California Proposition 19 (Legalization of Marijuana)

[Hadley4000]

I do agree that research seems to indicate that THC is at least not more damaging than alcohol when used often, or to excess. However, I do wonder at the effects of a child growing up in a pot smoking household and being exposed to the smoke for their entire formative developmental years. I don't like the fact that pot smoke can be be breathed in by the non-smokers in the room. And for those saying you don't get high off it, you certainly can get a contact buzz. I absolutely hate getting this feeling when you want to remain not high.

Alcohol drinking does not create the effects of the alcohol in the non-users in the room, THC does.

It takes a LOT to get a contact buzz. You'd pretty much have to hotbox with someone. I've been in tiny rooms with people when they were smoking and I wasn't, and nothing at all. You simply aren't breathing in a high enough concentration to actually get a real effect from it. 9/10 contact highs are placebo effect.

The biggest thing it gives you is an exposer to a sweet smell.

 

[qqwref]

However, I do wonder at the effects of a child growing up in a pot smoking household and being exposed to the smoke for their entire formative developmental years. I don't like the fact that pot smoke can be be breathed in by the non-smokers in the room. And for those saying you don't get high off it, you certainly can get a contact buzz. I absolutely hate getting this feeling when you want to remain not high.

Alcohol drinking does not create the effects of the alcohol in the non-users in the room, THC does.

Yeah, but smoking has this effect too (and remember the idea of comparing to alcohol is to say that if alcohol should be legal then marijuana should also be, so the exact same idea applies to nicotine). I knew someone who grew up with a heavy smoker and didn't at all mind secondhand smoke, where I find it very annoying.

I'd consider this effect not necessarily a problem of the drug (since pot can be used without getting smoke all over the place, and similarly nicotine can be ingested in ways other than smoking) but of the inconsiderateness of certain users of it.

 

[Tyson]

I do agree that research seems to indicate that THC is at least not more damaging than alcohol when used often, or to excess. However, I do wonder at the effects of a child growing up in a pot smoking household and being exposed to the smoke for their entire formative developmental years. I don't like the fact that pot smoke can be be breathed in by the non-smokers in the room. And for those saying you don't get high off it, you certainly can get a contact buzz. I absolutely hate getting this feeling when you want to remain not high.

Alcohol drinking does not create the effects of the alcohol in the non-users in the room, THC does.

I would say yes, this is true. When your neighbors drink, you don't have to drink with them. But when they smoke, you inevitably get some of that. And I don't feel that's fair. It would make more sense to me that drinking is allowed in public, and not smoking.

As for Stefan's comment that you don't have to drink alcohol to be affected by drunks, I would say you're not being affected by alcohol. If some guy drinks, and he's an a$$hole, then it's his responsible, and not the alcohol's. I'd say people can drink as much as they want. But they are completely responsible for their actions. So some guy who is a complete a$$hole while being drunk, I guess my point would be to blame the person, and not to blame the person only with alcohol. Just because he sobers up it doesn't make him less of an a$$hole.

We're all responsible for our own actions, and alcohol is never an excuse for anything.

 

[Hadley4000]

I would say yes, this is true. When your neighbors drink, you don't have to drink with them. But when they smoke, you inevitably get some of that. And I don't feel that's fair. It would make more sense to me that drinking is allowed in public, and not smoking.

As for Stefan's comment that you don't have to drink alcohol to be affected by drunks, I would say you're not being affected by alcohol. If some guy drinks, and he's an a$$hole, then it's his responsible, and not the alcohol's. I'd say people can drink as much as they want. But they are completely responsible for their actions. So some guy who is a complete a$$hole while being drunk, I guess my point would be to blame the person, and not to blame the person only with alcohol. Just because he sobers up it doesn't make him less of an a$$hole.

We're all responsible for our own actions, and alcohol is never an excuse for anything.

I don't know if I 100% agree with that. I know some people who are super chill and nice when sober, but become angry and jerks when drunk. Drugs(And yes, alcohol IS a drug) can bring out emotions that would not be experienced when sober.

I tend to sort of lean towards the not smoking in public idea, however, to an extent. If legalized, I think there should be specific areas(Like smokers sections) where people would be allowed to go light up. Since people under the influence of marijuana are not as much of a problem than some people under the influence of alcohol. Sloppy, potentially angry drunk verses someone who got lost trying to find Funyuns. I personally(Not on the whole, just with my experience) think that high people are way less of a hassle to deal with than drunk people. You don't have to worry about a pot head passing out or puking all over the place. Some people I know don't even shows signs at all of being intoxicated, when they are in fact absolutely toasted.

 

[FatBoyXPC]

Hadley: Alcohol basically removes a filter from people, which is why we see such huge differences in emotions. Like I've explained before, it's just a judgement call, once it goes out the window, true thoughts come out the mouth instead of processed ones. This was kind of aimed toward Tyson too, well, his statement at least. I completely agree with you though, drunk people are far more of a hassle to deal with than high people. I think the most annoyance I've ever had from somebody smoking was "cmon man just hit it once, just onces, cmon man, just hit the bowl with me!" This (even though I get annoyed of it very quickly) is much easier to deal with than somebody about to puke all over my shoes.

