Welcome to Gaia! ::

acesuv's avatar

Gaian

Taikyoku
acesuv
i agree with this. it was rightfully banned, its just a shame cigarettes and alcohol were not taken down when the other drugs were due to their social acceptance

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prohibition
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prohibition_in_the_United_States
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repeal_of_Prohibition
i meant when the FDA originally studied the effects of drugs...
they banned most of them
tobacco and alcohol should have been but they were too socially accepted
and obviously it was too socially acceptable during prohibition too
im not saying we havent tried, im just saying it should be done regardless of social opinion
acesuv
i agree with this. it was rightfully banned, its just a shame cigarettes and alcohol were not taken down when the other drugs were due to their social acceptance

Yeah, let's arbitrarily infringe on the rights of others and make laws that do more harm than good. E.g. that dog in your signature looks like a pitbull. Let's kill it.
acesuv's avatar

Gaian

Ratreoz
acesuv
i agree with this. it was rightfully banned, its just a shame cigarettes and alcohol were not taken down when the other drugs were due to their social acceptance

Yeah, let's arbitrarily infringe on the rights of others and make laws that do more harm than good. E.g. that dog in your signature looks like a pitbull. Let's kill it.

at this point a complete ban of tobacco or alcohol wouldnt work
im not saying straight up killing the dog is the right path
but maybe just beating it up a little bit...


also he looks like a rottweiler not a pitbull
acesuv
Ratreoz
acesuv
i agree with this. it was rightfully banned, its just a shame cigarettes and alcohol were not taken down when the other drugs were due to their social acceptance

Yeah, let's arbitrarily infringe on the rights of others and make laws that do more harm than good. E.g. that dog in your signature looks like a pitbull. Let's kill it.

at this point a complete ban of tobacco or alcohol wouldnt work
im not saying straight up killing the dog is the right path
but maybe just beating it up a little bit...


also he looks like a rottweiler not a pitbull

You would beat up your own dog?! You are clearly a psychopath.

You obviously don't know what a pitbull is.
acesuv
Taikyoku
acesuv
i agree with this. it was rightfully banned, its just a shame cigarettes and alcohol were not taken down when the other drugs were due to their social acceptance

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prohibition
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prohibition_in_the_United_States
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repeal_of_Prohibition
i meant when the FDA originally studied the effects of drugs...
they banned most of them
tobacco and alcohol should have been but they were too socially accepted
and obviously it was too socially acceptable during prohibition too
im not saying we havent tried, im just saying it should be done regardless of social opinion
So people don't have a right to their own bodies? And the term "drugs" is hopelessly vague. Do you mean psychoactive substances? Alright, we can ban those, and there goes caffeine, antidepressants, antipsychotic medication, medication for people with things like bipolar disorder, etc etc. There goes caffeinated soda and pretty much any energy drinks because those are stimulants that can cause technical addiction and even withdrawl symptoms. You can get something called water intoxication too. Where do you draw the line between drug, medication, and food? If I follow those thought patterns to their logical conclusion then I might as well stop eating, or just destroy my own brain because hell, sobriety is the result of a certain chemical balance in your mind. Fun fact: Your brain produces DMT, which is a Schedule I drug. You are currently in possession of a drug which would land you in jail.

I know it's ridiculous to take it to such a stupidly literal point, but you have to know where to draw the line. You can't just ban something because you don't like it.
acesuv's avatar

Gaian

Ratreoz
acesuv
Ratreoz
acesuv
i agree with this. it was rightfully banned, its just a shame cigarettes and alcohol were not taken down when the other drugs were due to their social acceptance

Yeah, let's arbitrarily infringe on the rights of others and make laws that do more harm than good. E.g. that dog in your signature looks like a pitbull. Let's kill it.

at this point a complete ban of tobacco or alcohol wouldnt work
im not saying straight up killing the dog is the right path
but maybe just beating it up a little bit...


also he looks like a rottweiler not a pitbull

You would beat up your own dog?! You are clearly a psychopath.

