Potent Pot

[imported_hscorpio]

Here is a study on the effectiveness of vaporization

The results indicate that vaporization can deliver therapeutic doses of
cannabinoids with a drastic reduction in pyrolytic smoke compounds.
Vaporization therefore appears to be an attractive alternative to smoked
marijuana for future medical cannabis studies.

The whole marinol aspect is very interesting to me. Think about how easily it was approved by the FDA and classified as schedule II. Then it was rescheduled as schedule III. The DEA rescheduled marinol so that it could be more widely available. The reasoning was if marinol is available then they can easily dismiss the need for crude marijuana. So in effect it was made schedule III to satisfy the DEA's political goals of hampering the medical marijuana movement. It probably helped that a huge pharmaceutical company was lobbying them too , note that no wealthy companies lobby on the behalf of patentless pot.

It just goes to show how political the classification of certain drugs on the CSA is. How can marijauna still be schedule I (with no medical value, very harmful) while the synthetic version of its main active ingredient is schedule III ( with medical value and low harm)? It is ridiculous.

The DEA cannot honestly deny the medical value of marijuana whose main active ingredient is THC while admitting to the medical value of synthetic THC. They cannot honestly say the THC from marijuana is dangerous while admitting the synthetic THC is relatively safe. Well of course they do say this which should be a big red flag as to the honesty and integrity of the DEA. It just proves how much they are willing to lie to continue the war on pot.

Imagine if someone told you coca leaves are extremely dangerous but somehow cocaine is not.

 

[imported_hscorpio]

I missed some points earlier:

Originally posted by Tabb:
When did you start smoking weed? More than likely during your younger years. I fully support holding parents resposible when their child has had a consistent problem with drugs. They are not doing their job.

Tougher laws aren't going to help? I am sure some people will always smoke, but I'd beileve the numbers without a doubt would drop considerablely if you started making parents partially responsible.

Bamacre said he started smoking at age 19.

We are not talking about legalizing pot for children. The majority of pot smokers are not children so stop saying that fining parents and "enforcement" will lower the number of marijuana users.

In North Dakota Gay Marriage was added to our state consitution in 2004, doesn't mean it was right. The federal goverment has juristiction over state goverments, they removed gay marriage from california didnt they?

Just because one new law might be "wrong" does not mean that every new law is "wrong". Changing the law to allow gay marriage may be wrong, but that does not mean changing the law to allow sick people to use a drug their doctor approves of is wrong too.

It has a medical use, but the fact is there are other drugs WITHOUT the negative side effects that Marjiuana has. That is why they shouldn't use the natural form.

Then why should they be allowed to use the synthetic form of marijuana? If you allow access to synthetic THC, then why not allow access to natural THC?

 

[arsbanned]

It is amazing what some of the more knowledgeable growers are doing these days. Very fine tuned strains depending on the desired effect. So I've read anyway.

 

[bamacre]

I think Tabb needs to get the fvck out of Fargo, ND.

 

[imported_hscorpio]

Originally posted by: bamacre
I think Tabb needs to get the fvck out of Fargo, ND.

There's still hope for him. Atleast now he knows about marinol, THC, and other aspects of marijuana that most prohibitionists are completely ignorant of.

He's probably at least contemplated this issue more than most high school students in Fargo, ehh.

 

[Sassy]

My response to Hscorpio: ?If I should be King.?

The Queens opinion:
Here are a few of my brainstorm ideas. Please feel free to add, make changes or suggest other courses of action. Since English is not my native language, at times I have trouble writing and clearly expressing my ideas. If you need me to clarify, please don?t hesitate to ask

Due to widespread public misconceptions of marijuana being harmful, I believe we have no choice but to move slowly through the process of legalization. If we find moments of stagnation in moving forward, we shock it to bump the progression by instilling the ?fear? factor as noted in the ?Introduction? at the bottom of this
page
My following ideas does not address the ?fear?, but instead a slower, more reasonable approach from decriminalization to legalization.

Pot Usage
1) We start with one, two, three strikes your out (fines to minimal jail time). As the public becomes more educated, we gradually reduce fines and sentencing, and eventually eliminate both.
2) Once pot is legalized, we place a heavy tax on it.
3) Fines, and later tax money, should be applied towards continuing education of the public including strong emphasis in schools. We can substitute an extra-curricular coarse requirement with a mandatory class on educating students on tobacco, all drugs and alcohol or incorporate the teaching into health

Medical prescription:
1) Lower class schedule to that of amphetamines and barbs.
2) Begin with palliative usage then expand to other beneficials for patient.
3) Let the experts decide on usage, dosage, route of administration, etc. etc.

Cannabis the plant:
1) Begin growing fields of this plant.
2) Extract the hemp and utilize it to its fullest capacity.
3) Build purification processing plants to accommodate for medicinal usage and future legalization of pot.

