Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 12/22/06 11:32 PM, Dash-Underscore-Dash wrote: I'm sorry, but making hippies happy is just too much of a price to pay.

Dude, I live in Ester, Alaska, so believe me when I say I know quite a bit about hippies, and personally know a good few, as well. And honestly, hippies wouldn't notice if marijuana was decriminalized, as the most hardcore hippies (eg. Alaskan ones) grow their own. In fact, I know one old hippie (I'm talking really old) has been growing his own for so long, he didn't even know it was illegal until I told him a story about this one time I almost got busted.

um thats cool.

At 12/25/06 01:21 AM, Oblivia wrote: Here's a proven fact about weed, it's more than three times worse than a cigarette, how it's that not going to effect your lungs?

riight, lets see a source for this 'proven fact' because, it appears that almost every single source you'll find would say the precise opposite.

Marijuana makes you lazy, stupid, and causes many problems. You can't change my mind on this. Marijuana not being addictive is probably one of the dumbest things I've ever heard of. I Could bet money that if any of you pot heads went on a No-Marijuana-Streak you would end up going back to it because of ADDICTION! Be high , stupid and have a criminal record(prohibiting you from good jobs) or throw it away and find a new hobby. No, the girl in my previous post was not bumped off the honor role for being caught, but because getting high was her life, and yes, it made her stupid. She failed and was moved to "other" classes. One year for marijuana to completely leave your body? Too much grass and it could be more. The government has a hand in this because people are sick of their kids getting high, spending money on weed, and becuase it makes them lazy! If you were smart you'd all stop smoking it but you won't because you LOVE IT your ENSLAVED to this stupid drug. You defend it becuase your addicted. Is getting high really worth prison?

At 12/23/06 02:16 PM, packow wrote: www.aclu.com

You know, I was ACTUALLY reading noting everything you've said about the subject and even re-evaluating my conception on cannabis, until I came to this. Anyone who tries to link me to the ACLU as a legitimate source is not worth my time, and thus, every other point you've made is invalid now.

At 12/22/06 01:42 PM, BanditByte wrote: Lately I've been grappling with the issue of pot decriminalization. On one hand it would give more power to the individual on the other it'll make hippies happy, an idea that pains severely. So, after doing alittle reading from political and scientifical sources I decided on a compromise.

1#. If you smoke you cannot have kids. I am not joking, pot tends to cause genetic defects from prolonged use. If you smoke you confine it to yourself and not ruin the genepool.

2#. If you're one of those very, very rare cases where cannabis triggers female developments in you (boobies) do not expect it to be covered by medicare or health-insurance. You played the game of chance with your habit and lost.

3#. Smoke at your own risk. If something bad happens as a result expect no handout or pity due to your pastime.

Well, those are my criteria for lighting up a blunt.
Discuss

everything you said is a myth, marijuana does not do any of that to you or your offspring, it might hurt the baby if a woman smoked it when she was pregnant but the rest are all lies.

At 12/25/06 11:30 AM, BanditByte wrote: Anyone who tries to link me to the ACLU as a legitimate source is not worth my time, and thus, every other point you've made is invalid now.

"Don't worry about, the guy couldn't refute my post, so he had to try and discredit my source."

Your words.

At 12/25/06 01:15 PM, Peter-II wrote: "Don't worry about, the guy couldn't refute my post, so he had to try and discredit my source."

Your words.

I love how you ignored everything else I said in my post about how everything he wrote was convincing me up until that point.

At 12/25/06 01:36 PM, BanditByte wrote:

At 12/25/06 01:15 PM, Peter-II wrote: "Don't worry about, the guy couldn't refute my post, so he had to try and discredit my source."

Your words.

I love how you ignored everything else I said in my post about how everything he wrote was convincing me up until that point.

Except I wasn't talking about that. I was talking about the fact that you said any points he may have had are essentially invalid, just because you didn't like the source he cited.

At 12/25/06 03:58 PM, Peter-II wrote: Except I wasn't talking about that. I was talking about the fact that you said any points he may have had are essentially invalid, just because you didn't like the source he cited.