You obviously don't know what a pitbull is.
my dog is part pug and part beagle
he looks like a rottweiler
i have owned 3 pitbulls i know what a pitbull is

this is not even up for debate
whether or not my dog looks like a pitbull is completely subjective
you are welcome to your own opinion
Suicidesoldier#1's avatar

Fanatical Zealot

Taikyoku
Also, I know this is older but just because this is a pet peeve of mine:

Suicidesoldier#1
Anyways, it would be functionally impossible for the average person who smoked marijuana or consumed THC to get through the day, unless certain specific criteria were met.
What? Seriously, what? Do you simply mean on the job? Why would we let people on the job smoke weed? Alcohol is legal, but I'm pretty sure we don't let surgeons and construction workers and bomb squad members down shots of whiskey periodically. I doubt anyone is seriously suggesting that it be okay for you to take a drag off of a nice fat doobie right before performing open-heart surgery. Although on a side note, if that surgeon managed to pull that operation off without a hitch after taking a big hit, then that's worthy of some respect right there. Not that I'd condone it, just that damn, wouldn't that be kind of awesome if your surgery went over great and all your surgeons were blazed?


Well, if the effects linger to some degree some time afterwords, say a week, and a person smokes say, 4 times a week, and 25% of it get's left behind, that means that if he keeps that up every week it will be like he's constantly stoned. O_o

Which is entirely possible.
Suicidesoldier#1
Taikyoku
Also, I know this is older but just because this is a pet peeve of mine:

Suicidesoldier#1
Anyways, it would be functionally impossible for the average person who smoked marijuana or consumed THC to get through the day, unless certain specific criteria were met.
What? Seriously, what? Do you simply mean on the job? Why would we let people on the job smoke weed? Alcohol is legal, but I'm pretty sure we don't let surgeons and construction workers and bomb squad members down shots of whiskey periodically. I doubt anyone is seriously suggesting that it be okay for you to take a drag off of a nice fat doobie right before performing open-heart surgery. Although on a side note, if that surgeon managed to pull that operation off without a hitch after taking a big hit, then that's worthy of some respect right there. Not that I'd condone it, just that damn, wouldn't that be kind of awesome if your surgery went over great and all your surgeons were blazed?


Well, if the effects linger to some degree some time afterwords, say a week, and a person smokes say, 4 times a week, and 25% of it get's left behind, that means that if he keeps that up every week it will be like he's constantly stoned. O_o

Which is entirely possible.
Have you ever been around people who smoke weed? Like, honestly? Just because there's 25% of it left in your brain does not make you 25% stoned, it doesn't work that way.
acesuv's avatar

Gaian

Taikyoku
acesuv
Taikyoku
acesuv
i agree with this. it was rightfully banned, its just a shame cigarettes and alcohol were not taken down when the other drugs were due to their social acceptance

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prohibition
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prohibition_in_the_United_States
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repeal_of_Prohibition
i meant when the FDA originally studied the effects of drugs...
they banned most of them
tobacco and alcohol should have been but they were too socially accepted
and obviously it was too socially acceptable during prohibition too
im not saying we havent tried, im just saying it should be done regardless of social opinion
So people don't have a right to their own bodies? And the term "drugs" is hopelessly vague. Do you mean psychoactive substances? Alright, we can ban those, and there goes caffeine, antidepressants, antipsychotic medication, medication for people with things like bipolar disorder, etc etc. There goes caffeinated soda and pretty much any energy drinks because those are stimulants that can cause technical addiction and even withdrawl symptoms. You can get something called water intoxication too. Where do you draw the line between drug, medication, and food? If I follow those thought patterns to their logical conclusion then I might as well stop eating, or just destroy my own brain because hell, sobriety is the result of a certain chemical balance in your mind. Fun fact: Your brain produces DMT, which is a Schedule I drug. You are currently in possession of a drug which would land you in jail.

I know it's ridiculous to take it to such a stupidly literal point, but you have to know where to draw the line. You can't just ban something because you don't like it.
sorry for my vagueness, i just assumed you wouldnt be a nazi about it
this is a scientific and political debate, not an english debate
youre not dumb, and i will assume that you understand my point of view
if you truly dont understand, then ill explain it to you in a less vague way
Suicidesoldier#1's avatar

Fanatical Zealot

Taikyoku
Suicidesoldier#1
Taikyoku
Also, I know this is older but just because this is a pet peeve of mine:

Suicidesoldier#1
Anyways, it would be functionally impossible for the average person who smoked marijuana or consumed THC to get through the day, unless certain specific criteria were met.
What? Seriously, what? Do you simply mean on the job? Why would we let people on the job smoke weed? Alcohol is legal, but I'm pretty sure we don't let surgeons and construction workers and bomb squad members down shots of whiskey periodically. I doubt anyone is seriously suggesting that it be okay for you to take a drag off of a nice fat doobie right before performing open-heart surgery. Although on a side note, if that surgeon managed to pull that operation off without a hitch after taking a big hit, then that's worthy of some respect right there. Not that I'd condone it, just that damn, wouldn't that be kind of awesome if your surgery went over great and all your surgeons were blazed?


