Weed is a loser drug, don't care what anyone says

[Deep Dish]

A joint? I hate joints, actually.

 

[synergy1]

I knew my class and knew which ones lighted up. Coincidentally enough the ones I gave bad grades too ( by merit alone) became some of my best friends. These classes were upper class technical (engineering), so it wasn't that big - the department had the small town feel so I knew everyone it seemed. And yes, a few of the folks who opted did just fine and were smart guys. In general based on grades, those who smoked were later on assignments and got more incorrect. Yes, its anecdotal but if it was the other way around i'd also state that.

Alcohol inhibits driving. Driving while on the phone inhibits driving. Driving high inhibits driving. your just lying to yourself if you claim otherwise. I lost a LOT of respect for my friends who got in MULTIPLE accidents while high. their apparent apathy towards passengers was utterly frightening. They blame it on the conditions, but when you are going tokyo drift around corners at insane speeds beyond ones control right after toking - bad things will happen. Due to the number of accidents i have been in, I refuse to drive with people who have smoked. None of the accidents were related to alcohol, all of them were related to pot. Confirmation bias, statistics, standard distribution, quartile, regression, t test etc...don't care how you try and lie to me. I have seen it too many times to ignore it. If you drink, hand over the keys. If you light up, do the same friggan thing.

Im not here to belittle MJ. As I said, I have a great deal of friends who do it on a frequent basis. Aside from impaired driving, I could give two ****s about the stuff or the culture. I tried it a number of years ago and honestly it wasn't my thing.

 

[Deep Dish]

bradd80:
And if you don't believe deepdish, take it from these guys:

http://www.youtube.com/verify_age?next_url=/watch?v=_L8DcjFOD1k

And then watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2H8IOzWAuo

For what it’s worth, the context of the ‘smarter’ comment was a sarcastic rejoinder. No, marijuana doesn’t literally cause people to be smarter but there are correlations with academic achievement and it does help the brain with creativity vis a vie hyper-priming.

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/08/does-marijuana-make-you-stupid/

 

[Bible_Belt]

Alcohol inhibits driving...Driving high inhibits driving.

Well, yes, but in different ways. Alcohol makes your brain make mistakes, but more importantly, it impairs the part of your brain that notices and corrects its own mistakes. The drunk driver will swerve, and his brain will tell him "ah, it's ok. No big deal."

The stoned driver also makes mistakes, but his reaction is the exact opposite. Instead of discounting the mistakes, he will think they are a bigger deal than what they really are. Because of this, the only quantifiable difference in stoned drivers is that they tend to drive more slowly. There was a piece of research out of the UK proving that fact, and the US government has been trying to debunk it with bad science ever since. I remember one headline that appeared just before the last legalization initiative in California: Research Proves Stoned Driver are Deadly. The "research" was having a local radio DJ, apparent non-potsmoker, and friend of the police drive through a timed obstacle course. Then they got him really stoned and made him drive through the same course. He had a slower time and ran over two orange cones. That proves that driving high will kill you

My dad was a truck driver in the 80's. That was before CDL drug testing. Stoned truck drivers were so common that out west, when a cop would pull over a big rig, the first thing he would say as he walked up was, "Gimme your pistol and your bag of dope. Come on, hand it over now."

 

[FairShake]

I've driven drunk high. Driving high is not safe in my case. I do drive slower but my reaction time is just as slow and my mind wanders more. I was also paranoid to the point of getting in fights a couple times when it wasn't warranted.

None of this is reason for it to be illegal mind you. Alcohol does the exact same thing to me. I just don't like when marijuana "experts" twist the facts. Smoking blunts will explain it all.

 

[taiyuu_otoko]

Everything's bad for you if you do too much of it. Sugary cola is bad for you if you drink gallons if it everyday. So should they outlaw it like in new york?

What about burgers? If you eat burgers every day, you'd get fat, and through roundabout taxes, everybody would end up paying for your health care. So should burgers be outlawed?

In an ideal society, everything would be legal. If you wanted to get high, you would get high. Until it impaired with your ability to hold a job, in which case you couldn't afford weed. Then you'd stop getting high.

With a sufficient police force to protect private property, you wouldn't be able to steal anything, either.

Everything would be self regulated.

Now, back to the OP's point, that all weed users are losers. A simple solution would be to stop hanging out with people who smoke out.

After all, where they get their money, and how they spend it during their free time is their business.

Now, if you're talking about keeping tax dollars from eventually getting into addicts' hands so they can buy a blunt, then that's one thing.

But if you are ranting about people's personal choices and lifestyles, that have NOTHING to do with you, then that problem is yours.

You may as well rant about people who wear white socks before Easter. It ain't your business, chief.

 

[Purefilth]

^^People who wear white socks anywhere but the gym are losers, let's hate on them too! :crackup:

 

[Deep Dish]

btw hardly any of your links work, maybe you wouldn't make so many mistakes if you could just stop doing so much dope

It’s interesting to me why you would choose the path of facetious hostility towards me, before I even said anything to you, when in fact I’ve been nothing but polite throughout this entire thread. I guess the original poster’s flaming sent you a cue that it’s “game on” for snide remarks. Even though I can dish out scorchers, I’m always polite until provoked, and your poor wit is not inspiring enough for me to care. In the words of William Shakespeare, “I would challenge you to a battle of wits, but I see you are unarmed!”

By the way, I posted four links and only one had an error. One error doesn't qualify as "so many" mistakes.

 

[goundra]

Only idiots inhale smoke of ANY type. Not another animal on the face of the Earth will WILLINGLY do so, they all know to flee from it, cause it's a toxin. Sure, you can TRAIN an animal to inhale smoke, and override their instinct, just like you can cough and gag and spit and choke and learn to "like" it as a kid but it's still stupid.

 

[synergy1]

Well, yes, but in different ways. Alcohol makes your brain make mistakes, but more importantly, it impairs the part of your brain that notices and corrects its own mistakes. The drunk driver will swerve, and his brain will tell him "ah, it's ok. No big deal."

The stoned driver also makes mistakes, but his reaction is the exact opposite. Instead of discounting the mistakes, he will think they are a bigger deal than what they really are. Because of this, the only quantifiable difference in stoned drivers is that they tend to drive more slowly. There was a piece of research out of the UK proving that fact, and the US government has been trying to debunk it with bad science ever since. I remember one headline that appeared just before the last legalization initiative in California: Research Proves Stoned Driver are Deadly. The "research" was having a local radio DJ, apparent non-potsmoker, and friend of the police drive through a timed obstacle course. Then they got him really stoned and made him drive through the same course. He had a slower time and ran over two orange cones. That proves that driving high will kill you

My dad was a truck driver in the 80's. That was before CDL drug testing. Stoned truck drivers were so common that out west, when a cop would pull over a big rig, the first thing he would say as he walked up was, "Gimme your pistol and your bag of dope. Come on, hand it over now."

That being said, if they had a reliable way to check on the spot if a driver was high and had a zero tolerance policy like they do with alcohol, I don't see a problem with outright legalization of pot. This might be a whole different discussion in and of itself, but as I said earlier..i care only to the end where others can ( and have) been affected.

Ultimately people will make choices anyway. If its legal or illegal, people will still drive stoned. At least if it was legal, the US government could spend money on other more important matters. enforce zero tolerance like in many countries, and this will be enough of a deterrent to many folks ( lets face it the small subset that doesn't care won't change their habits anyway).

On another topic, I kind of feel bad for some of the heavier pot smokers. As I said earlier, I have lived with a good number of folks for many years and can attest to behavior. It seems they are extremely happy when they can get their high, and very down/ tense when they have to abstain ( piss test for employment, time away from home etc). The reaction to abstinence is very similar amongst my friends ; they become extremely irritable and very difficult to socialize with. At least in my observations, it creates a higher high ( not a pun, am referring to happiness), and lower lows. It seems to me that they use it to soothe those ups and downs when in reality it seems that the drug causes those ups and downs. We all get ups and downs, but over the years I observed that mine generally aren't quite as extreme, and they aren't quite as quick. Put another way, I don't really get as happy as them, but I stay where I am at for longer than a pot smoker does.

as ron paul said, let people make their own choices and keep government out of our lives. I agree here. let em smoke if they want!

 

[Bible_Belt]

The reaction to abstinence is very similar amongst my friends ; they become extremely irritable

Yes, absolutely. I think it has to do with the serotonin receptors and neural synapses. When you give the brain any chemical that makes it happy, it starts to lose the ability to produce happy chemicals on its own. Meth is the worst; getting off meth almost always involves extreme depression. Pain pills are really bad about withdrawal, too. Anyone who works in the medical field and deals with patients on pain pills will get screamed at by pillheads on a regular basis. Withdrawal makes them cranky.

