Blogs Nov 25, 2010 at 9:56 am


You constant insistance that marijuana is a safe drug is absurd. The particulate matter you inhale is absolutely as dangerous as a cigarette (nicotine doesn't cause lung cancer: habitually inhaling smoke does.).

It causes effects that make operating a motor vehicle just as dangerous as drinking and driving, or texting and driving.

I'm ok with legalisation, actually, done intelligently and with sane restrictions and the same rules as, say, alcohol (no recourse if you get fired for showing up high; even if it's "medicine".).

But insisting that marijuana is 'safe' is duplicitous and mendacious. Your entire argument is meretricious.
You're right Dan, legalize it and it takes the glamour out of it. No one wants legal stuff, there is nothing mysterious or intriguing about that. And those that do want it, voila there it is.

I don't think it's safe. I think it has health consequences, like most other substances we ingest. It is, however, safer and less addictive than booze and cigarettes—both legal, both potentially deadly.
Banning fake pot... Jesus H. Christ.

Makes me think of this classic George Carlin bit:…
Next, the DEA needs to ban the opposite -- things that aren't pot at all, but sort of look like it in a baggie. Oregano, sage. There's a corner store up the street that sells a melange of spices for Greek cooking rolled up in plastic that you'd SWEAR was a lid of skunk weed.

This cannot be allowed. Think of the children.

@1, if you want to win an argument with Dan, you're going to have to go back and hit that thesaurus HARDER AND HARDER. "Duplicitous", "medacious" and "meretricious" are excellent but there's a whole armory of iciouses and aciouses out there to bring. Auspicious, audacious, capricious, contumacious, pernicious, ingracious, judicious, sagacious! Rapacious! Specious! Vivacious! Voracious! Mellifluous!

Is it getting a little Gilbert and Sullivan in here or is it just me?
Bummer. Guess I'd better go stock up while it's still not a crime...
I do not think fake marijuana is going to be a big hit on the black market.

If you carry this argument to its logical extreme, then the DEA should be calling for banning the inhaling of air.

Given the amount of particulate matter and toxic chemicals in the air we breath on a daily basis: Carbon Monoxide, Nitrogen Oxide, Sulfur Dioxide, Lead and Carbon particulates, etc., etc., and the number of annual deaths in the U.S. attributed to pulmonary and respiratory disease linked to air pollution (more than 60,000 according to the American Heart Association), clearly breathing air is a serious threat to the health and safety of the American public and should be prohibited immediately.

And for comparative purposes, do you know how many deaths are attributed each year to the direct use of marijuana (excluding other factors, such as concurrent alcohol or cigarette use, for example)? Zero. Zip. Zilch. Nada.

So far as marijuana is concerned, the so-called "War on Drugs" is a complete and utter sham, and the justification for the DEA and state and local LEA's interdiction policies is as flimsy as a house made of rolling papers. In fact, it only serves one purpose so far as I can see: to funnel huge amounts of federal and state funds to these agencies, and to provide them with continued opportunities for further enrichment via draconian property confiscation policies.
Why hasn't the DEA banned salvia? Now there's some perfectly legal shit that could send the mentally unbalanced straight to a looney bin, but it's as legal as oregano. Since its high is psychotic, maybe it's not so popular?
Comte said it already, but yeah, life isn't safe. And it's gonna kill you in the end. Everything's relative.

That said, does anybody actually bother with this shit? It ain't cheap, and let's face it, pot's pretty easy to come by.
What are the medical emergencies with pot? Someone got to high and called 911?
Every month it's something else we have to be protected from. They think we're little children that need them to protect us. They should shut down the fucking DEA and put the money in schools!
@10 FTE Yeah, I actually prefer it. It smells better, tastes better, lasts longer, you're not going to get busted for having it or fail a drug test, and while pot is easy to come by, it's nowhere near as easy as walking into a store and plunking down a $20. No waiting on lazy dealers required. And the price, at least in my market, is actually a bit cheaper. I'm still waiting for the results of the tests where they feed mass quantities of it to rats to see what happens, but for now, it's well worth it IMHO--for the next month anyways.
Thanks, LW.
@Moderate: Troll harder, "Moderate 1
You constant insistance that marijuana is a safe drug is absurd. The particulate matter you inhale is absolutely as dangerous as a cigarette (nicotine doesn't cause lung cancer: habitually inhaling smoke does.). "

You don't have to burn it to enjoy it, you manchild.
Right when I start to think the DEA isn't the stupidest bunch of dipshits on the planet (excepting only the GOP/TP'ers, of course!), they go and say something like this.

Hey, DEA, you're a bunch of idiots. Maybe you should go back to using your shit to finger-paint your names on the bathroom wall.

Legalize pot, tax the living daylights out of it, make everybody happy and hungry and have more tax dollars to mitigate the worldwide fiscal crisis caused by those other shit-finger-painters, the GOP/TP'ers.
@8: You'll notice, if you read all the way to the end of my very short note, that I'm ok with legalisation done sanely. As for carrying arguments to their logical extemes: you're right, you sure can come up with a lot of silly arguments that way!

@Dan: Cool. I stand corrected.
@5: Sorry. Ask anyone who knows me. That's how I actually talk. And yes, it has cost me a few friends. But I only know how to use the word I mean, not their second-cousins. (That's Mark Twain...)
@9 salvia is pretty hard to find outside of the southwestern states. For some reason it rarely, if ever, makes it to me in the midwest. Sadface. It is banned by state law in IL, but I think it's mostly flown under the radar since it's pretty rare.

@1, you have no idea what you're talking about. Long term marijuana use is not carcinogenic like cigarette smoke is. The smoke in itself is not a problem. It's what you're burning. And even IF marijuana smoke were as dangerous as cig smoke (which it's not, but for hypotheticals' sake let's say it is), it's very easy to prepare baked goods with weed butter or weed oil. No smoke required, get high all you want.

You are part of the cancer that's killing decriminalization legislation. Stop being carcinogenic.
Also, vaporizers.
@19: even the most cursory search of the medical literature, you know, people who know what they're talking about proves that you're a total moron about marijuana use and cancer. Oh, and cancer in the offspring of women who smoke.

You mean like the Haiti study that followed pregnant women who do smoke weed and pregnant women who don't? And monitored their children's development through age 5, finding that there were no developmental delays or defects in the children? From… : "The results show no significant differences in developmental testing outcomes between children of marijuana-using and non-using mothers except at 30 days of age when the babies of users had more favourable scores on two clusters of the Brazelton Scales: autonomic stability and reflexes. The developmental scores at ages 4 and 5 years were significantly correlated to certain aspects of the home environment and to regularity of basic school (preschool) attendance."

Or this study which found that the infants of women who smoked weed during pregnancy were not any different from the infants of women who abstained? From… : "There were no significant differences between exposed and nonexposed neonates on day 3. At 1 month, the exposed neonates showed better physiological stability and required less examiner facilitation to reach organized states."

In fact, this research supports that the children of mothers who smoked pot during pregnancy perform BETTER at around 1 month of age (though no long-term improvements of the children of users are noted; neither are there long-term deficiencies).

Put that in your pipe and smoke it.
@21- Could you change your name? Cause you're not a moderate, you're a sucker.
Oh, I don't know, Dwight - I think he's moderately full of shit.
@18: Sorry, I call bullshit. I recently described something, in everyday speech, as being "of dubious veracity", and even I don't believe you talk like that.
@18 Especially since you misspelled "insistence" in your first comment. People who are genuinely in possession of very large vocabularies are usually careful with all aspects of the words they use (especially since "-ence" not "-ance" is extremely common in words of that construction; it's not a difficult rule to memorize the exceptions to).
Actually, I'm totally a moderate. And, for all you people who can't seem to read, I said I'm in favor of careful and controlled (you know, moderate) legalization. But lying to yourselves about the dangers of marijuana (which are less than tha anti-drug community says, but more than the pro-pot community says) doesn't help your cause. When all you pro-pot folks come out saying it's perfectly healthy and good for you and great and stuff, you look like the idiots that some of you actually are.
Congrats Rachel! You learned how to cherry pick, while totally ignoring the moutain of evidence that shows pot is associated with many cancers! I'm whelmed.
Rachel gave two credible sources for her factual information to prove her argument. You seem to only be saying the same things over and over without providing evidence such as scientific studies, etc. I think if you want to make a valid argument, it would be important for you to do this. (I would also love to see where you are obtaining all of these silly lies that you take for the truth.)
Wow anyone who thinks weed is bad needs to open there eyes. Show me one case of lung cancer in a marijuana user only. Thats right cant find one. If you could the government world be putting emaciated body's and black lungs out to parade around the all of the know use of marijuana there has never been a recorded death from cannabis use. In the united states alone there are over 400,000 deaths a year directly attributed to tobacco . you tell me which is worse?

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.

Add a comment

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.