Virtual Teen Forums
 

Go Back   Virtual Teen Forums > >
Register Blogs FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read Chat Room

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old April 5th, 2005, 06:36 PM   #201
<-Dying_to_Live->
VT Lover
 
<-Dying_to_Live->'s Forum Picture
 
Join Date: January 30, 2005
Location: Athens
Default

instead of trying to disprove everything youve said (which is all wrong anyways), i want you to prove this

"Cannabis has beneign effects, they fail to mention that cannabis users only experiance these side effects for a few weeks to a month, after stopping the use of cannabis. "

if you can't prove that in your next post nothing you ever say or have said is credible because your full of shit.
<-Dying_to_Live-> is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2005, 07:26 PM   #202
nwshc
Banned
 
nwshc's Forum Picture
 
Join Date: March 27, 2005
Location: With yo moma
Default

Shaolin, you want fact?? I got your facts right here:
There are no FDA-approved medications that are smoked. For one thing, smoking is generally a poor way to deliver medicine. It is difficult to administer safe, regulated dosages of medicines in smoked form. Secondly, the harmful chemicals and carcinogens that are byproducts of smoking create entirely new health problems. There are four times the level of tar in a marijuana cigarette, for example, than in a tobacco cigarette."
"Smoking marijuana may increase the risk of cancer more than smoking tobacco. Marijuana smoke contains 50% to 70% more carcinogenic hydrocarbons than does tobacco smoke. It also produces high levels of an enzyme that converts certain hydrocarbons into their carcinogenic form--levels that may accelerate the canges that ultimately produce malignant cells."
"It has been estimated that smoking a cannabis cigarette (containing only herbal cannabis) results in an approximately five-fold greater increase in carboxyhaemoglobin concentration, a three-fold greater increase in the amount of tar inhaled, and a retention in the respiratory tract of one third more tar than smoking a tobacco cigarette."
MEDICAL COMPLICATIONS associated with marijuana use include an increased risk of chronic cough, bronchitis, and emphysema; increased risk of cancer of the head, neck, and lungs; a decrease in testosterone levels and lower sperm counts for men and an increase in testosterone levels for women and increased risk of infertility.
Studies show that approximately 6 to 11 percent of fatal accident victims test positive for THC. In many of these cases, alcohol is detected as well. In a study conducted by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, a moderate dose of marijuana alone was shown to impair driving performance; however, the effects of even a low dose of marijuana combined with alcohol were markedly greater than for either drug alone. Driving indices measured included reaction time, visual search frequency (driver checking side streets), and the ability to perceive and/or respond to changes in the relative velocity of other vehicles.
Cancer of the respiratory tract and lungs may also be promoted by marijuana smoke. A study comparing 173 cancer patients and 176 healthy individuals produced strong evidence that smoking marijuana increases the likelihood of developing cancer of the head or neck, and that the more marijuana smoked, the greater the increase. A statistical analysis of the data suggested that marijuana smoking doubled or tripled the risk of these cancers.
Marijuana has the potential to promote cancer of the lungs and other parts of the respiratory tract because it contains irritants and carcinogens.42 In fact, marijuana smoke contains 50 percent to 70 percent more carcinogenic hydrocarbons than does tobacco smoke.43 It also produces high levels of an enzyme that converts certain hydrocarbons into their carcinogenic form, levels that may accelerate the changes that ultimately produce malignant cells.44 Marijuana users usually inhale more deeply and hold their breath longer than tobacco smokers do, which increases the lungs' exposure to carcinogenic smoke. These facts suggest that, puff for puff, smoking marijuana may increase the risk of cancer more than smoking tobacco does.
So, unless you want to be on kemo and lose all of your hair or whatever goes with cancer, i suggestt that you dont do it.
nwshc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2005, 08:15 PM   #203
<-Dying_to_Live->
VT Lover
 
<-Dying_to_Live->'s Forum Picture
 
Join Date: January 30, 2005
Location: Athens
Default

^^^^ all of that clearly proven by science, someone shaolin fails to comprehend.
<-Dying_to_Live-> is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2005, 08:18 PM   #204
nwshc
Banned
 
nwshc's Forum Picture
 
Join Date: March 27, 2005
Location: With yo moma
Default

I got you your god damn facts. Any drug, ask me, i HAVE FACTS.
nwshc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 6th, 2005, 03:35 PM   #205
Kiros
Retired Administrator
 
Kiros's Forum Picture
 
Name: Ben
Join Date: May 22, 2004
Location: Albany, LA - USA
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Blog Entries: 17
Default

ok, now i dont care whether drugs should be legal or not...

nwshc and cosmos this is NOT a forum to start fights! Shaolin may or may not have the evidence to back up what he has said, u do not know that! do not call him a liar and do not lie, yourselves!

Quote:
No, because you will say its false and im just doing all of this to get you kicked out, when in fact you said that you will fram me and have me kicked out. So, no
that REALLY sounds like ur tryin to set Shaolin up and make him look bad. jus for that, u should really be ashamed of ur doing.
Quote:
i saw the convo. shaolin is a liar and a cheat
cosmos, omg, how can u say that?! u dont know whether what u saw was real or whether it was set up. with today's technology, anything can be edited, so unless u see it in real time (which is impossible unless u were over at his house watching the convo) never say that u saw the real convo!
Quote:
your full of shit.
and cosmos... i dont care what ur reason is for that, u shouldnt say it because that is VERY demeaning and Im positive that Josh nor 777 would approve of such a vulgar insult!

KEEP ON TOPIC! dont fight, dont call each other liars, dont use things said out of context, and dont bring convos in VT that do not happen in VT - if its in an IM, then leave it be and do not mention anything about it.

Kiros || Ben

Happiness is not about being perfect.
It is about seeing beyond the imperfections.
Kiros is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 6th, 2005, 04:14 PM   #206
Shaolin
Awesome Poster
 
Join Date: March 21, 2004
Location: England - United Kingdom
Default

Thankyou Kiros, atleast someone with RATIONAL here!

Cosmos and NWSCH, you can get a license to grow cannabis for medicinal purposes, and ingest it anyway you want, smoking it, eating it, putting it up your ass, whatever you want to do.

However.

The pharmaceutical version of the drug currently used contains THC, the active ingredient in Cannabis, this is called Dronnibol (sp?) It can come in the form of a pill or a spray that is used inside the mouth.

Also id request that you stop hiding behind one website!

National Institude on Drug Abuse is hardly a unbiased source, it's government run.

You get hte impression Science is saying cannabis is evil and dangerous, from a few government funded tests.

Yes much of what they say is true, even on NIDA. However there are thousands of scientists who agree cannabis is a beneign drug. Beneign means it is harmless, the drug is not permanently damaging, Cancer is either malignant or beneign lump, if it's malignant it will kill you, if it's beneign it wont and it's relativly safe.

The same word applys to cannabis. It has no permanent side effect, not all users experiance side effects although most will experiance a few after heavy use, heavier users are more likey to experiance side effects, addiction is NOT a huge issue with cannabis as it is not physically addictive, it is psychologically addictive.

And most importantly, Cannabis is not Lethal, and it's used everyday for medicinal purposes and recreational purposes.

Also in the future, i ask that you do not make false accusations against me, or conspire against me.

If anyone wants immediate advice don\'t hestitate to contact to me on AIM (AOL instant messenger) - aim: vodkasmodka

Eccentric! Not egocentric!
Shaolin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 6th, 2005, 06:19 PM   #207
<-Dying_to_Live->
VT Lover
 
<-Dying_to_Live->'s Forum Picture
 
Join Date: January 30, 2005
Location: Athens
Default

dont just say thousands of scientists, i want you to show me.

oh and by the way, a trillion scientists say its bad. therefore it is? dont believe me? well you better, cuz i said it
<-Dying_to_Live-> is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 6th, 2005, 06:27 PM   #208
nwshc
Banned
 
nwshc's Forum Picture
 
Join Date: March 27, 2005
Location: With yo moma
Default

No matter what we do, we always come up the bad guys. Some how when we say something, we are the liars because since Shaolin is the counceler he would never do anything bad. We come up with credibal evidence that Shaolin doesnt care, and and you all come out and say we edited it to make it look like he is the bad guyy. But as soon as he comes out with something, No, he didnt edit it. It must be true. Why do i even bother.
(and no, all of the mary info wasnt from a gov funded site)
And you said you were going to conspire against me. You said you would crush me. So in a way, we conspired against each other. Draw
nwshc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 6th, 2005, 06:33 PM   #209
<-Dying_to_Live->
VT Lover
 
<-Dying_to_Live->'s Forum Picture
 
Join Date: January 30, 2005
Location: Athens
Default

"National Institude on Drug Abuse is hardly a unbiased source, it's government run. "

Prove me the government is biased, and prove to me that billions of dollars have gone down the drain for the sole purpose of making drug takers unhappy.

"You get hte impression Science is saying cannabis is evil and dangerous, from a few government funded tests."

A few? how about 85% of all the worlds research regarding the topic.

"addiction is NOT a huge issue with cannabis as it is not physically addictive, it is psychologically addictive. "

so basically your admitting that its addictive.

"The same word applys to cannabis. It has no permanent side effect,"

prove it. word of mouth doesnt prove anything


"Also in the future, i ask that you do not make false accusations against me, or conspire against me."

stop making false accusations rightnow, and maybe i will stop too
<-Dying_to_Live-> is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 6th, 2005, 07:07 PM   #210
Shaolin
Awesome Poster
 
Join Date: March 21, 2004
Location: England - United Kingdom
Default

Cosmos so far you've put foreward these points -

- Cannabis is physically addictive
- Cannabis use can be lethal
- Cannabis is 'bad' because it's illegal
- Cannabis is not a medicine
- Cannabis has no positive effects because there are none
- Trillions of scientists all agree it's bad
- NIDA uses 85% of every single peice of research into cannabis (i wonder what the other 15% is?!?)
- Cannabis use will ruin lives
- If anyone takes drugs, they should die, according to cosmos.

In defense...

How about instead of using NIDA, which gathers scientific research that only they want hte public to see, and has no legal boundaries on how little or how much data they can show. How about you get it from the source of the research, like i have.

The source of the lab experiments, with the methodology and etiology. The results of the research and the scientists conclusions. Rather than an anti drug webpage, which quite obviously will take an anti drug stance, and give you anti drug information. You have to be pretty ignorant to think that using one anti drug website is enough evidence.

So far i've used a range of sites, unbiased and government and non government. You've used ONE government site.

If you can get a source from medical researchers and scientists, who aren't on a government website then well done!

As for NWSCH, copying and pasting information and calling these facts your own is terrible. Atleast cite where the source came from.

Try and find your information from a NON government website, because as you keep asking me, no matter what the issue is, if hte government is involved it will be biased, no matter how unbiased they are trying to make it be. It's like letting either the accusor (government) or the defendor (scientists and cannabis activists) take the seat of the judge (government). It's biased. Sorry i have to use examples, you can't even seem to understand hte basic definition of words like mental illness, let alone prjudice and bias.

If anyone wants immediate advice don\'t hestitate to contact to me on AIM (AOL instant messenger) - aim: vodkasmodka

Eccentric! Not egocentric!
Shaolin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 6th, 2005, 07:16 PM   #211
Shaolin
Awesome Poster
 
Join Date: March 21, 2004
Location: England - United Kingdom
Default

(Source:Juneau Empire)

http://www.mapinc.org/norml/v05/n558/a03.htm

Quote:
Alaska
-------
Prof Who Is A 40-Year Student Of The Effects Of Marijuana Says Public Has Been Brainwashed

A representative from the Alaska Civil Liberties Union joined a handful of experts Friday to tell a Senate committee that marijuana is less harmful than alcohol and even tobacco.

