|
RichieWolk posted:
Like a dealer? I'm talking about states without even medical mj.
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2013 22:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 20:53 |
|
|
Like you can literally type "order marijuana seeds online USA" into google and find dozens of non-US websites willing to ship you seeds straight to your house. If you've ever received mail and can use the internet, you have access to marijuana.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2013 23:00
|
|
|
Install Gentoo posted:You're not really understanding why alcohol is a whole lot harder to suppress than marijuana is, do you? Since you can make alcohol out of almost any crop you'd otherwise eat versus marijuana being a specific plant. I never said it wasn't; I interpreted your original post as saying that growing pot from seeds you bought isn't really 'making weed' because you bought the seeds. If I misinterpreted what you were saying, I apologize. I do not disagree with you that pot is, overall, easier to suppress - though that is context sensitive. It's easier to make alcohol than grow pot in jail, but it's probably easier to buy pot at a typical high school than beer (that was certainly my experience, anyway).
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2013 00:59
|
|
|
RichieWolk posted:Like you can literally type "order marijuana seeds online USA" into google and find dozens of non-US websites willing to ship you seeds straight to your house. Growing isn't that easy. I mean, if for no other reason than because the cops will find your teenagers grow because of the massive cloud of fresh marijuana smell it will produce.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2013 01:32
|
|
|
I disagree. All it takes is dollars. Hell, somethingawful has a thread dedicated to helping people cultivate their own marijuana called "growing cannabis made fun and easy". The risk of getting caught is inversely proportional to the education of the grower. If you think the high school biology chapter on botany is enough to do a stealth grow op in your attic, you're gonna get nailed immediately. If you do some research about the necessary equipment like charcoal filters and heat shielding and stuff, you increase your chances of remaining undetected by a considerable amount.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2013 01:54
|
|
|
What the gently caress are you nerds arguing about? I knew at least a dozen kids in high school who grew pot plants. You know how many kids made their own toilet wine? Zero. That's how many. Teenagers aren't trying to make themselves blind with jailhouse rotgut. Meanwhile, putting some seeds in a pot with some soil and pouring water on it to make drugs seems a little more manageable to your average 15 year old.MaxxBot posted:On the subject of lovely prohibitionist arguments I just have to post this, it's been on my mind for the past couple weeks because I really think this might be the single worst/most misinformed op-ed I have ever read out of tens of thousands. Not only is this guy rabidly anti-pot but is also ardently pro-tobacco and constantly tries to downplay the risks of tobacco on his radio show. Thousands or possibly over a million people listen to this rear end in a top hat's advise on a regular basis, so with any luck some lucky souls will eschew the demon weed in favor of lung cancer and emphysema. Ahh, yes. Prager. I used to listen to his radio show because he would do this reasonable-sounding-conservative-jew-who-just-wants-to-discuss-ideas-rationally thing until one of his pet issues would come up and then he would completely lose his poo poo and just start spouting gibberish, much like this tobacco is safer than pot thing here. Really entertaining.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2013 01:59
|
|
|
When I worked crappy min wage jobs I was regaled of tails from my coworker who grew up in Buffalo. When he was a teenager he and his friends would buy fresh unpasteurized cider from local growers, stick it in their closet and wait a few weeks for  That is about as bugfuck easy as it gets.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2013 02:08
|
|
|
EBT posted:When I worked crappy min wage jobs I was regaled of tails from my coworker who grew up in Buffalo. When he was a teenager he and his friends would buy fresh unpasteurized cider from local growers, stick it in their closet and wait a few weeks for Exactly, and it tastes delicious. When I make mead I don't even add yeast, there's enough ambient yeast in the air to get it started. Fermentation is the easiest thing in the world. Any kid with access to a sugary liquid, air and patience can make their own booze.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2013 17:12
|
|
|
800peepee51doodoo posted:What the gently caress are you nerds arguing about? I knew at least a dozen kids in high school who grew pot plants. You know how many kids made their own toilet wine? Zero. That's how many. Because alcohol is freely available to anyone with access to an adult that doesn't give a gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2013 17:24
|
|
|
Slarlid posted:Exactly, and it tastes delicious. When I make mead I don't even add yeast, there's enough ambient yeast in the air to get it started. Fermentation is the easiest thing in the world. Any kid with access to a sugary liquid, air and patience can make their own booze. I'm betting you make terrible mead.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2013 17:29
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Because alcohol is freely available to anyone with access to an adult that doesn't give a gently caress. The whole argument of "which drug is easier for kids to get" is stupid because they are both easy for different reasons. Marijuana is easy to get because it is illegal, and therefore completely unregulated. Alcohol is easy to get because adults succumb to bribery and ambivalence. Keeping marijuana illegal because you'll be able to give your older brother $20 to buy you some weed from the store is idiotic.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2013 17:47
