cannabisnews.com: Believe Me, I Do Know





Believe Me, I Do Know
Posted by FoM on August 27, 2000 at 09:22:18 PT
By Licia Corbella, Calgary Sun
Source: Calgary Sun
Reefer madness? No kidding. And here I thought all along that pot smokers were laid back and happy-go-lucky. However, ever since July 31 when the Ontario Court of Appeal struck down the federal government's marijuana possession law as unconstitutional, the letters to the editor section of virtually every paper in the land has been flooded by cannabis crusaders. 
Recently several letter writers e-mailed me personally asking me why I am opposed to legalizing marijuana. One asked "what studies have you read -- what do you know about marijuana anyway?" So I thought I'd use my column to share my answers with everyone. When it comes to studies, I've read just a few -- mostly on the Internet a couple of years ago while researching the topic. Ah ha! I can almost hear all of the stoners shout at once (about two minutes after reading the line) -- candy wrappers and empty chip bags falling to the floor around them. She doesn't know and yet she writes all of those maddening little comments at the bottom of our letters. But not so fast. While I may not have read every study on marijuana, I still know tonnes about it. After all, that's about how much of the stuff I smoked many years ago when I was young and foolish. There are a few things on earth that I'm an expert on. Food is one of them and another one is illicit drugs. I'm not proud of this, it's simply a fact -- a part of my past. And I have the memory -- or rather the lack of one -- to prove it. In other words, my memory is vastly diminished from what it once was. Before I started smoking marijuana, I had a memory like a vice. Something went in there and it never came out. I mean, I can still remember what I got for my birthday when I turned five and who gave it to me. (My sister's memory is even better, she can tell you the birthdates of most of the people in her Grade 1 class and stuff from her teens like the definition of Meiosis and Mitosis because, unlike me, she never touched drugs.) Needless to say, after my five-year intensive foray into drug use, my memory of events since then is not what it once was. Heck, I sometimes have to stop and think how old I am. So, as soon as I remember what I was going to write I'll get on with this column.... Oh yeah, let me espouse a few truisms about pot that affect most real stonies. When a person first starts smoking marijuana they continue doing it because it's fun. It makes you laugh, it relaxes you, it puts an interesting slant on things. But after a while, instead of having a good time with pot, it gets to the point where you can't have a good time without it! It gives you the munchies too which, needless to say, is bad for the waistline. I can remember practically cleaning out entire chip aisles at the corner store some evenings with my girlfriends. Couple the munchies with the tendency to get lethargic and crave sleep, and once energetic and fit people start to pack on the pounds. But none of these are valid reasons for opposing the legalization of marijuana. My main reason for being opposed has more to do with the fact that marijuana -- because of its relative benevolence -- gives users an unrealistic belief that other "social" drugs will be equally "harmless." In other words, marijuana is a gateway drug -- it leads many of its users to try other drugs, which is what I did. But I was lucky. One of the girls who was at my fifth birthday party (she gave me paper dolls) that I mentioned earlier wasn't so lucky. Sue was adorable and so smart she skipped a grade in elementary school. Her birthday was -- still is -- just 10 days after mine. By the time she reached high school, she got involved in marijuana and dropped a grade, which put her back in my grade for our final two years of high school. Sue always had the best drugs -- pungent buds and powerful coke. She could cook up a batch of freebase faster than Martha Stewart can list the ingredients for bouillabaisse. But it soon became very evident to me that her drug use was way out of control. After a 10-year hiatus, I saw her again recently in Vancouver. She had recently celebrated four years of being clean, celebrating through Narcotics Anonymous what they call her fourth-year cake. She told me that while she was 37 like me, she really felt 27 because she had lost 10 years of her life. While I was pleased she had realized that drugs were a loss, not a gain, I wanted to weep. Sue didn't lose 10 years, she lost 20, and untold potential, experiences and joy. She lost 20 years of living -- really living. While many of us got degrees, travelled the world, married and had kids, she's had very limited experiences -- mostly getting stoned in some filthy living room. Drugs ruin lives and I think lives are precious -- a gift from God to be used wisely. Now if it was just adults who started using drugs, I would say fine. But nobody starts using drugs in their 30s. They start when they're kids. So, like many Canadians out there -- four out of five according to recent polls -- I am in favour of decriminalizing the possession of marijuana. It simply makes no sense to lock someone up -- or to even bring them before a judge -- for having a little pot on hand for their own use. But I'll never be in favour of legalizing it. That would mean that society endorses its use, and that would negatively affect our youth. I have many other reasons why I'm opposed to legalizing marijuana. When I remember them, I'll let you know. E-mail: licia.corbella cal.sunpub.comPublished: Sunday, August 27, 2000Source: Calgary Sun, The (CN AB)Copyright: 2000 The Calgary SunContact: callet sunpub.com Address: 2615 12 Street N.E., Calgary, Alberta T2E 7W9Fax: (403) 250-4180Website: http://www.canoe.ca/CalgarySun/Forum: http://www.canoe.ca/Chat/home.htmlRelated Articles:Home-Grown Drug Business Booms in Vancouverhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread6839.shtmlOntario Court Says Law Against MJ Unconstitutionalhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread6576.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #10 posted by Skibum on October 05, 2000 at 11:31:42 PT
Bad Memory?
"Before I started smoking marijuana, I had a memory like a vice. Something went in there and it never came out. I mean, I can still remember what I got for my birthday when I turned five and who gave it to me."So what's the problem? She says she can STILL remember, even after all those years of smoking. I don't get it.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #9 posted by Dan B on August 27, 2000 at 23:22:33 PT:
Smarmy Drivel
***"And I have the memory -- or rather the lack of one -- to prove it. In other words, my memory is vastly diminished from what it once was."One wonders how she can possibly remember enough about her memory "back then" to make the comparison! I'd be willing to bet that the only thing she forgot was how stupid she used to be. It's the ol' "when I was younger, I was a genius" routine. ***"While many of us got degrees, travelled the world, married and had kids, she's had very limited experiences -- mostly getting stoned in some filthy living room."Does this woman really believe that only those who have never used drugs get degrees? Hasn't she ever met a liberal arts major? And why does she assume that her friend had a filthy living room? Has there been a study recently correlating drug use with filthy living rooms? And really, who cares about the state of her friend's living room?Reporter: "This just in...a new study reveals that 84% of those addicted to drugs have, and I quote, 'filthy living rooms.' Martha Stewart has asked the President of the United States and the Prime Minister of Canada to declare national states of emergency!"This entire article is ridiculous, sentimental, smarmy drivel in the order of the following (try reading this while mimicking Sally Struthers in one of those Feed the Children ads): "I know it's wrong to use marijuana because...well...because I just know! And I should know because I know somebody with no self-control, and she said drugs mad her have a bad life."Give us all a break, Licia Corbella.Note: No offense to Feed the Children, a very worthwhile organization (as far as I know). 
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #8 posted by merchant_x on August 27, 2000 at 16:15:51 PT
This is bull
This story could have been written by an ex alcoholic, ex gasoline sniffer, or even ex sexaholic. Anybody with an addictive nature is probably going to go down a path that they'll either later regret or die on. It doesn't matter what substance starts them on that path. Don't blame marijuana for your personal dysfunction. I personally have been toking up for over ten years and haven't delved into any of the more hardcore substances and am very happy with the way my life has turned out so far. Don't deny marijuana to the rest of us responsible adults just because a few people with pre-existing conditions can't handle it.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #7 posted by freedom fighter on August 27, 2000 at 11:48:26 PT
Oh for pete's sake
Im going to fill me a bowl wither if its legal or not!
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #6 posted by STAN DUP on August 27, 2000 at 10:57:34 PT
WHAT??????????????????????????????????????????????
  A word of advice to her editor, "TERMINATE THIS NON-RESEARCHING, INCOMPETENT, IGNORANT _FOOL_ IMMEDIATELY!!!
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #5 posted by FoM on August 27, 2000 at 10:52:27 PT
the gateway
mainline windex! I had to comment on that! That was good!
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #4 posted by r.earing on August 27, 2000 at 10:43:30 PT:
the gateway!
Why ,oh,why can't any else seem to partake in a little MJ without seeing the immediate need to mainline windex?Am I the only one in the world who has smoked herb and not become a raving crack head?I know i'm supposed to be listening to hot jazz music and associating with killers and murderers by now ,but I just can't seem to find the time.I guess I got lost shortly after the "gate" and haven't yet been able to find this "tragic path of drug addiction".
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #3 posted by kaptinemo on August 27, 2000 at 10:24:37 PT:
They sent in the second string
First, it was Linda Williamson who tried to step up and take a free swipe at cannabis users, thinking she could get away with it. Like most antis, she forgot the power of instant communication that the Internet provides (they all seem to make that mistake - repeatedly). She also seems to have gotten a nasty surprise at the amount of criticism she received. She then wrote an second piece demanding that we, in essence, *not* require her to provide any factual information to back up her claims. When she derided a cannabis user who had asked her to name the studies she claimed proved her point, she retorted with "Lighten up." Hardly the best riposte that a so-called journalist could come up with, but typical of the antis. I've no doubt that this did not sit well with her editors, who are probably wiping egg off of their faces because of her less-than-deft handling of the subject. Which is probably why we haven't heard anything from her again. The most important thing which she got her hide scorched for doing was to make light of the fact that more people's lives are ruined by the damn laws than by any THC molecules.So now, the Sun papers send in another lamb to the journalistic slaughter. Another mouthpiece who believes she can bait cannabis users with impunity. After the deafening silence that has accompanied Ms. Williamsons limping departure from the stage, I would have thought she would known better, and could learn from another's mistakes. I guess not. I've already sent her an email telling her what I think of the faulty logic she displays in this piece; might I recommend giving the same education to her what so many of us have taught Ms. Williamson?
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #2 posted by dankhank on August 27, 2000 at 09:44:46 PT:
I'm Smilin' ...
What an amusing little piece from a person who STILL espouses some incorrect "facts" while claiming to be an expert. She breathes every day all day long, what does she know about air?She writes:My main reason for being opposed has more to do with the fact that marijuana -- because of its relative benevolence -- gives users an unrealistic belief that other "social" drugs will be equally "harmless."Is that the fault of the pot? Is it MY fault? Is it her fault?  Yes, maybe ... she sat back for how many years and let the government say that pot was as bad or worse than the narcotics, and when kids found out that pot was not so bad at all some must have thought that it meant that the rest weren't so bad either.Her friend always had the best bud AND the best coke? Figure that out ... her ruin came about due to MORE than simple pot.I don't know about everyone, but I know about a few folks ...Qhen I encounter some really kind bud I smoke less. It is so good that less is really still more than the average stuff.so she says that decriminilising is OK ...Thanks for nothing, girl.Peace ... 
HEMP n STUFF
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #1 posted by Lehder on August 27, 2000 at 09:33:38 PT
sheesh
Your poor memory is a personal problem, not a basis for public policy.
[ Post Comment ]

Post Comment


Name: Optional Password: 
E-Mail: 
Subject: 
Comment: [Please refrain from using profanity in your message]
Link URL: 
Link Title: