cannabisnews.com: Should Marijuana Be Legalized? No
Should Marijuana Be Legalized? No
Posted by FoM on April 10, 2001 at 09:26:37 PT
By Kimmy Schwarm
Source: Register-Guard
Guess what would happen if marijuana were legalized. The next time you have cramps, a migraine or other chronic pain, your doctor might tell you to go smoke a joint.Instead of Aleve or Advil, you could enjoy the pleasures of what is now considered an illicit drug. The other day, I had an argument with my friends at school. We debated the advantages and disadvantages of legalizing marijuana. They are all strongly opinionated people, and I learned several facts from them.
One thing I learned is that marijuana does relieve pain and that it is not nearly as addictive as morphine. It can ease the nausea and vomiting caused by chemotherapy and, at the same time, give you a wonderful high.Despite the positives, I am not convinced. There are so many other factors that need to be considered. Marijuana causes some parts of the brain - such as those governing the emotions, memory and judgment - to spin out of control.Tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC, is one of the main chemicals in marijuana. It attaches itself to receptors in the hippocampus (an area in the back of your brain). This part of the brain is responsible for short-term memory.When THC arrives in this area, it inhibits new memories from forming and also can cause people to forget facts they have just learned. Also, THC influences the limbic system (the part of the brain responsible for emotions) and can cause attacks of hysteria and paranoia.If you choose to ignore the attacks and memory loss, consider what marijuana can do to your lungs. Its smoke carries more tar and other particles than tobacco. You can relieve your migraine, but you also have a higher chance of developing lung cancer.So far, there aren't any other safe, alternative ways to take marijuana.THC attaches to certain other receptors in your brain, and when it is there, it blocks pain and nausea. Researchers recently discovered that the brain makes a chemical - anandamide - that attaches to the same receptors as THC. This discovery may lead to the development of medications that are chemically similar to THC, but less harmful. You could get the same results, but with no lung cancer or short-term memory loss.Are there advantages to legalizing marijuana? I can't deny that the answer is yes. Do the benefits outweigh the side effects? No. We already have too many people high in our country. We don't need to prescribe it when there are other safe alternatives.We are learning valuable information from research done on marijuana, research that some day may enable us to find chemicals that provide the same effects without the dangers.Complete Title: The Great Debate: Should Marijuana Be Legalized? No: On Balance, Pass Up GrassKimmy Schwarm is a senior at Willamette High School. Source: Register-Guard (OR)Author: Kimmy SchwarmPublished: April 9, 2001Copyright: 2001 The Register-Guard Contact: rgletters guardnet.com Website: http://www.registerguard.com/ CannabisNews - Cannabis Archiveshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/list/cannabis.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help
Comment #71 posted by JOHN G on September 05, 2001 at 14:20:20 PT:
DONT SMOKE!!! EAT YOUR WEED!
IF YOU COOK AND EAT YOUR WEED,YOU WILL HAVE NO CHANCE OF LUNG CANCER.
EAT YOUR WEED
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #70 posted by eric snell on September 04, 2001 at 11:41:06 PT
weed is gooooooooooooooooood
i have smoked weed for some time know and i havent found a problem with it i am a vary happy and intelligent person and people shouldnt put down weed it not bad it kills your lungs like cigerettes it kills brain cells just like ALCHOHOL it is not bad so make it legal right now
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #69 posted by johnnyx2x on June 18, 2001 at 20:31:52 PT:
weed is baaaadddddd!!!!!!!!!
i've been smoking marijauna most of my life about 6 years....i am 18 no and very miserable....weeed is bad for ur lungs, stomache and brain......it causes dumbness and social phobia no matter what article u read promoting marijauna .....it is very bad for u.....and i hope it never becomes legalized!!!!!!!!!!!
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #68 posted by kevin on June 13, 2001 at 17:56:53 PT:
pot and cancer
POT DOESN'T CAUSE LUNG CANCER, RESEARCHER SAYSCanada Also Doesn't Seem To Cause Emphysema Or Birth Defects, Senate Hearing Told OTTAWA ( CP ) - Smoking marijuana does not seem to cause lung cancer, emphysema or cause birth anomalies in fetuses, a prominent U.S. researcher told a Senate committee Monday. John P. Morgan of City University of New York Medical School said heavy marijuana smokers do show some symptoms of lung damage, such as coughing, frequent colds and bronchitis, but not the life-threatening conditions seen among tobacco smokers. ''We are some 30 to 40 years into this marijuana epidemic and still have not seen evidence of pulmonary cancer in marijuana smokers.'' He was speaking before a special Senate committee reassessing federal legislation and polices on marijuana. Morgan said there are reasons to believe the heavy smoker of cannabis will not succumb to emphysema, a condition frequent among cigarette smokers. He said cannabis contains just as many harmful compounds and irritants as tobacco, but even heavy marijuana smokers - those who consume four to six joints daily - don't smoke nearly as much as tobacco smokers. ''The critical issue is the amount of smoke inhaled.'' He said marijuana smokers have slightly more respiratory complaints than non-smokers, but the difference is so small that it is of no practical significance. Morgan also criticized research purporting to show fetal damage among women who smoke marijuana and scoffed at the theory that marijuana is a gateway leading to hard drugs. ''Many critics in the United States have decided that marijuana incites some biochemical trance that leads people to tramp the streets looking for heroin and cocaine.'' But statistics show that most marijuana smokers never go on to other drugs, he said. ''There is no gateway, there is no credible gateway theory.'' He said prohibition of marijuana only makes young people more interested in trying it. Rates of marijuana use in The Netherlands, where the drug is freely available, he said, are lower than in the United States where it is banned. Morgan conceded that marijuana smokers are impaired for several hours after smoking. People who are high should not drive, babysit, mow the lawn or enter into marital contracts, he said. He attributed opposition to decriminalization of marijuana to what he called ''the drug-law industrial complex'' in the United States. ''I don't believe anyone should go to jail for using a psychoactive substance,'' Morgan told the committee.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #67 posted by Dan B on April 13, 2001 at 11:41:06 PT:
Censored
No problem. I get a bit hot under the collar from time to time, and I really did not mean it as a personal affront. Frankly, I'm not all that affected by words. I realize that words are just words, and they can only harm a person if that person allows them to. My main point was that others can be offended, and I thought it best to respect those who might come across one of those words and either be turned off to our primary goal of changing drug policy or use them against us to suggest that we are somehow bigoted.I understand what you're saying about these words being thrown around all the time. When I was in the Army, I used some of the words I spoke out against here, and I really didn't mean anything by them. They were just words that everyone was using. Perhaps being in college/university settings (particularly in the field of English) for the past 11 years has made me ultra-sensitive to potential repurcussions of using those words.I hope you have no hard feelings toward me over this. I harbor none toward you.Best,Dan B
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #66 posted by Rambler on April 13, 2001 at 04:00:03 PT
Censored
I know what you mean.I grew up in those days too,and I must admit that Istill use the n, and f,and many other such words when clowning aroundamongst friends.....Back in those days,you could park your car somewhere,put in an 8-track tape,,Jimi Hendrix,,The Cream,,,Inna gadda davida,,,,andfire up a big ol' reefer,from a lid that you got for ten bucks,and smoke tillyour eyes were redded out,,and if a cop came to see what you were doing,he would probably just take away your weed,and maybe call your folks...But now days,if a cop found you smoking in your car,your life would be ruined,and your car would be forfieted,and you would see it a week later,with a newDARE paint job,with the cop at the wheel,on his way to a classroom of fourth graders to spread the word about drugs that most of them would have never heardof,or cared about if officer DARE hadnt told them all about the evil of the forbiddenfruits. After the bust,if you lived here in California,you would have to go for "treatment".And if you say the wrong word,at the wrong time nowdays,you may be accused of a "hate crime",or if someone hears you say,"bawmb"(*),at or near a school,you can be sure that the gestapo will be knockin' at your door.People are really sensitive in these strange times,and perhaps rightfully so.I justwanted to let you know that I think I know what you mean,and I dont think your contraversial comment was meant in a hateful way,but rather as an expletive.I guess maybe you will choose alternate expressions to say what you want to say in the future.Peace(*)dont want Carnavore to be pickin' me up
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #65 posted by Censored on April 13, 2001 at 03:14:11 PT
Apologies
I apologize if my comments added to stress and divisiveness. I understand your points Dan, and respect them. I guess times have changed. I grew up during a time when "the f word" was slung around with such frequency by kids at each other and had no more of a "hateful meaning" than the n-word is slung around by African Americans at each other today. Sometimes its genuinely confusing getting the rules down of what is acceptable in a particular context and what is not. Sincerely, please forgive my ignorance.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #64 posted by dddd on April 13, 2001 at 01:21:34 PT
Right on Dan B
Well spoken.I am quite confident that all would agree with your statements.You are right.This is not a place for senseless words of hate...no place is.I stand with you on your views concerning this matter.Keep on keepin' on........May JAH continue to shine on you.dddd
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #63 posted by THCensorship on April 13, 2001 at 00:39:39 PT
look on the brightside
well at least censorship is nowhere near as bad as a miracle herb being illegal...welll i dont know if that was nesscearily the bright side or not....
