People constantly talking about weed. +Lots of shit threads recently. - General

[QUOTE=franz;22378101]I was never pressured into trying a drug, and I hung out with teenagers who did them all through high school. I made the choice to try cannabis myself when I was 15 and I'm glad I did. And no one gets drunk to get attention. The last thing an underage drug user wants is attention, because that's what will get them caught. I understand that you have no knowledge of real-life drug use, but don't you have a shred of logic? And drop the superiority complex, you're as insignificant as anyone.[/QUOTE] that guy was being sarcastic fyi

yo fuck tha Man and the OP

[QUOTE=:smug:;22365832]I read half of OP, I'll go smoke some weed and read the rest. [editline]12:01[/editline] Chillaxxxx OP calm down. :downs:[/QUOTE] sums it up

brb going to go smoke weed

[QUOTE=franz;22378101]And no one gets drunk to get attention. The last thing an underage drug user wants is attention, because that's what will get them caught. I understand that you have no knowledge of real-life drug use, but don't you have a shred of logic? And drop the superiority complex, you're as insignificant as anyone.[/QUOTE] And the people who say buy weed it's cool hurr hurr aren't looking for attention?

[QUOTE=FINLEY;22378862]And the people who say buy weed it's cool hurr hurr aren't looking for attention?[/QUOTE] nobody ever says that with a straight face, it's a strawman argument that some stoners say jokingly

There isn't a drugs subforum. :downs:

People like smoking weed.. who cares. Get out of the 'You guys think your cool' attitude and go outside maybe find another social outlet other than FP and stop complaining.

Weed may not be harmful (for all we know) but why even do any drugs if you don't have to? Its poison to your head man.

This reminds me of some retards in my class. They keep talking and talking and talking about drugs. Drugs this, drugs that... Hey lets go roll 1. Hey lets go roll another. For fuck sakes... I just stopped hanging out with them because of how fucking annoying they were.

[QUOTE=Idi Amin;22379805]Weed may not be harmful (for all we know) but why even do any drugs if you don't have to? Its poison to your head man.[/QUOTE] Why is there this automatic sitgma associated with the word 'drug'? Why does anybody try and make objective statements about "drugs" like all drugs have some kind of common characteristic. Drug is just an all-encompassing umbrella term for substances that induce unfamiliar states of consciousness. To say that drugs are poison for your head is pretty retarded considering for all intents and purposes your brain is one of the most efficient "drug" factories on the planet - our entire sensory and perceptual experiences are regulated by "drugs". So why is there this idea that drugs are bad or good? They're not - they have no inherent moral qualities.. how could they? Drugs are just drugs.. some of them have desirable side-effects and some of them don't.. it may be appropriate to call some drugs "poison" but it's really, really dumb to make some objective claim about "drugs".

It's interesting to see that every study that says anything related to "Marijuana isn't really that dangerous/addictive" (usually biased, unreliable sources, spread supporter to supporter) are frequently quoted, while the studies that says that it is dangerous/addictive are ignored, critizised or even hated. What happened to critical thinking and the scientific method?

[QUOTE=Herr Sven;22380382]What happened to critical thinking and the scientific method?[/QUOTE] Good question. It's exactly because of critical thinking and the scientific method that we've been able to dispel bullshit myths like marijuana killing brain cells or causing cancer. Addictive? Sure, but anything can be addictive. It isn't addictive in the same sense that something like heroin is, anyway. Dangerous? More people OD on caffeine. As long as you don't have any underlying mental conditions it's one of the tamest drugs in the world.

[QUOTE=Herr Sven;22380382]It's interesting to see that every study that says anything related to "Marijuana isn't really that dangerous/addictive" (usually biased, unreliable sources, spread supporter to supporter) are frequently quoted, while the studies that says that it is dangerous/addictive are ignored, critizised or even hated. What happened to critical thinking and the scientific method?[/QUOTE] Uh, I think you have that all mixed around there bud. Modern studies have found no harm in smoking marijuana other than the minimal damage to your lungs from the smoke. Hence why it's used for MEDICAL purposes.

[QUOTE=Adam192;22380708]Good question. It's exactly because of critical thinking and the scientific method that we've been able to dispel bullshit myths like marijuana killing brain cells or causing cancer. Addictive? Sure, but anything can be addictive. It isn't addictive in the same sense that something like heroin is, anyway. Dangerous? More people OD on caffeine. As long as you don't have any underlying mental conditions it's one of the tamest drugs in the world.[/QUOTE] Give me sources. Have you compared the evidence? Have you checked your sources? Have you doublechecked every piece of text skeptically? Are there positive evidence? Can you find details about how the experiment was conducted? No, marijuana is dangerous. You just showed an example on what I meant in the post you quoted. [QUOTE=SnakeHead;22380773]Uh, I think you have that all mixed around there bud. Modern studies have found no harm in smoking marijuana other than the minimal damage to your lungs from the smoke. Hence why it's used for MEDICAL purposes.[/QUOTE] In controlled amounts it can be used as a treatment against pain, yes. And I say that it absolutely can be used in strictly controlled amounts in treatment, although what many people are for is a uncontrolled legalization, and if uncontrolled, it has been proven to be dangerous.

[QUOTE=Herr Sven;22380835]Give me sources. Have you compared the evidence? Have you checked your sources? Have you doublechecked every piece of text skeptically? Are there positive evidence? Can you find details about how the experiment was conducted? No, marijuana is dangerous. You just showed an example on what I meant in the post you quoted.[/QUOTE] Have you? You're making a (very vague) claim. How is marijuana "dangerous", according to you? I'll provide you all the links you want once that's been addressed. Even the dirtiest, stinkiest pothead with the most unkempt dreads and most unwashed Bob Marley t-shirt will concede that inhalin burning planet matter isn't good for your lungs, that weed exacerbates already underlying mental conditions, and that marijuana is not good for the still-developing brain (ie; teenagers) but there's very little "danger" produced from smoking a joint beyond that. You want to talk about critical thinking let's talk about the fact that nobody has ever died from overdosing on weed and that compared to all the other substances we have easy access to it's much much safer. Also I see you like Carl Sagan.. give [url=http://marijuana-uses.com/mr-x/]this[/url] a read and stop thinking in such black and white terms.

[QUOTE=Adam192;22380948]Have you? You're making a (very vague) claim. How is marijuana "dangerous", according to you? I'll provide you all the links you want once that's been addressed. Even the dirtiest, stinkiest pothead with the most unkempt dreads and most unwashed Bob Marley t-shirt will concede that inhalin burning planet matter isn't good for your lungs, that weed exacerbates already underlying mental conditions, and that marijuana is not good for the still-developing brain (ie; teenagers) but there's very little "danger" produced from smoking a joint beyond that. You want to talk about critical thinking let's talk about the fact that nobody has ever died from overdosing on weed and that compared to all the other substances we have easy access to it's much much safer. Also I see you like Carl Sagan.. give [URL="http://marijuana-uses.com/mr-x/"]this[/URL] a read and stop thinking in such black and white terms.[/QUOTE] It's addictive, it can work as a Gateway-drug, a lot people have died in accidents when under the influence of marijuana. There's a reason to why it's illegal. Also: That's one of the points where I disagree with Sagan. [url]http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/evidence99/marijuana/Health_1.html[/url] [url]http://www.cmaj.ca/cgi/content/full/180/8/797[/url] [url]http://www.health.harvard.edu/newsletters/Harvard_Mental_Health_Letter/2010/April/medical-marijuana-and-the-mind[/url]

[QUOTE=Herr Sven;22381021]It's addictive, it can work as a Gateway-drug, a lot people have died in accidents when under the influence of marijuana. There's a reason to why it's illegal. Also: That's one of the points where I disagree with Sagan. [url]http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/evidence99/marijuana/Health_1.html[/url] [url]http://www.cmaj.ca/cgi/content/full/180/8/797[/url] [url]http://www.health.harvard.edu/newsletters/Harvard_Mental_Health_Letter/2010/April/medical-marijuana-and-the-mind[/url][/QUOTE] The word addictive gets thrown around way too much - yes weed is addictive.. it's addictive in the same way that anything else that feels amazing is generally considered worth repeating again and again and again.. the Internet, video games, porn, sex, and even eating can all be "addictive" in this sense - that's not an argument against legalisation, unless of course you're using it to mean something that somebody can develop a physical dependency on (heroin, tobacco, or cocaine, for example.) Tobacco use is actually a far greater predictor of whether or not somebody will go on to use harder drugs. The "Gateway effect" is actually a product of prohibition since you force the consumer to have access to other unregulated substances when you lump marijuana in with them. And I would argue against "a lot" of people having died under the influence of marijuana unless you give me a source. If marijuana really is such a dangerous drug as you claim, there should be plenty of recorded deaths attributed to marijuana, right? Oh, and all of your links cited side-effects that I already conceded exist.

[QUOTE=Herr Sven;22381021]It's addictive, it can work as a Gateway-drug, a lot people have died in accidents when under the influence of marijuana. [/QUOTE] You could be talking about a number of things with a description like that. Alcohol, for example. [editline]01:09AM[/editline] Which is a legal substance, by the way.

[QUOTE=Superginger;22381729]You could be talking about a number of things with a description like that. Alcohol, for example. [editline]01:09AM[/editline] Which is a legal substance, by the way.[/QUOTE] Fun Fact: If alcohol was introduced today, it would be banned. Yes, a lot of drugs can be given that description, but does that mean that it should be legal? Now I can't comment more on this subject, as I need to get some sleep.

[QUOTE=Ultra Violence;22365731]Unless it was very recently changed, marijuana is a Section I drug in the United States Controlled Substance Act. A few other Schedule I's: GBH, Heroin, ecstasy, peyote, mescaline, LSD, etc. And the criteria for fitting into Schedule I classification: (A) The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse. (B) [b]The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.[/b] (C) There is a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision. (from wiki).[/QUOTE] There is such a thing as medical marijuana.

[QUOTE=Herr Sven;22381904] Yes, a lot of drugs can be given that description, but does that mean that it should be legal?[/QUOTE] No, it just goes to show you how arbitrary and inconsistent U.S. drug laws are. How does it make sense to prohibit a substance that is actually less dangerous than drugs the state supplies and regulates? Also, let's just talk about simple [b]supply and demand[/b]. We know prohibition does not work, and the "war" on drugs has obviously been an utter failure since the potency, availability, and purity of almost all drugs have increased in the past 30 years. We're wasting resources on fighting a (relatively speaking) harmless substance that could be taxed and used to fund whatever the hell needs to be funded.

Weed is fucking terrible. My friend suggest we try some a couple of months ago and it only resulted in us feeling like a couple of rebellious 16 year old twats. Weed doesn't have class. I'll stick to cigars thank you very much.

I think weed certainly has a horrible aftereffect. Some of its users JUST CAN'T SHUT THE FUCK UP ABOUT IT. We get it, it's not bad. We get it, won't kill you. Why can't you just be another minority, and be quite about your addiction (You might say, there isn't any. Your behavior shows otherwise.). I am annoyed. I don't care that you want people to ignore it, the people want you to shut up about it. It's that easy. [/raegagainstthestoners]

[QUOTE=Melnek;22382823]Weed is fucking terrible. My friend suggest we try some a couple of months ago and it only resulted in us feeling like a couple of rebellious 16 year old twats. Weed doesn't have class. I'll stick to cigars thank you very much.[/QUOTE] You smoke weed to get high, not to feel like your cool, although it can feel pretty cool. [editline]11:30PM[/editline] [QUOTE=gufu;22383877]I think weed certainly has a horrible aftereffect. Some of its users JUST CAN'T SHUT THE FUCK UP ABOUT IT. We get it, it's not bad. We get it, won't kill you. Why can't you just be another minority, and be quite about your addiction (You might say, there isn't any. Your behavior shows otherwise.). I am annoyed. I don't care that you want people to ignore it, the people want you to shut up about it. It's that easy.[/QUOTE] There is obviously a large amount of people that don't get it and by this post is still appears you don't. Honestly, I hope people talk more and more about weed, not just on Facepunch but everywhere.