Sales and home-grown:
1) Set up a radius to distance of a pot-selling store to that of a liquor store.
1) License marijuana distributors similar to that of alcohol.
2) For the home grower, without physicians script: Start with fines, (as stated in ?Pot Usage? above), then eventual legalization.
3) A home grower with a physician?s script to smoke pot as a palliative measure should not be criminal offence.
4) Distribution in the sales of homegrown marijuana will be considered a criminal
offense resulting in prison sentencing or heavy fine. The amount of marijuana
sold will be adjusted to time sentenced or fine.

Hard drugs:
1) Keep this category of drugs on the streets until we have hard data on the effect of our decriminalization/legalization of pot and education of the public in relation to it?s impact, if any, on hard drugs sold on the streets.
2) Re-evaluate the data and make changes where needed. The Netherlands has statistics showing an actual decrease in hard drugs after legalization of marijuana. This surprised me, but made sense after I read the article.
3) If there is no impact in reducing the hard drugs on the streets, we may have to implement a new strategy of legalizing by prescription and administering via drug clinics. This will allow us to regulate the addiction and control the use of these drugs.
4) Reduce prisoner sentencing and place heavy emphasis on education, rehabilitation and acclimation back into society.
5) Substitute prisoner?s belief in the drug with God. J/K Although, if this approach works, I?m all for it.

Howard thanks for this link. I found it to be educational

 

[imported_hscorpio]

Originally posted by: kissnup
My response to Hscorpio: ?If I should be King.?

The Queens opinion:
Here are a few of my brainstorm ideas. Please feel free to add, make changes or suggest other courses of action. Since English is not my native language, at times I have trouble writing and clearly expressing my ideas. If you need me to clarify, please don?t hesitate to ask

Due to widespread public misconceptions of marijuana being harmful, I believe we have no choice but to move slowly through the process of legalization. If we find moments of stagnation in moving forward, we shock it to bump the progression by instilling the ?fear? factor as noted in the ?Introduction? at the bottom of this
page
My following ideas does not address the ?fear?, but instead a slower, more reasonable approach from decriminalization to legalization.

Pot Usage
1) We start with one, two, three strikes your out (fines to minimal jail time). As the public becomes more educated, we gradually reduce fines and sentencing, and eventually eliminate both.

I disagree with the last strike. To me it is just wrong to send someone to prison for a marijuana offense. We can start off with decriminalization, where possession limits are set and fines or community service are issued to people who violate the limits. So if you get caught with under an ounce(28g) the police just let it slide, but over an ounce means a scaled fine based on the amount. Repeat offenders get higher fines or longer community service. Jail is reserved only for offenders who refuse to pay or do their service.

2) Once pot is legalized, we place a heavy tax on it.

Yes, but we must be careful not to tax it back into the black market. In other words the tax must be reasonable. In New York taxes are so high on cigarettes that there is a growing black market for them where organized crime steals cigarette trucks and sells them cheaper. Link

3) Fines, and later tax money, should be applied towards continuing education of the public including strong emphasis in schools. We can substitute an extra-curricular coarse requirement with a mandatory class on educating students on tobacco, all drugs and alcohol or incorporate the teaching into health

Good. Just remember to provide honest factual education, and not reefer madness style scare tactics.

Medical prescription:
1) Lower class schedule to that of amphetamines and barbs.
2) Begin with palliative usage then expand to other beneficials for patient.
3) Let the experts decide on usage, dosage, route of administration, etc. etc.

OK, one important part is this needs to be sperate from recreational use policies. So a distribution system must be set up just for medical marijuana, while recreational use is decriminalized at first. Once we get to full legalization their should still be a distinction between medicinal pot and recreational pot. Medicinal pot should be subject to more strict and extensive quality tests when grown/harvested.

Cannabis the plant:
1) Begin growing fields of this plant.
2) Extract the hemp and utilize it to its fullest capacity.
3) Build purification processing plants to accommodate for medicinal usage and future legalization of pot.

OK. Low THC hemp varieties can be grown for industrial purposes. The hemp growers should not face the same licensing hurdles as the sinsimilla growers. So I see three classes of cannabis cultivation: 1) Low THC hemp for fibre, clothes, etc. 2a) Medium-High THC sinsemilla plants for recreational use 2b) High THC sinsemilla for medical use that must pass strict quality tests.

Sales and home-grown:
1) Set up a radius to distance of a pot-selling store to that of a liquor store.
1) License marijuana distributors similar to that of alcohol.
2) For the home grower, without physicians script: Start with fines, (as stated in ?Pot Usage? above), then eventual legalization.
3) A home grower with a physician?s script to smoke pot as a palliative measure should not be criminal offence.
4) Distribution in the sales of homegrown marijuana will be considered a criminal
offense resulting in prison sentencing or heavy fine. The amount of marijuana
sold will be adjusted to time sentenced or fine.