No, I was talking about how his points were so plausible they seemed to be all true, except until he linked me to the ACLU.

I doubt you would take someone seriously after they try and pass a neo-nazi site as an impartial source.

At 12/25/06 04:35 PM, BanditByte wrote:

At 12/25/06 03:58 PM, Peter-II wrote: Except I wasn't talking about that. I was talking about the fact that you said any points he may have had are essentially invalid, just because you didn't like the source he cited.

No, I was talking about how his points were so plausible they seemed to be all true, except until he linked me to the ACLU.

So your reasoning for his points suddenly becoming inplausible is the fact that he linked you to a source you don't like.

I'm not saying this is an absolute hypocrisy. However, it does strike me as slightly ironic that you once criticized me for essentially doing the same thing.

I doubt you would take someone seriously after they try and pass a neo-nazi site as an impartial source.

You're correct there. I don't actually know anything about the ACLU, so could you please elaborate on your comparison of it to a neo-nazi resource?

At 12/22/06 01:42 PM, BanditByte wrote:
1#. If you smoke you cannot have kids. I am not joking, pot tends to cause genetic defects from prolonged use. If you smoke you confine it to yourself and not ruin the genepool.

i dont know about that cause in a study i found there comparing the newborn babies of women who used marijuana during pregnancy with the babies of women who did not. Mainly, they have looked for differences in birth weight, birth length, head circumference, chest circumference, gestational age, neurological development, and physical abnormalities. Most of these studies, including the largest study to date with a sample of more than 12,000 women, have found no differences between babies exposed to marijuana prenatally and babies not exposed. Given the large number of studies and the large number of measures, some differences are likely to occur by chance. Indeed, researchers have found differences in both directions. In some studies, the babies of marijuana users appear healthier so maybe marijuana is a good thing

Is it just me or has the intelligence level on this forum reached an all time low? Foremost, if I may address the author, please search the BBS before you make a topic. This same debate has come up countless times the last few months, and your topics brings absolutely nothing new to the playing table. Secondly, if any of you are looking for a serious debate on Marijuana, please keep your witty comments and insightful opinions to yourself. Stating the you dislike hippies dismisses your entire argument on the grounds that it is biased and unreliable.

With that being said I would like to point out the cold hard facts as they relate to the health issues and legalization of Cannabis for recreational use. I type this post with ignorance to my personal persuasion on the topic at hand. Furthermore, I will purposely neglect to take a stance on this issue for the purpose of keeping this post true to its intention. With that in mind...

1) Marijuana has never been proven to cause any genetic mutation of offspring. I'm not saying that it doesn't cause mutation, just that no current studies (that are widely accepted by the scientific community) have proved this accusation.

2) Smoking marijuana does not cause men to grow breast. There have been cases where marijuana smokers encounter enlargement in their breast area, but this has not been directly linked to marijuana usage. However, studies have proven that, in some cases, marijuana has been known to lower testosterone levels. This regression is so minimal that it is believed, by many, to cause no noticeably side-effects.

3) Marijuana is addictive. Physically, no. There are no physical withdrawal symptoms cause by Marijuana. Mentally, yes. Everything that causes a rise in dopamine levels has potential to be mentally addictive.

4) You cannot claim that Marijuana is more dangerous that tobacco. This statement is way to broad and can be interpreted many different ways. There are several areas where marijuana is believed to be more harmful, and several areas believed to be less harmful. If you want to make this type of comparison than BE SPECIFIC! Comparing carcinogens is much different than comparing tar levels.

5) If you're going to use an example of a specific study please post a link to confirm this study. This does not apply to facts that are viewed as "common knowledge".

6) Marijuana does cause short-term memory loss. The effects of marijuana as it relates to long-term memory impairment varies greatly from study to study. If you would like to argue the former, please be prepared to inform us of your source.

7) Marijuana does impair ones reaction time. Therefore, driving under the influence of this drug is dangerous.

8) Marijuana cost the United-States billions of dollars each year. This money goes to the war on drugs, imprisonment of drug users, government funded rehab centers, and programs dedicated to spread knowledge about common street drugs.

Please keep the all this information in mind when you formulate your next post.

At 12/25/06 01:21 AM, Oblivia wrote: That is the biggest load of bull I've ever heard! It doesn't what kind of drugs you are using, it still makes your life go down the shithole!

They used the same scare tactic in the days of prohibition, linking alcohol drinking with poverty and crime. Nowadays you see lots of rich people drinking, they don't seem to be poor (though many of them are corporate criminals). The reason you don't see many rich drug users is because they hide their drug use because it's illegal. (Case in point: cokehead politicians).

But there are many, MANY successful casual marijuana smokers.

Here's a proven fact about weed, it's more than three times worse than a cigarette, how it's that not going to effect your lungs?

The statistic is the weed contains 3 times the TAR of a cigarette. Comparing one joint to one cigarette is not fair, because many tobacco smokers smoke 15 cigarettes a day, while most marijuana smokers smoke maybe up to 2 or 3 joints a week. Therefore, the damage doesn't accumulate.

Also, tobacco causes the bronchial tubes in the lungs to contract, restricting your breath, while marijuana smoke does the exact opposite: it dialates your bronchial tubes, allowing for easier breathing and coughing, which is the lungs' natural mechanism of expelling harmful chemicals. Tobacco smoke causes lungs to constrict, limiting the expulsion of the harmful chemicals, including tar.

There has also been (count it) ZERO cases of lung cancer resulting from the smoking of marijuana alone, without additional use of tobacco or another drug.

There are also other methods of using marijuana, like cooking it into foods, brewing it as a tea, or vaporizing the active chemicals.

At 12/25/06 11:30 AM, BanditByte wrote:

At 12/23/06 02:16 PM, packow wrote: www.aclu.com

You know, I was ACTUALLY reading noting everything you've said about the subject and even re-evaluating my conception on cannabis, until I came to this. Anyone who tries to link me to the ACLU as a legitimate source is not worth my time, and thus, every other point you've made is invalid now.

I'm sorry, I should have been more specific. Read the ACLU's "drug policy" link. It's about the harsh and unfair drug policy.

Marijuana makes you lazy, stupid, and causes many problems. You can't change my mind on this.

There is no evidence for it. I sounds like a conclusion about all drugs reached from health class. Read about it.
-Constantly being intoxicated with ANYTHING is going to make a person be unproductive.
-I've been smoking for a year (on weekends) and my health is better than ever. My grades are also among the highest in my school.
-People who decided to smoke weed everyday, including school, make the choice to do shitty. If you want to do it when it won't cause problems, then there's no problem.

Marijuana not being addictive is probably one of the dumbest things I've ever heard of. I Could bet money that if any of you pot heads went on a No-Marijuana-Streak you would end up going back to it because of ADDICTION!

It can cause mental addiction, which can be just as strong as physical addiction. But unlike alcohol, nicotine, heroin, cocaine, and other illegal drugs, your body will not start to need marijuana to feel normal. Mental addiction results mostly in people who use it on a daily basis and spend their lives constantly high.

After using on the weekends for months, I went on a trip to Europe for 2 months without any weed. Never once did I feel any need for it. If it was physically addictive, I would not be able to go a few days without it. But I take week long (or longer) breaks constantly. I just don't see a reason to stop.

Be high , stupid and have a criminal record(prohibiting you from good jobs)

That's why we pressure for new legislation. The penalties cause MUCH more damage than the drug does.

or throw it away and find a new hobby. No, the girl in my previous post was not bumped off the honor role for being caught, but because getting high was her life, and yes, it made her stupid. She failed and was moved to "other" classes.

Well, you said so yourself then: Getting high was her life. You're supposed to develop hobbies and live a life and try hard in school. But there's nothing wrong with occasional pot use. Some people decide "fuck life i'll just stay high all the time." But I know so many honors students (including myself) who keep their motivation despite OCCASIONAL pot smoking.

One year for marijuana to completely leave your body? Too much grass and it could be more.

One year is the maximum ever recorded. And the chemicals are not harmful, they are just metabolites and can't do anything except show up on drug tests.

The government has a hand in this because people are sick of their kids getting high, spending money on weed, and becuase it makes them lazy!

The Government has a hand in this for many reasons, but not for the reasons you mention.

1. Legislation was originally passed to discourage Mexican immigration in the 1930's.
2. The textile, oil, and paper industies support criminalization because hemp is a threat to their business. An acre of hemp produces 4 times as much paper than an acre of trees. Hemp is a much more sturdy clothing material than cotton. Hemp also can provide clean emmission fuel for automobiles, in fact, Henry Ford created a car that ran efficiently on hemp.
3. The religious right wing opposes ALL drugs, including alcohol, for morality reasons. The only difference is that there's a huge alcohol lobby that opposes them.
4. They can arrest marijuana smokers to claim that they are arresting lots of drug offenders and claim that they are stopping drug use, when this actually just causes people to turn to harder drugs and the demand (and therefore profitability) for marijuana to increase.

If you were smart you'd all stop smoking it but you won't because you LOVE IT your ENSLAVED to this stupid drug. You defend it becuase your addicted. Is getting high really worth prison?

The vast majority (try 94%) of users aren't addicts.

The 30% of the United States Population who have tried marijuana say yes. The law only causes harm, so we want a change.

At 12/22/06 01:42 PM, BanditByte wrote: Lately I've been grappling with the issue of pot decriminalization. On one hand it would give more power to the individual on the other it'll make hippies happy, an idea that pains severely. So, after doing alittle reading from political and scientifical sources I decided on a compromise.

1#. If you smoke you cannot have kids. I am not joking, pot tends to cause genetic defects from prolonged use. If you smoke you confine it to yourself and not ruin the genepool.

2#. If you're one of those very, very rare cases where cannabis triggers female developments in you (boobies) do not expect it to be covered by medicare or health-insurance. You played the game of chance with your habit and lost.

3#. Smoke at your own risk. If something bad happens as a result expect no handout or pity due to your pastime.

Well, those are my criteria for lighting up a blunt.
Discuss

you are a fucking tool the first two have never happened (ask Timothy Leary) and your mom sucks dick for crack so dont fucking judge hippies you piece of shit

"before you knock it try it first oh you'll see its a blessing and its not a curse"-Ben Harper

At 12/25/06 10:55 AM, TheApple wrote: Marijuana makes you lazy, stupid, and causes many problems. You can't change my mind on this. Marijuana not being addictive is probably one of the dumbest things I've ever heard of. I Could bet money that if any of you pot heads went on a No-Marijuana-Streak you would end up going back to it because of ADDICTION! Be high , stupid and have a criminal record(prohibiting you from good jobs) or throw it away and find a new hobby. No, the girl in my previous post was not bumped off the honor role for being caught, but because getting high was her life, and yes, it made her stupid. She failed and was moved to "other" classes. One year for marijuana to completely leave your body? Too much grass and it could be more. The government has a hand in this because people are sick of their kids getting high, spending money on weed, and becuase it makes them lazy! If you were smart you'd all stop smoking it but you won't because you LOVE IT your ENSLAVED to this stupid drug. You defend it becuase your addicted. Is getting high really worth prison?

oh right and your so fucking different with your quote defending beer down their just because its illegal doesnt mean its not addicting and by the way not only is alcohol mentally addicting like pot it is physically addicting as well

so before you post your next response ask your self "should I really say this or should I kill myself instead"

by the way thirty percent is way off thats just motherfuckers who have admitted to doing it my dad said he never did my uncle said otherwise

At 12/26/06 02:28 AM, jeremiah-bullfrog wrote: by the way thirty percent is way off thats just motherfuckers who have admitted to doing it my dad said he never did my uncle said otherwise

I know... a better percentage would be like 55% or so

Pot, has shown no negative side effects,

in fact more possitive, the only thing it can possibly effect is your lungs and since you can't smoke a pack of joints everyday the relatively small amount of smoke causes little to no harm.

Also would you say the same to tobaco smokers

Doctor: We have found you have a curable form of lung cancer that other wise would kill you
Smoker: well at leaste i'll live good thing i have insurance i oculdn't afford the procedure otherwise
Doctor: Actually Insurance (which you pay for medicare i'm tlaking u.s isn't given to all citizens and doesn't cover medical procedures) instituted a new policy that essentially gives you a middle fingure

Then if you apply the same thing to liver damage from heavy drinking its the same

you can't legalize pot with limits, you either have to consider like smoking and drinking, even though it is better for you, or continue to endanger the youth and keep it illegal.

Now i believe it should be legalized because as a studies show few kids don't smoke it because its illegal, meaning if it was legal its not like everyone would become stoners
2) its non addictive
despite what those scare tactic adds have told you pot isn't physically addictive, you have no withdrawl symptoms like you do ciggaretes or even harder derugs like heroin.
3) By legalizing it you lessen the risk of obtaining it as well as adding the ability to regulate it. By knowing exactly what strain and knowing that it has nothing laced in it, pot could become a whole lot safer.

People who consider it worse for you than drinking or smoking are completely wrong, its better for you. then some people bring up it impairs you, but so does drinking even usually to a gereater and more dangerous extent.

also to the guy who said its 3 times worse for you then a cigarette

can you ever smoke a pack of join†s a day, as some people smoke up to 3 packs of cigs a day

At 12/26/06 02:23 AM, jeremiah-bullfrog wrote: you are a fucking tool the first two have never happened (ask Timothy Leary) and your mom sucks dick for crack so dont fucking judge hippies you piece of shit

"before you knock it try it first oh you'll see its a blessing and its not a curse"-Ben Harper

I hope you and your family gets AIDS and dies, hippie. Have a nice day.

Wow, just leave. I think the general forum would be more to your liking.

Okay Packow, Okay Jeremiah-Bullfrog, you win.

But because Marijuana makes you high, it can't be legal. If it could be made without The chemicals that make you high maybe it could be legal. Then again, there are many chemicals in Marijuana and we don't know what the majority of them do. Legalizing Marijuana would put some people out of work and since those people are probably the middle-man it would be difficult. Marijuana paper? Sounds strange to me. If I were you, Packow, I would stop using Marijuana, some schools do random drug tests on smart kids or if your in clubs like band or something. If your school does'nt then you might get caught in another situation. The Beer Quote was actually stated by Ben Franklin (please don't argue on that) and I put it there because it's funny. Trust me on quitting, probation is hell and annoying. Jail is a good enough reason for me to never get involved with any illegal drug.

At 12/26/06 06:34 PM, TheApple wrote: But because Marijuana makes you high, it can't be legal.

with that logic technically alcohol should not be legal either. hell, if the reason marijuana should remain illegal is because it affects your mind then a number of other things would have to be made illegal. no more tobacco because it can give the smoker a mild buzz and energy from the nicotine, coffee would have to go because it stimulates and gives one energy and forget things like prozac and other medication, we certainly can't have people feeling anything.

At 12/26/06 06:34 PM, TheApple wrote: Okay Packow, Okay Jeremiah-Bullfrog, you win.

But because Marijuana makes you high, it can't be legal.

Markers and whip-cream make you high as well. How come they're legal?

At 12/26/06 06:34 PM, TheApple wrote: Okay Packow, Okay Jeremiah-Bullfrog, you win.

But because Marijuana makes you high, it can't be legal. If it could be made without The chemicals that make you high maybe it could be legal. Then again, there are many chemicals in Marijuana and we don't know what the majority of them do. Legalizing Marijuana would put some people out of work and since those people are probably the middle-man it would be difficult. Marijuana paper? Sounds strange to me. If I were you, Packow, I would stop using Marijuana, some schools do random drug tests on smart kids or if your in clubs like band or something. If your school does'nt then you might get caught in another situation. The Beer Quote was actually stated by Ben Franklin (please don't argue on that) and I put it there because it's funny. Trust me on quitting, probation is hell and annoying. Jail is a good enough reason for me to never get involved with any illegal drug.

That's why I favor decriminalization, not legalizing, because that would never happen. We have acheived decriminalization in many states, including New York and California. It was almost made national law under Jimmy Carter.

At 12/26/06 06:34 PM, TheApple wrote: But because Marijuana makes you high, it can't be legal. If it could be made without The chemicals that make you high maybe it could be legal.

Hemp?

Then again, there are many chemicals in Marijuana and we don't know what the majority of them do.

As compared with tobacco, where we know absolutely what most of the chemical do;

Cigarettes

- Nicotine is a poisonous, water-soluable alkaloid found in tobacco leaves and used as an insecticide.

- Tar is a sticky substance found on tobacco leaves. Tar coats the lungs and air sacs in smokers, preventing them from getting enough oxygen. Tar paralyzes the cilia in a smoker’s windpipe so that dust particles and pollen are not swept out of the air passages. Tar contains more than 40 cancer-causing chemicals. Organs affected by these poisons include not only the mouth, vocal chords, throat, and lungs, but also the kidneys, bladder, and uterus and ovaries (in women).

Tobacco Smoke

- Carbon monoxide (CO) is an odorless, colorless toxic gas that reduces oxygen levels in the blood. CO lessens night vision and hearing and is the same deadly gas found in auto exhaust.

Tobacco smoke is also full of dozens of other poisons, such as arsenic, barium, lithium, copper, lead and xanthine.

At 12/26/06 06:52 PM, SolInvictus wrote:

At 12/26/06 06:34 PM, TheApple wrote: But because Marijuana makes you high, it can't be legal.

with that logic technically alcohol should not be legal either.

Alcohol is a depressant that is valued primarily for its minor consumption effect-- you don't have to get totally drunk, and most people don't. It is more safe than water and has a completely different effect and set of consumption circumstances, so the "logic" of marijuana does not apply to alcohol at all.

Nonetheless, binge drinking is actually discouraged and in many places around the world, like Britain, new laws are being made to fight against it. Also, drunk peoploe are not allowed to drive or do many activities.

no more tobacco because it can give the smoker a mild buzz and energy from the nicotine,

Tobacco is on the way out. Ohio recently approved a statewide ban on smoking in public places. Legislation is tearing down tobacco companies. It's dying, slowly.

coffee would have to go because it stimulates and gives one energy

Logic? You call that logic? Caffeine is a stimulant-- it makes you more active, not a strung-out washout. I disapprove of it personally, but it is in no way similar to marijuana and actually serves a positive purpose in our country.

and forget things like prozac and other medication, we certainly can't have people feeling anything.

Don't be a fool; all medication has usage limits, just like alcohol where a little bit is fine but too much is bad. If you abuse medications, you are breaking the law. If you use only the recommended dosages, you can't become addicted and you are operating within the law.

Notice also how most medications require a need first before a doctor will prescribe it to you-- no recreational medications.

Marijuana is illegal because it is not like alcohol or medications. It has no positive purpose, it only has one state, it is a smoked substance, and it makes you high. It's illegal because it has the wrong traits.

At 12/27/06 09:31 AM, Draconias wrote:

At 12/26/06 06:52 PM, SolInvictus wrote: coffee would have to go because it stimulates and gives one energy

Logic? You call that logic? Caffeine is a stimulant-- it makes you more active, not a strung-out washout. I disapprove of it personally, but it is in no way similar to marijuana and actually serves a positive purpose in our country.

You are perpetrating the myth that the marijuana "high" is mental only. The high that myself and many others get is a very positive energy which gives hours of productive creativity. It's also an excellent social drug better than alcohol. Your point being?

Marijuana is illegal because it is not like alcohol or medications. It has no positive purpose, it only has one state, it is a smoked substance, and it makes you high. It's illegal because it has the wrong traits.