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #62 posted by FoM on April 12, 2001 at 23:29:03 PT
Dan
I'm calling it a day and checked in and want to say thank you. You say what I feel is right too. I can't put my thoughts in words as well as you or others can and I appreciate them.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #61 posted by Dan B on April 12, 2001 at 23:16:09 PT:
Censored:
You are the one who is being too sensitive--about your concept of "censorship." Keeping hate speech (that is an accurate description of the word you so cavalierly defend) out of C News is not a matter of censorship. People are still free to promote whatever KKK mentality they want, just not here. It's the same thing with publishing an article in a magazine: if you want to write an article against hunting and fishing, don't send it to Outdoor Life. You won't likely get it published there. It isn't a matter of censorship; rather, it is a matter of catering to the needs of the publication. Comparing your "f" word to "fucking idiot" is like comparing a dog to a tree. They are completely different. The latter is directed at a specific individual, the former promotes hatred of and discrimination against an entire group of people. If you don't believe that, go ask the family of Matthew Shepard. In this forum, if we judge, most of us judge people's public actions and words--not their personal lives or genetic makeup.Using that word is exactly the same as using a word that is intended to attack a person because of his or her ethnicity. Use the "n" word in a comment here and see how many people on C News ask FoM to remove your post.Until that posting, C News has never (to my knowledge) had a problem with hate speech. Every once in a while we get someone responding to the words of a politician by attacking the individual rather than the rhetoric, but this is the first time I have seen on C News a word directed at an entire population of people. Removing the message sends a clear signal to others with the same idea: we will accept a lot of different viewpoints here, but we don't accept hate speech.If you want to debate the issues, that's fine. If you want to use hateful, ignorant language--words designed to attack entire groups of people--that's your business, but go do it on your own web page. FoM, sorry if I'm misrepresenting you here. I will not--cannot--cave on this issue, and I'll bring it up again if need be. I have been civil, diplomatic, and as respectful as I can be, given this topic. But I will not be idle while others are making a mockery of what this site is intended to be.Dan B
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #60 posted by FoM on April 12, 2001 at 20:41:20 PT
Willy
Thank You Willy,The way I look at this is I personal have a great deal of stress in my life right now with my husband being so sick. I don't have the emotional strength to fight people. I want to save my energy to help my husband fight to get better if that's possible. I believe that stress of a certain nature can really make a person sick and I'm doing everything to keep us strong. CannabisNews is a place where I learn everyday and see familar peoples comments and it puts my day in a better light. Negative energy is just too hard for me to handle and thank you for your support.I am very sensitive to using words that are slanderous towards any group. I lost my son to Aids but I'll always be a mother and defending a child is what mom's do best particularly when they aren't here to defend themselves anymore. I do take things like that personally and I just can't help it.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #59 posted by Willy on April 12, 2001 at 20:24:48 PT
FoM
I see Dan's point and I understand removing the post. It seems to me that censoring ideas has never happened here and I can't imagine it ever will. Enforcing rules meant to maintain decorum, however, is sometimes necessary. I think you have enough respect from those of us who read and post regularly that a word from you in response to a profane or flaming post will be enough to minimize that sort of thing.Keep up the good work. I for one have become "addicted" to your site and withdrawl would be painful. Thanks
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #58 posted by freedom fighter on April 12, 2001 at 18:42:28 PT
Man,
It is so easy to overgeneralize, undergeneralize, or just generalize the words.. A'int Life just a bowl of Cherry pits!!\/"Always expect the unexpect.."
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #57 posted by FoM on April 12, 2001 at 18:39:24 PT
Censored
Your allowed to post Censored. That was never a issue. Let's not bring these words up anymore and get on with talking about the news and everything will be just fine. I really do appreciate people who try to understand what is important to me and I don't think it's too much to ask. Thank You.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #56 posted by Censored on April 12, 2001 at 17:21:15 PT
Reality.
Dan B.,I am glad you don't aren't offended by curse words. I read the post that got deleted and all's someone did was make a general reference to "fag" just like someone would make a general reference to "fucking idiot". However, that curse word is interpreted as "hate speech". I think you're overly sensitive to some words, and I think it's political correctness.I also think the system operator does a great job posting news items here, and making a generally interesting place to visit. But this is not a feel-good candy store, this is a place tackling hardcore controversial issues. And because of that you shouldn't be surprised to see disagreement, debate and yes, even some occasional mudslinging. You can label it with terms called "hate speech", you can shout it down, you can delete posts, block IP numbers and shut down the whole website if you want. But don't be surprised if controversial subjects sometimes net controversial responses delivered in controversial posting styles. Nobody's trying to pick a fight or make the sysop defend himself. But if you really wanted a news service where everybody validated everybody else, then you shouldn't be allowing anonymous posting and you shouldn't be encouraging opinions to be posted by allowing a "Post Comments" option.I like it here. I think there are many thoughtful responses, and I have learned a lot. I may not be a "regular" to this website, but I like to think that somehow doesn't dilute the value of what I might have to say.Thanks for listening and allowing me to post.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #55 posted by Rambler on April 12, 2001 at 12:04:27 PT
golly
We are lucky there is no censoring niceness and politeness here.If that wasthe case,then these pages would be empty.Thank you FoM.You are the BEST!
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #54 posted by FoM on April 12, 2001 at 11:36:33 PT
Hi Dan
You make good sense and I appreciate what you wrote. You know I'm not a fearless leader. You know what I am? I must be an extension of all of the dispositions that visit here. Lord that might not make sense. Respecting each other is very important to me but political differences don't bother me. That's how we learn. We need to hear different sides because there is always more then one side to every story. I am not who I was yesterday and I won't be the same person tomorrow either. Neither will any of us. That means we should humbly look at our opinions from day to day and make sure they'll fit tomorrow. Kinda deep huh? LOL!
What's New
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #53 posted by Dan B on April 12, 2001 at 11:20:47 PT:
Censorship: Blame Me
As the person who instigated the removal of the aforementioned post, I feel I should come to the defense of our fearless leader, FoM. Here is the reasoning behind my suggestion:FoM has always fostered a policy of open communication on C News in which everyone feels comfortable expressing her or his opinions, beliefs, research, and philosophical iterations. I believe strongly that censorship of ideas is wrong, and I openly speak out against censorship of ideas whenever I can.Why, then, would I ask for the removal of a post here on C News? Because I believe that at some point, some level of decorum must be established if we are to remain effective and useful in our pursuit of a common goal. I don't have a problem with so-called "curse words," and I don't have a problem with those who disagree with me or anyone else in the context of this forum (although I have been known to snap at people who I think are snapping at me).But when comments are reduced to what amounts to hate speech, I think we have a right to say "this does not represent us; we are not a group of haters," and take measures to insure that such speech is not later taken out of context to discredit what is a very credible and sound group of individuals working toward a worthy and respectable cause.I respect everyone's right to say what he or she wants, but I also understand that prohibitionists are watching us and waiting for an opportunity to pounce. We need to be free to express our ideas and opinions, but we should hold some standard of decency as well. That is why I asked FoM to consider removing the post that contained hate speech. I apologize if some of you are offended at my actions. Please understand that I had the best interests of all of us in mind when I made my request. FoM has been quite accomodating to all of us, and I am thankful for her dedication to providing the best service possible to educate and facilitate honest, open discussion. Dan B
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #52 posted by FoM on April 12, 2001 at 11:19:10 PT
Thank You Jean
If what you say is true and I do believe you then Cannabis News has achieved it's potential. That's all I ever wanted and your words mean a lot to me. That feels nice right about now. Take good care of yourself and your family. I'm sure you do. Peace, FoM!
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #51 posted by Jeaneous on April 12, 2001 at 11:02:55 PT:
FoM
What would we ever do without you and all the hard long hours you put into our movement. I think you know that all of us "oldies" trust you. I hate to think where I would be without having found your site. You do a beautiful job and all of us appreciate you. This site is to bring us activists together so we are stronger. We help one another daily by our posts. Hate does not belong here. This is not a debate page, but a news page. And a great one at that!!Carry peace in your heart FoM. I know you are not unfair to any of us. Bless ya!!