Well, if the effects linger to some degree some time afterwords, say a week, and a person smokes say, 4 times a week, and 25% of it get's left behind, that means that if he keeps that up every week it will be like he's constantly stoned. O_o

Which is entirely possible.
Have you ever been around people who smoke weed? Like, honestly? Just because there's 25% of it left in your brain does not make you 25% stoned, it doesn't work that way.


Sure, weed smokers are everywhere.

Enough to realize that psychosis is an observable fact even if it's not an objective one lol
acesuv
Taikyoku
acesuv
Taikyoku
acesuv
i agree with this. it was rightfully banned, its just a shame cigarettes and alcohol were not taken down when the other drugs were due to their social acceptance

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prohibition
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prohibition_in_the_United_States
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repeal_of_Prohibition
i meant when the FDA originally studied the effects of drugs...
they banned most of them
tobacco and alcohol should have been but they were too socially accepted
and obviously it was too socially acceptable during prohibition too
im not saying we havent tried, im just saying it should be done regardless of social opinion
So people don't have a right to their own bodies? And the term "drugs" is hopelessly vague. Do you mean psychoactive substances? Alright, we can ban those, and there goes caffeine, antidepressants, antipsychotic medication, medication for people with things like bipolar disorder, etc etc. There goes caffeinated soda and pretty much any energy drinks because those are stimulants that can cause technical addiction and even withdrawl symptoms. You can get something called water intoxication too. Where do you draw the line between drug, medication, and food? If I follow those thought patterns to their logical conclusion then I might as well stop eating, or just destroy my own brain because hell, sobriety is the result of a certain chemical balance in your mind. Fun fact: Your brain produces DMT, which is a Schedule I drug. You are currently in possession of a drug which would land you in jail.

I know it's ridiculous to take it to such a stupidly literal point, but you have to know where to draw the line. You can't just ban something because you don't like it.
sorry for my vagueness, i just assumed you wouldnt be a nazi about it
this is a scientific and political debate, not an english debate
youre not dumb, and i will assume that you understand my point of view
if you truly dont understand, then ill explain it to you in a less vague way

I'm sorry, you just struck a bit of a pet peeve with me. "Drug" is a pathetically thin way to describe materials which the government, for one reason or another, considers illicit, and people interpret that as meaning that these substances are inherently bad. I understand that you don't like people drinking or smoking cigarettes. That's fine, you have every right not to like those things. I don't drink or smoke tobacco either, so we're in the same boat when it comes to those, but that boat can only apply to us as individuals. I cannot tell you what to do with your body. If you want to go out and start smoking grass clippings, that's your deal, not mine. Now, if smoking grass clippings means that you get in the car and proceed to run over my grandma or something, then it becomes an issue, but if you aren't harming others, then I have no right to tell you to stop.

No victim, no crime. And no, the person taking it does not count as the victim. I know addiction is a horrible thing and that it would be awful to just have people waste away if they're badly addicted to one of the really harsh drugs like heroin, cocaine, or meth, but making them illegal makes them impossible to regulate and it makes it harder for addicts to get the help they need.
Suicidesoldier#1
Taikyoku
Suicidesoldier#1
Taikyoku
Also, I know this is older but just because this is a pet peeve of mine:

Suicidesoldier#1
Anyways, it would be functionally impossible for the average person who smoked marijuana or consumed THC to get through the day, unless certain specific criteria were met.
What? Seriously, what? Do you simply mean on the job? Why would we let people on the job smoke weed? Alcohol is legal, but I'm pretty sure we don't let surgeons and construction workers and bomb squad members down shots of whiskey periodically. I doubt anyone is seriously suggesting that it be okay for you to take a drag off of a nice fat doobie right before performing open-heart surgery. Although on a side note, if that surgeon managed to pull that operation off without a hitch after taking a big hit, then that's worthy of some respect right there. Not that I'd condone it, just that damn, wouldn't that be kind of awesome if your surgery went over great and all your surgeons were blazed?


