[Rap]

Bill I realize that we represent a small percentage of patients in treatment but the majority of young people are not ordered into treatment by the courts. 80 percent of people appearing before the courts in Pa.( again the frame of reference that I am familiar with) have a D&A component behind or driving their charge. But they are not all ordered or even a high percentage into treatment. Nor is the number one drug pot. Most kids are poly abusers as I previously stated. Course if you delineated it by age perhaps. I mentioned to our Chairman as we quickly entered and exited a corner in the 968 today this ongoing discussion and it's civility. He mused about the educational background and demographic of the forum members. I suggested it might just be a love of a well strung car! The end of Prohibition didn't stop alcohol abuse. Lucky Luciano and the Kennedy's just moved on to different ventures. The Mexicans, Russians and Latin Americans will just move to launder their money into legit business's.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[tamathumper]

I have never met an open cannabis user about whom I thought - "Gee, I'd like to be more like that guy. He's really got it together."



If I've learned anything in life, it's "You are who you associate with." The biggest harm that could come to my kids from doing illegal drugs like pot might not be brain damage - it might be the introduction to- and subsequent association with- people whose judgment is unquestionably questionable and who have "nothing to lose"... In those terms, it's a gateway to more than just harder drugs, it's a gateway to a network of harmful associations and subsequent bad decisions.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Rap]

Allen, perhaps but I think we all everyday associate and interact with people whose judgement at best is questionable and flawed. Certainly those using right off the bat are using questionable judgement. But even those that don't use drugs can be part of that harmful network of associations. Drugs increase the probability no doubt. Learning to determine who is someone one wants to associate is part of the difficulties of just kids growing up. Mine come back on occasion and say, you know you were right about that person. Age, experience and if I am real lucky wisdom are all I hope to pass on for their decision making process.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[tamathumper]

Agreed. Nobody's judgment is perfect, but as with all things it falls on a spectrum and it's as good a measure as any I've found to determine who I might want to associate with. As humans, our gauge of what is acceptable behavior and even what is "right and wrong" can largely be determined by those in our immediate surroundings. "Mob mentality", "herd behavior", and "cult psychology" are similar in nature. "Falling in with a bad crowd" is another colloquialism that refers to someone's judgment and decisions being influenced by those they most closely associate with.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Monstrous4Banger]

Well, normally Tamathumper Id probably take offense to that statement. You seem to be laughing at cannabis users (like myself), and implying they are stupid, unsuccessful losers, who are all by and large, of questionable character. For the sake of the debate, Im not going to feed, or read into it much, or reciprocate any negativity. I will just continue to state the facts, and give everyone some real world, actual physical experiences with cannabis. Really tho, how many open cannabis users have you met? Most people who are successful dont talk about it out of fear. Fear you'll judge them. Im an exception, because I am a CA resident, and an AZ resident. Two states where the people have decided, and our voice will be heard. I dont fear any type of trouble, or retribution, because I am licensed to do so in my state. Correct me if Im wrong Bill, but up to an ounce of pot here in CA without license is about the equivalent of jaywalking. There simply is no valid argument why cannabis shouldnt be rescheduled. It does clearly have medicinal properties.

No offense Tamathumper, but by your logic that cannabis users make bad decisons. Well, I tend to think my forefathers made good decisions. Decisions like revolt against the crown, documents like the declaration of independence, the constitution, etc, etc. Without cannabis, those things wouldnt have even been printed. The truth is, we owe our freedom to a bunch of "bad decision" making stoners. The world thrived on it until a small group of lobbyists had their way. Historically speaking for a American citizen to ridicule it, and deny its benefits, is down right definitively hypocritical. It seems to me, the general public has taken our freedoms for granted, and become complacent for the notion of safety, and we are definitely starting to reap what we have sown. I think the current state of our nation is enough proof of that.

I come from a long line of alcoholics. I could say the reason Ive never known my father is because he was a drunk, amongst other things of course. No other drugs, but alcohol. And yes, contrary to the carefully worded propaganda, alcohol is certainly a "drug". Alcohol certainly has a negative impact on society, and is a much more harmful substance than cannabis. I dont see us rushing to make it illegal. We know better now. In time we will know better about cannabis, and once again use it to fuel our country, and economy.



The gateway drug theory is really just that. A theory. A proven implausible one at that. Children becoming crackheads has more to to with parenting than anything. Its not about wealth, or because they werent loved, or anything like that. In fact in my experience most of the kids who became junkies, or crackheads were the ones who came from prominent, or affluent well to do families. They seemed to just take life for granted, because theyve had everything given to them their whole lives from my perspective at least. Either that or just to spite their families for whatever reason. As if drugs were the ultimate revenge or something.