I still object to the prison part and prefer fines and community service. I would also add STRICT advertising regulations. We do not want to repeat the mistakes of tobacco advertising that targets minors. Also our current alcohol advertisements are very bad and send the message to kids that drug use is cool and will get you laid. We can't let this happen with marijuana ads.

Hard drugs:
1) Keep this category of drugs on the streets until we have hard data on the effect of our decriminalization/legalization of pot and education of the public in relation to it?s impact, if any, on hard drugs sold on the streets.
2) Re-evaluate the data and make changes where needed. The Netherlands has statistics showing an actual decrease in hard drugs after legalization of marijuana. This surprised me, but made sense after I read the article.
3) If there is no impact in reducing the hard drugs on the streets, we may have to implement a new strategy of legalizing by prescription and administering via drug clinics. This will allow us to regulate the addiction and control the use of these drugs.
4) Reduce prisoner sentencing and place heavy emphasis on education, rehabilitation and acclimation back into society.
5) Substitute prisoner?s belief in the drug with God. J/K Although, if this approach works, I?m all for it.

I think hard drugs must be treated very differently then marijuana. They actually are very dangerous to the user and society. Also there use is relatively small compared to marijuana use. I think our current strategies are not working, but I do not want to legalize them. They present a more difficult problem than marijuana. The only thing I know for sure is that we can better tackle this problem once we have seperated marijuana.

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: hscorpio

Originally posted by: Tabb

EDIT- Remember that California voters made medical marijuana legal in 1996. These women were abiding by state law but the federal government stuck its nose where it don't belong and arrested them.

I am making a comparrison between california and how the gay marriage issuse was delt with and the medical marijuna issuse. Their nose does belong there.

We'll have to see what the supremes decide this summer. I think the CSA should be trumped by state law in the particular case of medical marijuana.

Use, Marinol then.

I'v gone over the reasons why people choose pot over marinol. Why is it ok to get THC in a pill but its not ok to inhale it? Sure the smoke from combustion of organic material is harmful to the lungs, but vaporizers solve that problem. Prove that vaporizing marijuana is more dangerous than popping a marinol pill. Why should a person spend 17$ a pill when they can grow more effective pot in their closet for free?

Prohibition is defined as the time period as when something is illegal.

To prohibit X means you make laws that punish people who use/make/sell X. Prohibition is not a time period. The "era of prohibition" refers to when alcohol was prohibited and you are confusing that definition with the more general definition.

Prohibit From dictionary:

1) To forbid by authority. 2) To prevent from doing something.

Prohibition

1) The act of prohibiting by authority. 2) An order to refrain or stop.

The authority in our case is the government and police.

Not if it the populace is actually practicing its enforcement. How can you say enforcement is working when its just as easy to get as alcholol?

So you admit it is just as easy to get as alcohol, good.
The point is enforcement of marijuana laws will never stop it from being available. To many people disagree with the law and want to use marijuana. The government has been increasing its enforcement efforts since the war on drugs started and look at the results, pot is just as easy to get as alcohol. You should be able to conclude that prohibition of marijuana is not working and will not work.

Are we discussing "Vaporizers?" You're making this more complicated. If someone has a health problem that can be solved by "THC" and Vaporizes have the value as Marinol and not the health effects of weed then I don't care.

I am NOT confusing it. Do we call LAW ENFORCEMENT Law Prohibition? No we don't, you're a fvcking idiot if you think otherwise.

The act of prohibiting or the condition of being prohibited.
A law, order, or decree that forbids something.

The forbidding by law of the manufacture, transportation, sale, and possession of alcoholic beverages.
Prohibition The period (1920-1933) during which the 18th Amendment forbidding the manufacture and sale of alcoholic beverages was in force in the United States.

Link for the retards

ENFORCEMENT is NOT WORKING. People will ALWAYS do drugs, but thats not a good reason to LEGALIZE THEM.

I don't believe that website, period. Someone went to jail for 93 for POT! Thats redicilous! I believe either he did other things that made him stay in jail for 93 or something fscked up. If he really was in jail for 93, I feel extremely sorry for him and I believe he should be compenstated.

How do we increase enforcement? Start fining parents who children are cought with the drug, they'll care once they lose money.

The majority of indiviuals don't start smoking pot before age 18? I'd love too se statistics for that.

You can't use Natural THC because people smoke it and that IS bad for YOU. If you use a vaporizer, I really don't give fsck.

I would love to leave Fargo, North Dakota this state is fricken freezing and is the home of bible munchers... Please take me with you...

 

[imported_hscorpio]

Oh yeah I forgot about the policies concerning minors. We need to take extra caution here because I think pot is more appealing to youngsters than alcohol, at least for me it was .