|
|
|
RichieWolk posted:The whole argument of "which drug is easier for kids to get" is stupid because they are both easy for different reasons. Marijuana is easy to get because it is illegal, and therefore completely unregulated. Alcohol is easy to get because adults succumb to bribery and ambivalence. Keeping marijuana illegal because you'll be able to give your older brother $20 to buy you some weed from the store is idiotic. The argument is "which is easier to make". I responded to the point of why people aren't making their own moonshine.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2013 17:48
|
|
|
Blind Melon posted:I'm betting you make terrible mead. Not necessarily. Spontaneous fermentation can produce some great poo poo depending on where he is. That's how Lambics are made.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2013 18:09
|
|
|
December Octopodes posted:Like a dealer? I'm talking about states without even medical mj. I tried to read back but I don't really get the context of any of this, it's such a flimsy argument either for or against. With the kind of poo poo we accept as part of the daily workings of society, worrying about kids getting weed a different way than they already do is just silly, silly, silly. If I misunderstood what was being said, which I kinda hope I did, then sorry. Hmm, realized I mistakenly combined you with another poster with naive ideas about kids in high school when I quoted you.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2013 19:33
|
|
|
In Australia they give the stuff away: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-11-20/free-dope/4381488 I've never seen free booze.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2013 20:05
|
|
Install Gentoo posted:You know, actually making a thing. Instead of buying it.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2013 03:14
|
|
|
I grew a couple of plants in high school and it made the whole street smell. It was in a brand new mc-mansion. The smell is the problem. I don't know what you could do about it, because you could smell it 3 houses down, from a concrete basement. Also it's like alcohol. My friends and I binged on alcohol before we were 21. Once we were 21 we started being responsible users, because it moved into bars. You steal/score a bottle you drink it in a very irresponsible way. Anyway it's a stupid argument. Anything that keeps people out of jail, improves safety, and hurts the black market is an all around boon to society. There are no legitimate arguments against marijuana legalization in a society where alcohol is legal. None. My buddy in high school got into a car accident and died because he smoked some weed that was laced with embalming fluid. That one kid dying is enough reason to regulate it. It's the same as one innocent person going to the electric chair is enough to make every execution in history a potential murder. Harm reduction is the sane way to handle these things, prohibition hurts everyone. e; except the financial beneficiaries of the prison industrial complex I guess. Umph fucked around with this message at 03:37 on Mar 31, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2013 03:25
|
|
|
http://news.yahoo.com/kansas-couple-indoor-gardening-prompted-pot-raid-182449463.html Some bullshit right there.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2013 03:43
|
|
|
Warchicken posted:I went to practically every class, rehearsal and performance of my entire master's degree stoned as loving poo poo. Result? Getting my doctorate. Not disputing your conclusion, but the argument being made by some opponents is that frequent adolescent use of pot is detrimental to development. Your anecdote is not applicaable.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2013 04:42
|
|
|
Longanimitas posted:Not disputing your conclusion, but the argument being made by some opponents is that frequent adolescent use of pot is detrimental to development. Your anecdote is not applicaable. It's been said that marijuana use in those under 18 inhibits the development of the frontal lobe. I believe it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2013 05:15
|
|
|
And if you give a pint of moonshine to a toddler, they die! A substance's effect on a developing child is still no excuse for it being illegal for mature adults to consume.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2013 05:26
|
|
|
Warchicken posted:I went to practically every class, rehearsal and performance of my entire master's degree stoned as loving poo poo. Result? Getting my doctorate. Yeah, this is real dumb. Unless that was an MFE I'm guessing you already know that the plural of anecdote is not data, and the singular definitely isn't either. There are plenty of high-functioning alcoholics out there, that doesn't mean heavy alcohol use is harmless.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2013 05:50
|
|
|
The Insect Court posted:Yeah, this is real dumb. Unless that was an MFE I'm guessing you already know that the plural of anecdote is not data, and the singular definitely isn't either. There are plenty of high-functioning alcoholics out there, that doesn't mean heavy alcohol use is harmless. There should be statistics on it. There aren't, because it's illegal. Vague notions of what it does aren't enough to make it illegal, just like vague notions of what it doesn't do aren't enough to justify its safety on their own.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2013 06:01
|
|
|
Warchicken posted:There should be statistics on it. There aren't, because it's illegal. Vague notions of what it does aren't enough to make it illegal, just like vague notions of what it doesn't do aren't enough to justify its safety on their own. Not only are there not statistics on usage due to the current illegality of the substance, but ex-CIA agents get their front door busted down because they bought some indoor grow equipment. What a country! It's interesting times, to be sure. Question: Do the Feds act less assholish in CO and WA as compared to TX of IA because of the state laws?
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2013 06:07
|
|
|
Warchicken posted:There should be statistics on it. There aren't, because it's illegal. Vague notions of what it does aren't enough to make it illegal, just like vague notions of what it doesn't do aren't enough to justify its safety on their own. There are statistics, it's just that they tend to be self-reported ones. And there have been methodologically sound studies indicating probable links between marijuana use and harm to foetal development and the reproductive system, among other things. There are a non-trivial percentage of cannabis users who develop clinically recognized dependence symptoms, and cannabis dependency is listed in the DSM-IV. "Safer than" is not "completely safe". You can be in favor of decriminalization or legalization without being in favor of a regulatory regime where anybody anywhere can walk into a 7/11 and walk out with a pack of pot cigarettes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2013 06:40
|
|
|
The Insect Court posted:There are statistics, it's just that they tend to be self-reported ones. And there have been methodologically sound studies indicating probable links between marijuana use and harm to foetal development and the reproductive system, among other things. There are a non-trivial percentage of cannabis users who develop clinically recognized dependence symptoms, and cannabis dependency is listed in the DSM-IV. The point is that marijuana isn't completely safe, it's just far safer than deadly drugs like acetaminophen that we let people buy with hardly any regulation.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2013 08:39
|
|
|
Umph posted:I grew a couple of plants in high school and it made the whole street smell. It was in a brand new mc-mansion. The smell is the problem. I don't know what you could do about it, because you could smell it 3 houses down, from a concrete basement. There are ways to keep it from smelling the area it's grown in. Ona gel is a huge help, as are carbon filters. quote:My buddy in high school got into a car accident and died because he smoked some weed that was laced with embalming fluid. That one kid dying is enough reason to regulate it. And you should never drive while high or intoxicated. That's just plain stupid. P.S. the chance of finding embalming-fluid laced weed on the streets is about one in a million. That's along the lines of buying PCP-laced weed. It's %99.99 urban legend.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2013 10:57
|
|
|
Umph posted:My buddy in high school got into a car accident and died because he smoked some weed that was laced with embalming fluid. There no way in hell he didn't notice.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2013 12:27
|
|
|
Tab8715 posted:There no way in hell he didn't notice. Anyone who's ever had to dissect something in a grade school biology/anatomy class would be able to place the smell right away. It doesn't get masked by weed (anyone who's ever had a lab partner shuffle into class practically still coughing up bong smoke would know this) and god knows how rough it would feel on inhalation.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2013 12:32
|
|
|
I live outside Seattle and the other day my friend took me to a dispensary that his brother works at. So not only could i enter the store as a guest(i don't have a medical card, my friend does), we vaporized with his brother in front of other customers and workers. This poo poo is getting real. Fragmented fucked around with this message at 13:52 on Mar 31, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2013 13:50
|
|
|
eSports Chaebol posted:The point is that marijuana isn't completely safe, it's just far safer than deadly drugs like acetaminophen that we let people buy with hardly any regulation. APAP is not psychoactive and I've never seen anyone cause themselves serious functional impairment through compulsive, addictive use of it. Sure, most of the people I've known in my life who use pot have not been harmed by it, but I definitely know addicts. I suppose the alcohol comparison is somewhat more reasonable, but the pharmacology is so different I still don't like it. The problems posed by APAP and pot are so different I do not see the purpose of the comparison.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2013 15:40
|
|
|
Someone earlier asked about pot laws in Maine. Here's a longish article describing some of the current issues in the state related to marijuana: http://www.pressherald.com/news/mainers-deal-with-pot-law-fallout_2013-03-31.html?pagenum=1 It's an interesting dilemma - do I have any rights NOT to smell your legal marijuana grow if we have a shared basement?
