You know it's actually illegal to inhibit someone from the "reasonable enjoyment" of their own property.
Do you smoke pot?
Good luck with that one.
What kind of sardine can do you live in where a little smoke in the ear hinders enjoyment of the outdoors?
Marijuana has many beneficial qualities, in fact if you smoked some it would probably help you out a good bit.
When someone is chronically smoking it on BOTH SIDES of my 25' patio/balcony, it does hinder my enjoyment of my property.
I have a newborn baby who loves being outside and now I don't want to bring him out there and expose him to narcotics. My wife feels the same way. Who knows what they have laced the stuff with. I have seen evidence which suggests that they grow it and deal it in large quantities as well.
I feel sorry for the new people moving into my unit.
TBH IMO people would benefit more from therapy rather than the 'benefits' of marijuana.
Narcotics? :laugh:
So you have giant clouds wafting over a 25' patio continuously? How rich are your neighbors that they can keep a constant wave of MJ smoke floating around?
MJ isn't a laced drug on the dealer end, by the way, because MJ is much cheaper than all the other products. It's a natural, cheap cultivated substance. You'd know this if you stopped believing urban legends.
"One of the most regularly told urban myths regarding cannabis talks about various other recreational substances such as PCP or cocaine being used to adulterate cannabis. This is very rare without the end user paying more for the cannabis, as it is not financially viable for illicit drug dealers to contaminate a substance with a substance that costs more than the original substance (i.e its not financially viable to cut a bag of cannabis that is sold for £20 for 3.5 grams with something that costs £40 for one gram)."
Also, therapy will not help with:
* Relief from nausea and increase of appetite;
* Reduction of intarlobular ("within the eye") pressure;
* Reduction of muscle spasms;
* Relief from chronic pain.
All of the following conditions have been ruled by courts to be valid uses of MJ:
* AIDS. Marijuana can reduce the nausea, vomiting, and loss of appetite caused by the ailment itself and by various AIDS medications.
* Glaucoma. Marijuana can reduce interlobular pressure, thereby alleviating the pain and slowing -- and sometimes stopping -- the progress of the condition. (Glaucoma is the leading cause of blindness in the United States. It damages vision by increasing eye pressure over time.)
* Cancer. Marijuana can stimulate the appetite and alleviate nausea and vomiting, which are common side effects of chemotherapy treatment.
* Multiple Sclerosis. Marijuana can limit the muscle pain and spasticity caused by the disease, as well as relieving tremor and unsteadiness of gait. (Multiple sclerosis is the leading cause of neurological disability among young and middle-aged adults in the United States.)
* Epilepsy. Marijuana can prevent epileptic seizures in some patients.
* Chronic Pain. Marijuana can alleviate the chronic, often debilitating pain caused by myriad disorders and injuries.
XZeroII -- You might want to read my previous post, as I'm not using a strawman argument; I'm using the alcohol situation as a metaphor and as an example to explain the problems we have with prohibition of drugs and thus support the argument for legalization.
SickBeast -- I'm actually for the legalization and regulation of absolutely all drugs. The majority of drug money comes from cannabis, but on top of that the majority of the quick cash that attract our children to gangs comes from drugs in general. Legalizing cannabis will significantly impact the situation, but legalizing all drugs will virtually eliminate the issue.
It is true that criminals will always find something illegal to do. But if you raise the barrier to entry, increase the difficulty in trading in crime, and significantly reduce the profit of the business of crime, it will attract significantly fewer people.
As an example, with no illegal drug trade, you might have to rob a bank to make the same kind of profit per unit investment dollar. But 14 year olds aren't going to start robbing banks as it is much more difficult to rob a bank than to make a drug deal. The job can't be split up in to millions of tiny parts each having little risk. The criminal "jobs" that will be left after the drug trade is gone will be larger, harder jobs to accomplish that carry lower chance of success, higher risk, more chance of getting caught, and just won't be as attractive to people looking for a quick buck.
... also, cannabis is not a narcotic in a medical sense or as per the US definition. People have misused the term to refer to any illegal drug for so long that it unfortunately suck despite the fact that it is not technically accurate especially because of the connotation people wish the term to carry (i.e. saying "narcotics are bad because they are narcotics" is, in the vernacular, equivalent to saying "illegal drugs are bad because they are illegal").
