quote:Originally posted by negrospiritual:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
They also probably drank and smoked cigarettes long before they smoked some weed. Why aren't they viewed as 'gateway drugs'?
A kid or young person sipping alcohol and smoking joints is indeed a warning sign that parents and communities must be ever vigilant about.
This is non-responsive about why alcohol and cigarettes aren't labelled gateway drugs and/or why they are legal.
quote:Also, just becausemost people participated in something that became drug addicts doesn't make it a cause/result senario, that logic is proven to be flawed.
Perhaps not directly causative, but strongly correlated. I'll try to pull the stats, as soon as I get on a different computer. Flawed logic asserts that drug experimentation has no bearing whatsoever on drug addiction, particularly within a feel good all the time, change it with a drug, doped up, here's a pill for that drug-pushing culture like in amerikka.
Pull the stats on cigarettes and alcohol while you are at it, and don't forget perscriptiond drugs. You actually pointed out the general problem, the instant gratification, 'drugs are the answer' society... But that should cause one to be irritated with the inconsistancy of the law... LAWS which actually incarcerate human beings for marijuana, yet allow drug tobacco and alcohol industries to wreak destruction an society...Not go along with the structure 'as is'. CAll me crazy, it distrubs me that peoples FREEDOM to eat, sleep, and walk around is taken from them for weed... yet big brother Pharma is a multi-national pusher.
quote:Most people who have never become addicts of anything else have taken a puff of of mariguana at some point in their lives too.
Does this mean you believe most people have experimented with marijuana? That is indeed flawed logic.
No, it means what it says, that most people that have used marijuana never become substance abusers... Therefore it's 'gateway' label is illogical. Especially when the 'gateway label' is never given to alcohol and cigarettes, even though their use also proceeds harder drugs in known drug addicts.
quote:I never called marijuana 'benign' in comparrison to anything, and BTW it isn't a 'chemical'.
In reality Marijuana contains many chemicals, chiefly TETRAHYDROCANNABINOL, from which the name "Cannabis" is derived and also the chemical shortcut name, "THC", used by laboratories. Perhaps there was no intent to compare marijuana with tobacco and alcohol but the exact quote was
Every herb contains 'chemicals'...But these substances are naturally derived from the plants. They are not synthetic and/or processed chemicals like the the heroin and crack you mentioned and made a comparrison with. But you know that...
quote:"Since you are against the legalization of marijuana, are you also in favour of making even harder drugs like alcohol and cigarettes illegal? If not, why not?
Does not the descriptor "even harder" regarding tobacco and alcohol render marijuana less so?
Why are you answering a question with a non-responsive question? The comparison has already been PROVEN. Alcohol and cigarettes ARE harder drugs. I was stating a FACT. Now would you like to answer why you think that cigarettes and alcohol are legal while marijuana isn't? Or would you prefer to dodge again?
quote:I specifically avoided saying that so you wouldn't go of an a rant about that again...Guess that didn't work out to well...
Go off on a rant? Again? Pardon? Those who have repeatedly insisted that the drug Tetrahydrocannabinol is benign have not been characterized as "ranting" but it's a free world *shrug*
When someone repeats what they have already said to a myriad of other posters on a thread to a new poster, even though the new poster made NO MENTION of that subject, and therefore what they are repeating is non-responsive, it can be safely considered 'ranting'.
quote:My post 'specifically' stated that alcohol and cigarettes are HARDER drugs than marijuana... Which is a FACT.
That is debatable but still makes a comparison...
No, it is stating a comparrison that has already been done. So it is a fact. It also is not labelling marijuana as 'benign'.
quote:I always wonder why folks that are so vehamently against the legalization of marijuana aren't out protesting about making the HARDER drugs of cigarettes and alcohol 'illegal'.
Perhaps they view the artificial consideration of all other substances when discussing the one as contrived distraction? Are there any indicators that those who "vehemently" protest are not also vocal about a myriad of things? Funny how the "Yay" position is not characterized as "those who so vehemently want marijuana flowing in the streets"
People who don't think people should loose their freedom and be incarcerated while big buisiness makes millions off similar goings on are talking about consistancy and logic in LAW. People who think marijuana should retain a penalty of incarceration while other drugs are widely available for the profit of Big Pharma, Tobacco, and alcohol...Sorry, I just don't understand their stance.
quote:It would only be logical and consistant to want less drugged out people. But I'm starting to see that logic and consistancy are not necessarily a goal.
Judging by this post one could swear that NS is the one who is promoting 2for1 spliffs at the KwikiMart instead of less drugged up, red eyed, amotivational syndrome having, drug screen failing, can't keep a job people. To borrow a phrase Simply Amazing... The shortsightedness of trying to gauge a messageboard poster's drug prevention efforts and anti drug advocacy within their community is not only illogical, and inconsistent, but also laughable.
Uhhhm, OK... When a poster on a forum totally dismisses and avoids responding to questions about cigarettes and alcohol...yet keeps harping on marijuana... The only LOGICAL conclusion is that the inconsistancy in law and what is deamed 'harmful' is not an issue they want to deal with.
quote:What do personal preference have to do with the establishment of societal law?
[quote]Uhh...that's what the thread was about, initially, the personal preferences of the majority of Zogby pollees being translated into public policy aka "democracy".
Yes, and your personal preference didn't match the numbers...So once again, what does your(or my BTW) personal preference of 'usage' have to do with the establishment of democratic law that leads to incarceration?
quote:I'm not sure why peep are responding as if i've said alcohol and tobacco are wonderful and passing out cognac and a stogi?
It may be your refusal to deal with/adress/respond to the inconsistancy in the law...The law that people are incarcerated for[b/](sorry,that's a big deal to me) while industry makes millions pushing similar societal ills?
quote:[b]The Amerikkkan culture promotes individualistic 'feel good' consumption and the pursuit of physical pleasure at large. This includes smoking and drinking. So I wonder why(I'm being sarcastic) those very harmful drugs aren't being pushed by folks to become 'illegal'.
A fair question I suppose but I'm more concerned about the high rates of addiction, which contributes to joblessness and incarceration for black people. I agree that the culture promotes hedonism.
We right there ----><----
Yes, you I, and Kalliqua all see rye to eye on that. What disturbs me is that not only is incarceration NOT the solution to preventing drug or substance abuse or availability... Such punishment isn't fairly or logically distributed for equally harmful substances. That is the 'reason' I think marijuana actually being 'illegal' is assisinine. This 'feel good' society has at it's origin a lot more and far beyond the legality of certain substances. So I don't think that pushers/users of one substance should be stripped of their basic human freedoms while other pushers, who have the power of industry should be multi-national, while the greater society get's their 'fix' off of their dope.
quote:[quote]Alcohol and cigarettes also get you 'high'.
Nicotine is addictive and also toxic, I'm not sure that it has the same mood altering properties of tetrahydrocannabinol/THC/Marijuana though. A great google prompt....
Nicoyine is actully more addictive than crack...and the other chemicals in cigarettes lead to cancer, which has already been discussed on this thread...and ignored.
quote:Does it not disturb you that these MORE HARMFUL drugs are legal then?
there you go, NOT COMPARING again
There you go dodging the question again.
quote:A few reasons people give. Pleasure, Escapism, state altering for ritualistic/shamanistic purposes. I'm not endorsing or negating any of the above, just stating them.
The ritualistic/shamanistic purposes are about the only legitimate ones I see here, along with the chemo brownies for cancer patients.
Well, these legitamate usage that you have acknowledged puts folks in jail. There is also appetite stimulant and pain supressor for AIDS patients. There is also industrial hemp usage that is hampered because of the illegality of marijuana(even though it contains 0% THC)...This is devastating the lives of many a Native Amerikkkan agricultural industry...