Is marijuana really as dangerous as heroin and LSD? Finally, a welcome legal review

a reply to: LewsTherinThelamon

Well at least your sense of humor is intact.



Cheers buddy

a reply to: pl3bscheese

And you're right.

Taking a bath is good, it keeps you clean, but we have a safer alternative--showers equipped with chairs to sit in so we don't slip, and handle bars to grip as we get in and out of the shower. Add a good drainage system so there's no risk of drowning and the whole system would be perfect.

"Relaxing" in the tub isn't utilitarian enough to keep it legal. Bathtubs are dangerous.

originally posted by: pl3bscheese
a reply to: LewsTherinThelamon

Well at least your sense of humor is intact.

Cheers buddy

Yeah, at least your sense of deflection is intact.

a reply to: Diisenchanted

You are misrepresenting addiction. Not all addictions deal with substances! What about gambling and sex addictions?
Regardless of what you are addicted to everyone is addicted to something. You have your addictions let them have theirs.
Would I be wrong to say that you are addicted to ATS ? Do you use it daily? Some people might say that your addiction is unhealthy. Does it make it so?
People just need to let others make their own decisions. We already have to many dictators in the world. Don't be one of them!!!!

That didn't make any sense at all. Unless you aren't willing to face your own addictions… and behind that, shortcomings.

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: LewsTherinThelamon

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: LewsTherinThelamon
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Is Marijuana as Dangerous as Heroin and L.S.D

>heroin and L.S.D
>L.S.D

allofmywats

Sorry but I've gotta go with... what?

Heroin and L.S.D are two completely different substances. It's like comparing mustard gas to table salt.

Cool. I just didn't get it at first. You are right. Legal heroin(morphine derivatives) are dispensed daily. As are opiates(barbiturates). L S D not so much. Well, never.

That's not what I meant.

There is no science behind herion and L.S.D being classified in the same schedule of drugs.

That's the fun part of anyone being allowed to become a politician--any idiot can become one. We have no politicians in the US with science backgrounds--no psychopharmacologist would be dumb enough to stick heroin and L.S.D in the same schedule together.

a reply to: LewsTherinThelamon

Heck a Social or Behavioral Scientist would never condone making them illegal in the first place.

a reply to: LewsTherinThelamon

The problem is what we can discuss here. Experience is not allowed. That's cool. One could postulate though that a certain substance actually cures the cold. It may have been proven in life, not a study BUT that's not accepted in certain avenues. Which is actually the topic.

originally posted by: LewsTherinThelamon

Yeah, at least your sense of deflection is intact.

I've already addressed this:

a reply to: LewsTherinThelamon
To be clear, there is certainly some things which are legal which should not be, that make no sense when taking in risks vs rewards. So there's no need to try and appear correct by listing off the most obvious ones from your list. You'll have to do better than that.

My point was that to equally weigh all of these, and make it an all or nothing, everything is legal or everything is illegal, POV, is just not reasonable, or well thought out.

Though I doubt you were being serious. It wasn't your belief, just an extreme example.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

If it's OK to let Police harass, beat, and arrest heroin addicts because they made poor life decisions--then it is OK to allow Police to harass, beat, and arrest fat people for making poor life decisions

And now that I think of it, poverty should be illegal, too.

originally posted by: LewsTherinThelamon
a reply to: Krazysh0t

If it's OK to let Police harass, beat, and arrest heroin addicts because they made poor life decisions--then it is OK to allow Police to harass, beat, and arrest fat people for making poor life decisions

And now that I think of it, poverty should be illegal, too.

*sigh*

You continue to treat entirely different things as if they were the same.

Show me mutual increases in the rates of criminality with both heroine use and fat people. Oh wait, it doesn't exist for both. Just one. I bet you know which one.

Wow guy, you really are out there! What's tragic is you're clever enough to shape contexts in ways that most people wouldn't bother to critically think through. I feel for those who buy into your poor, yet cleverly delivered reasoning.

a reply to: pl3bscheese

Though I doubt you were being serious. It wasn't your belief, just an extreme example.

No, it wasn't. It followed the same exact reasoning behind the prohibition of drugs.

My logic was 100% sound, you're just being subjective. There is no benefit to television other than its entertainment value, for the majority of drugs, the benefit is the same.

Television has helped to fuel people's poor health, it has been shown how our sedentary lifestyles are hurting us. If it is true that we can ban drugs because they harm us and their value is not utilitarian enough--then it is true that we can ban television.

Buuuut, you probably like TV and are merely being subjective. My reasoning is flawless and you are grasping at straws.

originally posted by: pl3bscheese
Show me mutual increases in the rates of criminality with both heroine use and fat people. Oh wait, it doesn't exist for both. Just one. I bet you know which one.

I know this wasn't directed at me but.... there's a big difference between the price of a Big Mac and a... whatever they are selling heroin for. And most heroin(crack, meth, I could go on) use is supported by theft.

originally posted by: jtma508
The Rockefellers then used their political leverage to make hemp cultivation illegal using Reefer Madness as their PR engine. It's always about the money.

That may all be true, but I just can't imagine that many people who don't have stock in hemp manufacturing getting as vehemently worked up about the issue as you find among the hemp fanatics.

How about this? How about we completely legalize industrial hemp growing and manufacturing of all the related products, but we come down hard with hard prison time for people who smoke marijuana recreationally?

originally posted by: LewsTherinThelamon
a reply to: pl3bscheese

Though I doubt you were being serious. It wasn't your belief, just an extreme example.