Luckily alcohol has a built in mechanism that makes it not so fun for kids. What kid ever liked the taste of alcohol? Also alcohol makes inexperienced users very sick. What kid likes to vomit and have a hangover? Marijuana has none of these drawbacks, so it is easier for kids to like it and abuse it.

This is where honest education comes into play. Our only hope is to tell kids why they should not mess with marijuana while they are in school. Make them not want to use pot to rebel or be cool. Explain to them that pot can be abused and is not 100% safe even though it seems so to them.

At the same time we don't want to ruin their lives if they do experiment with it. We can punish them mostly with community service. We can push back the age they can get a drivers license too.

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: hscorpio
Oh yeah I forgot about the policies concerning minors. We need to take extra caution here because I think pot is more appealing to youngsters than alcohol, at least for me it was .

Luckily alcohol has a built in mechanism that makes it not so fun for kids. What kid ever liked the taste of alcohol? Also alcohol makes inexperienced users very sick. What kid likes to vomit and have a hangover? Marijuana has none of these drawbacks, so it is easier for kids to like it and abuse it.

This is where honest education comes into play. Our only hope is to tell kids why they should not mess with marijuana while they are in school. Make them not want to use pot to rebel or be cool. Explain to them that pot can be abused and is not 100% safe even though it seems so to them.

At the same time we don't want to ruin their lives if they do experiment with it. We can punish them mostly with community service. We can push back the age they can get a drivers license too.

Beer Tastes bad, wine on the other hand... I'd go back up to communion twice if I could

Marijuana smells bad.... They already move driver liscenses back I think...

 

[imported_hscorpio]

Originally posted by: Tabb
Are we discussing "Vaporizers?" You're making this more complicated. If someone has a health problem that can be solved by "THC" and Vaporizes have the value as Marinol and not the health effects of weed then I don't care.

We are discussing marijuana. Yes it is a complicated subject, deal with it. Don't claim you don't care. Vaporizing marijuana provides all the benefits of smoked marijuana with the same health effects as synthetic marinol. If you approve of marinol there really is no reason to disaprove of vaporized marijuana. Are we OK here?

I am NOT confusing it. Do we call LAW ENFORCEMENT Law Prohibition? No we don't, you're a fvcking idiot if you think otherwise.

There is no need to resort to name calling Tabb.

The Prohibition is working, it is ILLEGAL

Prohibition is the act of prohibiting. To prohibit means to forbid by authority aka make something illegal. So in effect you are saying "the act of prohibiting it is working, because we are prohibiting it". Do you see why I thought you were confused.

You then say our enforcement of the laws is ineffective, but you just said prohibition is working. So we are not enforcing the laws yet somehow we are still prohibiting access to marijuana?

The fact is that we are enforcing the laws, but that is failing to prohibit people from using marijuana. You aknowledged that pot is just as easy to get as alcohol. Yet you claim we are successfuly prohibiting people from using pot. Which is it?

ENFORCEMENT is NOT WORKING. People will ALWAYS do drugs, but thats not a good reason to LEGALIZE THEM.

No its not a good reason. I have already told you the good reasons why MARIJUANA should be legalized. You have failed to "prove" ,as you like to say, that marijuana should remain illegal. You concede that THC is relatively safe, and that people should not go to prison for pot, but you still want to keep it illegal. Do you really want it to remain in the hands of criminals who have no problem selling it to a 12 year old?

I don't believe that website, period. Someone went to jail for 93 for POT! Thats redicilous! I believe either he did other things that made him stay in jail for 93 or something fscked up. If he really was in jail for 93, I feel extremely sorry for him and I believe he should be compenstated.

Yes that conviction was ridiculous! Unfortunately it is a very true story. He got the sentenced reduced to 20 years after much public uproar and was paroled after serving 6 years. Perhaps you will believe PBS. There are several other cases of people getting LIFE sentences for growing/selling/buying pot. I guess you would never believe that some politicians have actually stated they want the DEATH PENALTY for drug dealers?

How do we increase enforcement? Start fining parents who children are cought with the drug, they'll care once they lose money.

The majority of indiviuals don't start smoking pot before age 18? I'd love too se statistics for that.

I already said the majority of them start in their teens. Where have you been? The point is that more adults smoke pot than kids. Fines/community service is fine by me for juvenilles, but it does not address the overall use of marijuana. You seem to think that if people don't start smoking pot as teenagers then they will never smoke pot. Prove it.

You can't use Natural THC because people smoke it and that IS bad for YOU. If you use a vaporizer, I really don't give fsck.

Yes you do care or you wouldn't be here unless you just like to argue for no reason. Did you listen to anything I said about why patients prefer smoked cannabis over marinol? Do you not understant that smoking is the fastest and most effective path for a drug to enter the body. Yes smoking is harmful, that is why I linked to the vaporizer study. Read it so you don't sound so uninformed.

I would love to leave Fargo, North Dakota this state is fricken freezing and is the home of bible munchers... Please take me with you...