[QUOTE=Ultra Violence;22365564]Yes, marijuana is considered a class A drug, equally as dangerous as heroin and methamphetamines! That is the fact that I am getting at. It's a naturally occurring substance in nature that just happens to have a medical purpose, as opposed to real drugs that are pharmaceutically engineered to cure you / get you high by introducing chemicals that, more often than not, do not naturally occur within the human body [i]or[/i] nature.[/QUOTE] How is it equally as dangerous? Has marijuana/THC ever actually killed a person? There are more ibuprofen deaths each year than I care to even look up and post. I, myself, refuse to take aspirin or ibuprofen and even antibiotics because of the harm they pose to the human body. But I will smoke to reduce a headache or calm my nausea. In fact, it is the only thing that I have to help my severe, painful condition, endometriosis.

[QUOTE=DisasterButton;22385197]How is it equally as dangerous? Has marijuana/THC ever actually killed a person? There are more ibuprofen deaths each year than I care to even look up and post. I, myself, refuse to take aspirin or ibuprofen and even antibiotics because of the harm they pose to the human body. But I will smoke to reduce a headache or calm my nausea. In fact, it is the only thing that I have to help my severe, painful condition, endometriosis.[/QUOTE] You go, sis. Actually, THC can kill you if you overdose, but it takes sooo much. On wikipedia: It is generally considered to be impossible to achieve a lethal overdose by smoking cannabis. According to the Merck Index, 12th edition, the LD50, the lethal dose for 50% of tested rats, is 42 milligrams per kilogram of body weight. That is equivalent, for a 75 kg (≈165 lb). male, to ingest all of the THC in 21 one-gram cigarettes of maximum-potency (15% THC) cannabis buds, assuming no THC was lost through burning or exhalation. For oral consumption, the LD50 for rats is 1270 mg/kg and 730 mg/kg for males and females, respectively, equivalent to the THC in about a pound of 15% THC cannabis. Only with intravenous administration— an unheard of method of use by humans— may such a level be even theoretically possible. TL;DR = It's damn near impossible.

[QUOTE=Pepin;22383970] There is obviously a large amount of people that don't get it and by this post is still appears you don't.[/QUOTE] Just because someone does not like the same things as you do, doesn't mean they don't understand. The same idea can be applied to anything, which also means you don't understand so many things, its terrifying.

[QUOTE=Adam192;22380142]Why is there this automatic sitgma associated with the word 'drug'? Why does anybody try and make objective statements about "drugs" like all drugs have some kind of common characteristic. Drug is just an all-encompassing umbrella term for substances that induce unfamiliar states of consciousness. To say that drugs are poison for your head is pretty retarded considering for all intents and purposes your brain is one of the most efficient "drug" factories on the planet - our entire sensory and perceptual experiences are regulated by "drugs". So why is there this idea that drugs are bad or good? They're not - they have no inherent moral qualities.. how could they? Drugs are just drugs.. some of them have desirable side-effects and some of them don't.. it may be appropriate to call some drugs "poison" but it's really, really dumb to make some objective claim about "drugs".[/QUOTE] QF fucking T

[QUOTE=Whitebowl;22382449]There is such a thing as medical marijuana.[/QUOTE] The extent to which American citizens do not understand the American government is appalling. Yes, there is a such thing as medical marijuana... on the state-level (and only some states, where I live it's still illegal). If you knew how this country works, you know that possession is still a FEDERAL crime--meaning, even if you have a prescription, if a Fed (not a state police officer) catches you, you're going to prison. Even after Obama promised to stop raiding medical dispensaries, it still happens frequently in California, and people with permits are still going to prison. Technically a state cannot violate federal laws, which is why Californian police officers can't do anything but stand by and watch when federal agents raid a business.