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2013 15:52
|
|
|
Devyl posted:And you should never drive while high or intoxicated. That's just plain stupid. Ahh, not so fast! "http://dailymed.nlm.nih.gov/dailymed/drugInfo.cfm?id=41006 posted:Patients receiving treatment with MARINOL® Capsules should be specifically warned not to drive, operate machinery, or engage in any hazardous activity until it is established that they are able to tolerate the drug and to perform such tasks safely. The government already admits that the level of impairment caused by marinol (THC) is not high enough to completely restrict driving while medicated, and that it is up to the individual to decide if they're too high to drive safely.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2013 17:32
|
|
|
The Insect Court posted:"Safer than" is not "completely safe". You can be in favor of decriminalization or legalization without being in favor of a regulatory regime where anybody anywhere can walk into a 7/11 and walk out with a pack of pot cigarettes. Well, yeah, it should probably have an age limit like 18 or so. Making sure people are educated about the (actual) dangers involved in consumption would also be a good step, kind of like how we tell people not to drink while pregnant.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2013 18:52
|
|
|
RichieWolk posted:Ahh, not so fast! Well, alcohol isn't completely restricted for driving either. You can get a DUI for prescription drugs just like you can for alcohol, its just alcohol also has a statutory limit restriction as well as a "you may not drive while impaired" limit. Hilariously a driver's ed class I had to take at one point took this to its hilariously illogical conclusion - you are driving impaired if you have taken any medicine at all. I'm not sure how anyone wrote that with a straight face.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2013 19:23
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Well, alcohol isn't completely restricted for driving either. You can get a DUI for prescription drugs just like you can for alcohol, its just alcohol also has a statutory limit restriction as well as a "you may not drive while impaired" limit. You could probably get a DUI for insulin too, if you're diabetic and overdosed. The problem with automatically assuming marijuana use, even frequent heavy use, is damaging is that it's not as much of an impairment as DARE would have you believe. CNN recently did a study on marijuana use and driving skills. It came out heavily supporting what many aging stoners have been claiming for years, "I can drive fine while I'm high, man. If I'm too stoned to make it I'll let you know." http://www.tokeofthetown.com/2013/02/cnn_high_driving_test_shows_five_nanogram_thc_limi.php posted:
One of the test subjects came in at 3x the legal DUI limit and still did fine until forced to smoke herself into oblivion. Even then, everyone was totally self-aware of how impaired they were, and stated that the only reason they would even consider driving was to help the study. The biggest consequence the supervisors noticed was "increased risk of getting caught by the cops for driving too cautiously". You have to smoke yourself retarded to be a serious danger on the road, and once you're that baked you realize you shouldn't be driving. You don't have to pass a bunch of laws to get over-medicated stoners to stay at home and do nothing. You could probably announce a presidential executive order on cartoon network saying "weed's legal, don't drive if you're too high" and the traffic risks of marijuana would be gone by the next day. quote:Hilariously a driver's ed class I had to take at one point took this to its hilariously illogical conclusion - you are driving impaired if you have taken any medicine at all. I'm not sure how anyone wrote that with a straight face. That comes largely from people not recognizing how much of everything contains drugs, or not counting them as "real" drugs. If you ever want to explore the limits of human creativity, tell one of those guys he can't drive for 8 hours after drinking coffee and watch the mental gymnastics involved in reclassifying caffeine. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2013 20:16
|
|
|
MaxxBot posted:On the subject of lovely prohibitionist arguments I just have to post this, it's been on my mind for the past couple weeks because I really think this might be the single worst/most misinformed op-ed I have ever read out of tens of thousands. Not only is this guy rabidly anti-pot but is also ardently pro-tobacco and constantly tries to downplay the risks of tobacco on his radio show. Thousands or possibly over a million people listen to this rear end in a top hat's advise on a regular basis, so with any luck some lucky souls will eschew the demon weed in favor of lung cancer and emphysema. So you're against the free market regulating cannabis, Mr. Prager? Why do you hate America? 