"There has not been a single case of lung cancer or emphysema triggered by smoking marijuana found in medical literature," said Dr. Lester Grinspoon, an associate professor emeritus at Harvard Medical School who has studied the effects of pot for almost 40 years.

In his assessment, he said the public has been "brainwashed" on the effects of marijuana. Senators reviewing a criminalization bill were hesitant to agree. "
You say scientists are in full agreement that cannabis use is bad and has no positive effects. This is a professional, who has studied cannabis for years, along with a team of other scientists.

Quote:
The most debated finding throughout the afternoon was whether an increase in marijuana's potency has led to more addictions and associated problems.

"The marijuana of Cheech and Chong had a THC level of 1.5 percent," said John Bobo, adviser to the office of drug and alcohol policy U.S. Department of Transportation. He claims THC levels of homegrown pot today can be as high as 22 percent to 24 percent.

Mitch Earlewine, assistant professor of psychology at the University of Southern California, said that those high percentages are rare and the national average today is closer to 6 percent.

"When we give people cannabis that has 1 percent in the laboratory, they get a headache and claim it is placebo and they find it inactive and don't want to use it again," said Earlewine. "Obviously this wasn't the case in the 1970s or people wouldn't want to try it again."

Muscular sclerosis sufferer Jim Welch of Eagle River said the potency was a hidden "healthy" benefit: "That means I'm putting less smoke in my lungs."

Kelly Drew, a University of Alaska Fairbanks chemistry professor, phoned in to say that it is unlikely for marijuana to be addictive since it stays in the body's fat cells for about 30 days. Therefore, the body doesn't suffer withdrawal symptoms, she said.

Bobo also said that people under the influence of pot are more likely to commit accidents on the highways. The senators wondered why they haven't heard about marijuana being linked to such highway collisions.

"The media does not want to acknowledge there is a problem," said Assistant Attorney General Dean Guaneli, the bill's sponsor.
This extract focuses on addiction, cannabis is not physically addictive, as a professor of psychology says, it has no withdrawl symptoms. This means the body can survive without hte drug.

A drug that is physically addictive, and in high enough doses, can kill the user if they don't get it on a regular basis, an example of this owuld be heroin, or hte legally prescribed drug morphine, or prozac, or methadone.....

Cannabis has no lethal effects, there has not been ONE single death from it's direct use, ever recorded in medical literature, and cannabis has been used, not abused, for thousands of years.

"There are many misunderstandings about drug abuse and dependence (see reviews by O'Brien14 and Goldstein54). The terms and concepts used in this report are as defined in the most recent Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV ),3 the most influential system in the United States for diagnoses of mental disorders, including substance abuse (see Box 3.1). Tolerance, dependence, and withdrawal are often presumed to imply abuse or addiction, but this is not the case. Tolerance and dependence are normal physiological adaptations to repeated use of any drug. The correct use of prescribed medications for pain, anxiety, and even hypertension commonly produces tolerance and some measure of physiological dependence.

Even a patient who takes a medicine for appropriate medical indications and at the correct dosage can develop tolerance, physical depen-
"

If anyone wants immediate advice don\'t hestitate to contact to me on AIM (AOL instant messenger) - aim: vodkasmodka

Eccentric! Not egocentric!
Shaolin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 6th, 2005, 07:22 PM   #212
Shaolin
Awesome Poster
 
Join Date: March 21, 2004
Location: England - United Kingdom
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cosmos
"National Institude on Drug Abuse is hardly a unbiased source, it's government run. "

1. Prove me the government is biased, and prove to me that billions of dollars have gone down the drain for the sole purpose of making drug takers unhappy.

"You get hte impression Science is saying cannabis is evil and dangerous, from a few government funded tests."

2. A few? how about 85% of all the worlds research regarding the topic.

"addiction is NOT a huge issue with cannabis as it is not physically addictive, it is psychologically addictive. "

3. so basically your admitting that its addictive.

"The same word applys to cannabis. It has no permanent side effect,"

4. prove it. word of mouth doesnt prove anything


"Also in the future, i ask that you do not make false accusations against me, or conspire against me."

5. stop making false accusations rightnow, and maybe i will stop too
1. The government doesn't want to make just drug users unhappy, they want to make anyone who has any fun unhappy! They are obviously not doing this just to make people unhappy, or to deprive people of something they are entitled to. However the government is biased because they have a stance on an issue, and if they go back on a stance, it shows weakness. How would it look if George Bush legalised all drugs, after YEARS of anti-drugs campaigning and "Just say No!" schemes!

The government is biased, and NIDA is too. For they are an instiute that is against drug use, and against poeple having rights to do what they want with themselves. Where do you get your information from? Anti-drugs sources. Where do i get my facts from? Non government, scientific research, or the PRESS, which is supposed to be as unbiased as possible.

How about you use CNN, seeing as it seems too hard for your mind to comprehend there is actually a huge opposition to marijuana criminilsation in the medical and scientific community. Why should i have to prove all of this to you, im the one proving my argument, and disproving your argument at hte same time. All you are doing is going around in circles with your NIDA crap.

2. 85%? Where did you get this figure? Of the worlds research? I find that hard to believe, either you made it up or NIDA made it up. Prove it (something you keep saying)

3. Basically i am admitting that it can be addictive in people with addictive personalities. Someone can get psychologically addicted to anyhting wether its sweets or normal drugs, read my sources in the post above. Any drug can produce a craving effect, psychologically.

However the difference is, cannabis does not produce physical withdrawl effects like those seen in heroin users, who can die. It does activate the GAS system, if they are a heavy user, but this triggered psychologically, and can occur with anything from sweets to paracetemol. Basically anything that has a chemical reaction in your body and effects the brain chemical dopamine (ie chocolate). I was never holding anything back, and i never said it wasn't addictive in anyway.

4. Word of mouth? Im using a word, as a definition from the dictionary.

If by word of mouth, you mean that that it is not fatal. Then you are absolutly wrong. Cannabis has had NO fatalities recorded in medical literature? Don't believe me, prove im wrong. SHow me where it says "Cannabis overdose can cause death, or brain damage in high doses" on the NIDA webpage....I wonder why it doesn't say anything about cannabis overdose on there.....because there's no such thing!

Scientific evidence says others. Yes there is a toxic limit anyone can take for any drug, but for cannabis, you have to consume a third of your bodyweight....all at once! That was no fabricated bullshit, like your work. Look it up if you don't believe me, Prove cannabis is fatal.

Where does it say cannabis has permanent side effects on the NIDA webpage? It doesn't, and that's your beloved anti-drugs website. I've sent you many MANY sources from different locations, citing it has no permanent effects.

Yes it has LONG TERM effects in heavy users, such as problems with short term memory. But these subside after a few weeks to a month, don't believe me it even says so on NIDA. Something along hte lines of "cannabis use has been shown to cause anxiety effects and thinking etc blah blah in users for days or even upto months in some users!"

And thats the most biased they can put it, because if they wrote.

Cannabis use is lethal in high doses, it has permanent side effects and makes you brain damaged for the rest of your life. It is physically addictive, and users commonly die of withdrawl. - Saying a statement like that wouldn't be fact, that would be an outright lie.

5. So your admitting you were trying to conspire against me earlier?

If anyone wants immediate advice don\'t hestitate to contact to me on AIM (AOL instant messenger) - aim: vodkasmodka

Eccentric! Not egocentric!
Shaolin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 6th, 2005, 07:58 PM   #213
nwshc
Banned
 
nwshc's Forum Picture
 
Join Date: March 27, 2005
Location: With yo moma
Default

In anycase, there is no clear information that mary is good or bad for you. Scientist will always find something different from each other.