 

[OzyBoy]

ok fine we get it smoking lots of weed makes you smarter and healthier lol can we move on to another thread topic now?

Yes. Well said.

 

[Deep Dish]

bradd80:
Please stop writing these ridiculous quotes by actors and philosophers who have been dead for hundreds of years.

The Voltaire quote was making a valid philosophical point. The translation is "Neither abstinence nor excess ever renders man happy." The point is everything in moderation. It does have medical relevance, because responsible moderation mitigates for harm.

dependence and withdrawal reactions

The dependency rating is estimated at 9% (or less) which is the same as caffeine. Few people smoke enough marijuana to experience withdrawal symptoms and, for those who do, the symptoms are relatively mild and comparable in magnitude with caffeine.

association with polydrug abuse, ie cocaine, crack, heroin.

Association is not casuation. The "gateway effect" has been thoroughly disproven. 99% of people who try marijuana never proceed to harder illicit drugs and marijuana is a proven "exit drug" away from those harder drugs.

respiratory and cardiovascular health risks including bronchitis, emphysema, lung cancer, aggravation of heart disease.

Bronchitis and emphysema occurs only with the heaviest of users. People who practice responsible moderation are not affected. There have only been two times where I began to develop a cough and it was easy to take a break for awhile and then cut down on consumption. Everything in moderation. It should also be noted that baked goods, vaporizers, and liquids sidestep all health concerns about toxins and combustion. Yes, you can even drink it.

There is no connection with lung cancer. I notice your study is dated 1999, but times have changed. In 2006...

The largest study of its kind has unexpectedly concluded that smoking marijuana, even regularly and heavily, does not lead to lung cancer. The new findings "were against our expectations," said Donald Tashkin of the University of California at Los Angeles, a pulmonologist who has studied marijuana for 30 years. "We hypothesized that there would be a positive association between marijuana use and lung cancer, and that the association would be more positive with heavier use," he said. "What we found instead was no association at all, and even a suggestion of some protective effect."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/25/AR2006052501729.html​

The hypothesized reason is that marijuana either promotes apoptosis (programmed suicide of old cells) or inhibits angiogenesis (generation of new blood vessels). Tumors need new blood vessels to grow and marijuana shrinks tumors in half.

There is an elevated risk of a heart attack for one hour after smoking a joint, but the elevation is comparable to running up a flight of stairs or having sex. Nothing to worry about if you are healthy enough to have sex. Speaking of sex...

effects on reproduction, reduced sperm count

Myth: Marijuana Causes Sterility and Lowers Testosterone
Government experts concede that pot has no permanent effect on the male or female reproductive systems. A few studies have suggested that heavy marijuana use may have a reversible, suppressive effect on male testicular function. A recent study by Dr. Robert Block has refuted earlier research suggesting that pot lowers testosterone or other sex hormones in men or women. In contrast, heavy alcohol drinking is known to lower testosterone levels and cause impotence. A couple of lab studies indicated that very heavy marijuana smoking might lower sperm counts. However, surveys of chronic smokers have turned up no indication of infertility or other abnormalities.

Less is known about the effects of cannabis on human females. Some animal studies suggest that pot might temporarily lower fertility or increase the risk of fetal loss, but this evidence is of dubious relevance to humans. One human study suggested that pot may mildly disrupt ovulation. It is possible that adolescents are peculiarly vulnerable to hormonal disruptions from pot. However, not a single case of impaired fertility has ever been observed in humans of either sex.

http://norml.org/library/health-reports/item/norml-s-marijuana-health-mythology​

A few months ago there was a big news headline about a very rare kind of testicular cancer. Supposedly marijuana doubles your risk of non-seminoma testicular cancer, but most at risk are people who only smoked once in their life or quit years ago and the heaviest chronic users are the safest. Which makes no sense. The scientific study was only a small handful of people, so the result may have been a fluke. The overall risk is very low, so the "doubling" of risk is not too worrisome.

Directly contradicting you and the other pro-weed supporters in this thread, this is what the experts have to say regarding the effects of cannabis on motor function ie driving.

"impaired motor performance has been shown in many studies in humans, including measurements of body sway, tracking ability, pursuit rotor performance, hand-eye coordination, reaction time, physical strength, and many others. The impairments are demonstrable after commonly used social doses of cannabis in experienced users."

Here is the rebuttal to your rebuttal:

http://norml.org/library/item/cannabis-and-driving-a-scientific-and-rational-review

The article goes on to state that "in many countries, cannabis is the most common drug, apart from alcohol, to be detected in individuals involved in traffic accidents."

Reasons for this fact are twofold. One, cannabis is by far the most widely used illicit drug among the US population, with nearly one out of two Americans admitting having tried it. Two, marijuana is the most readily detectable illicit drug in toxicological tests. Marijuana's primary psychoactive compound, THC, may accumulate and be detected in blood for several hours in occasional users; in some chronic users, THC may be present in blood for a period of days after past use, long after any performance impairing effects have worn off. In addition, non-psychoactive byproducts of cannabis, known as metabolites, may be detected in the urine of regular users for days or weeks after past use. (Other common illicit substances, such as cocaine or methamphetamine, do not possess such long half-lives.) Therefore, the substance's prevalence in toxicological evaluations of US drivers does not necessarily indicate that it is a frequent or significant causal factor in auto accidents. In fact, states that have experienced a significant increase in the total number of authorized medical cannabis users have in general experienced no proportional corresponding rise in traffic fatalities, and most have experienced a decline in overall fatal accidents.

(see above link)​

Need I go on?

Sure, why not? I may not have covered everything, but I'm very prepared to continue on.

 

[Fatal Jay]

I use to smoke in my highschool days, but i stopped cause I noticed that all I wanted in my life was to get high,eat,and watch cartoons weed made me lazy

And I hate women who smoke, you ever notice how slutty women are when they are addicted to weed?

 

[Deep Dish]

Deepdish, when you’re at work and your colleagues are discussing various topics do you suddenly launch into diatribes featuring Shakespeare and Voltaire quotes like you did with us here?... So why on earth you continue to quote Voltaire and Shakespeare during a medical debate about the deadly harm caused by marijuana drug use is beyond me.

You are unaware of the fantastic thing called "wit." There is nothing wrong, and everything right, with sprinkling dashes of wit with serious writing, especially if, as now, it is conversational.

Dr. Marie-Josee Lynch wrote an article in which she discussed how marijuana use causes psychiatric disorders and aggravates schizophrenia. In it, she says that “results from 7 cohort studies showed a 40% increased risk of psychosis in cannabis users compared with nonusers. The data also revealed a dose-response effect—the risk of psychotic symptoms was increased approximately 50% to 200% in those who used cannabis frequently compared with nonusers.”

There is a slightly higher rate of schizophrenia than the general population but that is no proof of marijuana causing psychiatric disorders. It could simply be that many people with schizophrenia or other disorders are self-medicating. If marijuana causes schizophrenia then rates would be expected to rise with rising marijuana use, but the prevalence of schizophrenia remains consistently the same despite fluctuations in marijuana's popularity. Once again, correlation is not causation.

Deep Dish:
Paradoxically enough, marijuana does not impair experienced users.

bradd80:
This is an utterly preposterous statement and goes against literally thousands of medical studies that state otherwise, as well as the personal experience of hundreds of individuals reading this very thread! If experienced users were not impaired, then they would stop using the drug since they would no longer feel many of its effects.

Ignoratio elenchi. You are quote mining.

LOL is that what you call a rebuttal?

Let us review...

Directly contradicting you and the other pro-weed supporters in this thread, this is what the experts have to say regarding the effects of cannabis on motor function ie driving:

"impaired motor performance has been shown in many studies in humans, including measurements of body sway, tracking ability, pursuit rotor performance, hand-eye coordination, reaction time, physical strength, and many others. The impairments are demonstrable after commonly used social doses of cannabis in experienced users."

Although acute cannabis intoxication following inhalation has been shown to mildly impair psychomotor skills, this impairment is seldom severe or long lasting. (By contrast, virtually no published research exists assessing the oral ingestion of cannabis edibles on psychomotor performance). In closed course and driving simulator studies, marijuana's acute effects on psychomotor performance include minor impairments in tracking (eye movement control) and reaction time (break latency), as well as variation in lateral positioning (weaving), headway (drivers under the influence of cannabis tend to follow less closely to the vehicle in front of them), and speed (drivers tend to decrease speed following cannabis inhalation). Notably, these impairments in performance are more likely to be manifested in driver simulator tests than in assessments of actual on-road behavior, where changes in performance are consistently nominal. 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." 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."​

Don’t insult the intelligence of everyone here by quoting “medical science” from a pro-marijuana website, this can in no way be considered unbiased scientific proof of anything other than the fact that these guys are smoking a lot of dope and trying to convince you to do the same.

The paper was full of scientific citations. You must address each individual citation. Shooting the messenger, ignoratio elenchi, ad hominem, and poisoning the well are logical fallacies.

Besides, I find it very interesting and hypocritical of you that the studies you posted in that link were done in the early 1990’s and you yourself have already made it clear that such studies are old and outdated.

There is no expiration date for scientific relevancy but it depends on each individual data point. Larger studies, with proper controls, do take precedence over smaller studies because studies tend to become progressively larger to control for more variables and produce more refined results. The 2006 study on lung cancer overturns the specific data point in the 1999 study because the 2006 study is the most thoroughly comprehensive study ever done, not merely because it was done seven years later. A study from 30 years ago would still be relevant if its findings have not been overturned by better-controlled studies.

And you make up a number saying out of nowhere that 99 percent of people who try marijuana never proceed to harder drugs is another example of you pulling statistics out of your ass.

50% of Americans have tried marijuana at least once in their lifetime, but rates of current hard drug use are around 1%. So, okay, the number would be 98%.

Whatever the difference between trying something once in your lifetime and current use, there is no pursuasive argument for the gateway effect. If the gateway effect was truly valid, streets would now be littered with heroin addicts on every street in every neighborhood in the country, multitudes greater than observed today. Rates of marijuana among teenagers is on the rise, but rates of hard drug use have been falling. Other spurious factors such as personality differences are a better explanation for polydrug behavior.

A 35-year study published in the August 2012 issue of Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences provides “objective evidence that marijuana is harmful to the brain. 1,000 individuals were IQ-tested at ages 13 and 38, the age of onset of smoking marijuana. Users who started in adolescence showed an average decline of 8 IQ points, and quitting cannabis did not appear to reverse the loss.” The study goes on to conclude that “the decline in IQ among persistent cannabis users could not be explained by alcohol or other drug use or by having less education.”

Thank you, but I already alluded this study when I said "There is some preliminary evidence that marijuana may lower IQ scores by 8 points, but that only happens under the age of 18. Adults are perfectly fine." Even though people were tested at age 38, they first began when they were 13.

I advocate for responsible adult consumption. No teenagers under the age of 18.

 

[Deep Dish]

Brad, first of all, I was editing my post of any harsh rhetoric as you posted, as I see you posted three minutes before I was done. So, I do regret the harshness.

The medical reports which conclude that marijuana is a gateway drug does not mean that everyone who smokes weed will go on to do harder drugs. What it means is that people who use harder drugs started out with marijuana, which desensitized them and made them more prone to using other hard drugs… The problem with this, is that when it comes to drug abuse, there is no such thing as “responsible consumption.”

If so, then alcohol is the gateway drug, because people first try alcohol before they try marijuana. Alcohol is a drug, you are essentially arguing there is no such thing as responsible consumption of wine in moderation, however cautiously done. To you, just one sip of wine is recklessly abusive.

99% of heroin users drank milk before they drank beer, so is milk a gateway?

This is great, you finally agree that smoking weed does in fact make people stupid! Oh but wait a second, you're only saying that it makes young people under 18 stupid. Hahaha you're such a pothead where do you get your ridiculous sense of logic from this is friggin hilarious!

The brain is still developing in adolescence, but no scientific studies find long-term cognitive deficiencies in adults (any small, minor, barely noticeable memory or cognitive impairments are clear within four to six weeks). Children should not smoke pot, just as much as they should not drink underaged.

 

[Married Buried]

I'm against using marijuana but for legalizing it, which is a no brainer. Know too many people who flushed their lives down the toilet for it.

The only way marijuana flushes your life is when you get caught with it. Legalizing will fix that.

 

[Deep Dish]

bradd80:
In this thread, we're talking about the destructive effects of weed not alcohol so changing the subject isn`t going to make my facts any less true.

Alcohol is a drug, ‘the gateway drug,’ and you said there is no such thing as responsible moderation of drugs. I bring up alcohol because people most certainly can drink in responsible moderation. If people can drink responsibly, with setting personal limits, designated drivers, not getting drunk at work, why can’t adult marijuana users be regarded as similarly responsible in moderation?

People who hate marijuana always hate it when we drug reformers bring up the alcohol comparison, because they can’t stand the cognitive dissonance.

The standard refrain regarding the immorality of drug use crumbles in the face of most Americans’ tolerance for alcohol and tobacco use. Only the Mormons and a few other like-minded sects, who regard as immoral any intake of substances to alter one's state of consciousness or otherwise cause pleasure, are consistent in this respect; they eschew not just the illicit drugs, but also alcohol, tobacco, caffeinated coffee and tea, and even chocolate. ‘Moral’ condemnation by the majority of Americans of some substances and not others is little more than a transient prejudice in favor of some drugs and against others.

http://www.skeptictank.org/files/conspire/prohibit.htm​

And not only are they all true, but the fact that marijuana continues to become more and more potent (today it`s up to 5 times more potent than it was 30 years ago) only means that the negative brain-altering effects of marijuana will only continue to get worse.

It means people are smoking less to achieve the same effect, so increases in potency are actually healthier on the lungs. By way of comparison, if you doubled the potency of beer, most people would drink 1/2 as much to compensate rather than get twice as drunk. They keep to a certain comfort level. The same holds true for marijuana. When someone consumes too much, the high from marijuana can become a rather unpleasant experience, or you just fall sleep, so increases in potency are mitigated by reaching the upper ceiling for an enjoyable experience and staying awake.

I took a closer look at the schizophrenia link you provided and it proves a point that I’ve been making. The subjects were all adolescents between 15-18 years old. Like I said, teenagers should not be doing any substances which may hurt their development, but it speaks nothing of adults.

I looked at academic research for months before ever deciding to try marijuana and noticed that scientific studies finding negative effects fit into one of three categories:

1. Teenagers
2. Extreme consumption (one study was 50 joints a day)
3. Small effects less than six weeks

Thus, as an adult, I made the rational deduction that marijuana is probably safe in moderation.

Here is a video clip from ABC’s Nightline:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H2DdAKefrJI

It features Allen St. Pierre of NORML, debating Brian Darling, a representative from the conservative Heritage Foundation. You sound just like Brian as he repeats your talking points. The debate focuses on legalization, which is different from what we’re talking about, but it does cover hypocrisies and Allen cites the federal government’s own data to disprove the gateway effect. It’s quite entertaining!

You may think NORML is a bunch of factless stoners, but Mr. Pierre proves otherwise.

 

[Bible_Belt]

Brad, you need a Caribbean vacation. Yeah, mon. In most places, pretty much everyone is stoned all the time and have been for all of their lives. They do tend to be kinda lazy, but they don't have cancer, schizophrenia, or man-t!ts. One of my favorite memories was seeing a group of white-bearded old fisherman who had come in for the day. They were sitting on milk crates under a sign that said 'no loitering' and smoking a joint the size of an Olympic relay baton.

The reason we think of the "lazy stoner couch potato" stereotype is that those are the ones we see. They don't care if people know, because they don't have anything to lose. The stoners you don't see tend to hide it well because they want to keep their job. I'm sure you know several pot-smoking lawyers, but they'd never tell you. The only lawyer I actually trust to not screw me over is a stoner. He's been arrested for weed before and knows what it feels like. Now he does criminal defense, and he's damn good at it.

I think of pot not as good or bad, but as simply human. A lot of women smoke weed. My pick-up line when I was much younger was usually "hey let's go get high!" and it worked like magic. As a demographic, female pot-smokers tend to be young, hot, and prone to impulsive decision-making

 

[Bible_Belt]

prevalence of cannabis use worldwide is around 1 to 5%

That's a worldwide average that factors in billions of Indian and Asian people who can barely afford food, much less weed. You could probably find 5% of any one Caribbean island that was anti-pot, but they would be expats from the US, UK, and Canada.

I'm saying you should go to the Caribbean to see it for yourself if you don't believe it. Pot is cheaper than tobacco, because it's so common. Everyone's a weed smoker, but their society doesn't fall apart. And their rates of diseases like cancer and psychosis are not any different than anyone else's. All the cooked-up research to predict all of the bad things that would happen if pot use were widespread doesn't mean very much when there really is such a place. And like I said, they're not exactly the most industrious people in the world, but at least health-wise, everyone's just fine.