Skip to main content

View Diary: Western hemisphere decriminalizing cannabis (173 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I don't agree with FDR at all (11+ / 0-)

    "herd instinct" is pretty rare here, more like herding cats. The only reason there is so much agreement is because so many of us can vouch for the crappiness of the current situation.

    Cannabis is an herb with many uses. Don't try that old "developing brain, children will get destroyed by pot" crap. You sound like those old reefer madness posters. Children already get their hands on pot very easily. Prohibition doesn't work, you miss the memo.

    MORML gets a blank check? Ha ha.

    Tobacco lobby? In this conversation?  Pot and tobacco are in different categories, unless they now have medical tobacco.

    A true craftsman will meticulously construct the apparatus of his own demise.

    by onionjim on Sun Mar 24, 2013 at 12:16:53 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Developing Brain Research (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      You should be ashamed to call my raising of this point "crap."  There is a real and legitimate ongoing debate on this issue.  See for example.

      You will notice that in my opening post nowhere did I say "children will get destroyed by Pot."  Those words were put in my mouth.  What I did say is non-controversial: "that the science is unsettled."  That is a fact, no "crap."

      The "prohibition doesn't work" meme can be applied to virtually any human activity we try to regulate.  No one believes when we pass a law we always prevent every bad outcome.  What I did point out was the alcohol and tobacco policy were not made by the exercise of informed medical science, but rather by the exercise of raw political power.

      We have advanced quite far in science since the 1930's.  We now regulate all sorts of activities, e.g. pesticides, that were once considered harmless.  It is amazing to see here that people defend recreational MJ legalization based on the way we did things in the 1920's.  Who is a dinosaur now?

      "Hidden in the idea of radical openness is an allegiance to machines instead of people." - Jaron Lanier

      by FDRDemocrat on Sun Mar 24, 2013 at 12:47:01 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Not surprised at the citation. (12+ / 0-)

        Interesting how they characterize all use as "Abuse".

        That's kinda like going to AA for advice on how to know when you've had enough booze so that you shouldn't drive.  (Here's a hint:  They call you an alcoholic, even if you haven't had a drink in years.)

        But yeah, I glanced at.  It's laden with drug warrior propaganda and talking points, and the first thing it points out is that this study is about folks who use it EVERY DAY.  And then judges based off IQ scores.

        I of course don't need to lecture you about correlation and causation.  Seeing as the DEA likes to conflate the two on a regular basis.  

        I don't blame Christians. I blame Stupid. Which sadly is a much more popular religion these days.

        by detroitmechworks on Sun Mar 24, 2013 at 01:03:59 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Repeal of Prohibition in the 30's (6+ / 0-)

        Was hardly an example of "the exercise of raw political power". It was driven by popular opinion, and the recognition that it wasn't working, made criminals of otherwise law-abiding citizens, and was providing a funding source for organised crime.

        Hmm, that sounds familiar, somehow.

        Note that the repeal of prohibition was the only constitutional amendment passed by state ratification conventions. From Wikipedia:

        To some extent, the convention method of ratification loosely approximates a one-state, one-vote national referendum on a specific proposed Federal constitutional amendment, thus allowing the sentiments of registered voters to be somewhat more directly heard on highly sensitive issues.
      •  The DEA is not a credible source. You're going to (5+ / 0-)

        have to come up with something better if you want to be taken seriously in this conversation.

        income gains to the top 1% from 2009 to 2011 were 121% of all income increases. How did that happen? Incomes to the bottom 99% fell by 0.4%

        by JesseCW on Sun Mar 24, 2013 at 01:22:07 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      • (5+ / 0-)


        you expect that to be taken seriously?

        It's almost as if you're just not cognizant of how the Schedule I status of MJ has been used by the govt to arrest legitimate scientific inquiry, and has been dishonestly exploited to only OK researchers who are going to come to a pre-determined conclusion in favor of the status quo.

      •  Sorry to be so late to the conversation (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        nota bene

        The story at your link is incomplete. Yes, the authors of the original study responded to their critics. AND, their critics responded back explaining why they were still wrong - that part was left out of the drug abuse website account.

        I recall seeing a news story about that report and finding it to be highly suspect. Here's why - this was me and my friends. And I know that we didn't become idiots because we starting smoking pot in our youth. I first tried pot in 8th grade and by 9th grade was a frequent user. By 11th grade I was a daily user. Many of my friends and classmates were also pot smokers. This being the 1970's and there being certain architecturally unique aspects of my high school, we had a regular spot for smoking both cigarettes and pot during lunch break.

        Being serious about my education, I generally refrained from getting high at school, but would do so if I anticipated an easy afternoon. This was how I discovered that I could think well when high on pot. One day at lunch during 10th grade a friend offered to share a joint right at the end of break. It was just the two of us smoking and I got a really good buzz. I wasn't all that concerned because my next class was English and I knew that we had a substitute that day. What I didn't realize was that she was going to be giving us our tests on Julius Caesar. It was the first time I ever took a test high. I did reasonably well on the recall portion of the test - True/False, fill in the blank, multiple choice. Then came the essay questions. As I read the first question, the entire answer formed in my mind, complete with references to the text. All I had to do was transcribe it from my thoughts to paper. When we got our tests back the teacher remarked about how frustrating it was for an English teacher to grade an essay and not be able to find any excuse to deduct points - as she handed me my test.

        My combined SATs, without taking any test prep courses as that was not something we could afford, were indicative of the same overall IQ as from my school entrance testing. Back in 2004, after a cumulative 50,000 joints or so, I figured I'd retest just out of curiosity. I didn't feel any dumber for all my years of smoking but I wanted an objective measure. I paid to take an extremely comprehensive battery of IQ tests. My results were 9 points higher than I scored in my youth.

        Meanwhile, many of the stoners I knew from both high school and college were also highly intelligent people and high achievers.  For many, myself included, marijuana both inspires creativity, and also facilitates the creative process. For years I designed and wrote software systems. Without using pot I was an above average programmer. With pot I was prolific. I could literally produce 3 times as much as I did when I was straight, sometimes even more when I was on a roll. And the code was more likely to test flawlessly as well.

        What pot facilitated in this instance was the ability to hold the entire map in my head of the system I was designing and writing. I could easily step from level to level of the structure to see how the piece I was currently writing fit into the system, how it interfaced, which system variables it affected, and how they in turn affected other aspects of the system's operations. When I was straight this was a far more tedious and time-consuming process.

        So, given my personal experiences, can you understand my skepticism when I read about that report? Dramatically reduced IQs resulting from youthful pot smoking? Not even close. Just more of the same dishonest science in the name of prohibition. These kind of rigged studies and the rest of the government's anti-pot propaganda are part of why people such as yourself carry such negative opinions about recreational use. It's like you think that people who smoke pot are all unmotivated waste-cases like Jeff Spicoli - Sean Penn's character in "Fast Times at Ridgemont High."

        Hollywood has pushed this stereotype because it's good for a cheap laugh - just like a dick joke. And you don't have anything to refute it because all the responsible potheads are in the closet. Between the legal status, and the stigma caused by this stereotype, they fear letting people know they get high because it will put them in danger of being arrested or losing their jobs. I have personally gotten high with accountants, lawyers, nurses, doctors, dentists, chiropractors, X-ray technicians,  psychologists, psychiatrists, banking executives, engineers, high-priced consultants, CEOs, drug/alcohol counselors, and police officers. I'm sure there are some others I've missed in this listing.

        Also, while you've graciously granted the appropriateness of medical use, some of the effects of marijuana seem to be generally protective of health and safety. The pulmonary specialist who first raised the alarm about the identified carcinogens in pot, Dr. Donald Tashkin at UCLA, eventually discovered that, not only were the cancers not to be found - there appeared to be a protective effect.

        "We hypothesized that there would be a positive association between marijuana use and lung cancer, and that the association would be more positive with heavier use," he said. "What we found instead was no association at all, and even a suggestion of some protective effect."

        Pot has also been found to have a dose-dependent negative correlation to emergency room admissions. This has been found in three separate studies. The one with which I am most familiar found that straight/sober people were three times as likely, on average, to be admitted to the ER as people who had smoked pot in the previous six hours. People who had consumed alcohol were three times as likely as sober people to end up in the ER.

        There is also evidence that pot is protective against Alzheimer's disease. Research on this is ongoing.

        Free: The Authoritarians - all about those who follow strong leaders.

        by kbman on Mon Mar 25, 2013 at 01:24:22 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Here's what FDR actually said about Prohibition. (9+ / 0-)
      "The damnable affliction of Prohibition."

      income gains to the top 1% from 2009 to 2011 were 121% of all income increases. How did that happen? Incomes to the bottom 99% fell by 0.4%

      by JesseCW on Sun Mar 24, 2013 at 01:21:06 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site