 

[imported_hscorpio]

Here is a new story that claims pot increases psychosis.
More on psychosis.

 

[Tab]

I'll be posting sometime during the weekend, too busy.

 

[BBond]

Pat Morrison in an LA Times opinion piece.

Weeding Out the Politics of Pot

The Supreme Court is being asked to do what lawmakers fear.

Guess which one of the following remarks ? all made by Supreme Court justices during this week's arguments about California's medical marijuana law ? was uttered by the Supreme from the Golden State:

? "Go to the FDA and say, 'Take this off the dangerous drugs list?. Medicine by regulation is better than medicine by referendum.' "

? "Seems to me the sensible assumption is they're going to get it on the street."

? "If we rule for the respondents in this case, do you think the street price of marijuana would go up or down?"

Dude! Right the first time! It's Quote No. 3, from Justice Anthony Kennedy, the Sacramento homey who owes marijuana a big confirmation vote of thanks: He made it to the court because the nominee before him got dumped after admitting he'd smoked marijuana.

This is California's second date with the Supreme Court on the subject of Cannabis Rx. The first time, after California led 10 other states in writing itself a prescription for medical marijuana, the court unanimously folded its black-robed arms and said nope to medicinal dope when it was handed out at "cannabis clubs."

The matter is back for seconds because more medicinal marijuanists were busted, barely a month after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, by John Ashcroft's Justice Department, which evidently had already swiftly defeated terrorism and had some free time on its hands. The California women whose case was argued this week grew their own to counter ailments that could keep an entire medical school occupied.

The legalities at issue in the case are grounded in interstate commerce, but let's not kid ourselves, this case is really before the Supreme Court for one reason: Because, in spite of Quote No. 2 from Justice Stephen Breyer, that regulation is better than referendum, no politician and no regulator answerable to a politician has the guts to stick up publicly for the medical merits of marijuana. Even if it ends world hunger, makes peace between Palestinians and Israelis and sends the Cubs to the World Series, no politician will go there; the kiss-of-death risk of an endorsement by the Cheech and Chong Bong Club is too terrifying.

There are even legal precedents available for its use as medicine, if the pols weren't too wimpy to use them. Under a mid-1970s court order, the federal government grew medical-grade marijuana in Oxford, Miss., supplying legal dope to a few aging and ailing patients. In California in the 1920s, marijuana was generally banned under the state Poison Act, but druggists kept it and doctors prescribed it legally for pain relief.

If the Puritan politicians suspect that some patient might be having a good time, one toke at a time, I offer this rebuttal: It is not fun. How do I know this? Because I have had glaucoma since I was in my teens, and some years ago, after every prescription drug failed and before I resorted to surgery, my doctor let me know obliquely that marijuana could do me good. I dutifully inhaled almost every night. Taking drag after drag under doctor's order was a drag.

What is fun is watching how the cheerleaders for states' rights sort themselves out when the state's right in question makes their skin crawl. Ashcroft, the lame-duck attorney general, would conceivably be fine with it if you were dying of cancer in Oregon and killed yourself with an assault weapon, but he would lock you and your doctor up if the two of you tried, under Oregon state law, to find you a more peaceful and painless exit from life.

On the other side, you're never likely to see medical marijuana on the ballot in Alabama, Louisiana or Mississippi, but at least they see that it's in their interest to side with states'-rights medical marijuana this time, because next time they'll need a clear route to make their own arguments ? like, say, when Alabama is called to account for the bit in its constitution about school segregation, the part its voters refused to get rid of last month.

Fifty, 60 years after states' rights meant the right to segregate and discriminate, I think we're overdue for a Blue States Rights Revolt. It was Chief Justice William Rehnquist who 10 years ago made it clear that states' rights were the next civil rights; it's time to hold him to his word. He wasn't on the bench to hear the arguments. He is out ailing after being treated for thyroid cancer. He is also one of three of the justices to hail from states whose voters like the notion of medical marijuana, and one of several justices with medical problems.

Angel Raich, the Oakland woman whose case is one of those before the court, had Rehnquist on her mind this week at least as much as her case may be on his. The other day, on the steps outside the Supreme Court, she wondered aloud whether his suffering might "soften his heart about the issue." He might even find, she suggested, "that cannabis would help him a lot."

 

[Tab]

Wait a sec, before that I was dicussing medical marijuana but before that I was discussing marjiunana in general, before that it was potent pot... Can we please stay on one topic?

Okay, I am sorry that I am a name calling lewser...

I am a idiot using the definition of prohibition like that as well. Our goverment is infact having a prohibition of marijuana. It's infact illegal, but that doesn't mean its actually being enforced. A reason why I don't like legalization is look how much control we have over alcholol. A lot and I mean a lot of underage indiviuals drink. You shouldn't even drink until you're 25 as your liver has a hell of time processing alcholol. Now, we don't have a lot of control of marijuana itself and considering how much control we have over alcholol which is legal to an extent, my fear is we make it illegal and we have even less control.

We are NOT enforcing the laws enough nor or we enforcing them properly. Some drug dealers should die, aka major ones who are violent criminals who knowlingy distrubute hard drugs like eX, I want these people in jail. The fact is the indiviuals who distrubute marijuna didn't REALLY hurt anyone, marijuana hurt them. It should be considered a civil offenese and not a criminal one. Things like house arrest, community service and fines are great ideas.

THC is relatively safe, but its still not good. The fact is marijuana is much more harmfull than THC. I've been talking to several people and no one has really died from ciggerrates, we just ASSUME they did.

Learning starts at a early age, the habits and traits you develop at a early age will last you a LIFETIME. Education also starts at home as well.

Explain to me why just why so many drugs are infact eaten or injected and not inhaled.

From your vapor report...

Upon analysis, the Volcano vapors were found to consist overwhelmingly
of cannabinoids, while the combusted control contained
over one hundred additional chemicals, including several known PAHs.[/quote]

Thats still NOT pure THC. Yes, there is still a lot crap they got out but you're still getting a lot of unwanted chemicals. Is it cheaper? Possibly, but how can a doctor give you a proper doseage?

 

[imported_hscorpio]

Originally posted by: Tabb
Wait a sec, before that I was dicussing medical marijuana but before that I was discussing marjiunana in general, before that it was potent pot... Can we please stay on one topic?

Okay, I am sorry that I am a name calling lewser...

I am a idiot using the definition of prohibition like that as well. Our goverment is infact having a prohibition of marijuana.

The topic of this thread is basically marijuana, so I think we have been on topic.

I don't mean to be a grammar nazi, but that sentence suggests you are still confused. Our government is infact engaged in the prohibition of marijuana. Or we are prohibiting marijuana use. To say we are "having a prohibition" is incorrect. Just replace "prohibition" with "act of prohibiting" to see if it makes sense better.

It's infact illegal, but that doesn't mean its actually being enforced. A reason why I don't like legalization is look how much control we have over alcholol. A lot and I mean a lot of underage indiviuals drink. You shouldn't even drink until you're 25 as your liver has a hell of time processing alcholol. Now, we don't have a lot of control of marijuana itself and considering how much control we have over alcholol which is legal to an extent, my fear is we make it illegal and we have even less control.

We have much more control over alcohol when compared to marijuana. Originally before alcohol prohibition, alcohol was relatively unregulated and widely abused. So the temperance movement started with the goal of prohibiting alcohol sales. When the 18th ammendment was ratified, alcohol sales and transportation became illegal. You should know the next part; alcohol became more concentrated/dangerous, rampant corruption of police, organized crime, etc. Alcohol prohibition made the situation worse. So then what happened? The 21st ammendment revoked the 18th and it was now up to the states to regulate alcohol. States eventually set up regulatory agencies to control and regulate alcohol sales. Tons of alcohol prohibition info

The whole point of legalization is so we can regulate the marijuana market. The market for marijuana exists if we like it or not. You should be able to realize this, we have been trying to eliminate the marijuana market for over 60 years! Yet it has grown that whole time.

We are NOT enforcing the laws enough nor or we enforcing them properly.

The government is trying desperately to enforce the law just look at our ballooning prison population.
You are making the observation that marijuana is widely available and used. Then you are concluding that we must not be enforcing the laws against marijuana. What you are failing to realize is that we CANNOT enforce the marijuana laws. Prove it you say, well just look at the last 30 years. We've made penalties stiffer, we've spent more and more money on law enforcement and prisons. Every time someone see's that prohibition isn't working the answer is "we just have to beef up enforcement!". When do you stop and realize that you can't enforce marijuana prohibition in a free society? A lot of people want pot, and a lot of people want to sell them pot.

Right now marijuana is not regulated whatsoever. If I want to grow some pot in my closet I can go to home depot, spend 200$ and start. Then a couple months later I can sell that pot to whoever wants it, whenever they want it, and for as much $ as we agree on. I would be risking going to jail so I would increase the price so that the rewards > the risks. It is total anarchy as far as regulation goes. This is why it is so easy for high school kids to buy weed. Selling to kids has less risk since it is unlikely they are cops.

What if I wanted to sell beer instead? I could setup a brewery in my garage, but when I try to sell the beer what happens? I have to compete with budweiser first of all, so my beer has to be cheap. But I still risk being fined or going to jail for selling homebrew. So if I sell the beer competitively the risks > the rewards. This is why no organized criminals sell alcohol. Its all about risks versus rewards. '

If we regulated marijuana sales then law abiding organizations would sell pot instead of criminals/gangsters. The sales would be in the open where they can be scrutanized and taxed, instead of behind closed doors and under the table. Now who is going to sell pot unlicensed? The same guy who currently sells alcohol unlicensed, NOBODY! We can know who is selling it, when they sell it, and most importantly to who they sell it. Its called REGULATION and it works! Some underage people will get it by having older friends buy it for them, but we can work to minimize this as we do with alcohol.

Some drug dealers should die, aka major ones who are violent criminals who knowlingy distrubute hard drugs like eX, I want these people in jail. The fact is the indiviuals who distrubute marijuna didn't REALLY hurt anyone, marijuana hurt them. It should be considered a civil offenese and not a criminal one. Things like house arrest, community service and fines are great ideas.

Should the liquor store owner die for selling some guy a bottle of tequila? What if the guy downs the whole bottle and dies from alcohol poisoning? Should a ferrari dealer die for selling the car to some young guy who crashes it and kills himself? Should gun store owners die for selling a gun to some guy who blows his brains out? If you don't think they should die, then should they go to prison for a 20 year mandatory minimum? Every year a lot of people die from abusing a product or just being stupid. Should we always send the person who sold them the product to jail? Are we going to just throw personal responsibility away? Do you really want to live in a nanny police state where someone else tells you whats best, or can you make your own decisions? Oh let me guess, you can make your own decisions but everyone else needs to have their decisions made for them.

THC is relatively safe, but its still not good. The fact is marijuana is much more harmfull than THC.

Not good for what? It's not good for the chemo patient who wants it? It's not good for the guy with glaucoma who's doctor wants it for him? The fact is smoking marijuana is more harmful than ingesting it. If it weren't illegal we might not even need to adress this because some company would probably already have invented an inhaler like asthma sufferers use. Do you think the government is going to allow research into a safe marijuana inhaler? No because "it would send the wrong message".

I've been talking to several people and no one has really died from ciggerrates, we just ASSUME they did.

What? Tobacco does not instantly kill people like alcohol or heroin can, well it can if you eat it. It kills slowly It is well documented how tobacco causes cancer. The number 1 cause of death among tobacco users is coronary heart disease though. Google is your friend; atherosclerosis+nicotine
coronary disease.

Where are all the scientific studies proving that marijuana causes cancer? What you don't think they've been trying? We've known about tobacco and cancer for a few decades, why don't we know about pot? Maybe we do.

Explain to me why just why so many drugs are infact eaten or injected and not inhaled.

I honestly don't know, maybe you can't inhale a lot of drugs. The four methods of use are ingestion, inhalation, injection, and absorbtion through skin or tissue. As far as the strength of the effect and how quickly the user feels it: inhalation>injection>absortion>ingestion. I didn't learn this until health101 in college. It has something to do with how quickly the drug enters the bloodstream and reaches the brain. Typically inhalation effects are within a few seconds, while ingestion is within an hour. Injection is only a little bit slower than inhalation, and many time critical drugs are infact injected. You don't want to be in horrible pain and have to wait an hour for the drug to kick in.

From your vapor report...

Upon analysis, the Volcano vapors were found to consist overwhelmingly
of cannabinoids, while the combusted control contained
over one hundred additional chemicals, including several known PAHs.

Thats still NOT pure THC. Yes, there is still a lot crap they got out but you're still getting a lot of unwanted chemicals. Is it cheaper? Possibly, but how can a doctor give you a proper doseage?

This boils down to risk vs reward. If you have glaucoma and marijuana helps you then vaporizing it provides the greatest reward with the least risk. Yes it's not 100% THC, it has other cannabinoids and some other stuff in it. The odds of this causing cancer must be extremely small though. Remember that it takes a few decades of smoking 2 packs a day of tobacco to get cancer. These marijuana users are not using that much.

It is significantly cheaper, almost as if it grows on trees! The doctor doesn't give them a dosage, that is the point. Since the effects of inhalation are instant the user can gauge when they have had enough. With a pill the doctor will estimate the dosage and the user will tell him if its enough or not. The first time they might take 10mg, and find it wasn't enough so next time they take 20mg but find out it was too much. Ingesting too much marijuana/THC isn't a pleasant experience for most people.



Text
Brits test inhaler
sativex inhaler

 

[imported_hscorpio]

Thanks for that link Kissnup. It has some good arguments.

 

[Tab]

If you want to start a thread on marijuana I'd love you start a new one, all nice and tidy with bulleted points and mostly your on though and not bombarded with randomly links. Some forum members are unable to do that. Do you ever go up to person and debate something and say "Hyper-Text-Tranfer-Protocol-Colen-Slash-Slash-World-Wide-Web....{interestwebsite}...

We do? We are not enforcing our laws properly at all. I go into my chemistry class at 7:45 in the morning and the kid reaks of pot. No one does anything about this or the kids with bloodshot eyes... Thats a example of our laws not being enforced, a example of how they are enforcemed poorly is people with huge jail sentances. We don't have too "Beef" up the enforcement. We should do things like fines, community service. You don't pay your fines? Okay we'll take it out of your social security, how about that? This will make people think twice. It is regulated, you can't sell it for $10000 and its illegal you got cought and your in trouble

Legalization is a bad thing, IT MAKES IT "OKAY". It is not okay to smoke pot.

Is a ferrari dealer a hard drug dealer? I am taliking about Hard Drug Dealers and those who USE violence, they deserve to DIE. You can't NOT be a responsible Ectasy user.

THC is not good, for you. Do you want to lose cordination. Yes, its good for chemopatient who is in pain if the other alternatives don't work, thats WHY we have marinol.

Yes, but has every case of Tabacco been proven? Did Tabacco REALLY cause this man his cancer? Or was it something else?

Wouldn't we be able to vaporize pure THC? Show me evidence that prove we can't vaporize pure THC. Its cheap, so what! Its still cancer causing and I doubt the docter really want to put several hundred extra chemicals into your bloodstream.

 

[imported_hscorpio]

Originally posted by: Tabb
If you want to start a thread on marijuana I'd love you start a new one, all nice and tidy with bulleted points and mostly your on though and not bombarded with randomly links.

Yeah good idea! Maybe I'll call it "Potent POT".

Some forum members are unable to do that. Do you ever go up to person and debate something and say "Hyper-Text-Tranfer-Protocol-Colen-Slash-Slash-World-Wide-Web....{interestwebsite}...

You mean like you did in this post;

Originally posted by: Tabb
Weed is actually worse than Tobacco, sorry guys.
Cannabis smoke worse than tobacco smoke

We do? We are not enforcing our laws properly at all. I go into my chemistry class at 7:45 in the morning and the kid reaks of pot. No one does anything about this or the kids with bloodshot eyes... Thats a example of our laws not being enforced, a example of how they are enforcemed poorly is people with huge jail sentances. We don't have too "Beef" up the enforcement. We should do things like fines, community service. You don't pay your fines? Okay we'll take it out of your social security, how about that? This will make people think twice. It is regulated, you can't sell it for $10000 and its illegal you got cought and your in trouble

Legalization is a bad thing, IT MAKES IT "OKAY". It is not okay to smoke pot.

Is a ferrari dealer a hard drug dealer? I am taliking about Hard Drug Dealers and those who USE violence, they deserve to DIE. You can't NOT be a responsible Ectasy user.

THC is not good, for you. Do you want to lose cordination. Yes, its good for chemopatient who is in pain if the other alternatives don't work, thats WHY we have marinol.

Yes, but has every case of Tabacco been proven? Did Tabacco REALLY cause this man his cancer? Or was it something else?

Wouldn't we be able to vaporize pure THC? Show me evidence that prove we can't vaporize pure THC. Its cheap, so what! Its still cancer causing and I doubt the docter really want to put several hundred extra chemicals into your bloodstream.

I am not going to waste anymore time refuting your regurgitated claims. You entered this thread ignorant of the topic of marijuana. You appear to still be ignorant of the topic despite numerous attempts to provide you with the resources to educate yourself. This combined with your inability to construct a proper sentence leads me to conclude that you are a fool. I must therefore follow the following great piece of advice.

"Never argue with a fool. Someone watching may not be able to tell the difference."

Thanks for the sig.

 

[Tab]

Wow, I posted maybe two links? Most of the stuff I put was out of my own mind and stuff I actually looked at. Weed will never be legalized.

 

[dmcowen674]

Wow, this thread keeps going.

I love how the Hypocrites of the U.S. try to justify how they back the Tobacco (Nicotine Drug Operation) :roll:

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Wow, this thread keeps going.

I love how the Hypocrites of the U.S. try to justify how they back the Tobacco (Nicotine Drug Operation) :roll:

Uhhhkay, in reality Marijuana is just as bad as pot. Trust me, the goverment is trying to get tabbaco out of our society the best it can. Look at France and what Tobbaco has done to them.

 

[imported_hscorpio]

Originally posted by: Tabb
Uhhhkay, in reality Marijuana is just as bad as pot.

This is golden sig material!

 

[myusername]

Originally posted by: hscorpio If it weren't illegal we might not even need to adress this because some company would probably already have invented an inhaler like asthma sufferers use. Do you think the government is going to allow research into a safe marijuana inhaler? No because "it would send the wrong message".

If it were legal and didn't send the wrong message, I'm sure the researchers could have put their heads together and come up with something like this, but there was, iirc, a brief foray into this delivery method (the early 80's?) that found that aerosolized THC was highly irritating to lung tissue. Bummed me out because at the time (I originally searched for it) it seemed like such a swell idea

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: hscorpio

Originally posted by: Tabb
Uhhhkay, in reality Marijuana is just as bad as pot.

This is golden sig material!

crap meant to say Tobacco....whatever