Smoking Weed

[Luigi]

"(Sorry, but I'm a rabid nonsmoker who would ban tobacco entirely if I had my way. But, since it's legal, I try to put up with it in the most polite way possible.)" - Ignatius of Loyola

I've always found it odd - [i]extremely[/i] odd - that these two opposite trends are in motion simultaneously - smoking is terrible, ban smoking indoors/outdoors/anywhere, tax tobacco products from here to doomsday, eliminate smoking ads, make cigarette companies put warnings on their products and fund anti-smoking campaigns, even though Americans have been smoking since before Sir Walter Raleigh ever set foot on the continent - [i]YO, DUDES! LET'S LEGALIZE SMOKING[/i] (of a slightly different variety)! [i]THE ONLY REASON IT'S ILLEGAL IS THAT A ABUNCH OF UPTAIGHT PURITANS RUN THIS COUNTRY! PERSONAL FREEDON, DUDE - THEY SHOULDN'T BE ABLE TO STOP ME FROM DOING WHAT I WANT! WHERE'S THE HARM IN IT, ANYWAY? IT DOESN'T DO ANY GOOD TO OUTLAW DRUGS - LOOK WHAT HAPPENED DURING PROHIBITION?[/i]

Buy a vowel and try to solve this puzzle. Smoking is smoking is smoking. It all has effects. The people who are most oppressive about smoking tobacco (not you specifically, Ignatius - you've declared youre tolerance) are the most supportive of legalizing marijuana. Prohibition didn't work for alcohol and they say it won't work for dope, but they're slowly imposing prohibition on tobacco - es-plain this to me, Lucy!

And don't believe that "medical purposes only" carp, not for a minute. NPR ran a story two or three days ago about college kids in Colorado - nobody buys from drug dealers any more because they all have green cards. I'm sure they all suffer from glaucoma, post-traumatic stress syndrome, or at least test anxiety. It's just a way to slowly legalize dope-smoking.

Really it's the same kinds of contradictions as abortion (kill the babies, but save the baby seals), and the same kinds of tactics (a crack in the foundation here, a hidden agenda there).

It makes me tired.

[ardillacid]

FACT: marijuana is the #1 cash crop in America

[Jesus_lol]

[quote name='Luigi' date='15 June 2010 - 09:05 PM' timestamp='1276661150' post='2129685']
"(Sorry, but I'm a rabid nonsmoker who would ban tobacco entirely if I had my way. But, since it's legal, I try to put up with it in the most polite way possible.)" - Ignatius of Loyola

I've always found it odd - [i]extremely[/i] odd - that these two opposite trends are in motion simultaneously - smoking is terrible, ban smoking indoors/outdoors/anywhere, tax tobacco products from here to doomsday, eliminate smoking ads, make cigarette companies put warnings on their products and fund anti-smoking campaigns, even though Americans have been smoking since before Sir Walter Raleigh ever set foot on the continent - [i]YO, DUDES! LET'S LEGALIZE SMOKING[/i] (of a slightly different variety)! [i]THE ONLY REASON IT'S ILLEGAL IS THAT A ABUNCH OF UPTAIGHT PURITANS RUN THIS COUNTRY! PERSONAL FREEDON, DUDE - THEY SHOULDN'T BE ABLE TO STOP ME FROM DOING WHAT I WANT! WHERE'S THE HARM IN IT, ANYWAY? IT DOESN'T DO ANY GOOD TO OUTLAW DRUGS - LOOK WHAT HAPPENED DURING PROHIBITION?[/i]

[/quote]


first off, i think you have your demographics screwed up. as far as i know the people who like smoking pot couldnt care less about tobacco. secondly, smoking tobacco is pretty much fine. smoking cigarettes is not the same as smoking tobacco. cigarettes are tobacco plus all the chemicals you lock away from children.

if someone was selling a type of ketchup with drano and arsenic in it, we would try and ban that, we wouldnt try and ban tomatoes.

[ardillacid]

[quote name='Jesus_lol' date='16 June 2010 - 12:26 AM' timestamp='1276662403' post='2129708']
first off, i think you have your demographics screwed up. as far as i know the people who like smoking pot couldnt care less about tobacco.
[/quote]
Strange, all the pot heads i know also smoke tobacco...

[Jesus_lol]

[quote name='notardillacid' date='15 June 2010 - 09:29 PM' timestamp='1276662548' post='2129712']
Strange, all the pot heads i know also smoke tobacco...
[/quote]

by "care less" i meant about banning tobacco. so we agree again




not so much around here, there is some overlap between the two, but not much.

[ardillacid]

[quote name='Jesus_lol' date='16 June 2010 - 12:30 AM' timestamp='1276662654' post='2129715']
by "care less" i meant about banning tobacco. so we agree again




not so much around here, there is some overlap between the two, but not much.
[/quote]
So you are saying that pot heads could care less about banning tobacco?