Well, if the effects linger to some degree some time afterwords, say a week, and a person smokes say, 4 times a week, and 25% of it get's left behind, that means that if he keeps that up every week it will be like he's constantly stoned. O_o

Which is entirely possible.
Have you ever been around people who smoke weed? Like, honestly? Just because there's 25% of it left in your brain does not make you 25% stoned, it doesn't work that way.


Sure, weed smokers are everywhere.

Enough to realize that psychosis is an observable fact even if it's not an objective one lol
And your definition of psychosis is being stoned? Or even being sober after being stoned? Are you that concerned about people sitting around watching cartoons and listening to music while occasionally acting really hungry/thirsty? Are you that concerned about people chilling out? If it's the paranoia you're worried about, then let me make it absolutely clear that the biggest source of paranoia is the fear of getting caught, mostly because it's still illegal.
acesuv's avatar

Gaian

Taikyoku
acesuv
Taikyoku
acesuv
Taikyoku
acesuv
i agree with this. it was rightfully banned, its just a shame cigarettes and alcohol were not taken down when the other drugs were due to their social acceptance

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prohibition
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prohibition_in_the_United_States
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repeal_of_Prohibition
i meant when the FDA originally studied the effects of drugs...
they banned most of them
tobacco and alcohol should have been but they were too socially accepted
and obviously it was too socially acceptable during prohibition too
im not saying we havent tried, im just saying it should be done regardless of social opinion
So people don't have a right to their own bodies? And the term "drugs" is hopelessly vague. Do you mean psychoactive substances? Alright, we can ban those, and there goes caffeine, antidepressants, antipsychotic medication, medication for people with things like bipolar disorder, etc etc. There goes caffeinated soda and pretty much any energy drinks because those are stimulants that can cause technical addiction and even withdrawl symptoms. You can get something called water intoxication too. Where do you draw the line between drug, medication, and food? If I follow those thought patterns to their logical conclusion then I might as well stop eating, or just destroy my own brain because hell, sobriety is the result of a certain chemical balance in your mind. Fun fact: Your brain produces DMT, which is a Schedule I drug. You are currently in possession of a drug which would land you in jail.

I know it's ridiculous to take it to such a stupidly literal point, but you have to know where to draw the line. You can't just ban something because you don't like it.
sorry for my vagueness, i just assumed you wouldnt be a nazi about it
this is a scientific and political debate, not an english debate
youre not dumb, and i will assume that you understand my point of view
if you truly dont understand, then ill explain it to you in a less vague way

I'm sorry, you just struck a bit of a pet peeve with me. "Drug" is a pathetically thin way to describe materials which the government, for one reason or another, considers illicit, and people interpret that as meaning that these substances are inherently bad. I understand that you don't like people drinking or smoking cigarettes. That's fine, you have every right not to like those things. I don't drink or smoke tobacco either, so we're in the same boat when it comes to those, but that boat can only apply to us as individuals. I cannot tell you what to do with your body. If you want to go out and start smoking grass clippings, that's your deal, not mine. Now, if smoking grass clippings means that you get in the car and proceed to run over my grandma or something, then it becomes an issue, but if you aren't harming others, then I have no right to tell you to stop.

No victim, no crime. And no, the person taking it does not count as the victim. I know addiction is a horrible thing and that it would be awful to just have people waste away if they're badly addicted to one of the really harsh drugs like heroin, cocaine, or meth, but making them illegal makes them impossible to regulate and it makes it harder for addicts to get the help they need.

i agree that it should be an individual's choice
but i think more responsibility should be held by the tobacco companies (im just using this as an example. this also includes alcohol and... really all products that can potentially harm the user. even automobiles)
companies should take necessary steps towards customer interests

also
have you seen the s**t in cigarettes? how many smokers really know what theyre smoking?
education is key if we are going to trust individuals with their own choices
i believe we should be required to be educated about cigarettes, alcohol, etc by a third party so at least our choice to pick up that first cigarette wont be completely blind

Quick Reply

Submit
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get GCash
Offers
Get Items
More Items
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games