcohol. The drawbacks far outweigh any benefits from these things IMO. Yes, it is "fun" but, in all, the death and misery from these things is massive throughout the world.

GW - you certainly seem feel differently, and that's cool.

Click to expand...

The "yes it's fun" part lets me know that you really don't understand the overall benefits that are being talked about. The DOJ really likes to keep the focus on that as the 'real' reason people want it. There's so much more benefits that come from cannabis, that it should actually be criminal that the government has so successfully smeared it's reputation. I posted just a few information sources earlier. There are many, many more sources than that. Cannabis is one of the most useful plants ever cultivated by mankind, that's why the prohibitionist focused on calling it marijuana when they initially started their propaganda campaigns. The average person at that time knew the value of cannabis, but didn't realize the marijuana being talked about was the same thing.

I just don't find that a convincing reason to legalize everything.

My two cents...

Click to expand...

I don't actually think they should legalize everything. It's just that the prohibition of cannabis is based on misrepresentations and propaganda.

When your dealing with something that has to be lied about to justify it's prohibition, it's very difficult to actually achieve the prohibition. Prohibition prevents any kind of regulation whatsoever. If they can't eradicate it then the government has no control of it at all. If it were rescheduled then the government would be able to effectively regulate it. Regulation has a much better chance of preventing things like what has happened with your brother, or at least give a better chance of identifying and helping them when it happens.

The first post in this thread is a great example of the failure of prohibition. As a prohibited substance there is just too much incentive for a black market which really doesn't care about what harm it may cause. Regulating cannabis would be much more effective at restricting it's use by minors than prohibition ever has been.

Well the way to say who has an addictive personality is by it actually happening. Basically if someone gets psychologically addicted to something that isn't of itself physically addictive then by definitition that person has an addictive personality. Unfortunately it's very difficult to identify it in a person until it manifests as an addictive behavior.

Click to expand...

Fair enough - I would agree with your statements there. My initial reaction then would be: why take the risk of finding out whether you have an addictive personality?

The "yes it's fun" part lets me know that you really don't understand the overall benefits that are being talked about. The DOJ really likes to keep the focus on that as the 'real' reason people want it. There's so much more benefits that come from cannabis, that it should actually be criminal that the government has so successfully smeared it's reputation. I posted just a few information sources earlier. There are many, many more sources than that. Cannabis is one of the most useful plants ever cultivated by mankind, that's why the prohibitionist focused on calling it marijuana when they initially started their propaganda campaigns. The average person at that time knew the value of cannabis, but didn't realize the marijuana being talked about was the same thing.

Click to expand...

What, the government lying about something? Never.... Whether weed has any benefits or not, I have seen enough of its drawbacks to decide I won't go near the stuff (and hope others won't either). I simply believe the drawbacks of using the drug simply outweigh the benefits.

One example that comes to mind is wine. I think it is pretty well known that wine offers a lot of benefits to your heart. However, use of wine also leads to damage of your liver. Again, I believe the benefits are outweighed by the drawbacks - I can drink grape juice if I want to help my heart and avoid hurting my liver.

I don't actually think they should legalize everything. It's just that the prohibition of cannabis is based on misrepresentations and propaganda.

Click to expand...

We definitely agree on the fact that there are certain things that should not be legalized...

When your dealing with something that has to be lied about to justify it's prohibition, it's very difficult to actually achieve the prohibition. Prohibition prevents any kind of regulation whatsoever. If they can't eradicate it then the government has no control of it at all. If it were rescheduled then the government would be able to effectively regulate it. Regulation has a much better chance of preventing things like what has happened with your brother, or at least give a better chance of identifying and helping them when it happens.

Click to expand...

I'll be honest, I have a difficult time seeing how regulation would have made a difference for my brother. Even if it was legal in some instances (such as, for example, only to individuals over age 21) surely there will exist some type of "black market" element to provide it to people who are age 20 or younger. My brother, who (I think) began using weed around age 16, would have still been breaking the law (just like he does now) and probably ended up in the same situation.

Regardless of whether I'm right on that point or not, I simply believe the drawbacks of using this drug outweigh the benefits - just like I do with alcohol and gambling. I don't want to find out whether I have an "addictive personality" or not. By definition, you're not free to live your life when you are addicted to stuff like that IMO.

The first post in this thread is a great example of the failure of prohibition. As a prohibited substance there is just too much incentive for a black market which really doesn't care about what harm it may cause. Regulating cannabis would be much more effective at restricting it's use by minors than prohibition ever has been.

Click to expand...

As I stated above, I just don't see regulation stopping people that don't fit into the "legal mold" that makes using marijuana legal. Just like underage drinking today, kids would still find a way to "score" if they wanted some stuff to smoke.

This has turned into an interesting conversation. I appreciate your patience and willingness to hear out my point of view on this. It's refreshing from other threads on here where people just resort to personal attacks instead of discussing ideas.

Plus rep for your professionalism....

Clear Presence Media said:

Impairs brain function?

Every person handles being high differently. It also has different effects on them afterwards. It is a powerful and unique thing, as with every drug. Smart, well balanced people can experiment and even regularly use any substance responsibly and perhaps to gain competitive advantage in whatever it is they care about. They ask why to everything, constantly try to find the best way to do things, and are always thirsty to understand. These people, in my opinion, greatly benefit by gaining the unique experiences one can only achieve with substances. It is only people who have other mental issues, the ones who need an escape from their reality, who abuse substances, as they would over-use ANY solution to escape from the reality they created for themselves. These people dont see any benefit from drugs, just as they barely see benefits from anything, because benefits, in their mind, is temporary escape. Or perhaps the "cool" feeling they get doing it. If they were well rounded and half intelligent and otherwise happy, they wouldnt need this feeling, and thus would be able to control and even benefit intellectually.

tl;dr - It is all about how you treat it, which is in your attitude with or without any drug. Weed makes smart, responsible people more smart and responsible. Weed makes dumb, lazy people more dumb and lazy.

Click to expand...

I give you 100 point's you have hit the nail with first shot

I wouldn't trust anything reported by faux news.