If that is the case, I still disagree. Naturally, I have a very localized sample, bu at least americans count more than canadiens

[MithLuin]

Ummm, no, tobacco is not fine/harmless or in any way good for you. Nicotine itself has a significant (and detrimental) effect on the cardiovascular system. Also, it is a highly addictive substance that seems to make tumors grow faster. The tobacco itself can lead to lung cancer by introducing radioactive materials into the lungs. While cigarettes certainly have other harmful ingredients in them...[i]the tobacco itself[/i] is the problem.

[quote]The most harmful cancer-causing substances in spit tobacco are tobacco-specific nitrosamines which have been found at levels 100 times higher than the nitrosamines that are allowed in bacon, beer, and other foods. [b]These carcinogens cause lung cancer in lab animals, even when injected rather than inhaled.[/b]

The juice from the smokeless tobacco is absorbed directly through the lining of the mouth. This causes sores and white patches (called leukoplakia) that often lead to cancer of the mouth.

...

Hookah (or narghile) smoking started in the Middle East. Users burn flavored tobacco (called shisha) in a water pipe and inhale the smoke through a long hose.... It is marketed as being a safe alternative to cigarettes because the percentage of tobacco in the product smoked is low and people think the water filters out the toxins. [b]These safety claims are false. The water does not fiddler out many of the toxins. In fact, hookah smoke contains more toxins such as nicotine, carbon monoxide, tar, and other hazardous substances, than cigarette smoke. Several types of cancer have been linked to hookah smoking. [/b]

...

All forms of tobacco are dangerous. Even if the health risks were smaller for some tobacco products as opposed to others, all tobacco products contain nicotine, which can lead to increased use and addiction. Do not think tobacco is safe in any amount or form.

[url=http://www.cancer.org/docroot/ped/content/ped_10_2x_questions_about_smoking_tobacco_and_health.asp]American Cancer Society[/url][/quote]

I am not saying that one cigarette a week is going to mess you up for life. But I am saying that smoking is one of the most obvious things to shave years off your life. An actuary is going to ask you two primary questions: How many of your grandparents have survived past the age of 80? And...do you smoke? Most people who smoke go through a lot more than a pack of cigarettes in a week.

Smokeless tobacco, etc, is not good for you. It has a serious detrimental effect on your health. Have you ever known someone who died of pancreatic cancer? It's brutal...and using a product like Skoal is linked to increased risk of pancreatic cancer (among other things).

But tobacco is legal (no one is making it illegal, either). The legal restrictions are all aimed at whether or not people should be allowed to introduce cigarette smoke (which contains serious carcinogens) to public spaces and expose others to second-hand smoke (a serious health risk). Currently, you are permitted to harm your own body if you are an adult, but you are *not* permitted to (for instance) expose hospital patients or school students to cigarette smoke. Those restrictions, while stigmatizing smokers (certainly), are aimed at creating healthy environments for others.

[Socrates]

Potheads. . . .

[HisChildForever]

I see a few problems with legalizing marijuana (for the general public, I am not talking medicinal use).

One, adolescents showing up high to class. While there would be an age requirement for purchase like there is for alcohol and cigarettes, marijuana would be more accessible to older siblings and relatives - and I know that plenty of older siblings purchase beer for their younger siblings, so what would be stopping them from doing the same with marijuana? While alcohol is good and healthy when used in moderation (and used maturely), adolescents and young adults in particular often abuse it. The same can be argued for marijuana. There is such a huge problem with underage drinking, do we really want to add another (potential) problem on top of that?

Two, I assume that individuals will be smoking it on the streets like cigarette smokers. I for one cannot stand it when I get a cloud of cigarette smoke blown into my face by a passerby, or when I am walking behind the smoker. To me, the smell of marijuana is nauseating. I would rather have cigarette smoke in my face than that (if I had to choose).

Three, there are so many anti-smoking campaigns for cigarettes. It would send a conflicting message to people. Cigarette smoking is bad and unhealthy, so have a joint instead.

Edited June 16, 2010 by HisChildForever

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='Hilde' date='15 June 2010 - 09:09 PM' timestamp='1276650565' post='2129576']
Alcohol is a legal drug, and I don't know much about the difference. What about pot being a so-called gateway drug? Is it a good thing to keep it illegal to prevent the hard drug business flourishing and people getting their lives ruined? And to be a little cynical, leech off of health care and welfare because of their dumb decisions.
[/quote]

I wonder if making it legal would make matters worse.

Marijuana is a gateway drug because dealers who have marijuana either sell other drugs or know other dealers who sell other drugs. Therefore, other (more dangerous and addictive) drugs become more accessible to the marijuana user.

Dealers are clever. I can see some hiding other drugs in joints, and I can see them lace other drugs with the joints (which already happens actually). So the person strolling down the street smoking some marijuana may be smoking meth or crack at the same time. If marijuana is legal, they look like they are doing nothing wrong. If one person hands another person a joint on the street, who is to say the action is really criminal? It looks like both people are acting in conformity with the law.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='HisChildForever' date='16 June 2010 - 12:29 PM' timestamp='1276709399' post='2129894']
I see a few problems with legalizing marijuana (for the general public, I am not talking medicinal use).

One, adolescents showing up high to class. While there would be an age requirement for purchase like there is for alcohol and cigarettes, marijuana would be more accessible to older siblings and relatives - and I know that plenty of older siblings purchase beer for their younger siblings, so what would be stopping them from doing the same with marijuana? While alcohol is good and healthy when used in moderation (and used maturely), adolescents and young adults in particular often abuse it. The same can be argued for marijuana. There is such a huge problem with underage drinking, do we really want to add another (potential) problem on top of that?

Two, I assume that individuals will be smoking it on the streets like cigarette smokers. I for one cannot stand it when I get a cloud of cigarette smoke blown into my face by a passerby, or when I am walking behind the smoker. To me, the smell of marijuana is nauseating. I would rather have cigarette smoke in my face than that (if I had to choose).

Three, there are so many anti-smoking campaigns for cigarettes. It would send a conflicting message to people. Cigarette smoking is bad and unhealthy, so have a joint instead.
[/quote]
Well I think that adolescents would come to class high as often as they come to class drunk, which seems to be to not really be a big problem.

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='16 June 2010 - 01:40 PM' timestamp='1276710057' post='2129905']
Well I think that adolescents would come to class high as often as they come to class drunk, which seems to be to not really be a big problem.
[/quote]

You would be surprised then.

I actually [s]know[/s]knew people (not from my area) who would go home during lunch, get high, and then go back to finish the school day. They had also gone to school drunk before, and they were not the only "group" who did so.

Edited June 16, 2010 by HisChildForever

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='HisChildForever' date='16 June 2010 - 12:42 PM' timestamp='1276710162' post='2129908']
You would be surprised then.

I actually [s]know[/s]knew people (not from my area) who would go home during lunch, get high, and then go back to finish the school day. They had also gone to school drunk before, and they were not the only "group" who did so.
[/quote]
Yea, I get that some people do come to school drunk, just as some already with illegal marijuana come to school high. It's a stupid idea, and the school has every right to send them home, but it's still not the end of the world.

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='16 June 2010 - 01:46 PM' timestamp='1276710406' post='2129913']
Yea, I get that some people do come to school drunk, just as some already with illegal marijuana come to school high. It's a stupid idea, and the school has every right to send them home, but it's still not the end of the world.
[/quote]

You have no concern that it might become more prevalent?

I think it is terrible and that there already is a general disrespect towards teachers (and other students) that was not as common when I was in high school just four years ago. I spoke twice at my high school last month on college life to two chemistry classes - I am close with my old chem teacher - and he was telling me just appalling stories. Basically, students are given free reign because their parents have threatened to sue for x, y, and z reasons. Since the school wants absolutely no trouble, well, bad things have gone on behind closed doors - which increases the students' poor attitudes towards academics and other matters. Now those are issues outside of drug and alcohol abuse, although on average at least a few students per month are taken to the hospital for showing up drunk or high. Yes, that is just one example out of many, but I will add that my very small high school is in one of the safest towns of my state. If this is what goes on in my town, just imagine what happens in cities like Paterson and Newark and magnify that image if more students show up drunk or high to class.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='HisChildForever' date='16 June 2010 - 12:54 PM' timestamp='1276710852' post='2129919']
You have no concern that it might become more prevalent?

I think it is terrible and that there already is a general disrespect towards teachers (and other students) that was not as common when I was in high school just four years ago. I spoke twice at my high school last month on college life to two chemistry classes - I am close with my old chem teacher - and he was telling me just appalling stories. Basically, students are given free reign because their parents have threatened to sue for x, y, and z reasons. Since the school wants absolutely no trouble, well, bad things have gone on behind closed doors - which increases the students' poor attitudes towards academics and other matters. Now those are issues outside of drug and alcohol abuse, although on average at least a few students per month are taken to the hospital for showing up drunk or high. Yes, that is just one example out of many, but I will add that my very small high school is in one of the safest towns of my state. If this is what goes on in my town, just imagine what happens in cities like Paterson and Newark and magnify that image if more students show up drunk or high to class.
[/quote]
Alcohol is a legal drug that can be purchased by people 21 or over in the US. Students sometimes come to school drunk. Probably about as much as they come to school high. It's probably an issue sometimes, but I don't think it's some kind of social epidemic.

Seems to me that the problem lies more in the school's ability to maintain discipline being hampered by a developing nanny-state than in the chemicals involved.