Tamathumper: I just want to say, that I do not mean any of this offensively to you or any one. I dont think its surprising to think of California, and New York, as worlds away, and understanding each other can be difficult at times. I too am very pleased to see how well this conversation has gone.



Unfortunately, it is a highly controversial, and divided subject. In fact fighting over cannabis, was a big part of the civil war. One could argue maybe the biggest part. Considering cannabis, and cotton were the majority of the textiles market at the time. Its funny how history repeats itself. I think we have become much more civil as a nation on a whole.





Come on, really, can anyone here say they never wanted to be like this guy at some point in their life? Obviously he made some good decisions some where along the line.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FpCcYxDio...re=related

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Monstrous4Banger]

[quote name='tamathumper' timestamp='1312078238' post='113501']

Agreed. Nobody's judgment is perfect, but as with all things it falls on a spectrum and it's as good a measure as any I've found to determine who I might want to associate with. As humans, our gauge of what is acceptable behavior and even what is "right and wrong" can largely be determined by those in our immediate surroundings. "Mob mentality", "herd behavior", and "cult psychology" are similar in nature. "Falling in with a bad crowd" is another colloquialism that refers to someone's judgment and decisions being influenced by those they most closely associate with.

[/quote]



Isnt freedom great? The freedom to choose where you want to live, what you want to be, who you want to associate with. Its a beautiful thing.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[tamathumper]

No offense taken or intended.





My comments were not meant to cause offense, but if you feel offended, I understand and that is unfortunate. I don't believe I questioned the character of anyone, I believe I questioned the judgment of those who sell an illegal drug, although I could have been more clear. (I edited it a bunch of times trying not to be wordy or to offend anyone, but it appears I "over-pruned" that part.) My bad.





If you're somehow offended that I don't want to emulate you, there's probably a long line for that. Or maybe not, people shouldn't care whether I want to emulate them or not! Let me just go on record now that there are no adulterers whom I wish to emulate either. Given Arnold's long-term infidelity and the subsequent catastrophic impact on his wife and children, I'm not sure he's the right poster boy for "Making Good Choices".





I don't see the patriotic arguments or the Civil war tie, but that's a vastly different story for another time, and having more to do with bankers and usury in my mind. The forefathers fell on a spectrum, they weren't saints, and saying "They did it, so it's OK for me to do it" is an extension of "you are who you associate with", even beyond the grave apparently. Following this logic, someone might further imply that by following Thomas Jefferson, it would be OK to start a plantation, get some slaves, and father illegitimate children with them.





Blaming it on the parents or grinding an ax against people who are affluent across the board isn't something I accept in absolute either. I grew up poor as *dirt*, but drugs were just as prevalent there in rural Maine as they are here in relatively affluent upstate New York. I've read that there are hundreds of studies that indicate that once a child reaches mid-to-late teens, the parents are practically inconsequential, and it's their peers (their network of associations) who have almost all the influence. That's when "falling in with a bad crowd" makes a world of difference.





Anyway, I've re-edited and re-worded this about a hundred times and it's not getting any better at this point. Bottom line, if it's something *you* feel strongly about and you can somehow do it without hurting others, as with all things OK. I've tried to express *my* preference that people don't do it near me, don't sell it to my children, and respect my position.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Rap]

Boy oh boy this just gets better and better. Tama I too have stumbled in my editing! Monster, again just using my limited knowledge, most of the kids who become crackheads or junkies come from prominent families is just flat out wrong. These junkies come from across the entire socioeconomic spectrum. As a recovering family member, whether your active or not and I include your state granted right to medically use pot, this is something I would have thought you would know. Parent don't make kids do drugs. They may provide a bad influence by using in front of their children, a bad association for the kids no doubt, but kids or adults make these individual choices. I didn't do drugs because I came from a prominent family, to spite or get revenge on my family. I did it because I wanted to. A variety of factors where behind that decision but it had nothing to do with my family. All personal freedom of choice. Associating with the wrong people or crowd certainly increases the risks of bad decision making or being painted as someone who engages in what that bad crowd does. Not an absolute though. Because of what I do for a living I now associate with a lot of folks with checkered criminal pasts. These are the same people who hold a steady job, vote(some), pay their taxes, take their kids to school before work, pay off fines and restitution for past mistakes, go to worship(hope that covers the gambit) root for their kids(standing next to you at Little League or soccer game) or volunteering their time at the local soup kitchen. As a right wing conservative my eyes, are wide open, I hope. I believe its foolish to look at that with what we disagree with or dont like and make determinations about how others should act or run their own lives. Too many times I have seen people do things that I wouldn't do in a million years and it works out ok. Guess it means I am just not always right! I don't agree with some of what I have read here but I respect peoples opinions and carefully listen too them. As an imperfect human being( I know hard to believe since I own a 968 lol) what other people do is their business, their choice, their consequence just like mine.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

i had a very traditional middle class upbringing - i got into drugs purely as a very cliche peer pressure thing - the kids who people noticed were the ones doing drugs - there was the entire spectrum of that too - there were those that were known for doing drugs, and there were the popular kids who also did them, but it was not the focus of their notoriety, and those who snuck it and hid it from everyone



i wanted to be in that popular group of jocks and such, who did it at parties and things like that, and so i tried it



as a student, i found that it got in the way of my ability to concentrate - as an adult i have found it to be no different - working in the entertainment business, i find that while the creative people i work with often also are drug users, they are much more efficient when they quit doing drugs - i've been in the business long enough to see many of these people get into drugs, go through life using, and then quit - i've also seen way too many die as a result of use, whether direct or indirect



the same can be said of alcohol too though, and i wouldn't want anybody to tell me that i can't have my wine - at the same time, i don't drink when i have to be coherent and functional - frankly i would be happier if non-alcoholic wine tasted better - i don't like being fuzzy and less than sharp



again, i don't take issue or want to impinge on anybody's personal freedoms, but without exception i have yet to find anybody who is actually better at their job or learns better when on drugs of any kind, and the position that doing drugs is a good thing for anything other than medicinal use is indefensible - i think the movement would be far better served if that part stayed mute



i'm not sure what the best solution would be, but i think that legalizing it and selling it the same way as alcohol would be at least workable, and possibly appropriate - however, we also need to be prepared to contend with the repercussions of that, and be capable of enforcing laws that help protect us from the inevitable consequences brought on by irresponsible drinkers and users

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Rap]

Do we legalize all drugs or just some?

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

well, i see the logic in legalizing them all, but controlling the dispensing - i see no point in them being illegal, as we waste an awful lot of time and resource trying to achieve an impossible goal, when we could spend those resources enforcing the laws regarding the results of use - i think we could be better served if we merely controlled how and where they went, and the repercussions of use



i often feel this way about a lot of things (guns, gambling, prostitution, speeding, yada yada) - but then i'm a bit of an anarchist too

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[ds968]

This is good stuff for sure. And when I say "stuff" <img src="/forum/images/smilies/968/rolleyes.gif" class="smilie" alt="" /> I mean the discussion, of course. Learning lots of things and to echo others here, the civility is great to see, ironically surpassing the one in the Mac vs. PC debate thread , especially considering that deals with a silly, inconsequential subject matter whose impact on anyone,s life is negligible at best. Btw, I said earlier I never smoked pot which is true only in a direct sense..having attended a lot of rock concerts I think I have inhaled more second-hand weed than Cheech and Chong at a Greatful Dead show . Funny, I still listen to Pink Floyd once in a while and the moment the song starts the brain causes an immediate trigger to a pot smell sensation that is incredibly realistic.. <img src="/forum/images/smilies/968/blink.gif" class="smilie" alt="" />

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[lbpesq]

Just as alcohol can be responsibly used or irresponsibly abused, so can most, if not all, other drugs. I find it interesting that this country engages in an all out "war on drugs", yet in virtually every city and town is a store with a big neon sign proclaiming "DRUGS". We are really engaged in a war on some drugs. After all, probably 90% of adult Americans are addicted to caffeine - a stimulant. (I am often the target of peer pressure because I rarely drink coffee!) Is there really a relevant difference between having a martini at the end of the day versus having a joint?



Dealers in our inner cities deal because, other than professional sports, it is the highest paying job they can get. Bust one and another will immediately take his place. If the economics of drugs was controlled by the government instead of the black market those dealer jobs would cease to exist. The out of work dealers would of course look for the next best paying alternative, legal or not, but they wouldn't be dealing drugs anymore. Isn't that an improvement?



Flash wrote: (I can't figure out how you guys include the box with the quote in it)



"i think the proponents of 215 need to get a better list to display though,

because upon reviewing it, i don't see many that have not been found to have their reasoning and or actions extremely questioned - i think i now understand why many of them have been the way they are and have done some of the things they have done"



I honestly have no idea what you are trying to say here. What is the "list to display"? By proponents are you referring to the ballot proponents of 215 (Dennis Peron and Anna Boyce)? Those of us who actually wrote it? What is "the way they are"? What things have they (we?) done? I'm truly confused here.



