Should cannabis be legal

[mojoworking]

Originally posted by Phanerothyme

still can't find any other fault with toronto's post eh?

 

keep up the good work

 

(this is not an academic journal btw)

 

I'm with Bill Hicks

 

Interesting response Phan, especially considering you have a copyright warning as part of your signature.

 

I wonder if you would have responded in quite the same paternal way had Toronto's original post been anti-drugs? I suspect not.

 

How about I cut and paste a few pages of Shakespeare (uncredited, naturally), then you can faun and genuflect as you rush to agree with "my" sentiments?

[StarSparkle]

Originally posted by Cyclone

Neither was I suggesting that a mental dependancy was any less real, just that it's not physical. There will be no withdrawal symptoms from going cold turkey on shoe shopping, nor can you overdose on it. The addiction is quite different.

 

I find your posting very offensive. You are trivialising a very important subject by your reference to 'shoe shopping'. Sensitivity is clearly not a strong point with you.

 

You do seem to be suggesting that a mental dependency is somehow less valid or painful than a physical dependency, because mental withdrawal symptoms cannot be seen by others. It is as if you are saying that symptoms that cannot be proved to an outside agency are less 'real' than symptoms that just exist in a person's head.

 

Does emotional distress not count in your world?

 

As Robbie says earlier in the thread, an addiction is an addiction - whether it's physical or mental or both is irrelevant to the person suffering from it. The fallout from addiction is not something that can be measured and compared.

 

StarSparkle

[Cyclone]

Originally posted by StarSparkle

I find your posting very offensive. You are trivialising a very important subject by your reference to 'shoe shopping'. Sensitivity is clearly not a strong point with you.

 

You do seem to be suggesting that a mental dependency is somehow less valid or painful than a physical dependency, because mental withdrawal symptoms cannot be seen by others. It is as if you are saying that symptoms that cannot be proved to an outside agency are less 'real' than symptoms that just exist in a person's head.

 

Does emotional distress not count in your world?

 

As Robbie says earlier in the thread, an addiction is an addiction - whether it's physical or mental or both is irrelevant to the person suffering from it. The fallout from addiction is not something that can be measured and compared.

 

StarSparkle

 

you insist on reading something into my comments that i've specifically said isn't true. How can I disagree when you clearly know what I mean better than I do myself.

[Phanerothyme]

Originally posted by mojoworking

Interesting response Phan, especially considering you have a copyright warning as part of your signature.

 

I wonder if you would have responded in quite the same paternal way had Toronto's original post been anti-drugs? I suspect not.

 

How about I cut and paste a few pages of Shakespeare (uncredited, naturally), then you can faun and genuflect as you rush to agree with "my" sentiments?

 

I look forward to the sonnet celebrating the holy weed. But you are right of course - I'm far from non-partisan - and passing off is bad wherever it's seen.

[floyd77]

Originally posted by StarSparkle

As Robbie says earlier in the thread, an addiction is an addiction - whether it's physical or mental or both is irrelevant to the person suffering from it. The fallout from addiction is not something that can be measured and compared.

 

StarSparkle

 

This is a good point.......but......

 

The physical addiction caused by things like alcohol, caffine, nicotine will make someone addicted to it through prolonged use, whether they have an addictive personality or not.

 

If someone becomes addiced to cannabis, then how can we blame the herb? It has no addictive properties? The person still suffers the effects of an addiction, but someone could form that addiction to food, 'shoe shopping' or whatever.

 

We dont ban shoe shopping, or eating - we treat the person. Just because they formed the addiction to a currently illegal substance does not mean that substance is the root of all evil. It just means that its stupidly illegal, just like Penistone rd is stupidly a 30mph zone. (reel me in from this tangent!)

 

Anyway - the point is, in my opinion we should not be using the fact that some people have a reaction to cannabis (whether that be paranoia, or any other mental health issue), simply these people should not use (or abuse) it.

 

Some people have nut allergys, diabetics must watch what they eat/drink to watch their glucose levels, some have food allergies. Should we ban nuts, fizzy drinks & certain foods because a section of society may be harmed by them?

No - we put 'May contain traces of nut' on the box. We carry insulin around, and dont eat shrimp.

 

People aren't stupid - if they take something that harms them they should stop doing it. If they cant because they have formed an addiction they should be treated, but the weed is not the cause of the addiction, merely the focus.

[Phanerothyme]

A long held link appears not to be the case according to one study:

 

 

 

NORML

Marijuana smoking -"even heavy longterm use"- does not cause cancer of the lung, upper airwaves, or esophagus, Donald Tashkin reported at this year's meeting of the International Cannabinoid Research Society. Coming from Tashkin, this conclusion had extra significance for the assembled drug-company and university-based scientists ( most of whom get funding from the U.S. National Institute on Drug Abuse ).

[Kthebean]

Thank god for that

 

That is interesting Phanerothyme but unfortunately everyone I know who tokes uses tobacco in their joints thus utterly negating such good news!

 

Perhaps cooking is the only safe option we have?

[Berberis]

But there has been numerous other study's that are contradictory.

 

Also they are now starting to link it too serious mouth and tongue cancers!

 

Also seeing people typically smoke Marijuana combined with tobacco, there is little difference to smoking normal fags!

[Guest]

smoking dope is very harmful. really is . from an ex dope smoker and more

[RUBBER]

Originally posted by Miss

Why is it that when anyone ever criticises smoking weed, the comeback is always alcohol related??? The two are not the same! Smoking weed is against the law, and it normally happens in dark front rooms with the curtains closed...

 

I know alot of people who smoke on a regular basis, but it does not interest me in the slightest... I am quite happy with my glass of wine, thanks...

 

Some of the people I know can barely get up in the morning without having a joint first, or they get cranky when they have run out. Now, I know that I (nor anyone else I know) do not feel the same about alcohol...

 

And, if nothing else, the thought of putting my mouth around something that has been passed around several people is quite revolting.

 

You've never heard of alcoholics then?