No, it wasn't. It followed the same exact reasoning behind the prohibition of drugs.

My logic was 100% sound, you're just being subjective. There is no benefit to television other than its entertainment value, for the majority of drugs, the benefit is the same.

100% sound? I must have struck a chord. You're not used to someone so easily calling you out. Hah!

Television has helped to fuel people's poor health, it has been shown how our sedentary lifestyles are hurting us. If it is true that we can ban drugs because they harm us and their value is not utilitarian enough--then it is true that we can ban television.

Buuuut, you probably like TV and are merely being subjective. My reasoning is flawless and you are grasping at straws.

Your reasoning is poor, and I doubt you believe what you're saying at this point. I mean, you're the chump who is typing a way at a keyboard. For how long how you been doing so today. Whoops!

a reply to: pl3bscheese

Show me mutual increases in the rates of criminality with both heroine use and fat people.

Crime increases because heroin is illegal.

Alcoholics don't rob people to get alcohol, alcohol is far too easily attainable for that to happen--and withdrawal from hardcore alcoholism is just as bad as withdrawal from heroin.

But, your assumptions overlook the fact that, in countries where heroin has been legalized, usage rates have dropped.

Deny ignorance.

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: pl3bscheese
Show me mutual increases in the rates of criminality with both heroine use and fat people. Oh wait, it doesn't exist for both. Just one. I bet you know which one.

I know this wasn't directed at me but.... there's a big difference between the price of a Big Mac and a... whatever they are selling heroin for. And most heroin(crack, meth, I could go on) use is supported by theft.

That's true. While I doubt that overall use would change regardless of legalization, I do think you'd take away part of the criminal element. Then again, if you look to where pot has become legal, the prices are somewhat comparable to before it was legal, correct? If so, then there's little reason to think it would change that much.

originally posted by: LewsTherinThelamon
a reply to: pl3bscheese

Show me mutual increases in the rates of criminality with both heroine use and fat people.

Crime increases because heroin is illegal.

Alcoholics don't rob people to get alcohol, alcohol is far too easily attainable for that to happen--and withdrawal from hardcore alcoholism is just as bad as withdrawal from heroin.

Are you trying to say that heroine addicts can't get heroine nearly as easy as alcoholics can get alcohol? I bet it's pretty even, considering most cities have hours in which you can't purchase it. Yet another fail.

But, your assumptions overlook the fact that, in countries where heroin has been legalized, usage rates have dropped.

Deny ignorance.

No they haven't. I challenge you to back this up with the data.

This isn't coming from a source with an obvious agenda. You might want to check it out.

The data show, among other things, that the number of adults in Portugal who have at some point taken illegal drugs is rising. At the same time, though, the number of teenagers who have at some point taken illegal drugs is falling. The number of drug addicts who have undergone rehab has also increased dramatically, while the number of drug addicts who have become infected with HIV has fallen significantly. What, though, do these numbers mean? With what exactly can they be compared? There isn't a great deal of data from before the experiment began. And, for example, the number of adults who have tried illegal drugs at some point in their lives is increasing in most other countries throughout Europe as well.

Link

To be further balanced, this is how the article ends:

It is simply by chance that the European Monitoring Center for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) has its headquarters in Lisbon. Frank Zobel works here, analyzing various approaches to combating drugs, and he says he can observe "the greatest innovation in this field" right outside his office door.

No drug policy, Zobel says, can genuinely prevent people from taking drugs -- at least, he is not familiar with any model that works this way. As for Portugal, Zobel says, "This is working. Drug consumption has not increased severely. There is no mass chaos. For me as an evaluator, that's a very good outcome."

It's working. Good on them. I'm all for decriminalization, which should be quite clear by now. I'm against people using bogus reasoning to act as if there's no real consequences to marijuana use for people out there. The truth is some people don't like it from the get go, some people enjoy it for a period of time, most people who partake for long periods eventually find it's no longer worth it for them, and few continue using for their whole lives. There's reason for this, and giving people the whole story is what should be done so they can make an informed decision.

originally posted by: AutumnWitch657
To be fair heroin in the form of morphine also has medical value but still causes physical addiction.

Yes but strong opiates unlike cannabis have much narrower theraputic indexes.

The amount of heroine between effective use and toxicity is lower.


Its extremly hard to OD on pot, infact I think only one person has done it on edibles.


On the otherhand get the opiate dose wrong and your are likely to stop breathing or choke on your vommit.
Infact even doctors can get it wrong.

Addiction for heroin is I believe 1 in 4 were as MJ is 1 in 20

Withdrawal from opiates can also be deadly.



As to the OP even '___' should not be listed as dangrous as heroin. Its is impossible to OD on and has almost no addiction.


The most dangrous commonly used drugs legal and illegal in my experiance are:

Alcohol
Paracetamol
Asprin
Heroin and other strong opiates
Meth
Tobbaco products
Benzos

a reply to: intrptr

How does that not make sense? Really?

It is all about tolerance.

We all pick and choose what we will tolerate.

When we are intolerant we are also judgmental.

Take your reply for instance pretty judgmental if you ask me. Are you really saying that I don't know my

own addictions or my short comings? You don't even know me yet you judge me.

Funny that people will tolerate the things that they do , but when it come to other people we judge!

Anytime someone does something that we don't like we are more than willing to offer-up our opinion.

When our opinion doesn't seem to matter to them we tend to start to dictate to them. Telling them why we are

right and they are wrong. That is when we become dictators!

Apparently you are more right than I am that is why you express your intolerance.