UNDER AGE DRINKERS BEWARE!

[Texsox]

Are you a gun owner by any chance? Or a gun advocate?

 

Yes to both.

 

Great example, imagine if I argued that guns do not kill anyone. People bleed to death, but the gun didn't cause them to bleed. And if they make a decision to shoot themselves, it isn't the gun that killed them.

[farmteam]

You are right, it could be a contributor to a death, as well as many other factors, cell phone talking, radio changing, being a woman. This is all very true, but its not the drug that killed the person, its their decision to perform an activity while impaired, its their own decision and their own stupidity, not the drug itself. But you can also die from alcohol alone, you can literally drink until you die, which is what separates it from Marijuana.

 

I agree with you on a lot of the things you have said, but I have to disagree here. I don't think you can really separate the use of the drug and "their decision to perform an activity while impaired." They made that decision not because of "their own stupidity" but because they were impaired by the drug. Would they make a decision to climb around a balcony while sober/not stoned? Probably not. The drug impaired them, and made them think they could do it, and it directly led to their death.

[Texsox]

And to be fair, it cuts both ways. I have known a few guys were are mean, nasty, stupid, and dangerous drunks, who are mellow and funny when stoned.

[RockRaines]

Yes to both.

 

Great example, imagine if I argued that guns do not kill anyone. People bleed to death, but the gun didn't cause them to bleed. And if they make a decision to shoot themselves, it isn't the gun that killed them.

I know its a great example of h ow black and white your arguments are. If you thought of guns the same way as weed, guns have the potential to cause harm to someone but its the person who causes harm, not the gun itself. Your argument would be the simple use of a gun is wrong because it may have the possibility of hurting someone in a bad situation.

 

Any way you slice it there have been zero reported deaths in the history of the US directly related to marijuana use, it may have contributed in a bad situation, but you cannot die simply from the use of it.

[Texsox]

I know its a great example of h ow black and white your arguments are. If you thought of guns the same way as weed, guns have the potential to cause harm to someone but its the person who causes harm, not the gun itself. Your argument would be the simple use of a gun is wrong because it may have the possibility of hurting someone in a bad situation.

 

Any way you slice it there have been zero reported deaths in the history of the US directly related to marijuana use, it may have contributed in a bad situation, but you cannot die simply from the use of it.

 

Again, if someone is so drunk they can barely get behind the wheel of a car and dies in an accident, I say alcohol was the cause, not a neck fracture from hitting the windshield, not a stupid decision they made. If someone is baked and gets in a car accident, you claim that pot did not cause it.

 

You claim someone can die from drinking. If they are really drunk and aspirate their own vomit, choking to death, you would claim they died from vomiting, not drinking. It makes no sense.

 

You can be high, but if something bad happens, never ever blame it on the pot. Pot is the perfect drug, and nothing has ever happened to anyone because of pot. If that really makes sense to you, great.

 

And once again, I am in favor of decriminalizing pot, I've never said it was more dangerous that anything, or was so terribly bad for you. But I am realistic to know you shouldn't be driving or operating machinery when you are high. Your reflexes are much slower and accidents are more likely to occur. If you are high and get in an accident you would have avoided if sober, then common sense tells us that the cause of your reaction time slowing is the cause of the accident.

[RockRaines]

Again, if someone is so drunk they can barely get behind the wheel of a car and dies in an accident, I say alcohol was the cause, not a neck fracture from hitting the windshield, not a stupid decision they made. If someone is baked and gets in a car accident, you claim that pot did not cause it.

 

You claim someone can die from drinking. If they are really drunk and aspirate their own vomit, choking to death, you would claim they died from vomiting, not drinking. It makes no sense.

 

You can be high, but if something bad happens, never ever blame it on the pot. Pot is the perfect drug, and nothing has ever happened to anyone because of pot. If that really makes sense to you, great.

 

And once again, I am in favor of decriminalizing pot, I've never said it was more dangerous that anything, or was so terribly bad for you. But I am realistic to know you shouldn't be driving or operating machinery when you are high. Your reflexes are much slower and accidents are more likely to occur. If you are high and get in an accident you would have avoided if sober, then common sense tells us that the cause of your reaction time slowing is the cause of the accident.

No, you can actually drink until you die, its called alcohol poisoning and you dont necessarily choke on your own puke. That argument can end here. We both agree that its impairing to the user and you shouldnt be driving or operating or anything of that sort, I would NEVER claim that it doesnt impair you.

 

Basically if we are going to legalize and regulate any "drug" for the purpose of altering someone's mind, for relaxation or social reasons like alcohol, cigarettes, or even for medicinal purposes like vicodin, Marijuana has by far the least side effects, long term damage, and total danger of impairment. Alcohol's main dangers are the damage to the body long term, and the threat of actually overdosing. Marijuana has no addictive effects, has no danger of overdose, and the long term health effects are much less than other regulated substances. I never said it should be legal for all consumption, but if we are categorizing drugs that COULD be legal and regulated, it is probably the least damaging to us, with some actual positive effects.

[Texsox]

No, you can actually drink until you die, its called alcohol poisoning and you dont necessarily choke on your own puke. That argument can end here. We both agree that its impairing to the user and you shouldnt be driving or operating or anything of that sort, I would NEVER claim that it doesnt impair you.

 

Basically if we are going to legalize and regulate any "drug" for the purpose of altering someone's mind, for relaxation or social reasons like alcohol, cigarettes, or even for medicinal purposes like vicodin, Marijuana has by far the least side effects, long term damage, and total danger of impairment. Alcohol's main dangers are the damage to the body long term, and the threat of actually overdosing. Marijuana has no addictive effects, has no danger of overdose, and the long term health effects are much less than other regulated substances. I never said it should be legal for all consumption, but if we are categorizing drugs that COULD be legal and regulated, it is probably the least damaging to us, with some actual positive effects.

 

I have said many times that you cannot OD on marijuana, and that marijuana is a pretty mild drug. You build a great case to end the sale of alcohol in this country, but the liquor, hotel, advertising, restaurant, and bar lobbies are too powerful to make that happen.

 

But when someone drives high and gets in an accident, I blame the pot and you say it was some other cause. You even agree that it does impair you. But how can you not agree that if it impairs you, it is the cause?

 

Guys have heart attacks while having sex, that doesn't make sex all bad. Guys drop dead while weight lifting, running, playing hoops, that doesn't make those activities bad. Why is stating that some people have died from smoking pot and being impaired such a big deal?

 

 

Oh well, it was fun as always. See you next November to have the same semi-annual thread