Answering 4banger, since 1/1/11, simple possession of less than an ounce of cannabis in California is now an infraction - the equivalent of a speeding ticket with a maximum fine of $100. We've had this decrim law for 7 months now and the sky has yet to fall!



And I'm going to wash my 968 today!



Bill

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

i was referring to the list of names you used to seemingly indicate that these were people to be admired, when in reality is was more like a list of shame - you can pretty much run down the list and regardless of what other positive achievements they may have made, there are all too public glaring examples of poor judgement (or likely impaired judgement) exhibited by almost all of them



i don't think that list is a positive one for the campaign

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

i also think it is a strategic error to try to convince the public that recreational drug use is "ok" or not harmful - we all know better, and every one of us can site an example of somebody we know who has had their life turned upside down by it - no, pot isn't the worst thing we have out there - but just because we have screwed up on other things, do we need to pile another one on the heap?



i think the campaign would stand a much better chance of success by sticking to medicinal uses, and the idea that a war on drugs cannot be won, and that controlled distribution is key - further, if a means of testing for and then enforcing laws regarding public intoxication (driving under the influence, etc) and those behind the bill came out in massive support of that, it would be a much easier battle



clearly i am divided on this issue - the public is very much the same - a LOT more discussion has to be had before we think about doing something for which we are not yet prepared - the bill is a good thing for bringing up the subject, but we are not ready for this to become law

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[lbpesq]

The list I posted was in response to your claim that you can always spot someone who uses cannabis. No more, no less. And it wasn't intended to be all inclusive. Did you already know that all of the listed persons used cannabis? Carl Sagan? Newt Gingrich? Donna Shalala? Sam Donaldson? Bing Crosby? Rick Steves? Frankly, I'd bet dollars to donuts that you have encountered people who use cannabis without incuring your suspicions. Just as we have all encountered gay people that we had no idea were gay. Cannabis use does not brand a big scarlet "M" on the forehead of everyone who takes a toke. And many hard-working, productive people use cannabis responsibly, just as many hard working, productive people use alcohol responsibly while others don't. I can certainly understand disagreement about how we should handle this issue as a society, but I just don't understand how anyone can support the status quo or a ramping up of our abysmally failing drug policy. I keep coming back to the famous saying that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. Isn't 40 years of insanity enough?



Bill

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

to me, that list is a perfect example of being able to spot someone - i would have assumed most of those people used - it seemed pretty clear - i absolutely pegged sagan, donaldson, and crosby - rick steves was an obvious no brainer (have you ever watched his show?) - don't know who shalala is (is that a band?) - gingrich now makes sense (never thought about it though, as i tend to ignore most of what comes out of his mouth as just plain silly)



perhaps my "pot-dar" is heightened though, as i have been in and around it for so long - i imagine most people wouldn't spot it so easily - i still wouldn't put that list up, as those people have largely made some really public displays of poor judgement, leading one to now assume it was the pot



for the record, and i think i made my position clear on this:



i do not support our current policies



i don't do drugs anymore, and don't think anybody should, didn't think it was a good idea when i did, don't support it, don't want to be around it, don't want it in public or on the road, and won't hire anybody who does use



i don't care what somebody else does in the privacy of their own home, and feel strongly that we have no business interfering with that as a society



i understand the logic behind legalization, on the understanding that distribution would be controlled and influence laws are enforced (by the way i think our alcohol enforcement is also pathetic)



this has been by far the best and most civilized political discussion we have ever had - thanks to everybody

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[lbpesq]

No, Donna Shalala is not a band. She was Secretary of Heath and Human Services for eight years under Clinton. She is currently President of the University of Miami and was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom, (the nation's highest civilian honor), by Bush in 2008.

Bill

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

yeah - that one was sarcasm



lol - exactly my point though - they fail year after year to accomplish anything - 8 years with clinton and still no public health care, soaring medicare fraud, and a pharmaceutical industry run amuck



hey, but she did get some hate speech codes started (doooood - that's mean - be nice) though they were found to be unconstitutional and were removed



fat cat though she is, she did finally cave in after a sit in and pay the custodians a living wage



let's not get into the low rate loan scandal



perhaps if she was more focused?...............



funny that she was so anti-drug publicly - methinks thou dost protest too much?



not exactly a shining example of someone we want to emulate



it's embarrassing for me, as a democrat, to see what so many of them do - it's no wonder we can't get anything done

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Cloud9...68]

One of the greatest achievements in the history of medical science would be a vaccine that could turn off the sensation of getting high or intoxicated in response to ingesting stimulants, depressants, or any other type of intoxicating substances. Think of all the problems it would solve, and the drug kingpins it would put out of business.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.