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #50 posted by FoM on April 12, 2001 at 06:27:16 PT
My 2 cents
I just wanted to mention that I have no interest in censoring anyone. All I want to do is news and let you talk about the news so we can get out of this mess called the drug war faster. I remember that people said if you don't like the way we control our web site make your own. I did with the help of many good people so I ask for respect for my dream too. I remove multiple posts. I fix links if I can. Removing comments isn't what I'm interested in doing. So please leave hate off this site and we will all be fine here. Thank You for helping me make C News a nice place to visit. I just don't want those nasty people to come here and hassle me. I am not a fighter and I don't think I should be forced to fight. I think that is wrong. I respect people and I hope that I can get a little respect too. Please don't read more into what I am saying then I mean. I don't want to defend myself. I hope the record of the way I don't eliminate posts is remembered when the haters start stirring trouble. I hope not on this site though.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #49 posted by dddd on April 12, 2001 at 04:03:11 PT
Reflection of intellect
I agree with Zion on the subject of eliminating posts.I think that allthe good people are seasoned,and hep enough to not be too shocked,or offended when some idiot makes a senseless,or profane post.Ithink that the people who do this,are experimenting to see if theycan actually see their expletives in print.Perhaps there are somecomments that are so obviously senseless that they should be filedin the trash,but I think that the few idiots who do try and test thelimits ,and then realize that they were not censored,and that no onecares,or was shocked by their immature antics,,will reconsiderwhat they are doing,and hopefully come thru with some relevant,and constructive comments......dddd
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #48 posted by zion on April 12, 2001 at 03:37:07 PT
Images
I think the reason why government is so bent on prohibiting cannabis is because, in general, the people in U.S. gov can't admit to ever making a mistake. I think MJ prohibition is a lot like how we treated Native Americans and the Vietnam turmoil. We started down a path, and then had to continue down that path because to change would be admitting that what we were doing, as a nation, was wrong. It took a tremdous civil upheaval to change the political mindset on Vietnam, and unfortunately, the political mindset was never changed before the eradication of the Indian culture on the continent.So, in my opinion, a lot of the resistance to MJ law reform is just plain and unadulterated PRIDE.-zP.S. I believe that image is important, but it is a dangerous road to go down if one starts eliminated posts. I make no apologies that I am Christian, and have in the past been offended by a few posts on this website. But I have never asked for such posts to be removed, rather tried to point out the insensitivity and prejudices/stereotyping in the content. It's your website, FoM, and you do quite a fanstastic job. But be careful how you apply the criteria for post removal - it's a tricky catwalk, and it's easy to get caught between competing interests and sensitivities.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #47 posted by Stripey on April 11, 2001 at 22:19:37 PT
It's all about image.
Yes, censorship sucks. But if we don't keep ourselves clean of hate speech and the like, even if it's technically 1st amendment protected, the government will try to. And when they close the fist, we'll lose more than the ability to profane each other. The board might go under.It's a crappy thing to have to do, but we have to keep the rights to the important speech, and to do that, we have to sacrifice the right to the immature stuff.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #46 posted by Dan B on April 11, 2001 at 22:13:45 PT:
Good, Evil, and the American Way
WHAT NAME, I never once felt like I was wasting my time responding to your remarks. I enjoy a healthy exchange of ideas, and I think that is what just took place with all of these postings between you and me. In response to your question, I think that a large bulk of people making decisions for the rest of us are simply ignorant of marijuana's benefits. Many are just blindly following the status quo, never questioning the validity of arguments made by the prohibitionist government because, they reason, the government must have our best interests in mind. After all, we elected them, right? Of course, you and I know that this is not necessarily true. But, I do believe there are those who are profiting from the prison-industrial complex and other industries that would be affected (that is, their profits might decrease) should hemp/marijuana be made illegal. These people promote prohibition to such an extent that they are willing to lie in order to keep the "powers that be" in the dark--to keep politicians from changing the policies from which these industries are profiting. I understand that Jack Herer's book The Emperor Wears No Clothes gives an excellent overview of the origins of marijuana prohibition, including the prohibition of industrial hemp. I have read many historical documents on this subject (although I have not yet gotten my hands on Herer's extremely important book), and I have to say that there have been and continue to be profiteers who would sacrifice the well-being of a nation if it meant more money for them. I think that some who initially went along with these profiteers may not have thought ahead to the ultimate effects of their destructive policies, but most did not change their tunes when the negative repercussions began to become apparant. Some (like Anslinger) deliberately changed their messages over the years in order to continue profiting from the prohibition of cannabis.William Randolph Hearst, Andrew Mellon, the DuPonts, the Rockefellers, and many others profited from or represented others who profited from prohibition of cannabis, and many today (pharmaceuticals companies, petrochemical companies, the alcohol and tobacco industries) continue in this same sick tradition.Of course, there are also those who promoted cannabis prohibition for racist reasons (historically, racism has always been the means by which prohibitionists have promoted their policies in the general public). Today, the racism is still in effect (witness the recent study by Human Rights Watch, for example), although most couch their rhetoric in terms of a hated "drug counterculture." The effect is the same: prohibitionists marginalize and demonize certain segments of the population in order to promote their policies.In short, there is evil out there, and in most cases it boils down to hate, greed or both. At any rate, the main purpose of prohibition laws is to insure that one segment of the population complies with the arbitrary standards of another segment of the population, and in that sense--whether motivated by desire for money, power, religious fervor, or hatred of a particular group--those who support prohibition are interested in control. We are most evil when we seek to control the affairs of others.I hope I have answered your question.Best,Dan B
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #45 posted by WHAT NAME on April 11, 2001 at 20:39:15 PT
Dan B. (good argument)
okay, I read your entire argument, and I think i understand what you're trying to say. I actually totally agree with your last statement, about how you think I should use the info. in a way that would make the drug look good if it were to be legalized. I intended to do that,, but since I'm so "ate-up" , I must have forgot. (ate-up is a term used for being brain dead from doing too many drugs)So, you are trying to say that maybe my withdrawls were really just side effects from the stress that the weed induced?I do beleieve your theory, but since I would have never gotten those effects if i had never smoked, then I still consider it to be "withdrawl" or "physically additicing"My definitions don't nessecarily fit the government's or even yours. I usually have my own definitions for things, which can make arguing with me a pain in the ass, but I see that you're only trying to do good, so I'm sorry if i wasted your time, but I don't think i did, because you at least taught me something new.(i never really knew there were THAT many effects from stress)anyway, dont get the wrong idea, i didnt intend to waste anyone's time, I just think that if you're getting symptoms that are unconfortable after stopping usage, that the drug should be considered "physically addicting"Alcohol is pys. addicting , and I've done that many times, with no withdrawls ever, so i cant say from experieence that it IS addicting, but if they weed isnt, when i know it is, then I can imagine that they wouldnt lie about the alcohol, but let me quote something you said here, because i have a question for you...****These are mainly studies that are intended to show negative effects of marijuana, but NIDA and other government organizations keep getting slammed back into their places by these studies because, in fact, they show that marijuana is not nearly as dangerous as the government would like for us to believe).****okay, does this mean that the governmet KNOWS that weed is good, but they continue to make it illegal so they can make extra money?Because I used to think the same thing, before figuring out the meaning of life, but now I think different. I think the governemt knows nothing about how good weed is,because they are so conditioned and brainwashed by each other, so they are in "denial"Do you think so too, or do you think they are just plain "evil"?because anyone who would keep weed illegal for the money is either very very stupid, or evil, and I just don't beleive in evilness.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #44 posted by FoM on April 11, 2001 at 17:24:12 PT
Thanks Dr. Russo
Thank You Dr. Russo,I am against censorship too but flaming is also wrong. I just can't see how we as an intelligent community of activists can allow people to divide us and keep us from doing good helpful things. I am a loner not by choice but because I can't handle what I have seen on a few sites. We are suppose to all be on the same side. It can be that way if we all try hard enough.Thanks FoM!
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #43 posted by Ethan Russo, MD on April 11, 2001 at 17:12:59 PT:
It's Your Baby, FoM
I do not like censorship, but you have posted rules, and I feel that they are reasonable and proper. If people realize that their expletives and homophobic rants will not see the light of day on this corner of the WWW, they will be less likely to post, and find some other venue.Personally, I would like to see a lofty exchange done with panache, without personal attacks, profanity or similar problems. They are distracting without contributing to the dialogue.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #42 posted by FoM on April 11, 2001 at 16:53:19 PT
Censorship
I will answer this but this is all. I have been censored. What about what people don't want to hear? Where our our rights? That is Censorship too. I appreciate your comment but what must be will be to protect the integrity of CannabisNews. This isn't something I take lightly either but where can people of like mind go if nasty attitudes and name calling follow them everywhere? I hope you understand. If people don't agree with what I just wrote I'd like to hear from the regulars.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #41 posted by Censorship on April 11, 2001 at 16:30:17 PT
Sad day for Cannabisnews.com
I am a big proponent of tolerance. So much so, I prefer to tolerate ignorant name-calling and expose them for the childish arguments that they are, rather than risk censorship.I'm dismayed to see a post calling someone a "fag" is summarily removed, yet other posts that have graphic profanity are tolerated. Reading the acceptable use policies on this website, I would have thought profanity would have been removed immediately. But no, it wasn't until someone complained about "slamming life choices" by using the 'fag' epithet do the wheels of censorship kick in.It is truly a shame that CNews has become a haven for political correctness. In case you aren't familiar with the term, this is where selective standards are applied, and one political group is elevated to a particular level of special treatment at the expense of other groups. It is seen across college campuses left and right these days. I'm sorry to see it at Cannabisnews. In my opinion, it would have been better to stay out of the editorialization of people posting, than to be selectively censoring posts.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #40 posted by Dan B on April 11, 2001 at 15:26:39 PT:
WHAT NAME
Strange that you would write to refute what I have written (which is simply what four established medical professionals have stated), even though what I wrote was mainly intended to show that much of what you wrote initially was, in fact, correct. I wasn't arguing with you; I was backing you up.There is a withdrawal syndrome for some cannabis smokers. I acknowledged that. But I also looked into the scientific literature because that is where one is likely to find facts about marijuana use and its effects (contrary to what the government tries to tell everyone, quite a lot of studies have been conducted on marijuana. These are mainly studies that are intended to show negative effects of marijuana, but NIDA and other government organizations keep getting slammed back into their places by these studies because, in fact, they show that marijuana is not nearly as dangerous as the government would like for us to believe).You can talk all day about your personal experiences, but you cannot generalize from your own personal experiences to the general population. Most of the people you know smoke marijuana because you tend to gravitate toward people who are like you. That is a natural, human sociological phenomenon. But it can also present to you a rather warped perspective of the real world, such that you believe that everyone is like you because you tend to hang around people who are like you. Outside your circle of friends, however, are a great many other people (over 280 million people in the United States at the last count), and most of them do not smoke marijuana on a regular basis, although the majority of adults likely have tried it at least once or twice.There are flaws with the scientific methods used in many studies, to be sure. How many people, for example, are likely to answer truthfully when a representative of a government agency calls to ask about the consumption of illegal substances? So, I agree that Dr. Morgan's numbers may be off--but I think his numbers lend themselves to greater credibility than yours because they are derived from a variety of scientific studies conducted over a long period of time; whereas, yours are derived only from personal experience. With regard to withdrawal symptoms, it may well be that the symptoms you experienced were due to chemical changes brought on by marijuana, but I think it is likely that they are from a combination of the physical effects from no longer introducing cannabinoids into your system and the personal stress derived from your inability to continue a psychological habit. Consider this list of physical symptoms associated with stress (Taken and slightly adapted from Stress Assess--see link at the bottom of this page):Perspiration: increased sweating or cold clammy hands. Frequent need to urinate. Voice changes; stuttering, shaky, strained, high pitch laughter. Anxiety or panic: feeling things getting out of control. Hyperactivity: sudden bursts of energy. Poor diabetic control (if diabetic). Difficulty falling asleep; insomnia; nightmares. Fatigue, feeling tired. Neuromuscular dysfunction; trembling, shaking, nervous tics, frowning, wrinkling forehead. Impulsive behavior and/or accident proneness. Daydreams; preoccupied, indecisiveness. Skin changes; rashes, pimples, acne, temperature. Re-occurring herpes. Gastrointestinal symptoms: indigestion, gas pains, diarrhea, constipation, nausea, ulcers, rectal hemorrhoids. Muscular tension: bruxism (grinding or clenching teeth), pain in jaw, neck, shoulders, back. Low grade infections, flu. Self-conscious: feelings of guilt, inadequacy, poor self-esteem. Sexual dysfunction. Migraine headaches. Mental confusion, poor judgment, poor memory. Women: menstrual difficulties(premenstrual tension/missed menstrual cycle, infertility. Men: infertility. Cardiovascular symptoms: rapid heartbeat, chest pains, high blood pressure. Tension headaches. Kidney imbalance: bloating, water retention, excessive thirst. Pessimistic attitude, conviction everything turns out for the worse. Difficulty sitting still: pacing, finger or foot tapping. Respiratory symptoms: shortness of breath, dizziness, hyperventilation. Allergies, sores in mouth, hives. Inability or difficulty concentrating, racing thoughts. Arthritic joint pain. Upper respiratory: colds, strep throat, mono. Emotional tension and alertness: feeling frustrated, angry, restless, irritable, resentment. Drymouth or throat; difficulty swallowing. Emotional instability: feeling depressed, helpless, hopeless overpowering urge to cry and/or run and hide. Loss or excessive appetite. I think you'll agree, that is quite a list, and all of the symptoms you described can easily fit into this set of stress-related symptoms. Again, my intention is not to argue with you, but to show where your arguments are correct and where you might want to modify them a bit to make them more credible to the general populations. Please, take this list of symptoms associated with stress as an indication that making marijuana illegal can, and I believe does, increase any potentially harmful effects of using marijuana on a regular basis. And it makes withdrawal symptoms worse than they should be because stress is created when people are not allowed to carry out their habits due to draconian government decrees.I hope this clarifies my position and puts to rest any idea you may have that I don't believe you. I do believe you, but I think that your symptoms (and your friends' symptoms) may have been caused by more than just the sudden withdrawal from cannabinoids.Respectfully,Dan B
Stress Assess
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #39 posted by FoM on April 11, 2001 at 15:09:24 PT
Dan
Hi Dan, I will look closer at this thread and no slamming people's life decisions are wanted here. I must remove slanderous comments. CannabisNews has become too big to tolerate anything that will bring reproach on our hard work. There are very angry people on line that have caused much harm to our efforts and we need to get it right or it's all over for any hopes of reform. No time for fun and games. This is it! We will win soon or I'm afraid that if the antis see many more nasty comments they'll push harder against us because they'll say they are drug crazed. I hope this makes sense? We are supposed to be mature people. We need to act like one. Where is the problem in what comment? I'm having trouble keeping up with everything today. Dan I found it comment 33. I'll remove it in a little while. My son was Gay and slamming life choices has no place on CannabisNews.I am truly sorry that some people who hate so much come and try to post their nasty comments here. I just wish they wouldn't cause problems. There are plenty of web sites that it seems to be ok to do, so why don't they go there? I really hope they will show a little respect for us here. I give respect to people and I only hope for respect in return.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #38 posted by Stripey on April 11, 2001 at 14:41:54 PT
WHAT NAME
Ok, you're doing something that adult people with common sense like to call generalization. Just because more than 50% of the people that you know smoke weed on a regular basis does not make the 1% figure inaccurate. In fact, what you're doing is saying "that's not right, but I'm going to take a blind, unfounded stab at that statistic and Consider it more valid than John's well-researched statistics." How much sense does that make? Generalization #2. You experienced withdrawl. I haven't and I was a chronic smoker for 2 years, and quit without a single problem, outside of being a little grumpy which is not a physical withdrawl, but a mental one. But you're going to try to argue that I "don't smoke the right way." I gotta wonder how I can be clearing bongs and coughing up a lung and not be smoking enough to have withdrawls. You were probably expecting withdrawls for whatever reason, and your symptoms were probably psychosomatic. You thought you needed marijuana, and because you possibly used it as a dependancy drug, as in smoked it to relieve emotional problems or run from anxieties, you had stress related issues when your crutch was gone. Your personal experiences are valid, but not when making general statements about marijuana. To think so is egotistical and just plain wrong. And the fact of the matter is, you have the research of two licensed medical practitioners against your personal testimony in an uncontroled environment with countless variables that in conjunction with not being able to do what you like (read: smoke marijuana) or having your comfort crutch removed (read also: smoke marijuana) could cause these stress-related symptoms.Also, you seem to be putting out an awful lot of information and absolutely no scientific proof. Anecdotals may be nice for other legalizers/users, but not for the crowd that will get results. We have to present everything with proven fact, or the antis will win. It's just good practice.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #37 posted by jAHn on April 11, 2001 at 13:06:39 PT
People like Kimmy forget naturally...
...that there are THOUSANDS of children who have just gotten Cancer as a result of living too close to a plant that emits the Cancer. It's a shame that these industrial Plants aren't required to have warning labels on their construction plans, hiring applications, Corp. T's and Caps...and whatever else you can imagine. It's just terrible that this "Kimmy" is potentially an Inheritor of a plant that emits cancer......This is America....And the research used to back anything up--- is just contradicted by some other Fat Bastard's Pocket...so where are we now??? I guess we'll just have to let the Dictators stay at the reigns Lies kill memory! I'd LOVE to see this LYING government hire a liar to prove this!!! What a bunch of CRAP!!! ah ha ha ah! Noone in America is Humane, therefore, Humane-Structured laws are ONLY A VIRTUE...that'll be counteracted by some Rich, HEavily Lawyered Prosecutor...Who bought its; degree and not learned it!!!!
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #36 posted by WHAT NAME on April 11, 2001 at 12:27:06 PT
DAN B. (please read) WITHDRAWL INFO.
Okay, I know who john morgan is, and he is not that reputable of a source. (no offense) He does in fact know more about marijuana than the average person, but when it comes to addiction, he does not.The percentage of American's who smoke on a daily basis is much higher than 1%.Those figures are way off. I have never conducted a study on the %tage of americans who smoke it, BUT I DO know so many people that do, and it's estimated that in my home town, that 85% or more of the people here are smokers (daily).I heard that from somewhere, but the source may not have been right. From my own personal observation, I can tell that at least 50% of the people here are smokers. I live in the city where 420 originated. The only city I've ever been to that seemed to have as many smokers was LAs vegas, but that is a big city. I take in consideration that there are towns that don't have many smokers, but those figures are wrong, and I don't expect you to trust me, but if i had to guess, I'd say at LEAST 20% of the american population tokes on a daily basis.The times are changing, and more people are smoking, believe it or not. John Morgan does not have as much experience with marijuana as I do, obviosuly, or he would know that it's pretty addictive.Let me tell you the 2 main reasons why most people never notice addiction with weed. Well the first reason is because a lot of smokers ALWAYS have weed, and they will never run out, so they will never experience the withdrawls!That is a FACT.Another FACT, most people don't smoke weed the "right" way, and it's not that addictive when it's done any other way, just like heroin wouldn't be as addictive if you didn't shoot it up.The "right" way to do a drug would depend on what you were doing it for. With weed, most people smoke it to get high, so considering that, the "right" way to do it would be to get the bigest hit you could and to hold it in your lungs, so it expands. That is the "right" way. but most people don't do that. If you are not caughing after your hit, then you didn't do it the "right" way in my opinion.And if you are smoking this way, you probably wont get addicted. This was probably the case of that little poser who called me a fag.And if you think the withdrawls are only mild, then check this out.I smoked about 1/4 oz./wk for about 2 years for recreational purposes, and I had to stop over legal shit, and the night I stopped, my withdrawls hit.I had nausea, and loss of appitite as usual, but I had to go longer without the weed, so then I started really getting sick. There was NO way I could have eaten, unless I was to smoke some weed, and I tried to take a drink of water, and I PUKED it up. I could NOT hold it down. I was seriosuly addicted to the marijauana, and no it was never laced. MArijuana's withdrawls are sinmilar to that of ecstasy. It's like a natural ecstasy. It's funny how not many people know that MDMA is physically addictive too. It's withdrawls are usually even more mild than marijuana's but if you take an overdose, the withdrawls can kill. Believe it or not, it happened to me.I would not lie about this.I am a weed supporter, but I also want people to know the truth. I want you all to know that regardless of the bad effects of weed, it is still good, and no where near as bad as even the safest over the counter med.I know other people who were addicted to marijuana, and they all had the SAME exact withdrawls as me.The one unbleievable thing is that if I know I'm about to smoke, my withdrawls will subside, suggesting it could be psychological, but I vomitied from the withdrawl of marijauna, and so have other people. More and more are smoking all the time, and the times are changing. The new fact will stand in the future, MARIJUANA IS PHYSICALLY ADDICTIVE, BUT SAFE AS FUCK!I'm glad its addictive. It's addictive for a reason.NAture (god) wanted us to smoke it all the time!!!!!!!!!
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #35 posted by Dan B on April 11, 2001 at 11:54:07 PT:
FoM
Can we do something about the comments that do nothing but promote ingnorance on this site. I'm talking only about those that simply call people names. Shouldn't there be some substance to these comments? Or do we want to have an ongoing record of the ignorance and abuse dished out by people who mostly favor legalization? It seems to me that we are all in this thing together. Calling someone a "fag" (I'm sure that Richard Cowan, one of the major activist pioneers of marijuana policy reform, editor of MarijuanaNews.com and anchor for the 4:20 Marijuana News on POT-TV, happens to be gay, and I don't think he would much appreciate people throwing around such terms in the name of legalization) or cursing for the sake of cursing seems to me to carry nothing valuable--nothing of substance. I agree that we should allow people to say what they need to say in order to make their points, but shouldn't we hold people some standard of decency? Maybe we should ask the rest of the respondents here at Cannabis news. My guess is that I'm not alone.Here's a possibility: all those who disagree with what I have written and wish to abuse someone because that is all you can muster in the way of argumentation, send a personal e-mail to me, rather than taking up valuable space in this very public forum. Dan B
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #34 posted by johnny wilcox on April 11, 2001 at 09:32:59 PT
kimmy, baby...
they don't want you to smoke pot because it will set you free. and i'm not talking about getting high. what if you suddenly realized -- of your own accord -- that EVERYTHING you'd been told about pot was wrong? does it bother you that you've been lied to by people you're supposed to trust?
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #32 posted by sm247 on April 11, 2001 at 05:46:25 PT
look,listen and learn
Despite the positives, I am not convinced. There are so many other factors that need to be considered. Marijuana causes some parts of the brain - such as those governing the emotions, memory and judgment - to spin out of control.This statement is a krock totally.So far, there aren't any other safe, alternative ways to take marijuana.This statement is a bigger krock try eating it duhhhhhhAre there advantages to legalizing marijuana? I can't deny that the answer is yes. Do the benefits outweigh the side effects? No. We already have too many people high in our country. We don't need to prescribe it when there are other safe alternatives.And in this statement the auther is contadicting herself/himself.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #31 posted by johngrey on April 10, 2001 at 23:43:22 PT:
Hear Hear #30
I would also like to request that posters refrain from SHOUTING. Just because your Caps Lock is on does not make what you have to say more important or indeed, valid.Kimmy, I applaud you for having the courage to speak your mind as everyone is entitled to an opinion. But I and I'm sure many other readers hear today, fervently hope that your future opinions are developed through experience and not just glossy ad campaigns.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #30 posted by Dan B on April 10, 2001 at 22:24:02 PT:
Weighing in on #27 and #29 (and more)
First, I am glad to see yet another article getting so many responses. I have noticed, however, that the only articles getting this number of responses are those that attempt to put down the legalization movement. I appreciate the enthusiasm of everyone here, but perhaps we could devote some attention toward praising the articles that actually get it right, like the companion to this one.Second, the person who wrote comment #27 has no clue what this site is about. Notice, for example, that just above the place where we write comments is a sentence in red that states [Please refrain from using profanity in your message]. If the person who wrote #27 were truly interested in keeping harmony on this site, he/she should at least have the decency to follow this simple rule.In addition, the author of comment #27 has little of value to say, whatsoever. The idea that only smokers have a right to speak out against prohibition is absolutely absurd. The comment serves only to bolster the opinions of those who believe that (1) all people infavor of legalization are illicit drug users, and (2) people who care enough to work toward legalization are all idiots without an ounce of integrity or compassion. Those of us who have been commenting here far longer than the author of #27 know that this is far from the truth. In fact, most of the people who contribute their opinions are quite thoughtful and articulate, exhibiting enormous capacities for compassion and integrity. In short, if all you have to say is hateful, profane and derogatory, I suggest you find another forum in which to vent your feelings. At least think hard enough to write some sensible and interesting commentary before submitting your thoughts here. Almost everyone who posts here writes intelligent, insightful responses to the articles or to comments based on the articles; I'm talking to the tiny minority who can't seem to muster anything of value in their comments. We read enough hate and venom from the prohibitionists; we don't need it from our own camp, as well. Being angry is fine, but please don't alienate people from accepting what we have to say because of an inability to control your language.With regard to whether marijuana is physically addictive, here is what at least one reputable source has to say:"Most people who smoke marijuana smoke it only occasionally. A small minority of Americans--less than 1 percent--smoke marijuana on a daily or near daily basis. An even smaller minority develop dependence on marijuana. Some people who smoke marijuana heavily and frequently stop without difficulty. Others seek help from drug treatment professionals. Marijuana does not cause physical dependence. If people experience withdrawal symptoms at all, they are remarkably mild."from Marijuana Myths, Marijuana Facts by Lynn Zimmer, Ph.D. and John Morgan, M.D., p. 26It seems, then, that WHAT NAME is correct, at least in part. Withdrawal symptoms do occur for a tiny minority of marijuana smokers--primarily those who smoke it often and heavily. However, most users do not use marijuana enough to elicit the withdrawal symptoms, and some who do smoke it heavily and often manage to quit with few or no noticeable withdrawal symptoms. The main type of dependence on marijuana is psychological, not physical, and the withdrawal symptoms mentioned in comment #29 are not at all common. Most people who experience any withdrawal symptoms whatsoever are irritable for a few days, a sign of psychological dependence, not physical dependence.Two pharmacologists, Dr. Jack Henningfield and Dr. Neal Benowitz, ranked a variety of substances (heroin, nicotine, cocaine, alcohol, marijuana, caffeine) in terms of their "dependence potential" (Zimmer and Morgan 29). Both found that marijuana's "dependence potential" was less than or equal to that for caffeine. Here's another quotation from Zimmer and Morgan: . . . a 1991 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services report to Congress states that: "Given the large population of marijuana users and the infrequent reports of medical problems from stopping use, tolerance and dependence are not major issues at present."The U.S. government has not been known to make statements in favor of the relative harmlessness of marijuana, so the above quotation can be taken as a strong indicator that marijuana has not been proven to cause physical dependence, at least not in large numbers pof marijuana smokers. Recent increases in admissions to drug treatment programs for marijuana dependence are largely attributable to court-ordered "treatment" for anyone caught using marijuana, no matter the level of "dependence." I hope this message clears up some things for everyone.Dan B
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #29 posted by WHAT NAME on April 10, 2001 at 19:31:55 PT
POT IS ADDICTIVE, BUT VERY BENFICIAL
TO WHOEVER THE PERSON WAS THAT KEEPS THE RUMOR GOING AROUND ABOUT HOW POT ISNT ADDICITIVE (PHYSICALLY)WELL, HERE'S A LIST OF SOME OF THE MAIN WITHDRAWL SYMPTOMS THAT ARE EXPERIENCED BY MANY PEOPLE WHO ARE FORCED TO QUIT USING THE DRUG.WITHDRAWLS FROM POT--INSOMNIA/SLEEPLESSNESSPARANOIANAUSEAVOMITINGLOSS OF APPITITEIRRITIBILTYRESTLESSNESSHEADACHE INCLUDING MIGRAINEEYE PAINSMOOD SWINGSDIARHEAHOT FLASHESCOLD FLASHES (COULD BE BOTH AT THE SAME TIME ALSO)MANY MANY MORENOW, EVEN THOUGH THERE ARE MANY SIDE EFFECTS SOCIATED WITH MARIJUANA, IT IS STILL VERY VERY BENEFICIAL TO PEOPLE.I HAVE CROHN'S DISEASE, AND WEED WORKS PERFECT TO CURE EVERYTHING TEMPORAILY. THE REASON WHY IT IS ONLY TEMP. IS BECAUSE NATURE WANTED US TO SMOKE IT EVERYDAY. IT COULD BE A WAY OF LIFE. IT'S JUST LIKE EATING AND WORKING. IT HAS SO MANY GOOD EFFECTS, AND THE BAD EFFECTS WOULD NEVER BE EXPERIENCED IF IT WAS LEGAL EVERYWHERE. PEOPLE COULD GROW THEIR OWN AND ALWAYS HAVE IT, SO WITHDRAWL COULD BE AVOIDED.EVEN IF WITHDRAWL DOES HIT, IT USUALY ISNT TOO INTENSE FOR MOST PEOPLE, AND THAT'S PROBABLY WHY THE RUMOR IS STILL ALIVE TODAY, BUT MORE AND MORE PEOPLE ARE FINDING OUT THAT WEED CAUSES PHYSICAL DEPENDENCE. I'VE KNOWN FOR A LONG TIME. (BRAGGING RIGHTS)ANYWAY, WE NEED BALANCE, SO EVEN THOUGH THERE ARE BAD EFFECTS, IT'S ALL FOR THE GOOD. IF IT WERENT FOR BAD THINGS, ALL THE GOOD THINGS WOULD BE SORT OF DULL.BUT, MARIJUANA SHOULD BE LEGAL, BECAUSE RIGHT NOW, PEOPLE ARE BEING TORTURED, AND WE ARE ALL SLAVES.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #28 posted by freedom fighter on April 10, 2001 at 19:28:57 PT
Pure Poetry in Motion somewhere in the Internet!
youre an idiot" Emancipate....pure hempCheck Your Head After 5 or 10 Years in Prisonjust had to post another message"Take the high road"what the hell manSomeone's missing the point, here.um , doorsum, chipsSince no one else has, Kevin Hebert, good job.um, birdsOut of the mouths of others...dont smoke pot eat some F& KING CheamicalsI'll make NO apologiesDamn, guys! Take it easy!*laughter*Out of the mouths of babes...Vaporize it!Hey, who needs vagueness when you've got...You can fool some of the people all of the time Kimmy is a nose picker YES My response to the Register-GuardLegalization of potJail? Prison?
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #27 posted by SHUT THE FUCK UP on April 10, 2001 at 19:13:02 PT
SHUT THE FUCK UP U DUMBASSES AND LEGALIZE WEED
HEY U FUCKS THAT HATE WEED GIVE IT A TRY AND GET HIGH MAYBE ULL FUCKIN LIKE IT AND IF U DONT DONT EVEN COME TO THIS WEBSITE AND TALK SHIT U DUMBASSES THIS IS FOR SMOKERS.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #26 posted by mark on April 10, 2001 at 18:40:39 PT:
youre an idiot
what scientific evidence is there that marijuana causes cancer? thats it keep searching. done yet? didn't find any did you. that because there is none. The comment about it causes memory loss is true but only when the effects of the thc are still in your system. The comment about it causes your emotions to spin out of control can be applied to certain people. mine dont. sorry to disappoint you. If marijuana was legal they could make a thc pill that you could just swallow.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #25 posted by CongressmanSuet on April 10, 2001 at 18:16:01 PT:
" Emancipate....
yourself from mental slavery, none but ourselves can free our minds..." Kimmy, poor, sweet, uncritical, Mommy and Daddy loving child that you are, you have been BRAINWASHED! Now, for the sake of your fellow humans, many of which suffer constant pain, please take all your convoluted "facts" and get your self to a dare class pronto. Maybe you just need to be with your own kind, you know, the sheep at the trough, the lemmings headed toward the sea, because you dont fit in with any group who actually thinks for themselves....
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #24 posted by rabblerouser on April 10, 2001 at 18:05:32 PT
pure hemp
always relieves my aching back. Pain so great aspirin will not dent. I become nauseous when I ingest to much aspirin. 85% of the world's Ritalin supply is used in the US. The remaining 15% is consumed by Canadians; that should ring the Liberty Bell all the way to the moon, hammered out chips and all. Good money for the pharmaceutical sharks; it is also shocking to know that they are getting away with bags full of money. Oh well, they have good intentions; the road to hell is paved with 'good intentions.''In Heaven there is no pot, that's why we smoke a lot' Cheers
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #23 posted by Frank on April 10, 2001 at 17:56:31 PT
Check Your Head After 5 or 10 Years in Prison
Try doing 5 to 10 years in prison for a marijauan bust and then see how intact your memory and emotions are. Prison is much more harmful to your memory or emotions than marijuna.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #22 posted by SHEEM on April 10, 2001 at 17:46:37 PT:
just had to post another message
hey i forgot some things. i was reading some of the other peoples messages and i feel very strongly that you kimmy are wrong. you have been manipulated by the system ever sense you were born. parents and teachers and the GOVERNMENT ( which i happen to feel needs to be shown how to run a country) have implanted so many lies into the minds of our youth today the they can no longer think for themselves. no one is trained to learn they are all just trained to look at a book and absorb the thoughts of someone else. don't get me wrong i believe that books are on of the most important freedoms we have but being forced to read a text book and then right a paper saying what that person said and not having the option to put in your own two cents sucks. you also stated, kim, that later scientist's may find a chemical that is close to thc. well first what about people suffering now don't they have the right to be happy now and not have to wait 10 years or maybe even never to be out of pain, and besides shouldn't that be there choice or are you so brain washed that you believe people don't have a choice anymore. the fact is that the government is afraid of hemp or marijuana because they would lose so much money if they did legalize it. hemp can be used to make so many products (gasoline, paper, houses, flour, textiles, clothing.....etc) all of which are cheaper and better then what we have now. the gasoline produced by hemp does not produce near as much carbon monoxcide (the leading cause of global worming)as does gasoline from oil. hemp contains more protien's then any other source known to man. the paper and the clothing are longer lasting softer and they don't take near as much land to use to make them so we could stop cutting down our forest's. all of these things are cheaper and would lower the amount of money that the government would make off of these products (imagine buying gasoline for only 30 -40 cents galon and helping to stop global warming all at once, but they don't teach you that in DARE do they). basicly kim i just want you to make up your own mind and really research this topic you don't have to advocate smoking marijuana for recreation but just learn the real facts and all the good points not just a few because the only bad thing about marijuana is if you smoke it it does not do any permanent brain damage and it is our right as human beings to choose if we want to smoke it. so kim just think for yourself and don't listen to the lies told by the government, dare or any other peers that you may incounter just research it for yourself please and find out all the good points because i can't fit them all in just one message. thank you
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #21 posted by zion on April 10, 2001 at 17:33:43 PT
"Take the high road"
(pun intended)There are two approaches to dealing with ignorance. One is to extend the hand of enlightenment to your fellow man and help them climb out of ignorance. The other is to deride and ridicule your fellow man and shame them out of ignorance.I submit to the readers of this website that the advances made in the reversal of attitudes towards cannabis in the past 5 years among the public (federal government not withstanding) have been due to the cogent, articulate arguments made against the dogmatic DARE types who do nothing but ridicule, relying on slogans, stereotypes and blatant propaganda.Look at Gov. Gary Johnson and Gen. Barry McCaffrey. Who resorted to name-calling, stereotypes and propaganda to advance his cause, and who appealled to reason? Now which one of these individuals is currently still holding his job, and which one of these men will be more likely to go down in history as elevating the masses to higher intellectual standard?The point is, let's continue to take the high road in advancement of the cause. Sure, Kimmy is misguided and the result of a propaganda machine entrenched into our educational system, but it will be better to point out the folly of her position through returning to the focal point of the issue (SENDING PEOPLE TO JAIL) than to argue the finer points of whether smoking/vaporizing is harmful or draw parallels to Pavlov's reflex conditioning.-z
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #20 posted by SHEEM on April 10, 2001 at 17:21:55 PT:
what the hell man
hey first of all there are safer ways to take marijuana. you acan eat it which makes the effects last longer and it does not harm you body in any way. second you only lose your short term memory while under the influence. so who ever wrote this stuff need s to do some real research and know what they are talking about next time. thank you
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #19 posted by kaptinemo on April 10, 2001 at 16:26:15 PT:
Someone's missing the point, here.
Consider: today's youth will be tomorrow's voters. People able to either continue the oppression that this country has been unlawfully subject to...or free it. And thereby free themselves.(I suggest to all and sundry that they read how both the Harrison Narcotics Act and the Marijuana Tax Act, meant only to tax drug transactions, have mutated into the monstrosities that have ruined the lives of millions of people. The original laws were 'sold' as 'mere' taxes...and voted upon as such. By people who did not have the slightest qualifications in the matter, save that they thought, as Kimmy no doubt does, that they were acting in consideration for the common weal.)But if they have not been trained to think? If they uncritically swallow every last bit of propaganda that they are presented with? And act upon it?The oppression continues. Our oppression. Mine. Yours. And not merely as cannabis consumers; it is never as simple as that. A hoodwinked populace is relatively easy to control. Hoodwink the children first, as organizations like PFDFA, AmericaCares, DARE, ad nauseum are trying to do (just as Hitler recommended, mind you!) with scare tactics, and the effect has a much wider range than just upon your rights as a cannabis consumer. Much wider, much deeper...and much more deleterious to a soi disant 'democracy'.Democracy is a wonderful thing, because as messy as it can get, it beats having a jackboot applied to your throat. But it is not something to be taken lightly...or wielded ignorantly. Because when democracy becomes a matter of the 'tyranny of the majority' - and when the majority is ignorant of the issues because they've been deliberately made so, then a nation is in deep trouble. As we are.I don't know about you all, but I really don't like the idea of people ignorant of the MMJ and MJ issues deciding my fate. As Kimmy will someday be in a position to do. She has stated that she has studied the pro's and con's:"The other day, I had an argument with my friends at school. We debated the advantages and disadvantages of legalizing marijuana. They are all strongly opinionated people, and I learned several facts from them. One thing I learned is that marijuana does relieve pain and that it is not nearly as addictive as morphine. It can ease the nausea and vomiting caused by chemotherapy and, at the same time, give you a wonderful high." Yes, she has made what I suspect to be a passing - a very passing - acquaintence with the facts. Like so many of her anti tutors no doubt have. And true to her programming, just like them, she ignores those same facts:"Despite the positives, I am not convinced. There are so many other factors that need to be considered. Marijuana causes some parts of the brain - such as those governing the emotions, memory and judgment - to spin out of control."And thus plays right into the hands of those who have designs upon not only our liberties but our very lives (remember Peter McWilliams? Esequiel Hernandez? Ismael Mena? Donald Scott? Alberto Sepulveda?). Who depend upon people like Kimmie to, if not actively participate in it by voting for ever more egregious vandalisms of our rights, at least acquiesce to it. Someone once wrote that a nation of sheep begets a government of wolves. The DrugWar wolves have had a free run in this country for far too long. And part of the reason for that is that our children have not been given the armament - the training to think critically - which is so desperately needed to stave off tyranny-through- ignorance. Kimmy's statements are a perfect example of this at work.Is it 'foolish' to expect our schools, funded by us, to do a better job? Is it 'arrogance' to demand better? Particularly when her vote may someday decide whether cannabis users are imprisoned for life, or executed? Keep in mind, this is precisely what her DARE mentor, Darryl Gates, had in mind for us.Democracy can be wonderful...or it can be a deadly danger when people blissfully ignorant of the facts - and possess an inculcated hatred programmed into them by others with ulterior motives - have control over the lives of others.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #18 posted by nameless on April 10, 2001 at 16:15:46 PT
um , doors
well they do make vaporizors www.vaportechco.com and they are putting together inhalers, so the smoking problems aren't problems after all. legalize cannabis and profanity!!! fuck it , legalize freeddddoododododmommmmm
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #17 posted by who cares on April 10, 2001 at 16:08:17 PT
um, chips
well, vaporizors are out there www.vaportechco.com and they are also putting together inhalers so smoking problems can be well, not a problem after all. {:-)
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #16 posted by Stripey on April 10, 2001 at 16:05:26 PT
Since no one else has,
I'm gonna have to call you on that one.Marijuana is not at all physically addictive. There is absolutely no chemical dependency. None, nada, zilch. It can be, however, mentally addictive if you can't control yourself, but hey, so can chocolate. In fact, since it contains a small amount of caffine (there's a drug no one wants to talk about banning, regulating . . .) chocolate is actually slightly physically addictive in the right quantities. And it can contains fat, so chronic usage could result in heart disease. But no one wants to outlaw sweets and coffee. Sorry.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #15 posted by what name? on April 10, 2001 at 15:51:27 PT
Kevin Hebert, good job.
Good job kevin for being one of the first to point out all those important details. People are suffering because of the fact that marijuana is illegal. Let me ask you KIMMY, do you care that thousands are suffering? OF course you do. So that's not the issue were dealing with. We are dealing with the fact that you know nothing about marijuana. All you "think" you know is what you've been "fed". That's right. You couldn't know the facts about marijuana until you've been an experienced user , yourself.There are TOO many bullshit rumors about the drug, and there is MUCH mis-representation on both sides.The people that want it legalized are spreading the rumor about how it's an UN addictive drug. (it is in fact, addictive, both physically, and psychologically.)That's one rumor that needs to be put to rest, but it's not the biggest one. And who are you to say that weed causes cancer? How would you know? Did you have a family member that died from cancerm from weed? No, you didn't, because if you did, I would have heard about it. I'm not patronizing you, but trying to get you to realize that weed actually has been shown to prevent and even CURE cancer. There obviosuly is no proof for any of you, because the government won't allow it. They prevent all the proof from reaching your ears. Well, I figured out that it DOES cure cancer, NOT cause it. I also beleieve that smoking pot makes you healither, and who the fu*k needs to "remember" anything? I'd hate to live a life where you have to remember things, because the way it is now, I remember enough. So, what i'm trying to say, is that you've been "completely" brainwashed with bullsh*tinformation about marijuana. You were fed so much bullsh*t that you don't even think about the thousands who goto jail because of it being illegal. You probably don't realize that "pills" are not as safe as the natural marijuana. Well, it is a god giving nature gift. It is an herb.. not a deadly poisonous mushroom. It is here for people to smoke, eat, or whatever. Consider all the people suffering and the needless war on drugs, and all that stuff, and then come back and tell us if you want it to be "illegal" or not. And one more thing about memory.....IF we werent all so conditioned to "think" that we should have good memories, then it wouldnt matter. Our memory would be good enough, no matter how much we smoked it. No one NEEDS to live a life that revolves around "remembering" things. So, even though pot can screw with your memory, it is no big deal at all. If you would rather have "perfect" memory, than smoke pot, than so be it, but like i said earlier, smoking pot has many beneficial effects that can prolong life. I'd rather live longer, with a worse memory, than die young because i was too stupid to realize that pot was safe.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #14 posted by nobody on April 10, 2001 at 15:49:43 PT
um, birds
wrong again. legal drugs kill at least 500,000 people a year. um, u know tobacco, um, beer.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #13 posted by MDG on April 10, 2001 at 14:26:04 PT:
Out of the mouths of others...
can also come arrogance. Each of us will take a different path in our lives, an none can say that his/her path is more just than another, solely based on the time we are "able to accurately recognize such techniques when employed against" us, or that we "had a mentor of whatever sort". The starting point for one's journey doesn't negate the beginning of another, unless we don't mind using a bit of our own moral chastism. This is why I would caution those of us who might otherwise compare foolish children to our righteous selves to "take it easy".No one asked for an apology from anyone else.Besides, I didn't notice any "Right on!" or "It's good that she saw the light!" responses for the Should Marijuana be Legalized? Yes" article. Just the easy criticism of a fool.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #12 posted by Chris on April 10, 2001 at 13:50:00 PT:
dont smoke pot eat some F& KING Cheamicals
Instead of Aleve or Advil, you could enjoy the pleasures of what is now considered an illicit drug. LEGAl DRUGS KILL NEARLY 30,000 PEOPLE A YEAR!!!!!!!!!(accourding to Life Insurance Actuarial Rates and the last 20 years of Sugeon Generals Reports)Asprin claimes the lives of more than 1000 peaple every year!these stats are from 94 who knows how much higher they are now!That makes it the 3rd largest killer of ppl in the US under tobbaco and Alcoholresearch that some day may enable us to find chemicals that provide the same effects without the dangers.( remeber a plant canot be patented by a pharmaceutical company(chemicals can)so the can turn a profit! but it can be grown for free by the patient!)Kimmie is a Sales person for a LEGAL DRUG CARTELS(also know as pharmaceutical company's) and she does'nt even know it!!!god help us in our quest to free the minds of our country
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #11 posted by kaptinemo on April 10, 2001 at 13:08:45 PT:
I'll make NO apologies
By the time a person has reached high school, they have had at least 17 years of being manipulated by parents, teachers, authority figures, etc. and should be able to accurately recognize such techniques when employed against them.I certainly did. I'm sure many of us did.Yes, I did repeat as required all the scheisse that I had to in order to 'graduate'. But I always tried to turn things in such a way, like asking subtly pointed questions, that let the propagandists know I didn't swallow that scheisse. It might have cost me more favorable grades, but my instructors knew better than to tangle with me; especially as so many teachers were soooo heavily reliant upon the 'teacher's editions' of those books the students got; you know, the one with the politically approved answers in them. Nothing like a little original thinking to throw a shoe in the works of little satraps everywhere.Thank God I had a quasi-hippie as a social studies instructor, who friggin' demanded that we think 'outside of the box'...and examine the statements of those in power for holes in their logic.As dear Kimmy evidently has not.If she ever wakes up, she'll realize she's been little more than cannon fodder in a war aimed right at her and all other children.Until then, if I need advice from a child, I'll call my nephew's wife and have her hold the baby to the phone. The result is the same, but geographically, he's a lot closer.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #10 posted by MDG on April 10, 2001 at 12:43:44 PT
Damn, guys! Take it easy!
You should all note that Kimmy is a high school senior, not a card-carrying member of the Family Research Council. I thought the same thing she did when I was her age, and if I had a bunch of (what she might deem) "potheads" telling me I was an idiot, I'd be even less likely to listen to anything but what I had all ready heard from Antis (like "just say 'No!'" or "pot makes boys grow breasts" and "it's 20 times stronger", etc).People in Kimmy's position won't be educated through scorn and ridicule. It'll just make her dig her heels in deeper.Just look at it this way: She's a senior, she'll probably be going to college next Fall, and that's where she'll learn about cannabis! Then, in a couple of years, she'll look back at this article and shake her head saying, "What the hell was I thinking?"Cut her some slack, she's not Joyce Nalepka (who deserves ridicule/scorn/prison/etc.).Mike...
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #9 posted by Stripey on April 10, 2001 at 11:49:04 PT
*laughter*
"Marijuana causes some parts of the brain - such as those governing the emotions, memory and judgment - to spin out of control."Nice scientific definition. Spinning out of control, like stop working? Like overwork, underwork, work in a completely different mannor? I'd ask Kimmy, but I'm sure she doesn't know."Its smoke carries more tar and other particles than tobacco. You can relieve your migraine, but you also have a higher chance of developing lung cancer."People don't usually smoke upwards of 40 joints a day. And that's only two packs or cigs, folks."The next time you have cramps . . ."Cramps?! WTF?! Since when is cramps a chronic pain? Before you decide to support a platform, decide what that platform is.I guess maybe I should hav read the whole article again before I posted a reply. I forgot the most pertinant part of the article:"Kimmy Schwarm is a senior at Willamette High School. "Which means she's an expert. I'll be looking forward to your next article on advanced astrophysics or accelerated subatomic motion. You'd attempt to write an article on either without any base knowledge, too. Perhaps you should learn about something before you write about it.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #8 posted by kaptinemo on April 10, 2001 at 11:46:32 PT:
Out of the mouths of babes...
oftimes comes babble.Sit, Kimmy. Good Kimmy! Lie down, Kimmy! Goood Kimmy! Now, roll over Kimmy. Roll over! Good Kimmy! Fetch the stick, Kimmy! Fetch the stick! Good Kimmy! Now give it back! Give it back! (muttering: Give it back, you wretched excuse for an intellectual!)Good Kimmy!, Now, throw up, Kimmy! Throw up!"When THC arrives in this area, it inhibits new memories from forming and also can cause people to forget facts they have just learned. Also, THC influences the limbic system (the part of the brain responsible for emotions) and can cause attacks of hysteria and paranoia.If you choose to ignore the attacks and memory loss, consider what marijuana can do to your lungs. Its smoke carries more tar and other particles than tobacco. You can relieve your migraine, but you also have a higher chance of developing lung cancer.Good girl, Kimmy! Such a well-trained little ____________ (fill in the blank).Is there any question about how badly the American public school system is failing our children when this is supposed to pass for logical thinking?
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #7 posted by J.R. Bob Dobbs on April 10, 2001 at 10:45:54 PT
Vaporize it!
>>So far, there aren't any other safe, alternative ways to take marijuana. Aside from eating it - which would be much more popular if the prices came down, proving again that it's prohibition that's bad for your health... there's also the concept of vaporization. A vaporizer heats it just enough to release the cannabinoids, without burning the plant matter and ingesting "harmful" smoke. The only thing that's spinning out of control is the prohibitionist propagandists... hopefully, not for very much longer.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #6 posted by aocp on April 10, 2001 at 10:31:50 PT
Hey, who needs vagueness when you've got...
...this accuracy:Marijuana causes some parts of the brain - such as those governing the emotions, memory and judgment - to spin out of control.No way. "Spin out of control," you say? Scuse me for getting all picky and stuff, but just what the hell are you talking about? More Boogieman fright tactics that play the vague card like it's their job.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #5 posted by fivepounder on April 10, 2001 at 10:22:19 PT
You can fool some of the people all of the time
Successful brainwashing job. She so cutely recites each myth. How cute, how bs. And never mentioning that small problem of jailing people, well out of sight and out of Kimmy's propagandized brain. This shows how easily people are programmed.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #4 posted by Cute Little Bob on April 10, 2001 at 10:08:35 PT:
Kimmy is a nose picker YES
Kimmy, Kimmy, Kimmy.Don't you remember being told that it was best if you actualy knew something of your subject matter when you wrote?Remember Kimmy, when placing "facts" into your writing, you may be called upon to back them up, so it's best if you use real ones, and not the ones you made up to support your argument. I don't have any photographic proof that Kimmy is a nose picker.But since I'm using the same authority she does, you must certainly believe it; I mean thousands of people could have seen her do it on closed circuit TV or something.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #3 posted by Kevin Hebert on April 10, 2001 at 09:51:36 PT:
My response to the Register-Guard
Thank you for printing Kimmy Schwarm's column, "The Great Debate: Should Marijuana Be Legalized? No: On Balance, Pass Up Grass." I was disappointed, though, with the many factual errors in the article, none of which were backed up by references to the scientific literature readilyavailable on this subject.For example, Kimmy writes "When THC arrives in [the hippocampus], it inhibits new memories from forming and also can cause people to forget facts they have just learned." While some people experience short-termmemory problems during (and only during) marijuana intoxication, it is not true that THC destroys memory or causes permanent forgetfulness. And, no short-term memory effects occur after the user comes down from his or herintoxication.Also, Kimmy writes "You can relieve your migraine, but you also have a higher chance of developing lung cancer [from smoking marijuana]." This is also unfounded. Marijuana smoke does not enter the smallest chambers of the lung, unlike tobacco smoke, so it does not cause emphysema and hasnever been connected in and of itself to lung cancer. In addition, unlike tobacco, marijuana does not cause heart disease and is not physically addictive.Finally, Kimmy writes "So far, there aren't any other safe, alternative ways to take marijuana [other than smoking]." This is completely false. Marijuana can be cooked and eaten and doing so completely prevents deleterious side effects that may be caused from inhaling the burned plantmatter. The weakest part of the article, though, is that it never addresses why people should be arrested and go to jail for using something less harmful and far more beneficial than legal tobacco or legal alcohol. If you are going to speak out against something, call a spade a spade: if you thinkpeople should continue to be arrested and jailed (at a rate of one person every 45 seconds, mostly for simple possession -- not trafficking) for using marijuana, come out and say so. But let us know why. Because fromwhere I am standing, it's a position that has no basis in fact. Sincerely, Kevin M. Hebert
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #2 posted by Neutrinl on April 10, 2001 at 09:47:55 PT
Legalization of pot
Please Kimmy, look at all the ruined lives and billions of dollars lost as a result of prohibition. Nothing you said can justify this waste of lives and money.
[ Post Comment ]
Comment #1 posted by observer on April 10, 2001 at 09:47:55 PT
Jail? Prison?
Prohibitionist propagandists have done their job well, as we see in young Kimmy Schwarm. Kimmy never mentions that unpleasant "jail" detail ... the whole point of "legalize." (Not sending people to jail.) Kimmy, as programmed, converts the issue of jailing people for using a plant some disapprove of, into a vote on whether or no Kimmy thinks that plant is good to smoke. No mention of jail. Kimmy gets an A+ for parroting propaganda.
[ Post Comment ]
Post Comment
Name: Optional Password:
E-Mail:
Subject:
Comment: [Please refrain from using profanity in your message]
Link URL:
Link Title: