cannabisnews.com: The Case Against Legalizing Marijuana

function share_this(num) {
 tit=encodeURIComponent('The Case Against Legalizing Marijuana');
 url=encodeURIComponent('http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/24/thread24757.shtml');
 site = new Array(5);
 site[0]='http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u='+url+'&title='+tit;
 site[1]='http://www.stumbleupon.com/submit.php?url='+url+'&title='+tit;
 site[2]='http://digg.com/submit?topic=political_opinion&media=video&url='+url+'&title='+tit;
 site[3]='http://reddit.com/submit?url='+url+'&title='+tit;
 site[4]='http://del.icio.us/post?v=4&noui&jump=close&url='+url+'&title='+tit;
 window.open(site[num],'sharer','toolbar=0,status=0,width=620,height=500');
 return false;
}












  The Case Against Legalizing Marijuana

Posted by CN Staff on April 27, 2009 at 04:56:32 PT
By Shaeffer Bannigan 
Source: Daily Nexus 

California -- Many people blame the government for the war on drugs because the government refuses to legalize the drug. But the war on drugs isn’t as shortsighted as proponents of legalization would like to think. Legalizing marijuana will not solve all of our drug war problems and certainly won’t make our country a better place to live.Advocates of legalization propositions say that a federally regulated marijuana market will drive the cost of marijuana down, decrease the crime rate and thus decrease the wasted efforts put forth by the Drug Enforcement Administration.
The federal government spends billions of dollars each year in an effort to undermine drug distribution throughout the country. According to the National Survey on Drug Use and Health, in 2006, about 6,000 people a day used marijuana for the first time, a total of 2.2 million Americans. Of these, 63.3 percent were under age 18. So when the government legalizes pot for people over 21, as any of its attempted legislation has stated, it won’t suddenly eliminate the demand for marijuana of those underage users. The war on drugs will continue.The concept that marijuana is less harmful than cigarettes or alcohol may be a true statement to some degree but isn’t a cause for legalization. Standards should not be set on degree of harmfulness, but degree of helpfulness. Also, let’s not forget that the tobacco industry won’t just step aside to let a brand new business take over the market. Should marijuana become legal, who do you think will first start the mass manufacturing? My guess of Marlboro is a good one. But Camel is a decent choice, too. And if Marlboro wants to keep people smoking pot just like it does with tobacco, it may start putting a couple “harmless ingredients” into the mixture to help a little. After that, it’s anyone’s guess as to which of the three drugs is the worst for you.While the revenue stream may be helpful to the economy from a monetary standpoint, at what cost do we seek out this fortune? Juxtapose thinking only with a monetary mindset, why shouldn’t California lower the drinking age to 18? Our tourism industry will increase tenfold, with millions of 18 year olds trekking across our border in search of their state’s forbidden fruit. Besides the fact that the federal government would revoke several of our subsidiaries, the reason we don’t do this is because of the health impact it would have on the general public and state-to-state relations. Having a bunch of 18 year olds driving across the border to get drunk and then driving back home isn’t a good thing. The cost outweighs the benefits, just like with marijuana. The cost is far worse than the potential monetary benefits.I’m all for medical marijuana. If you’re in pain, it’s no different to be prescribed marijuana rather than morphine or Vicodin. But I’m not about to push for the full legalization of the latter two drugs either. Legalization is incentivizing, and the costs of incentivizing weed among our nation’s youth are scary, at best. While there may be some four million people smoking weed in our country now, imagine encouraging it among the rest. I can’t think of a better way to stimulate our economy than to inject into it a tool that entirely destroys ambition and motivation. Excuse the language, but nothing says “fuck it” like a big dose of THC in the morning. Instead of mandatory 15 minute “smoking breaks” for cigarette-smoking workers, employers will have to implement new hours for pot-smoking workers: 4 p.m. to 6 p.m., Tuesday through Wednesday. Nike may have to change their slogan from “Just Do It” to “Just Don’t.” I can see the potential now.Daily Nexus columnist Shaeffer Bannigan can see a red-eyed, stoney version of Joe Camel now.Source: Daily Nexus (CA Edu)Author: Shaeffer BanniganPublished: Monday, April 27, 2009 - Issue 113 - Volume 89Copyright: 2009 Daily NexusContact: opinion dailynexus.comWebsite: http://www.ucsbdailynexus.com/URL: http://drugsense.org/url/AbYBMpA7CannabisNews -- Cannabis Archiveshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/list/cannabis.shtml 

Home    Comment    Email    Register    Recent Comments    Help    
     
     
     
     







 


Comment #50 posted by afterburner on May 04, 2009 at 06:21:22 PT

Fascinating thread
I was too busy last week getting tax information finalized & filed to make any comments, but I enjoyed reading the interchange here. Hope, I agree that such things should not be done to freedom-loving, peaceful people over a plant!museman, thanks once more for interesting insights.and others, thanks for your input.
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #49 posted by AdaptBones on May 02, 2009 at 17:24:10 PT:

Museman...and others
As I am new here I obviously do not know about the history of this forum and of yourself and the rest who reside within these virtual walls. I was very sad to read about some of your experiences; nothing like that should ever have to happen to ANYONE for ANY reason. I, for one, am very glad you did not leave this forum and I am honored that I got a chance to read your words. You present your views very well, much better than I can, and I consider myself a wordsmith by nature. So thank you for being here and allowing us to learn another point of view as well as showing us all what it means to be an intelligent, passionate, caring human being. Thank you, and to everyone else I have really appreciated all the views here and being able to read them all and see them boiled down to their basic common sense arguments has really helped me choose the right words and way to phrase my own debates. So once again to everyone here, thank you, this place is a wealth of knowledge and anyone who truly seeks wisdom should not discount that which is stored here. Blessed be everyone.
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #48 posted by museman on May 01, 2009 at 11:55:31 PT

Yanxor
Glad to get that out of the way.However I'd like to clarify further that my 'intensity' is related a lot more to the underlying causes of prohibtion -the fakery of 'laws' and false authority -the status-quo than to prohibition, and the effects of prohibition.The personal history is slightly incorrect also. I did lose my house and land, and it was directly related to a bust, but not specifly because of it. Though it did cause me suffering that I actually thought I could deal with by letting go, the loss of my home is just a recent illustration of the many crimes being waged against us by the believers of the status quo. My case against the powers that be starts when I was 9 years old, and just got bigger as I got older and more experienced.One event was not enough to create this kind of adamant 'passion' - I had a lifetime of BS to deal with, cannabis use being only one of several moral, ethical issues involving personal liberties, and equality amongst men.I recently was honored by the son of a dead cop -a drug warrior from the early days, whose kharma caught up to him, and we all got to see it- who made threats against me and my family because I wrote a poem -all of it true- about his father.I was honored in ways that only another poet, or artist might understand. However the threat was real and I had to take certain steps to protect myself, like finally getting my medical card -even though I've been eligible for about 8 years (I was waiting for Obama), and I changed the name on the poem, because even in his asshole thug consciousness, the cop had a valid point about younger generations -who are innocent- being negatively affected by the use of their Grandfathers name. S0 I changed the name to protect the innocent, but the poem is still there. And in inspired retaliation, I wrote the new one;"Cops of America"The conicidental synchronicity of this threat has to do with another poster here who could not handle my 'passion' and resorted to underhandedness and despicable actions that in another age -before the lie was created concerning it- would be identified as 'terrorism' in that it was supposed to render me ineffective by introducing fear. What this person failed to take into account is that I have no fear of false authorities, and false power, even though they wave guns around and often use them.My, and I think others reaction to some of your words has to do with how they can be interpreted and easily used by the prohibitionists to further their weak case against us.Though I used the word 'prohibitionist' quite often in reference to your words, I made it in reference to your words, not any virtual quesses or perceptions of your character.There have been many attempts by status-quo posers to infiltrate and instigate division here on Cnews.We are sensitive to that, or at least I am, but other than ridiculous arguments that resolve nothing and go nowhere, I am usually up to the challenge.Because of the last 'argument' that caused so much angst, I nearly left Cnews for good, because I errantly thought I had little support. But friends, even virtual ones, are not all that easy to acquire for one such as myself, so because of my friends, in spite of those who hate my words, I have returned.Cnews is a phenomenon in the 'forum' world. Its population has probably the highest intelligence per forum capita, than any other in existence -IMEOSo as you have offered a 'handshake' of peace, I accept. However, I probably still strongly disagree with many of your opinions. I am of course always open to expanding my awareness, and any challenges -without personal slight and accusation entering into it- one cares to offer to the many outrageous things I have stated, are somewhat welcome, as long as I don't have to repeat my explanations over and over without getting any sign they've been actually read through with a discerning eye.LEGALIZE FREEDOM
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #47 posted by Hope on May 01, 2009 at 11:10:30 PT

Yanxor
You're welcome.
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #46 posted by Yanxor on May 01, 2009 at 10:44:45 PT

Museman, Hope
I had difficulty understanding why some members of the forum were incapable of finding fault with cannabis - but it all makes sense now.Museman...didn't realize that you were deprived of your family home because of the plant - that does explain the intensity.Hope: Thanks for not getting offended, for filling me in on some vital aspects of this forum's users and for being generally amiable towards my opinions.
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #45 posted by museman on May 01, 2009 at 09:48:49 PT

Yanxor. FYI
Religion, like 'science' 'mathematics', and other square thought forms, is a left-brain aspect of consciousness. Half of the story, and the least important half at that. In the case of religion, like the half-ass sciences some people (especially those confined to 'left-brain-only' limitations) think of their selective perception of reality as not only the whole of it, but have a gleefully satanic desire to force others into their mold.So yes, the 'answer' to your 'question' is "Religion is a major part of the false ethics and false morality of the fundamentals of the staus quo. It re-enforces -deliberately- the very precepts of the false values that enslave the world, and is the underlying premise of all things related to social corruption. Religion is the rotten heart of a decaying beast, how could it not be odorous to an honest person?"Would that those who would presume to know a person, do some cursory research before just throwing out barbs intended to irritate, or somehow 'trip-up' the logic of made statements with (thought to be) clever rhetorics.As Hope stated - BTW Thank You Hope...which is more than mentioned a few times in my posts, I have an equal respect for both the status quo, and the several religions that spawn it -including the religion of materialism, the religion of science, the religion of money, and the religion of politics- NONE.FREE CANNABIS FOREVER
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #44 posted by Hope on May 01, 2009 at 07:27:30 PT

Yanxor comment 39
Museman is not religious. He is spiritual and he believes... but he is not a fan of organized religion... to put it mildly. 

[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #43 posted by Hope on May 01, 2009 at 07:15:31 PT

Also, Yanxor...
I'd like you to keep in mind another reality that you may not be aware of. People suffer... really suffer... not just get irritated, by prohibition.Read Runruff's story on the front page here. Museman's home, that he and his family built with their own hands, was taken from them... forfeited... seized...because he chose to ignore an unjust law and grew a plant that he liked. He is a passionate man and there is more reason than you know for all of it. They're are many passionate men and women that post here.Don't "Diddle" with passionate men, or women, to alleviate your "Boredom", is good reality based advice for anyone... and I'm giving it to you, for free.There's a lot to worry about in this situation... and whether there are some "negative" effects for some people from the substance doesn't matter at all. Anyone that experiences such will be free of any negative effects they sense easily by simply not using the substance.But this business of prison, and killing, and taking people's homes and belongings and spying, searching, testing, and suspicion is serious. Very serious. Get a grip. Try to help us or don't... but get out of the way if you aren't going to help.
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #42 posted by Hope on May 01, 2009 at 06:51:49 PT

Negative effects?
Yanxor, you know what we, here, think is THE negative effect of cannabis use, whether we use it or not. Arrest, raids, killed pets, broken doors, belongings pilfered, death by cop, prison, and a hell of a lot of hullabaloo over virtually nothing.Cotton mouth is no big deal. Get a drink. Keep your mouth closed if you can't or don't do it.It's not about whether you do it or not or whether you like it or not ...it's about what you support or don't support doing to people that do like the stuff.
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #41 posted by Hope on May 01, 2009 at 06:43:45 PT

Yanxor
Maybe you are just yanxing people around. I never heard of such a thing...cottonmouth in your sleep? Only one reason that I can think of... you must sleep with your mouth open... and breathe through your mouth all night. You can get cottonmouth from that without ever having used cannabis.Another thing... not all cannabis contributes to cotton mouth... and if you have used one of those that does and you can't get a drink... just keep your mouth closed... don't talk a lot or sing. Breathe through your nose. The dry mouth problem will usually correct itself if you do that. Something to drink is the quick "cure" though. I suspect you are one of those people, and there are quite a few, that cannabis just doesn't agree with, for one reason or another. If that's true, just don't use it... but for reason's sake... don't "rescue" other people from what you experienced by bullying, threatening and punishing them or approving of their being punished or forcefully re-educated by agents of prohibition. 
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #40 posted by FoM on May 01, 2009 at 04:35:35 PT

Yanxor
Why are you trying to stir up people since we don't do that on this forum? 
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #39 posted by Yanxor on April 30, 2009 at 22:30:42 PT

One more thing
Museman, does religion not smell of the status quo to you?
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #38 posted by Yanxor on April 30, 2009 at 20:55:38 PT

Still not quite getting it
So um, anybody experience any negative effects stemming from cannabis use?I'll start off:When I've smoked before bed, even if I drink a cup of water right before going to sleep, I still get really bad cotton-mouth. Really unpleasant.

[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #37 posted by GeoChemist on April 30, 2009 at 15:44:33 PT

Yanxor
No Sh%& Sherlok.....you really don't get....End of line
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #36 posted by museman on April 30, 2009 at 14:24:31 PT

Yanxor
"Museman: please don't bring god into this - we should be and are able to have a pretty heated debate without accusing anyone of heresy."Don't accuse me of false accusation. I could get heated over that.I didn't 'bring 'god' into this' "He" was already in it. I was merely drawing upon that resource as one would any other. Are you telling me that the reference to knowledge and information that is associated with spiritual understanding is somehow less valid than any other? If so, I rest my 'case.'See #34 for other related.If I say 'You are this, or that, and I have YOUR identity attached to it, then you can accuse me of 'accusing you' of anything. I do challenge your conclusions, your opinions, concerning the things I have already stated, but don't make the same mistake as others have by taking it too personally.I do have some very low opinions of all things that smell like status quo, but, as I've stated over and over, I make my case, and -I will admit- 'emotionally' at times, (Hope calls it 'passion') directed at the concepts, and ideas, the philosophies that I profoundly disagree with - not for the sake of disagreement- but for the sake of the purest, and highest form of the truth that I can participate in mustering- it is a thing with me. I do not make aim at people (with some notable exceptions like our former monkey pres) or persons, though I have had to defend myself from personal attacks.I dont feel attacked -yet. Neither should you.LEGALIZE FREEDOM
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #35 posted by Yanxor on April 30, 2009 at 14:19:49 PT

  GeoChemist (33)
THC & 2AG share a functional group - they both do bind to CB1 & CB2. They are both produced in the natural world from similar precursors (just like cholesterol).In the human body, 2AG is synthesized as needed, rather than stored - THC is not synthesized at all. Also, the two chemicals probably have different binding specificities for the two cannabinoid receptors (assuming, can verify if need be).I'm sticking to THC as a xenobiotic - and still think that cannabinoids (when taken for the psychoactive effect) should be grouped separately from food... and should be grouped along with food outside of this forum discussion. 
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #34 posted by museman on April 30, 2009 at 14:03:53 PT

food subjects
"Feed my sheep." - an admonishment given to Peter by Yashua in reference to 'knowledge' as 'food.'"Food for the soul." a common reference about things that make a person feel 'fulfilled' in ways much greater than immediate sense gratification of assuaging ones physical 'hunger.'"Blessed are those who "hunger and thirst" for righteousness, for they will be filled." from the 'beattitudes'This (situation) is what happens when you base your conclusions on narrowly concieved resources such as 'dictionaries' for ones understanding of the meaning of words.I am reminded of an 'academic' story of an experience I once had with a dim-witted college professor.I had enrolled in a 'Creative Writing' class, and had to write a thesis based on a 'logic statement' 'This is 'that', therefore it is that' kind of thing. So I wrote a thesis bsed on the statement "Art is music."I spent some time on it, about 15 or so pages, feeling quite good about my 'logic' so I was actually expecting a 'good job' or 'well done' from my professor when he called me into his office.He practicly threw the paper at me, saying "What the hell is this?" I was stunned. He went on, "This is totally illogical. Art is art, and music is music, there is no logical correlation between the two, this is a false statement, therefore unacceptable in this class."Well it didn't take me long after that statement to draw my own conclusions on the futility of taking 'creative writing' from this fool. I smiled and told him to drop me from his class, and never bothered to give the benefit of a doubt to any other 'professors' I had to deal with in the future, which led to me never actually getting those useless classes from 'those who cannot do (who) teach.'Communication takes more than words, it take a willingness on the part of whom ever is involved in the exchange of words to intuit beyond the limitations of 'definition' to get at the essence of 'meaning.' When academic/inellectua thinks to define the parameters of meaning with their own narrow scope of perception, they are in error.Vocabulary defines intelligence like nailpolish defines beauty -its either there already and such accessories enhance it, or it is tantamount to the preachers who sounded all high and holy speaking latin in the dark ages to their congregations without the slightest clues as to what they were talking about. Unfortunately with all the false values, and false authorities infesting all walks of life, the 'appearance' of intelligence totally outweighs the fact of it, and distraction from the core of understanding by a kind of 'cheat book for wanna-be intellectuals' called a 'dictionary,' and 'published' theorums, etc., may be desirous of those few within that exclusive, but errant perception of reality, but there are a multitude of other understandings just as (and more so in my opinion) valid and worthy as anything ever coughed up by 'established,' status-quo acceptability.The 'meaning' of life isn't defined, anywhere. Even in all the 'scriptures' and wise words ever written, they are only shadows-after the fact- and not complete or wholisticly encompassing, even the best. Even Yashua himself spoke only in parables, communicating (and quite well -better than any other examples I know of) the 'essences' of meaning within the metaphoric riddles, using universal symbolism capable of containing multi-levels of meaning and clues to getting more.To adhere to such limited scope as -yes- right-brained definitive presumption of reality, will of course only render a limited version of reality, one that is not only like 'half-brained' but also half-blind.The use of word definitions that have certain connotative 'meaning' is no secret to the more intelligent of our adversaries in the prohibition camp, it is the whole weak foundation that prohibition propoganda is consistently standing on.Binding up time and space in an overly involved discussion/argument about 'definitions of terms' is also very helpful to the prohibition mind set, because it detracts away from the focus of the simple fact that cannabis use is NOBODY's BUSINESS but those who use it.Oh yeah 'The Children' etc. etc. Well just more of the same use of false meanings derived from 'dictionaries' re written by the proponents of the status quo. The powers have created so many catch 22s in our society, thay can 'refer' to their false definitions just about any time real intelligence attempts to challenge them.Fortunately, real intelligence tends to seek out real knowledge and real meaning (eventually), which is why the status quo is under a lot of fire right now -because real intelligence is rising like a Phoenix out of the ashes of long maintained ignorance.Food for thought.FREE CANNAIBIS FOR EVERONE

[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #33 posted by GeoChemist on April 30, 2009 at 14:01:31 PT

Yanxor
Come on bud, this isn't rocket science. They (anandamide & THC) share the same functional group; it's as simple as it implies. Sterols are natural, even cholesterol. Granted I am not a biochemist, I did minor in biology way back when I used to go to class stoned........ 
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #32 posted by Yanxor on April 30, 2009 at 14:01:00 PT

Hope 28, Museman 30
Hope: Agree with you completely. My experience is also very anecdotal, along with whatever wikipedia & erowid can provide. (empirical insight for cannabis should expand, assuming cannabis is decriminalized or at least re-scheduled).
I would also like for the herb to be legal (along w/all other drugs - comment 18), I agree with you and J.Carter about the prohibition being more detrimental to society and the individual than drug use. Still, I think that drug addiction (and especially the black market drug trade) are harmful in their own right.It seems to me that liberalization of the drug laws in the us temper down the detrimental effects of prohibition, the money reaped by violent groups from the drug trade, while identifying the molecular basis of addiction, and hopefully treating it.Museman: please don't bring god into this - we should be and are able to have a pretty heated debate without accusing anyone of heresy. Some people seem to have misunderstood my original statements.I find your eating/swimming comparison to be ideal for what I'm trying to say. Sometimes eating is not good for you - like right before you're about to go for a swim. Is eating always not good? Absolutely not. Do I think eating before swimming should be illegal? Absolutely not.Likewise - sometimes cannabis usage is not good for you - like before an exam or during a bout of amnesia. Is cannabis use always bad? Absolutely not. Should it be illegal? If you're under 18 - probably, otherwise - not really.Considering that I explained my views on drug policy (legalization and state distribution as part of a co-located drug distribution, research, education & treatment system - with a few national centers containing facilities for all 4, and regional centers containing facilities for any combination of the 4 as needed), and considering that some people have argued against the use of cannabis for any but medical reasons - I really don't see why I'm being labeled as a prohibitionist.I just listed what I felt were arguments against cannabis use (being able to identify appropriate and inappropriate times for drug consumption is a vital part of safe and responsible drug use). As with any drug, cannabis can have negative consequences (and in the case of cannabis - the biggest negative consequences are due to its legal status).
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #31 posted by museman on April 30, 2009 at 10:56:10 PT

Genesis 29
" Then God said, "I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food."What was that word? Was it "FOOD?"LEGALIZE FREEDOM

[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #30 posted by museman on April 30, 2009 at 10:47:23 PT

Yanxor
I beg to differ. You say "Food is different" and think to make a negative case against cannabis using the very singular incidence of 'students taking an exam' as a lever for that negativity (for one).Consider this; Everyone knows, or is taught that going swimming right after one eats can cause cramping, and can lead to such terrible eventualities as drowning. Yet there are no laws written that will prosecute someone who is foolish enough to make that mistake.In the case of cannabis, because of all the hype and picayune attention (and all based on emotional, anectdotal evidence, and very little else) given to the herb, we have all had to find out for ourselves. The only wise words given to us about the use of cannabis, is from experienced users.When I was taking Anthropology, way back before I had any clues about courses of study, I had an occasion to make the very mistake we are talking about. Right before a final exam, I smoked a very potent doobie from one of those mexican strains some people think aren't any good. Man did I get stoned.That was the hardest test I ever took. But I still passed with flying colors, though I was one of the last ones to finish that day (usually I was one of the first). It was a valuable lesson. But that was just one tiny facet of my entire 'academic' experience, about the equivalent to eating before swimming. (we won't talk about other 'illegal drugs' that many have used as 'academic enhancers')To take that one instance -that has to do with common sense and personal metabolic function- and attempt to build a negative argument against cannabis -and I'm sorry, but thats all it really amounts to- really has this loud aura of PROHIBITIONIST broadcasting around it. What is the difference between eating before swimming, and smoking before an exam? Well obviously the differences exist, but not in the comparative metaphor.The idea that anyone can tell another person how they make their own mistakes -like getting stoned before an exam, or eating before swimming- is fascist, pure and simple. That is prohibition, and arguments that dwell on reasons why prohibition has any merit at all, like isolated incidences where one shouldn't smoke cannabis that are really about common sense and personal choice, are prohibitionist in their result, if not in their intent.And another thing. The narrow definitions being used here, attempting to defeat the natural relationship we have had with cannabis since it was created for our use -of course if you don't believe in Creation, you probably believe that everything is just one happenstance chemical reaction, therefore the idea that something has been deliberately created by someone or something other than Left-Brained (half-witted) five-sense perception based 'scientists' is potentially 'foreign' to you. Those narrow definitions are also the same kind of arguments, -or stretching it a bit and call it- logic that the prohibitionists like to balloon far beyond reason. just to make a negative point against an overwhelmingly positive plant.One can go through college, and graduate with honors, smoking herb the whole time- during the times that seem appropriate for each individual, and if they are wise, they will wait to partake until after the classes and exams, but if they make the mistake I did, they will probably only make it once, or else they will fail academicly for entirely different reasons than smoking pot. I don't think anybody has claimed that smoking somehow 'makes you smarter' but the claims that it somehow makes you 'less smart' only applies if you are already 'less smart' to begin with.Stupid people should not smoke pot, or drink alcohol, or any other mind altering substances. Unfortunately stupidity cannot be measured academicly (even though some stupid academics think it can) it can only be seen through action. And though I'd feel ok about outlawing stupid people, if we did, the entire government would be in jail, along with their cops, lawyers, judges, and a lot of 'public employees.' Not to mention at least 70% or higher in the 'scientific community.'No, I have to live with all these stupids, who are making life on planet earth quite miserable for so many, so By God, they're going to have to live with me as well.And that means that empowering arguments against my liberty, through picayune fault finding is going to be met with challenge -until the day i die."On the bus, or run over by it."FREE CANNABIS FREE, FREE, FREE, FOREVER
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #29 posted by Miranger on April 30, 2009 at 10:41:28 PT:

well
The problem is really lies in the terminology they use... the "medical marijane" movement thats going on only limits it to those who are riddle with diseases and need help.
Many of us just want it for recreational use which is still illegal and will remain illegal for many years to come.
Small stems? yes.... should i be invested and interested in this because in a near future they'll legalize it?
probably not... I dont see a black president making that move, and even if he does i fully expect the guy that follows on his footsteps to change it back to the way it is now.... DOnt forget obama did the same thing to many of bushes laws whether they were wrong or right, they did not fit his personal agenda.
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #28 posted by Hope on April 30, 2009 at 10:38:16 PT

Yanxor
:0)But I have to tell you that to say "Cannabis this or that"... just doesn't cover the many effects and differences and nuances in effect in different batches of cannabis I've noticed over the years.I didn't partake until I'd finished all my "Birthin" duties, but that youngest of the birthin babies turned thirty nine yesterday. Thirty eight or so years of 'testing the product' off and on over the years has given me a little insight...although purely "anecdotal". One size fits all doesn't work in any way with consumption and the effects of the herb, cannabis.I'd like for the herb to be legal... but more than that... far more than that... I want the hideousness of the damage and destruction of the prohibition to cease more than anything.Society is idiotic in general, though, for not thoroughly researching the good and helpful for people, and even animals, things that are found in the plant.But killing, threatening, and destroying people's lives, and taking their property and freedom because of the plant is completely unacceptable... to me.
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #27 posted by Yanxor on April 30, 2009 at 09:57:59 PT

  GeoChemist (24) & Hope (25)
GeoChemist - I get the point completely - cannabinoids are found in both humans and plants, and are both synthesized from units of acetyl-Coa (but so is cholesterol) - endogenous cannabinoids and plant cannabinoids would have to share some structural similarity in order to bind as agonists to the cannabinoid receptors. HU-210(synthetic cannabinoid) also shares structural similarity with plant and endogenous cannabinoids - yet it is synthetic.Perhaps the word choice (unnatural) was poor, I meant "xenobiotic" to the human body - unless of course gene therapy introduces the molecular machinery for plant cannabinoid synthesis within the human body (that would be unnatural though in every sense of the word).Hope: I'm glad you didn't take the lazy comment as an insult - it was meant light-heartedly. Taking care of a kid requires the utmost effort and I feel apologize for the lazy comment. I presumed a level of informality that was not appropriate considering how seldom I comment in the forum.
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #26 posted by Hope on April 30, 2009 at 09:28:19 PT

"...toddler... real and imagined."
Lol! No, the stress isn't overwhelming me. I just didn't word that well in the time I had. Her "needs"... real or imagined". Not the toddler... real or imagined. She's real. Believe me.
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #25 posted by Hope on April 30, 2009 at 09:19:53 PT

Josephlacerenza
Thank you... but I didn't notice anyone calling anyone names. As far as Yanxor admonishing me for laziness... I took that as rather a compliment that he'd read another post I made a few days ago, confessing that I was indeed naturally lazy, but that the right cannabis strain often counteracted that natural tendency beautifully and gently... like good coffee, only with a bit of inspiration to it. And a compliment, too, that he expected me to explain more in depth... and that ... Wow!... he kind of cared whether I said anything or not. I understood him completely. That's just like a wise teacher might have admonished me in my school days, that knew I could have made a better response than I took the time, too.I am extra "Lazy" lately... because as I told you all a couple weeks ago... I'm full time keeping up with a three year old. Never an easy job. Really full time, like twenty four hours a day... because her parents both have to work and live so far away that she spends the night with me, too.So yes... I'm a bit "Lazier" than usual... because what energy I can muster usually all goes to her good.Thankfully, my puter isn't off in a puter room... but right in the middle of the "Hub" of the kitchen and living room and main activity areas. Also any moment I get to read or reply here... is definitely restricted to whether she will let me or not.:0)I'm enjoying the conversation and reading the differences of opinion, a valuable discussion not available much of anywhere else.Thanks guys. All of you... including Yanxor... my new cyber buddy that expects something worthy of me. Cool!Only available though when my dear Miss Zoe decides she can share any "Worthiness" I might have. This comment writing was willingly shared with, and interrupted many times, by the many needs of a toddler... real and imagined... and if I don't share these moments willingly... I'll be sorry... because the very sight of me sitting here would then surely set of a mini one-woman riot. So... it's major multi-tasking to sit here a bit, and think, and type and attend to all the "Gammi, Gammi!" business.
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #24 posted by GeoChemist on April 30, 2009 at 08:25:13 PT

Yanxor
You're missing the point. The natural receptors are there for a reason and the reason is anandamide....research "runners high". Anandamide is synthesized in the body during physical activity from the production of N-arachidonoyl phosphatidylethanolamine. Delta 9-THC is produced by a plant, they are almost identicle, if these aren't natural processes........ Again research the organic structure of each and you will notice an OH (or HO) at the same juncture, this is a functional group. The functional group of each is the same.
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #23 posted by Yanxor on April 30, 2009 at 06:31:16 PT

  GeoChemist (21)
College students - of course. Its not that technical thought is impossible under the influence of cannabis, as you said - you have written/read scientific papers. On AVERAGE the students under the influence of cannabis will get lower scores.
Heroine, synthetic amphetamines and synthetic cannabinoids all bind to receptors with endogenous ligands - just because they bind the receptors, does not make them natural to the human body (I guess the word I'm trying to use is xenobiotic, cannabinoids are xenobiotics in humans).
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #22 posted by FoM on April 30, 2009 at 05:37:23 PT

GeoChemist 
Thank you. 
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #21 posted by GeoChemist on April 30, 2009 at 04:13:42 PT

Yanxor
"Geochemist: If one large group of students, was to take a standardized mathematical exam after having consumed cannabis and another group of students, taking the exam under the influence of any placebo - I would be willing to wager that the group that consumed cannabis will get lower grades on average". Fair enough, but how old are these students? Are they high school age? College age? This is an issue about an adult's right to use not a childs. With that said everything effects everyone differently, I was speaking from personal experience, like museman, I do math based on complicated principles like Bernoulli's, Darcy's Law, the Debye-Huckel Theory, and Gibbs free energy of reaction and formation to name a few. Not only can I read and understand scientific papers under the influence, I have had three abstracts accepted for publication in a peer reviewed journal...and guess what my state of mind was when I wrote those papers. As far as foreign, this could not be further from the truth. Animal organ contain cannibinoid receptors that either anandamide or delta 9-tetrahydracannibinol can bind with. Look at the chemical structure of the two, if you understand anything at all about organic chemistry you will be amazed. FYI we will NOT tolerate childish name calling, so knock it off......End of line
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #20 posted by josephlacerenza on April 29, 2009 at 14:44:20 PT

Hope
I'm so glad that YOU did not resort to personal attacks. Those have no place in OUR forum!!!! 
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #19 posted by Hope on April 29, 2009 at 14:40:20 PT

"Hope: ... lazy"
I know. But I do agree with them.:0)
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #18 posted by Yanxor on April 29, 2009 at 14:10:51 PT

  Geochemist(14), Runruff(15), museman(16) & Hope
Geochemist: If one large group of students, was to take a standardized mathematical exam after having consumed cannabis and another group of students, taking the exam under the influence of any placebo - I would be willing to wager that the group that consumed cannabis will get lower grades on average.Runruff: True that, a lot of my evaluation is based on my own experience, but I think a lot of the things I mentioned are true for many users (keep in mind that if 5% or so of the subjects experience a particular side effect during drug trials - that is consider a common side-effect.) But you're right - as with any chemical - the individual user's biology has an important part in the drug experience.Museman: "Cannabis is far from 'foreign', and though any substance, including every food item ever consumed is composed of various 'chemicals' to attempt to label a natural, creation given substance in the same connotative category as those actual 'chemicly derived substances' commonly referred to as 'drugs' is a tactic those of us who have been actually arguing AGAINST PROHIBITION, are quite familiar with."Food is completely different - humans need carbs, proteins, lipids, vitamins & minerals in order to maintain their life and health - it's possible to ingest cannabinoids as an oil in a baked good, but in this situation the substance is being consumed probably for the psychoactive properties rather than the nutritional value. Hence it is foreign to the human body (it is not primarily used for nutritional value), rather than an unnatural chemical (cannabis has a more extensive history of use than alcohol).About the left brain thing - whoa, totally blew my mind - refer to my response to GeoChemist for a more direct explanation of what I consider to be a negative impact that cannabis has on information processing.Furthermore, I was not arguing FOR prohibition - I was bringing up what I feel are arguments against the use of cannabis (as per lukecha09's prompt). Don't see why you can't be middle of the road on the legalization thing. For example, there are some people who are for the complete legalization of the drug, and it becomes a commodity tomorrow just like tomatoes. There are other's who want it legalized medicinally, but distributed by the government - where it becomes a commodity like penicillin or adderall. There are those who want it legalized recreationally and distributed by the government - that would be more like tobacco or alcohol (but without the private corporations making/processing the product). As you can see, there are in fact different shades to the topic of legalization.I personally think that legalization and state-distribution of ALL drugs, as part of a program dedicated to setting up a drug distribution, treatment, research and education system throughout the country, with part of the tax proceeds going to pay off the establishment of this system, will have a positive impact on awareness on the dangers of drugs through the education efforts, a decrease in drug use rates induced by the boost in more direct research, education - along with some novel treatment strategies. It will also have the effect of cutting down on drug-related crime, while allowing the government to treat drug use as a rights/medical issue - rather than a criminal one.Hope: ... lazy
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #17 posted by Hope on April 29, 2009 at 11:05:15 PT

Yanxor
Interesting comment. I agree with GeoChemist, Runruff and Museman.
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #16 posted by museman on April 29, 2009 at 09:23:38 PT

Utterly ridiculous
"Allows user to be excited/happy/euphoric through consumption of foreign chemicals, this introduces the idea that doing nothing can be awesome if user self-medicates. Cannabis use, and association with others who use cannabis, normalizes drug use in the eyes of the user - by comparison, the user might feel that he doesn't really "do drugs" even if he is a casual consumer of various substances.""Foreign chemicals?"Cannabis is far from 'foreign', and though any substance, including every food item ever consumed is composed of various 'chemicals' to attempt to label a natural, creation given substance in the same connotative category as those actual 'chemicly derived substances' commonly referred to as 'drugs' is a tactic those of us who have been actually arguing AGAINST PROHIBITION, are quite familiar with.""Allows user to be excited/happy/euphoric.."If happiness were really that easy, or if one could actually make themselves believe that they were happy through the simple ingestion of any substance that actually was causing less harm than not by using it, we wouldn't have a reference to it as in '....inalienable rights...and the pursuit of happiness.""...it is rather challenging to exert technical mental effort (i.e. doing math, reading scientific papers, taekwondo)."All left-brain, status-quo qualifiers - just another almost fancy way of saying 'pot makes you lazy.' Which is a biased, un-informed opinon of people whose shirts are stuffed, and whose neckties are too tight. Anyway, I sort of agree, people (who can only view half of realty from their well ordered, but extremely limited left cranial hemisphere) with only half a brain should use potentially mind-altering substances with care and guidance. And if you don't want to suddenly start thinking in depth, leaving the 2 dimensional boundaries of failed consciousness behind for the one that includes both sides of the brain, you should never smoke cannabis unless you are in great pain, or have other medical conditions that warrant it.Anyone trying to find lame and weak excuses for any aspect whatsoever of this stupid, inane, insane, prohibition and WOD is a PROHIBITIONIST, pure and simple.You are either "on the bus, or you're gonna get run over by it." There is no middle ground in this issue. Prohibitionists like to go on about 'the grey areas', but the only true 'grey areas' are their own unused brain cells.Yeah, until a significant number of folks wake up, we are going to have to take whatever concessions we can get from the illegal, immoral 'government' but this movement never needed anyone to speak for the prohibitionists, they got plenty of funding for lies and propaganda.Oh, by the way, while I was doing Ohms formulas, trigonomic circuit vectors, and Boolean Algebra getting trained in electronics and computer language -and on the national honor roll with a GPA of 3.8, what do you think I did every evening while doing electronic mathematics-problems that were pages long -even with the use of a calculator? If you guessed 'smoked cannabis' give the man a joint.FREE CANNABIS FOREVER
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #15 posted by runruff on April 29, 2009 at 07:55:32 PT