SickBeast -- I'm actually for the legalization and regulation of absolutely all drugs. The majority of drug money comes from cannabis, but on top of that the majority of the quick cash that attract our children to gangs comes from drugs in general. Legalizing cannabis will significantly impact the situation, but legalizing all drugs will virtually eliminate the issue.
It is true that criminals will always find something illegal to do. But if you raise the barrier to entry, increase the difficulty in trading in crime, and significantly reduce the profit of the business of crime, it will attract significantly fewer people.
As an example, with no illegal drug trade, you might have to rob a bank to make the same kind of profit per unit investment dollar. But 14 year olds aren't going to start robbing banks as it is much more difficult to rob a bank than to make a drug deal. The job can't be split up in to millions of tiny parts each having little risk. The criminal "jobs" that will be left after the drug trade is gone will be larger, harder jobs to accomplish that carry lower chance of success, higher risk, more chance of getting caught, and just won't be as attractive to people looking for a quick buck.
... also, cannabis is not a narcotic in a medical sense or as per the US definition. People have misused the term to refer to any illegal drug for so long that it unfortunately suck despite the fact that it is not technically accurate especially because of the connotation people wish the term to carry (i.e. saying "narcotics are bad because they are narcotics" is, in the vernacular, equivalent to saying "illegal drugs are bad because they are illegal").
"OTC" is not really what I would call what is needed.
You would want to highly regulate things, at the least (for things like cannabis) like alcohol and at worst similar (but a little less restrictive) to the way we regulate methadone.
I believe, Portugal allows access to heroin and offer addiction treatment programs without criminalizing addicts. They've seen drops in usage and an increase in the number of people seeking help. You have a quality controlled supply that significantly undercuts the black market.
What is really needed, rather than no barriers to access, are low enough prices to make it so that criminals cannot profit from selling the drug combined with sensible regulation.
For instance, if access to heroin comes with mandated addiction therapy but doesn't cost anything compared to black market offerings, people will put up with the therapy and drug dealers will not be able to make money.
... of course, that's just a for instance ... if I had it my way I'd probably be a little more relaxed with it, but I think there is some room to compromise and try some different options.
SunSamurai
Diamond Member
- Jan 16, 2005
- 3,914
- 0
- 0
so ...
http://www.time.com/time/healt...0,8599,1893946,00.html
... and now it's getting better.
if they step forward to full legalization and regulation i think they'll find even more benefit not just through a reduction in harm to drug users (which is already happening) but a reduction in crime profit and drug trafficking (with its residual effects), a decrease in cost of enforcement, and the ability for private industry and government to start making money rather than the criminals.
::EDIT::
oh, and this could prove interesting if signed into law in Mexico ...
http://www.latimes.com/feature...9jun21,0,6336338.story
Originally posted by: irishScott
If I do this and it passes, will you people shut up about it?
Promise I will never bring up this bill again if it passes.
umbrella39
Lifer
- Jun 11, 2004
- 13,816
- 1,126
- 126
You couldn't be more misinformed if you were being paid to do so.
I have never treated so much as one patient who got cancer with only a pot smoking history. I have treated many who have both cigarette AND pot smoking histories who have cancers. I have also treated hundreds of asthmatics who have never had so much a 1 cigarette in their lives that three things in common:
1. Zero cigarette smoking history as mentioned above.
2. Moderate to heavy pot smoking histories.
3. Zero instances of oral, esophageal, tracheal, or lung cancers.
Plus, people can just forgo the smoking of pot and buy a vaporizer instead. So if folks want to buy into the FUD and error on the side of caution, they can always just buy a Volcano and vape instead of smoking. Better than Albuterol.
Do you really know that many people who smoke pot but not cigarettes? I don't. In fact everyone I know who smokes pot also smokes cigarettes, usually quite heavily.
The vast majority of the people I have smoked with in my lifetime (ok so maybe just a few years of high school and college) DO NOT smoke cigarettes. In my experience, those that do smoke cigs are more likely to drink hard as well.
surfsatwerk
Lifer
- Mar 6, 2008
- 10,110
- 5
- 81
Ns1
No Lifer
- Jun 17, 2001
- 55,420
- 1,600
- 126
me and my gf smoke pot, regularly, medicinally, and neither one of us smokes cigs. I guess that means...you don't know enough pot smokers?
GF diagnosed with juvenile polymyositis(sp? first case on the west coast actually...), fibromyalgia, RA, and a host of other tertiary problems caused by the first 3
She's been on every single painkiller known to man and HAD a prescription for lyrica, supposedly the "first FDA approved medication for fibromyalgia"
Let me give you a rundown of the laundry list of "possible" side effects to this legal prescription drug to "alleviate" fibromyalgia symptoms:
Adverse drug reactions associated with the use of pregabalin include:[10][11]
* Very common (>10% of patients): dizziness, drowsiness
* Common (1?10% of patients): visual disturbance (including blurred vision, diplopia), ataxia, dysarthria, tremor, lethargy, memory impairment, euphoria, constipation, dry mouth, peripheral edema, loss or decrease of libido, erectile dysfunction, weight gain
* Infrequent (0.1?1% of patients): depression, confusion, agitation, hallucinations, myoclonus, hypoaesthesia, hyperaesthesia, tachycardia, excessive salivation, sweating, flushing, rash, muscle cramp, myalgia, arthralgia, urinary incontinence, dysuria, thrombocytopenia, kidney calculus
* Rare (<0.1% of patients): neutropenia, first degree heart block, hypotension, hypertension, pancreatitis, dysphagia, oliguria, rhabdomyolysis
I went ahead and bolded all the ones that affected her, with depression EASILY being the worst of the side effects. To top it all off, it was LESS effective for her than medical marijuana.
What side effects does she get from MMJ? She gets nausea. That's it. Did I mention she eats them in cookie form? Cancer argument = GTFO
Who's government protecting? The people or big pharma?
Schadenfroh
Elite Member
- Mar 8, 2003
- 38,416
- 4
- 0
Agreed
Same situation here, my family name might hold some sway (doubt it) since my family is from the same same town our representative is from and he knows several of my relatives (several are actively involved in the Democratic party as well). Hmm, to send or not to send, regardless I know he would never go for it....
VashHT
Diamond Member
- Feb 1, 2007
- 3,396
- 1,481
- 136
This is ridiculous,out of all of my friends and acquaintances, all of the ones who smoke pot DO NOT smoke cigs, all of the ones who smoke cigs DO NOT smoke pot. I doubt you even have any pot smoking friends considering you seem so disgusted by it.
I tend also to find that the vast majority of the /adults/ I know who smoke cannabis do not smoke tobacco. And I live in North Carolina ...
There are a couple tobacco smokers I know who also smoke cannabis, but they tend to only do so recreationally and occasionally rather than medically.
I find that people who have resorted to medical marijuana, especially in states where it is not legal, have explored so many other options they they live much more healthfully and are more concerned about not doing harm to their bodies than most other people. And they typically vaporize or eat their cannabis as well.
Remember that cliche surfer do0d or down-to-earth yet deeply spiritual person back in school (didn't every college have one?) who thought of their body as a holy temple not to be defiled by any of "mans poisons," avoiding caffeine alcohol and tobacco -- but who smoked a literal ton of pot?
Well, it took me a while to realize the truth of it, but that fucker had it right well before I did -- before most of us did.
There are a couple tobacco smokers I know who also smoke cannabis, but they tend to only do so recreationally and occasionally rather than medically.
I find that people who have resorted to medical marijuana, especially in states where it is not legal, have explored so many other options they they live much more healthfully and are more concerned about not doing harm to their bodies than most other people. And they typically vaporize or eat their cannabis as well.
Remember that cliche surfer do0d or down-to-earth yet deeply spiritual person back in school (didn't every college have one?) who thought of their body as a holy temple not to be defiled by any of "mans poisons," avoiding caffeine alcohol and tobacco -- but who smoked a literal ton of pot?
Well, it took me a while to realize the truth of it, but that fucker had it right well before I did -- before most of us did.
I think it's interesting the two drugs that are legal - alcohol and cigarettes, two drugs that do absolutely nothing for you at all - are legal, and the drugs that might open your mind up to realize how you're being fucked every day of your life? Those drugs are against the law. Coincidence? See, I'm glad mushrooms are against the law, cos I took 'em one time, you know what happened to me? I laid in a field of green grass for four hours, going, 'My God, I love everything.' Yeah, now if that isn't a hazard to our countries...How are we gonna justify arms dealing if we know we're all one?
~Bill Hicks[/quote]
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter