Community Discussion Forum
Chat
Info and Media
Articles
Autism Talk TV
Books
Wiki
Contact Alex
Shop
Log in
|
Register
WP Members: > 75,000
New Today:
5
New Yesterday:
27
Wrong Planet Autism Forum Index
->
Health, Fitness, and Sports
Post a reply
Username
Subject
Message body
Emoticons
View more Emoticons
Options
HTML is
OFF
BBCode
is
ON
Smilies are
ON
Disable BBCode in this post
Disable Smilies in this post
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Topic review
Author
Message
techstepgenr8tion
Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2012 10:39 pm
Post subject:
Cutlass_Jack wrote:
It should but it won't because the prison industrial complex depends on it and other drugs being illegal to survive.
Keynesianism at its finest.
Cutlass_Jack
Posted: Sun Feb 19, 2012 10:30 pm
Post subject:
It should but it won't because the prison industrial complex depends on it and other drugs being illegal to survive.
JesseCat
Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2012 11:36 pm
Post subject:
It should absolutely be legalized in my opinion. There's a plethora of information regarding it's medicinal properties. One book I highly recommend is "Marijuana is safer: So why are we driving people to drink?"
http://www.amazon.com/Marijuana-Safer-Driving-People-Drink/dp/1603581448/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1329625867&sr=1-1
It's been proven alcohol is deadlier and more harmful than marijuana. No one has ever died from marijuana overdose.
As a recreational substance, I find it safer as well, how often do you read about "potheads" (for lack of better terminology) committing acts of rape and theft and assault while high? I don't know about you, but I've never come across any articles or information on that.
Not to mention how it would potentially help the economy, with many businesses created from it. One main reason it remains illegal is to keep the prison systems running. (Had a whole lesson on this in my college Criminology class).
That's just my 2 cents, I'll end this here before I type an entire book.
techstepgenr8tion
Posted: Thu Feb 09, 2012 11:05 pm
Post subject:
snapcap wrote:
techstepgenr8tion wrote:
K. It sounded like in your first post you were complaining about the prospect that all the lighter stuff would be laced with tobacco and that you aren't a tobacco smoker. Think I was just reading that in NT rather than aspie, and the fact that you kept trailing on after my first reply was what made me think my reading it in NT was correct (I was confused as to why you kept asking a question I already answered).
I was assuming that there were going to be blends, and that while one of them was going to use tobacco, I was wondering what another blend might have consisted of, in a smokeable form.
My answer to that was shisha. You'd could easily be smoking dried fruit and spices with it.
snapcap
Posted: Thu Feb 09, 2012 9:33 pm
Post subject:
techstepgenr8tion wrote:
K. It sounded like in your first post you were complaining about the prospect that all the lighter stuff would be laced with tobacco and that you aren't a tobacco smoker. Think I was just reading that in NT rather than aspie, and the fact that you kept trailing on after my first reply was what made me think my reading it in NT was correct (I was confused as to why you kept asking a question I already answered).
I was assuming that there were going to be blends, and that while one of them was going to use tobacco, I was wondering what another blend might have consisted of, in a smokeable form.
techstepgenr8tion
Posted: Thu Feb 09, 2012 5:57 pm
Post subject:
K. It sounded like in your first post you were complaining about the prospect that all the lighter stuff would be laced with tobacco and that you aren't a tobacco smoker. Think I was just reading that in NT rather than aspie, and the fact that you kept trailing on after my first reply was what made me think my reading it in NT was correct (I was confused as to why you kept asking a question I already answered).
snapcap
Posted: Thu Feb 09, 2012 3:16 pm
Post subject:
techstepgenr8tion wrote:
That's more of a British thing as I understand it. The overall gist though; no one would force it into being the only alternative nor would it be. That's what I'm disagreeing with you on.
I never said anything about anyone being forced into anything. I think you need to reread my initial post.
Quote:
I'm even more confused. If you want to mix tobacco and marijuana because you want to get your nicotine with your weed - do it.
In your first sentence, you say you're confused, then in your next sentence you act like you understand. If you read my initial post, you'd see that I was asking what would be a an alternate filler for a marijuana joint, as some people probably won't like smoking straight MJ. You don't seem to remember that
Quote:
If you really want to go technical I don't think the active chemicals, if pulled out of the plant, would necessarily taste or smell like weed. Its because of this that we're not talking about rolling paper as you put it.
I'm not trying to get technical, people drink alcohol because it get's them drunk, and people smoke MJ because it gets them high. It's not technical at all. Beer has a lower alcoholic content than whiskey, there's nothing technical about it. Some people don't like drinking whiskey because it has a higher alcoholic content than beer, again, there's nothing technical about it. Some people don't like real powerful strains of marijuana because it might be too "stoning". It just preference. The taste of marijuana is ,in most cases,ancillary to it's desired effect.
techstepgenr8tion
Posted: Thu Feb 09, 2012 2:37 pm
Post subject:
snapcap wrote:
techstepgenr8tion wrote:
I guess what I was saying - I can't imagine that being so universal that there's no other choice of filler, especially as negatively as tobacco is spotlighted these days. It seems impossibly unlikely.
A lot of people that smoke MJ smoke tobacco, so there's your market.
That's more of a British thing as I understand it. The overall gist though; no one would force it into being the only alternative nor would it be. That's what I'm disagreeing with you on.
snapcap wrote:
Quote:
They might do that - shisha as I mentioned before - or they might simply prefer to eat cookies or brownies. They could make milder strains and, say, go for flavor more than impact. Tea could be just as much an option as well. I guess what I'm getting at is, unlike tobacco, you've got tons of avenues and directions you can take.
Tobacco is one of the avenues.
I'm even more confused. If you want to mix tobacco and marijuana because you want to get your nicotine with your weed - do it.
snapcap wrote:
I was talking more about a watered down version of the core ingredient that draws a person to it in the first place: Alcohol. Many people don't drink whiskey because it's got too much alcohol in it. I don't think many people drink alcoholic beverages for the taste of other core ingredients, although it can play a part in someone deciding which alcoholic product they choose. No one says "I like smoking joints because I enjoy the taste of the paper."
If you really want to go technical I don't think the active chemicals, if pulled out of the plant, would necessarily taste or smell like weed. Its because of this that we're not talking about rolling paper as you put it.
snapcap
Posted: Thu Feb 09, 2012 2:25 pm
Post subject:
techstepgenr8tion wrote:
I guess what I was saying - I can't imagine that being so universal that there's no other choice of filler, especially as negatively as tobacco is spotlighted these days. It seems impossibly unlikely.
A lot of people that smoke MJ smoke tobacco, so there's your market.
Quote:
They might do that - shisha as I mentioned before - or they might simply prefer to eat cookies or brownies. They could make milder strains and, say, go for flavor more than impact. Tea could be just as much an option as well. I guess what I'm getting at is, unlike tobacco, you've got tons of avenues and directions you can take.
Tobacco is one of the avenues.
Quote:
...not really? Beer always has been beer, whisky was essentially a distillation from similar core ingredients. However the process really doesn't work in reverse - ie. beer is beer, water-down whiskey is still just watered down whiskey.
I was talking more about a watered down version of the core ingredient that draws a person to it in the first place: Alcohol. Many people don't drink whiskey because it's got too much alcohol in it. I don't think many people drink alcoholic beverages for the taste of other core ingredients, although it can play a part in someone deciding which alcoholic product they choose. No one says "I like smoking joints because I enjoy the taste of the paper."
techstepgenr8tion
Posted: Thu Feb 09, 2012 9:52 am
Post subject:
snapcap wrote:
I'm saying tobacco might be a potential filler for a weed joint. But some people might not like tobacco as the filler.
I guess what I was saying - I can't imagine that being so universal that there's no other choice of filler, especially as negatively as tobacco is spotlighted these days. It seems impossibly unlikely.
snapcap wrote:
Maybe some people would like to smoke a weakened joint filled with something other than cannabis, because straight marijuana is too much for them, even a weaker strain.
They might do that - shisha as I mentioned before - or they might simply prefer to eat cookies or brownies. They could make milder strains and, say, go for flavor more than impact. Tea could be just as much an option as well. I guess what I'm getting at is, unlike tobacco, you've got tons of avenues and directions you can take.
snapcap wrote:
It may seem strange to a cannabis user to consider, but when you're in the market, and not the black market, things could change in that direction if there is a market for it. It's like beer is a watered down version of whiskey.
...not really? Beer always has been beer, whisky was essentially a distillation from similar core ingredients. However the process really doesn't work in reverse - ie. beer is beer, water-down whiskey is still just watered down whiskey.
snapcap
Posted: Thu Feb 09, 2012 12:36 am
Post subject:
techstepgenr8tion wrote:
snapcap wrote:
I wonder what would be an alternative filler for people that didn't want to smoke tobacco? I don't know what smoking cannabis leaves is like, but I guess that could be an alternative.
Lol, I'm still lost. What's forcing people who don't want to smoke tobacco to smoke anything? If you don't want to smoke tobacco then don't smoke tobacco.
If someone specifically wanted to smoke something but also wanted to sort of 'club soda' their weed to make it last longer they could probably blend it with sheesha (sp?) which is pretty much Lebanese tobacco without the tobacco and essentially smoking fruit and spices. Alternately if they wanted to make some no-bake cookies to stretch it thinner they could just make a bigger batch of cookies with their weed and there you have it - much thinner dose (albeit you'd probably get pretty fat trying to catch a buzz). If they want to buy enough to make green butter they can put as much or as little of that on or in food as they please.
I'm saying tobacco might be a potential filler for a weed joint. But some people might not like tobacco as the filler.
Maybe some people would like to smoke a weakened joint filled with something other than cannabis, because straight marijuana is too much for them, even a weaker strain. It may seem strange to a cannabis user to consider, but when you're in the market, and not the black market, things could change in that direction if there is a market for it. It's like beer is a watered down version of whiskey.
Magdalena
Posted: Wed Feb 08, 2012 9:38 pm
Post subject:
techstepgenr8tion wrote:
Magdalena wrote:
I don't even know why this continues to be an issue in the United States (and elsewhere).
There is zero evidence whatsoever that marijuana is any more dangerous than the currently-legal alcohol, nicotine, and tobacco. And once you accept that, what other reason do you have to outlaw it that doesn't also exist for outlawing tobacco, nicotine and alcohol?
You make great points here.
Magdalena wrote:
I also say don't even put an age restriction on marijuana. Seriously! What is the point of that at all!?
....and then you shoot your credibility in the foot.
I'd really recommend being careful not to say something like that around NT's. I'd have to agree with them at least on this - when you're a teen, especially an early teen, even pre-teen, you're getting the core of your life together and the directions it will be going. Will kids find ways to get alcohol and anything else they want prior to 18 or 21? Of course. That said though, especially when they're really in formative years, you need to at least make it enough hassle that they have to go bug someone older than them. A highschool grad or college student toking - no problem. An eight, nine, or ten year old - I can't imagine anyone not having a problem there.
I completely respect your opinion, as well as the opinion of everyone else who thinks that marijuana should be age-restricted. And thanks for your word of caution as to how receptive NTs might be of some of my remarks.
However, I think that the pro-age-restriction position enters slippery slope territory. I don't mean to walk all over cultural sensibilities with regard to age, but kids have access to things like, for example, sugar and fattening foods at all ages of their life, but those generally aren't outlawed for young kids, and most kids have not indulged in these foods to the extent that it has threatened their lives. It's just another form of chemical pleasure. The legalization of a substance for all ages doesn't necessarily mean that a kid is going to be hooked or developmentally annihilated as a result.
I'm not encouraging kids to indulge too deeply in any one form of chemical pleasure, either, as most of the time it is not conducive to a constructive and productive life. Nor am I encouraging anyone to use more than they can handle, or is healthy. But the age restriction does nothing meaningful IMHO, and exists for no good reason. Kids can be healthy without remaining completely free of pot. Also, I'm not encouraging any kids to break the law or to disobey their parents.
Sweetleaf
Posted: Wed Feb 08, 2012 1:35 pm
Post subject:
snapcap wrote:
techstepgenr8tion wrote:
snapcap wrote:
If they made it legal and the regulated it like alcohol, I'm assuming they would have different grades, like you buy beer, then you can buy high proof liquor. I'm guessing there would be some kind of filler in a pre-rolled joint, and the most obvious filler would be tobacco, but then some people (like me) don't like cigarettes. What would be a possible filler alternative?
I think alcohol's a much better analogy. If you drink your fair share you notice that the purer the alcohol and the better grade of what your drinking the better and even cleaner and more lucid the 'drunk' feeling and the less sick you feel. Same with weed. If its crappy commersh weed you feel crappy, if its 'dank' you feel a much cleaner and more enjoyable effect, the Everclear extrema being hash where the feeling is a lot closer to bumping ketamine.
In essence you could figure that it would just like breweries contending over who has the best beer. Coffee shops would always be testing for new strains, coming up with a new flavor of the month, a new red or blue bud, a slightly different internal variation of internal chemicals for a different buzz, etc. Obviously in a pot legal society you could go out and buy the marijuana equivalent of MD 20/20, Wild Irish Rose, or King Cobra and feel similarly crappy. Top shelf would obviously be more expensive and of course fresher if partaken at the cafe.
I wonder what would be an alternative filler for people that didn't want to smoke tobacco? I don't know what smoking cannabis leaves is like, but I guess that could be an alternative.
Well smoking cannabis will help with the smoking part, however cannabis and nicotine have very different effects and from what I can tell cannabis does not make a very good nicotine substitute though it does help with that uncomfortable feeling someone who smokes gets when they have gone too long without a ciggarette..
Other then that there are apparently herbal ciggarettes which supposedly have an effect similar to a regular ciggerette but is a mixture of other herbs. Don't know that smoking them is any less damaging than smoking ciggarettes though.
techstepgenr8tion
Posted: Wed Feb 08, 2012 1:32 pm
Post subject:
snapcap wrote:
I wonder what would be an alternative filler for people that didn't want to smoke tobacco? I don't know what smoking cannabis leaves is like, but I guess that could be an alternative.
Lol, I'm still lost. What's forcing people who don't want to smoke tobacco to smoke anything? If you don't want to smoke tobacco then don't smoke tobacco.
If someone specifically wanted to smoke something but also wanted to sort of 'club soda' their weed to make it last longer they could probably blend it with sheesha (sp?) which is pretty much Lebanese tobacco without the tobacco and essentially smoking fruit and spices. Alternately if they wanted to make some no-bake cookies to stretch it thinner they could just make a bigger batch of cookies with their weed and there you have it - much thinner dose (albeit you'd probably get pretty fat trying to catch a buzz). If they want to buy enough to make green butter they can put as much or as little of that on or in food as they please.
Sweetleaf
Posted: Wed Feb 08, 2012 1:31 pm
Post subject: Re: Do you think Marijuana should be legal? (US resident)
CrazyCatLord wrote:
Alexender wrote:
I personally think that it should be legal for 18 and older like smoking but am perfectly okay with disagreement.
I completely agree with that.
Right now, 12 year old kids are buying overpriced weed laced with god-knows-what behind the schoolyard. How can this happen? Because it's illegal. We can only control the quality of and access to a substance if we legalize it. There are no pot smoking children in the Netherlands, and nobody risks their health by smoking laced / contaminated weed.
Besides, it is utterly ridiculous to outlaw a plant. Around here, one species of Psilocybin mushrooms grows wild in the woods. How do you outlaw that? How can you possibly forbid the existence of a living organism? That's human hubris at it's worst.
You know, most places weed is one of the cheap drugs......so why the hell would they be lacing it with more expensive drugs? But yes you are right if it where legal there would not be any chance at all of that. Though you never know what might be added to weed if any major corporations got ahold of it. Also you cannot possibly know for sure whether there are any children in the Netherlands who smoke....maybe it's less common then other places but that is simply an impossible claim to make......at least in my opinion.
I do agree with you about it being ridiculous to outlaw a plant though.
Forums ©
Read more Articles on Wrong Planet
Wrong Planet is a Registered Trademark.
Copyright 2004-2013,
Wrong Planet, LLC and Alex Plank
. Alex does
public speaking for Autism.
Advertise on Wrong Planet
Terms of Service - You must read this as a user of Wrong Planet
|
Privacy Policy
Subscribe:
Wrong Planet News
Wrong Planet Forums