AngeL: I take it you've tried eating human feces? What about drinking your own urine?

 

[Hadley4000]

Hadley: Alcohol basically removes a filter from people, which is why we see such huge differences in emotions. Like I've explained before, it's just a judgement call, once it goes out the window, true thoughts come out the mouth instead of processed ones. This was kind of aimed toward Tyson too, well, his statement at least. I completely agree with you though, drunk people are far more of a hassle to deal with than high people. I think the most annoyance I've ever had from somebody smoking was "cmon man just hit it once, just onces, cmon man, just hit the bowl with me!" This (even though I get annoyed of it very quickly) is much easier to deal with than somebody about to puke all over my shoes.

AngeL: I take it you've tried eating human feces? What about drinking your own urine?

True thoughts also can come out when smoking weed. It falls in the fact that they are different drugs. Alcohol is a depressant, and marijuana is a depressant and stimulate together. They also cause intoxication differently. Weed triggers canabinoid receptors in your brain, where alcohol is your body fighting off poison. So they both do in a sense "Break down the barrier," but after that they following is different.

 

[FatBoyXPC]

Oh, I forgot to ask, can you link to that article where that doctor found that pot can stimulate the brain? Preferrably link to it's Peer Review Journal entry.

 

[Hadley4000]

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/10/051016083817.htm

 

[Stefan]

As for Stefan's comment that you don't have to drink alcohol to be affected by drunks, I would say you're not being affected by alcohol. If some guy drinks, and he's an a$$hole, then it's his responsible, and not the alcohol's. I'd say people can drink as much as they want. But they are completely responsible for their actions. So some guy who is a complete a$$hole while being drunk, I guess my point would be to blame the person, and not to blame the person only with alcohol. Just because he sobers up it doesn't make him less of an a$$hole.

Why are there laws against guns? Guns aren't the problem, only a$$holes with guns are, right? I'm sure it's already illegal to shoot someone, so why are there laws against just having guns?

Why is it illegal for minors to buy alcohol? Buying isn't the problem, drinking is (or in your sense, not even that).

You're right, strictly speaking I'm indeed "not being affected by alcohol". But: without the alcohol, I wouldn't be affected (or at least less). The thing is, there aren't just laws against the harmful final act, there are also laws against precursors leading to it. Do you disagree that these exist or that they make sense?

And bah... you ignored what I called the most interesting part: how could drinking give you the right to ask for it to be banned?

 

[Stefan]

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/10/051016083817.htm

From that paper:
"However, marijuana has been the most commonly used illicit drug in developed countries, producing acute memory impairment and dependence/withdrawal symptoms in chronic users and animal models (6, 8–10)."
-- http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmc1253627/

Haven't read it all, but I think the neurogenesis was found in rats after a month of chronic treatment with injections of a much more pure and potent synthetic cannabinoid than your usual pot. From your link: “This is a very potent cannabinoid oil,” Zhang says. “It’s not something that would be available on the street.”

So as far as I can tell, the paper does say typical use of marijuana produces memory impairment and does not say it stimulates neurogenesis (you're not a rat, you're not injecting it, you're not using the very pure and potent cannabinoid they've tested).

 

[Tyson]

Why are there laws against guns? Guns aren't the problem, only a$$holes with guns are, right? I'm sure it's already illegal to shoot someone, so why are there laws against just having guns?

Why is it illegal for minors to buy alcohol? Buying isn't the problem, drinking is (or in your sense, not even that).

You're right, strictly speaking I'm indeed "not being affected by alcohol". But: without the alcohol, I wouldn't be affected (or at least less). The thing is, there aren't just laws against the harmful final act, there are also laws against precursors leading to it. Do you disagree that these exist or that they make sense?

And bah... you ignored what I called the most interesting part: how could drinking give you the right to ask for it to be banned?

Sure, I agree they exist and that they make sense. And I also agree that you can't just legalize every gun and allow your average civilian to carry around an assault rifle. But the consequences of someone being drunk in your presence is not the same as someone with a gun in your presence. With the exception of drunk driving, which is dealt with very harshly in the United States already, perhaps what you would like to see is harsher punishment for public intoxication.

As for the whole drinking thing and being allowed to criticize, I should be more specific. Someone such as yourself who makes informed decisions can generally make these judgments and know what's going on. But there are plenty of people out there who will say "X is bad" because their parents told them so, or because that's what they learned. It's those people that I was targeting with that statement.

Hmm, thought. If someone annoys you while they are drunk, it's public intoxication, but if someone annoys you while they're sober, they're just being stupid? I think that's partly my problem with it. That the alcohol alone should not escalate it from pure annoyance to crime.

If someone punches me, it doesn't matter if they are drunk or not. It's still assault.

 

[Hadley4000]

Hmm, thought. If someone annoys you while they are drunk, it's public intoxication, but if someone annoys you while they're sober, they're just being stupid? I think that's partly my problem with it. That the alcohol alone should not escalate it from pure annoyance to crime.

Alright, time to settle all of this. Outlaw stupidity and we're golden.