koala's eat only eucalyptus!
"Tends to have a somewhat harsh crash, encouraging repeated dosing. If more isn't consumed, users tend to be tired, lethargic, bored & irritable."tired, lethargic, bored & irritable."-You must have met my X! She didn't need any excuse!Any way, hey dude, you are talking about yourself here. I do not share your experiences. As a matter of general interest it is interesting to hear about your experiences but to me this only enforces my belief that cannabis usage, like anything from tomatoes to pharmaceuticals, we can be alergic or have any number of different reactions. We are all charged with something called self-care. My elixair is your poison. 
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #14 posted by GeoChemist on April 29, 2009 at 04:11:56 PT

Yanxor
"When under the influence of cannabis, it is rather challenging to exert technical mental effort (i.e. doing math, reading scientific papers, taekwondo)"........Would you care to place a wager on this statement?
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #13 posted by Yanxor on April 28, 2009 at 22:20:51 PT

  lukecha09 #12
It's habit forming and possibly addictive - I find that cannabis has a synergistic effect with dopamine-based euphoria (i.e. food, sex, amphetamines) and that boost in dopamine release, caused by cannabis, has addictive potential, just as any of the examples do individually. Cannabis is associated with higher rates of psychological illnesses... that's a correlation, but I still wouldn't feel comfortable having someone who suffers from parasomnia, schizophrenia or amnesia/memory problems consume it. But for other people... anorexics and a host of other conditions it does have medical potential.The smoking of anything (especially frequently) has harmful consequences on the respiratory system (not to say that cannabis is quite the same as tobacco. Tobacco is a carcinogen & smoking a carcinogen is especially bad).When under the influence of cannabis, it is rather challenging to exert technical mental effort (i.e. doing math, reading scientific papers, taekwondo).Tends to have a somewhat harsh crash, encouraging repeated dosing. If more isn't consumed, users tend to be tired, lethargic, bored & irritable.Allows user to be excited/happy/euphoric through consumption of foreign chemicals, this introduces the idea that doing nothing can be awesome if user self-medicates. Cannabis use, and association with others who use cannabis, normalizes drug use in the eyes of the user - by comparison, the user might feel that he doesn't really "do drugs" even if he is a casual consumer of various substances.
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #12 posted by lukecha09 on April 28, 2009 at 19:54:16 PT:

Was this serious?
"And if Marlboro wants to keep people smoking pot just like it does with tobacco, it may start putting a couple “harmless ingredients” into the mixture to help a little. After that, it’s anyone’s guess as to which of the three drugs is the worst for you."I will not smoke marijuana if its got all this useless unnatural crap in it and I'm sure many people agree so Marlboro can do this but they won't make any money off it. "Having a bunch of 18 year olds driving across the border to get drunk and then driving back home isn’t a good thing. The cost outweighs the benefits, just like with marijuana."JUST LIKE MARIJUANA??? No where in that paragraph does it say anything about the costs of marijuana. WHAT COSTS??And good post about going to work drunk i was thinking the same exact thing. If its legalized its not like employers HAVE to let people do it. "Legalization is incentivizing, and the costs of incentivizing weed among our nation’s youth are scary, at best.".....are you kidding me?? If anything, illegalization is incentivizing. Plus, it would still be illegal for our nation's youth. So that sentence is pointless.And after this WHOLE article I can not find ANY COSTS of marijuana except that it will be "more incentivizing." Why is that bad? Maybe more people should be doing it. Who knows? I want to see the serious arguments against marijuana.
[ Post Comment ]



 


Comment #11 posted by AdaptBones on April 28, 2009 at 15:32:22 PT:

Disgusting
Well I can't say I'm surprised by this article. The prohibs are in their death throws and they know it. More and more people are turning to common sense and tossing these prohibs out on their ass where they belong. Is it any wonder they give it a few more tries with all the old lies to see if anyone is listening any more? It's disgusting to read these "arguments" but only because this guy probably believes these lies 100%. They can keep talking but I hope they like the sound of their own voice because more and more no one is listening to them. Blessed be.
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #10 posted by Had Enough on April 28, 2009 at 06:52:27 PT

Joe Camel…???
From the article…
“”Should marijuana become legal, who do you think will first start the mass manufacturing? My guess of Marlboro is a good one. But Camel is a decent choice, too.””“”Juxtapose thinking only with a monetary mindset, why shouldn’t California lower the drinking age to 18? Our tourism industry will increase tenfold, with millions of 18 year olds trekking across our border in search of their state’s forbidden fruit.””“”Having a bunch of 18 year olds driving across the border to get drunk and then driving back home isn’t a good thing.””“”Instead of mandatory 15 minute “smoking breaks” for cigarette-smoking workers, employers will have to implement new hours for pot-smoking workers: 4 p.m. to 6 p.m., Tuesday through Wednesday.”Well now…that doesn’t seem to be a bad idea at all…But why just Tuesday through Wednesday???…and… I wonder why this propaganda artist didn’t just throw in the time of 4:20…“”Daily Nexus columnist Shaeffer Bannigan can see a red-eyed, stoney version of Joe Camel now.””Well it seems like he is…or trying to…use…the ‘save the children tactic’…***'Journalists' like this need to be taken out to the woodshed and reminded who their daddy is, and then go back to their yellow school and repaint it GREEN.Now this last statement by museman sums it all up pretty well…paint it green…lets roll…************Florida voters…listen up…http://www.pufmm.org/We are more than just a group. We are registered voters willing to sign a petition to show our support for medical marijuana. We are a political committee registered with the state of Florida to restore patients' rights to receive safe, affordable and effective medication. We are collecting signatures to amend the constitution.http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=127343055695

[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #9 posted by NikoKun on April 27, 2009 at 14:05:41 PT

Another bullshit opinion...
Well that was wonderful /sEvery point made was simple speculation, and not very good speculation...
Does the author honestly believe employers will change work hours for potheads?
If you go to work drunk, you get fired... Why would things be any different for Weed? If you go to work high, and are incapable of preforming properly, that was a big mistake on your part, and you should be fired.None of the points made hold any truth in reality... simple scare fears and bullshit propaganda.
There is no case against the legalization of Marijuana, without lying and spouting out bullshit like this. Stop trying and just accept that prohibition is wrong and counterproductive!
Legalize and regulate it! That is the only successful policy!
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #8 posted by Hope on April 27, 2009 at 11:22:04 PT

Comment 4 was in answer to Cheebs1
and his or her comment right before mine.
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #7 posted by museman on April 27, 2009 at 09:52:58 PT

huh?
"Many people blame the government for the war on drugs because the government refuses to legalize the drug" How ridiculous is that statement? Thats right, it was 'the people' that declared the war on themselves- hurry rewrite the history books before another generation gets a chance to figure it out for themselves."The federal government spends billions of dollars each year in an effort to undermine drug distribution throughout the country." And out of those 
'billions' the only moneys that aren't spent on setting up drug cartels in Mexico, buying heroin from Pakistan (or nearby- the Taliban aren't dependable these days) or other related 'investments' of your money, is spent paying off cops, judges, lawyers, prison guards, and politicians."Standards should not be set on degree of harmfulness, but degree of helpfulness." - I agree. Therefore pharmaceutical companies should all be encarcerated for their criminal creation of so much poison passed off as medicine."I can’t think of a better way to stimulate our economy than to inject into it a tool that entirely destroys ambition and motivation." oh, you mean like having to work a dead-end job because you can't pay the dues to belong to the 'special' club? Or seeing a long line of dead -end jobs in your future becuase this is such a ruthless competetive society? Talk about 'buzz-kills.' Personally, I can't see a better way to deal with 'our economy' than to let it die a swift death, so we can start being real with each other, and maybe build something worthy of the time we put into it. Motivation. I'll give you motivation. You better thank your stars that some of the 'motivations' of oppressed, impoverished, persecuted people get muted somewhat when they partake, otherwise your fancy fake reality may have already been burned to the ground.Ambition? What is that? To trample on anything and everything that gets in the way of your goal, - and whats that goal? Money. Just money. Nothing else. Money, an invented fake value system carefully maintained to rob of us the Providence of Creation, and ensure that the few have everything they want out of life at the expense of everyone, and everything else. Ambition is a four-letter word. Should be removed from publicly acceptable language.Snide is snide, and this article wouldn't make good toilet paper if it were printed. 'Journalists' like this need to be taken out to the woodshed and reminded who their daddy is, and then go back to their yellow school and repaint it GREEN.FREE CANNABIS FOREVER
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #6 posted by FoM on April 27, 2009 at 09:45:29 PT

rchandar
You're welcome. It's hard to post some of these articles.
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #5 posted by rchandar on April 27, 2009 at 09:32:40 PT:

...But I Disagree Completely
"pot is less harmful than alcohol or tobacco. But this is not a reason to legalize pot.??? No, Schaeffer, that is one of the reasons WHY pot should be legal."If we legalize pot, companies will add impurities and chemicals to keep people smoking pot like tobacco."???? What? Does this guy even READ the message boards? Any of you freedom fighters want anything but a pure product, which everyone could grow? How many of you would turn over legal MJ to Big Tobacco????I'm glad you posted this one, FoM. It gives a bird's eye view into how weak and half-truthed many of the arguments against legalization tend to be. It's a CIVIL RIGHTS issue, nothing more, nothing less.--rchandar
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #4 posted by Hope on April 27, 2009 at 09:22:49 PT

I disagree, somewhat.
"If you are lazy then yes cannabis will keep you lazy. If you are an active person then cannabis will keep you active. It really is as simple as that."I'm naturally lazy and cannabis can be a marvelous and gentle stimulant in my experience.I think it's different people and different strains. I suspect the indicas can make more for a lazy situation in some people... and sativas serve as a really fine stimulant for some people.There is a time for that "lazy" effect though. Like bedtime and recovery and recuperation time, from sickness or exhaustion, when necessary.There's more indica out there than sativa, right now, I think... and I personally, favor the sativa plant for personal consumption... if I had a choice.Indica grows faster and produces more in a small space... as I understand it. Sativa is taller and rangier, so not so good as indica for keeping that ever necessary low profile in times of prohibition of the plant.*sigh*Right now... the most important thing though, is to stop the persecution of people over the plant... no matter what it's strain.
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #3 posted by Cheebs1 on April 27, 2009 at 08:44:46 PT:

Misinformed
This is the sort of subjective reporting that toes the line of propaganda. Many more people than 4 million smoke on a regular basis. The average is 25 million smoke it almost daily, if not daily. The test results have shown time and again there is no such thing as "amovtivational syndrome" connected with cannabis. Anyone that has used cannabis can tell you that is an "enhancer". Cannabis enhances the traits that an individual already exhibits. If you are lazy then yes cannabis will keep you lazy. If you are an active person then cannabis will keep you active. It really is as simple as that.Legalizing marijuana will not solve all of our drug war problems and certainly won’t make our country a better place to live.Spoken like a true drug warrior. Where does this "certainty" stem from. Is it based in fact like the report filed with the Cato Institute about Portugal decriminalizing the possession of all drugs? Has the reporter actually "reported" anything or just given us an opinion? I would think that to all of us here, that know the truth, it is apparent that this is more of the propaganda drivel that oozes from the bowels of the bought and paid for main stream media.Like the president said, it is time to let science settle this issue and not faith based, corrupt political, fear mongering, right wing extremist lies.
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #2 posted by George Servantes on April 27, 2009 at 07:34:15 PT

article writer is right on some points but...
...alcohol, coffee and tobacco are legal too. Marijuana is no more bad then all these 3 legal drugs combined.
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #1 posted by FoM on April 27, 2009 at 06:26:59 PT

Drugs: To Legalize or Not
By John WalterApril 25, 2009URL: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124061336043754551.html
[ Post Comment ]







  Post Comment