One will say, Yes its dangerousnes out wieghs the benifits. And the other will say just the opposite.

Look on http://www.medicalmarijuanaprocon.org. They give a non-biased view giving both the pros and cons to all subjects.

As in the Question "Is Mary a "Gateway/ stepping-stone" drug?"

Here is a PRO(no):
Quote:
There is no evidence that marijuana serves as a stepping stone on the basis of its particular physiological effect. Much of their [U.S. drug-policy leaders] rhetoric about marijuana being a 'gateway drug' is simply wrong. After decades of looking, scientists still have no evidence that marijuana causes people to use harder drugs. If there is any true 'gateway drug,' it's tobacco.
And here is a Con (yes):
Quote:
Individuals who used cannabis by age 17 years had odds of other drug use, alcohol dependence, and drug abuse/dependence that were 2.1 to 5.2 times higher than those of their co-twin, who did not use cannabis before age 17 years. Yes it is, the medical literature documents this and IOM understates it. Alcohol, tobacco and marijuana all have serious primary effects but all serve as gateway drugs.
So what ever you say, no one is ever right or wrong. We simply wont know becuase they will come out with different reports.
nwshc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 6th, 2005, 08:27 PM   #214
Shaolin
Awesome Poster
 
Join Date: March 21, 2004
Location: England - United Kingdom
Default

Actually your right for the first time also nwsch. No one can win this debate and to be honest, we are not first people to try.

Infact this issue has been around for many many years, and there is alot of strong evidence on both sides biased or not biased, into wether it is dangerous to ones health or not, or wether it has any benefit.

The real issue is, and getting back to the original thread - Should all drugs be legal, regardless of wether it's cyanide, or soft drugs like Marijuana?

To spark it off, I think Yes. Everyone should have the right to do whatever they want to themselves, aslong as they are doing it in a manner that doesn't impose their behaviours on others - such as driving a car, or doing drugs or even alcohol blatently in public, or near a school for example.

I think this because there would be (in my opinion) more control because drugs are indespensible, alot of the ones kids use today that can be dangerous like E, are easily manufactured in mass quantities, in someones kitchen within hours!

It shouldn't be the production and use and selling of drugs the police should focus on, but the control of hte public who use htem. The crimes they commit should be tackled or contained completly like in Holland, with the use of Cannabis cafes, and although research in these debates is helpful, it never really helps as anyone can come up with a converse point to that research topic.

If anyone wants immediate advice don\'t hestitate to contact to me on AIM (AOL instant messenger) - aim: vodkasmodka

Eccentric! Not egocentric!
Shaolin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 6th, 2005, 08:45 PM   #215
nwshc
Banned
 
nwshc's Forum Picture
 
Join Date: March 27, 2005
Location: With yo moma
Default

i agree, its your body do what you want with it. The government just trys to protect you. Maby they just dont want their people, o whats the word... sick maby. If thats the word im thinking of. im not to sure. The government has always surprised me becuase we had this big thing on some ingredient is diet pills. So they banned that ingredient from all diet pills becuse it killed like 100 poeple. But on the other hand, you have cigs that cause cancer and all of this stuff that kills a ton of people and they dont even want to touch it. I really dont know why. That has always puzzled me
nwshc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 6th, 2005, 09:16 PM   #216
Shaolin
Awesome Poster
 
Join Date: March 21, 2004
Location: England - United Kingdom
Default

Because smoking tobacco is socially accepted, society accepts that people smoke. Society also accepts people drink alcohol. A large chunk of society does drugs, and it is to an extent sociall acceptable, however the government doesn't like that.

It might be to do with the fact that cigarettes get taxed alot, and millions smoke. The same with liquor.

Both are as or even more dangerous than some of the most dangerous illegal drugs.

If anyone wants immediate advice don\'t hestitate to contact to me on AIM (AOL instant messenger) - aim: vodkasmodka

Eccentric! Not egocentric!
Shaolin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 6th, 2005, 09:58 PM   #217
boognish
A Pleaser
 
Join Date: June 29, 2004
Location: somewhere in a galaxy far far away...
Age: 30
Gender: Male
Default

do we have an agreement between foes?

My Views Are Odd, I am Accutally a Republican
i dont suffer from insanity, i enjoy it
i swear to drunk im not god

pm me if anyone needs any kind of help, i probly know the answer you seek
i got a new email...
its gmail! it is: [email protected]
boognish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 6th, 2005, 11:05 PM   #218
Shaolin
Awesome Poster
 
Join Date: March 21, 2004
Location: England - United Kingdom
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by boognish
do we have an agreement between foes?
hah maybe. Personally i think we've been debating about something neither of us can win, and i've been wasting too much brain time working on a pointless issue to me.

I've been doing drugs for 4 years now. I started off smoking cigarettes and drinking alcohol. I smoke pot regularily now, and im holding up well at college. I have alot of friends and i take pursuit in my interests that do not involve drugs, drugs are a small part of my life.

I just got ticked off with the way some people assume that if you take a drug, your a bad person and that your life is ruined. So many people take drugs it's unbelievable, and alot of them are very acedemic and very famous (as i displayed in earlier pages examples of frued, hendrix etc)

Wether they remain legal or illegal, it doesn't matter to me. I've never had any trouble with the law, because i use things responsibly, with friends and away from the public. I don't sit in the middle of a shopping centre smoking a joint, i sit in my bedroom smoking a joint, laughing with my friends and messing about. None of us would dream of driving a car like this, but i can assume some people would.

As some people do get addicted, and some people are more willing to drive while on drugs or alcohol, or some people are more willing to gamble, or some people are more willing to skydive etc.

Drugs are down to your personality. People who never felt the need to experiment in different forms of consciousness will probably never do it, regardless of wehter its legal or not. The same goes for people who would, and they still do it, legal or not.

This is my point entirly - Drugs should be legal, because the law is having little effect on wether they take them or not, thats just down to hte individual. The government cant assume that chucking out anti drugs leaflets and adverts is going to stop everyone from abusing them, and they most certinaly cant stop the supply, because it's renewable, plants are not hard to grow, and anyone who knows a good solid basics of chemistry could with a recipe book, cook up alot of powerful drugs.

When there are drugs that are legal which are more dangerous than illegal ones, whats the point in even making any illegal.

People who have serious problems with drugs don't need jail time, they don't need impure drugs supplies. Impure heroin is one of hte leading causes of heroin related deaths, and seriously people who are addicted to heroin will find it very hard to turn down even the most impure heroin, they just want their fix.

So why not give it to them in a hospital, giving them the option to quit or not, and if they choose to, give htem all the support they need.

Or a cold jail cell. What do you think?

If anyone wants immediate advice don\'t hestitate to contact to me on AIM (AOL instant messenger) - aim: vodkasmodka

Eccentric! Not egocentric!
Shaolin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 8th, 2005, 07:43 PM   #219
Kiros
Retired Administrator
 
Kiros's Forum Picture
 
Name: Ben
Join Date: May 22, 2004
Location: Albany, LA - USA
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Blog Entries: 17
Default

I thought that Josh locked this
well, to prevent further arguements, I'll lock it

[LOCKING]

Kiros || Ben

Happiness is not about being perfect.
It is about seeing beyond the imperfections.
Kiros is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 24th, 2005, 06:27 AM   #220
TheWizard
Retired Administrator
 
TheWizard's Forum Picture
 
Join Date: March 19, 2004
Location: Hogwarts School
Default

To much fighting.

Locked

Josh

TheWizard is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:07 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright©2000 - 2020
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 2004 - 2020, VirtualTeen.org