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2013 20:42
|
|
|
Umph posted:My buddy in high school got into a car accident and died because he smoked some weed that was laced with embalming fluid. Making up stories is cool. This didn't happen, sorry.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2013 20:47
|
|
|
RichieWolk posted:You have to smoke yourself retarded to be a serious danger on the road, and once you're that baked you realize you shouldn't be driving. You don't have to pass a bunch of laws to get over-medicated stoners to stay at home and do nothing. You could probably announce a presidential executive order on cartoon network saying "weed's legal, don't drive if you're too high" and the traffic risks of marijuana would be gone by the next day. A few things I'm just going to put out there. One, these drivers where on a controlled course, aware that the news media was recording their every move. They were way more focused on driving then you would be on street conditions where you have stuff like the radio, traffic and possibly even more distracting things like texting. The extra possibility that something is going to distract you for three or four seconds still makes driving while slightly high a risk. Two, ok these guys could feel when they were too high to drive and stated that they'd never drive that way outside of the test. Good for them. I'm the same way when I go out and have a few too many drinks, I always call a cab or take the bus. This doesn't stop a poo poo ton of people who either don't care or insist 'I'm actually a better driver when I drink' from driving under the influence and killing a bunch of innocent motorists and pedestrians. I'm willing to debate over whether five nanograms is too low, but the authorities are always going to set it on the low end of the scale for safeties sake. And obviously driving under the influence isn't a reason to outright prohibit pot, just as it isn't a reason to ban prescription drugs or alcohol. But let's not paper over problems like driving under the influence that we're going to have to deal with when it is legalized.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2013 22:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 20:53 |
|
|
cafel posted:A few things I'm just going to put out there. One, these drivers where on a controlled course, aware that the news media was recording their every move. They were way more focused on driving then you would be on street conditions where you have stuff like the radio, traffic and possibly stuff like texting. Something distracts your attention for three or four seconds and things could get bad. Two, ok these guys could feel when they were too high to drive and stated that they'd never drive that way outside of the test. Good for them. I'm the same way when I go out and have a few too many drinks, I always call a cab or take the bus. This doesn't stop a poo poo ton of people who either don't care or insist 'I'm actually a better driver when I drink' from driving under the influence and killing a bunch of innocent motorists and pedestrians. The difference between the alcoholic saying they're good to drive and the stoner is the stoner has verifiable claims while drunk driving kills thousands every year. http://norml.org/library/item/cannabis-and-driving-a-scientific-and-rational-review posted:For example, A 2001 study evaluating the impact of marijuana intoxication on driving proficiency on city streets among sixteen subjects reported essentially no differences in subjects' driving performance after cannabis administration, concluding: "Performance as rated on the Driving Proficiency Scale did not differ between treatments. It was concluded that the effects of low doses of THC ... on higher-level driving skills as measured in the present study are minimal."[23] Similarly, a 1993 trial funded by the United States National Highway Traffic Association (NTHSA) evaluated subjects' driving performance after cannabis inhalation in high-density urban traffic. Investigators reported, "Marijuana ... did not significantly change mean driving performance."[24] If you smoke yourself to the point where you're actually dangerous on the road, you'll realize "holy poo poo I'm so high I shouldn't drive cause I'll kill myself and/or others", then become one with the couch and annihilate some pretzels. If you drink enough alcohol to be dangerous on the road, you may not even realize you're still buzzed. quote:I'm willing to debate over whether five nanograms is too low, but the authorities are always going to set it on the low end of the scale for safeties sake. And obviously driving under the influence isn't a reason to outright prohibit pot, just as it isn't a reason to ban prescription drugs or alcohol. But let's not paper over problems like driving under the influence that we're going to have to deal with when it is legalized. I suspect the DUI limit will always be set unnecessarily low in order to recover lost revenue from asset forfeiture. As approaching the level of impairment which would make you a danger on the road will actually make you avoid getting on the road in the first place, any sort of arbitrarily low number will have a negligible effect on actual road safety.
|
|
#
?
Mar 31, 2013 22:33
|
|