Anti-Marijuana ads

[1stdeadeye]

Hahaha

Originally posted by lopxtc
My facts came from studies that have been mentioned on both the www.NORML.org website and the institute of medicine ...

An NORML is unbiased? Hahahahahahahahaha. That is like asking Handgun Control Inc. if firearms are bad. Go back one page and read the Washington Post article. I think they are a bit more credible then NORML.

By the way where is yourmedical evidence or studies? How about one from the Journal of the American Medical Association. Is that real and unbiased enough for you?

Real proof that Marijuana is bad for you!

[giblit]

Originally posted by TransMan
Yeah and Patnership for drug free america isnt biased in any way right?

One thing about pot being 4 times as much tar as Tobacco do you know anyone that smokes cigerettes that only smokes 4 a day or even 8 for that matter. Most peoepl that smoke pot dont even smoke a joint a day they might smoke one or two on the weekends but that about it. And there are other ways to use pot you can vaporize it which alows no or a very small % of the tar into you. Or they way that im going to try tonight by putting it in capsules and swollowing them. Many peopel also put it in food and i might add that it is very good in cheese and bean burritos.

LOL small amounts i see poeple that can down an oz in a day between 2 people without getting up. most of the time i when i smoke i smoke about an 8th in 1 sesh. which isnt that much and im sure that has more tar then a packof cigerettes.

[lopxtc]

Re: Hahaha

OFFICIAL U.S. REPORT BACKS MEDICAL USE OF MARIJUANA

WASHINGTON, March 17 (Reuters) - A U.S.-commissioned report released on Wednesday strongly backed the medical use of marijuana, declaring that for some people with serious diseases such as AIDS it may be one of the most effective treatments available.

The widely-anticipated report by the Institute of Medicine (IOM) was commissioned by the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy and looked likely to prompt a thorough review of U.S. efforts to ban almost all marijuana use as dangerous drug abuse.

IOM investigators declared that marijuana was not particularly addictive and did not appear to be a "gateway" to the use of harder drugs such as heroin. They also said there was no evidence to indicate that approved medical use of marijuana would increase public abuse of the drug.

The IOM report, the product of more than 18 months of research, highlighted continued concerns over marijuana, noting that the common practice of smoking the drug was medically dangerous and asking for more studies on how the drug really works on the human body.

But on almost every front the independent medical review of scientific research and patient experience found "substantial consensus" to indicate that, for some people, the potential medical benefits of marijuana outweigh its risks.

"Smoked marijuana should not generally be recommended for long-term medical use," the report said.

"Nonetheless, for certain patients such as the terminally ill or those with debilitating symptoms, the long-term risks are not of great concern."

The focus of the report was on "cannabinoid" drugs such as THC, the main active element in marijuana.

Research over the last 16 years has provided new insight into how these drugs work on both the brain and the body, where they can help to modulate pain, and alleviate other symptoms of serious illness such as anxiety, lack of appetite, and nausea.

The report said one focus of new medical and pharmaceutical research should be to design a "non-smoked, rapid onset" delivery system for the drug which could mimic the speedy action of a smoked marijuana cigarette.

But the report's authors also noted that some desperately ill patients may not want to wait.

"We acknowledge that there is no clear alternative for people suffering from chronic conditions that might be relieved by smoking marijuana such as pain or AIDS wasting," they said.

To help these patients, the report suggested that doctors be allowed to launch one-by-one clinical studies of marijuana, informing each test subject of the potential risks and rewards of smoking the drug.

The IOM report lands amid an increasingly bitter U.S. debate over medical marijuana, launched in 1996 when California became the first state to pass a local initiative aimed at allowing patients with AIDS, cancer, and other serious diseases to use the drug.

While federal authorities have used their power to block implementation of the California measure, voters in six more states passed similar initiatives in 1998 -- boosting pressure on the Clinton Administration to consider removing marijuana from the "Schedule I" list of dangerous
narcotics.

Barry McCaffrey, Clinton's anti-drug "czar" and long an outspoken opponent of relaxing anti-marijuana law, ordered the IOM report in 1997 to give a scientific basis to the discussion, and his office Wednesday responded to the IOM findings with a call for more research.

"We will carefully study the recommendations and conclusions contained in this report," the Office of National Drug Control Policy said in a statement.

"We look forward to the considered responses from our nation's public health officials to the interim solutions recommended by the report."

Supporters of the medical marijuana movement declared the IOM report anunequivocal victory.

Bill Zimmerman, director of Americans for Medical Rights, the sponsor of six 1998 state marijuana initiatives, said the IOM's findings would radically rework the public image of what has long been one of the United States' most demonised drugs.

"They are in effect saying that most of what the government has told us about marijuana is false ... it's not addictive, it's not a gateway to heroin and cocaine, it has legitimate medical use, and its not as dangerous as common drugs like Prozac and Viagra," he said.

"This is about as positive as you can get."

Here is the report itself;
Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base ...
Again draw your own conclusion.

I believe this chapter is where you will want to spend your time, since its the one which goes into possible harm and side effects.

But lets not also forget this chapter which goes into the medicinal benefit of it also.

Got to be fair to both sides right? I would hate to only show one side of the story.


Aaron

Originally posted by 1stdeadeye
By the way where is yourmedical evidence or studies? How about one from the Journal of the American Medical Association. Is that real and unbiased enough for you?

[shartley]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...&notFound=true

[-J�ker-]

"If folks think it is okay for people to smoke marijuana for recreational use FINE, then show studies from reputable sources that prove that recreational use is GOOD for you and does not cause harm." Shartley

i think any use of drugs should be up to the person doing them... i think it should be ILLLEGAL to sell ANY drug on the street... to the point. shartley alcohol and tobacco are legal but both cause severe medical problems if these two are legal why cant marijuana be? is it more dangerous than both of these legal recreation drugs? if not there is NO reason it should be illegal but if so there is SOME justification for it being outlawed. but imo all drugs should be legal its your body not the gov.

[shartley]

"If folks think it is okay for people to smoke marijuana for recreational use FINE, then show studies from reputable sources that prove that recreational use is GOOD for you and does not cause harm." Shartley

i think any use of drugs should be up to the person doing them... i think it should be ILLLEGAL to sell ANY drug on the street... to the point. shartley alcohol and tobacco are legal but both cause severe medical problems if these two are legal why cant marijuana be? is it more dangerous than both of these legal recreation drugs? if not there is NO reason it should be illegal but if so there is SOME justification for it being outlawed. but imo all drugs should be legal its your body not the gov.

[-J�ker-]

people should educate themselves on what they get into if ppl OD on a drug they should have to pay for it themselves anyway they can... if they die then the gov gets their things... the drug taker should understand what it does to them... i wasnt suggesting that herion should be sold from a convieniance store i was just saying a person should not go to jail for using a drug.. but it should be illegal to go out and sell it on the streets to anybody. im not trying to explain how it should work. i just think it is not right for somone to go to jail over drugs if they are just using them for recreation and not selling them on the streets or anything like that.

[Restola]

Originally posted by shartley
If folks think it is okay for people to smoke marijuana for recreational use FINE, then show studies from reputable sources that prove that recreational use is GOOD for you and does not cause harm.

Has anyone here stepped back and asked themselves why it is any of their buisness what someone else does in the privacy of their own home?

We've heard its harmful to smoke. Then dont smoke it yourself.

We've heard its a gateway drug. Then dont smoke it yourself.

We've heard it destroys families. It destroys families now. If you are worried it will destroy more families, then spend some of the billions we would be spending on the drug war and use it to really change the way we help children in need.

We've heard people will be driving (or otherwise in public) while high. Then we will make it illegal to drive under the influence, or be high in public, and enforce these rules. Remember not forcing police to hunt down, arrest, process people who are hurting no one but themselves will give them time to enforce the rules that need to be enforced. Not to mention the INSANE drop in crime that would IMMEDIATLY result from drugs being legal. No longer would drug dealers have financial control of our streets. Gangs wouldn't be able to financially support their illegal activities. There wouldn't be drive-by shootings over territory rights. Drug addicts would no longer need to constantly steal money to support their addictions (in fact with the billions of dollars we saved from not fighting the drug war, government could quite easily give these people enough money to buy their drugs at market prices, while STILL providing assistence to get them to break their addictions, and STILL be saving billions of dollars a year).


Its great that so many people are on a moral crusade against drugs. But I just wish they would recognize that that is exactly what it is. You think you are doing the right thing by telling someone else not to hurt themselves. You are willing to make me and everyone around you pay any price so you can feel good about yourself, dispite the fact that no evidence supports that the war on drugs does any good, and the billions of dollars could be used to really make a difference.

[shartley]

Originally posted by Restola

Has anyone here stepped back and asked themselves why it is any of their buisness what someone else does in the privacy of their own home?

We've heard its harmful to smoke. Then dont smoke it yourself.

We've heard its a gateway drug. Then dont smoke it yourself.

We've heard it destroys families. It destroys families now. If you are worried it will destroy more families, then spend some of the billions we would be spending on the drug war and use it to really change the way we help children in need.

We've heard people will be driving (or otherwise in public) while high. Then we will make it illegal to drive under the influence, or be high in public, and enforce these rules. Remember not forcing police to hunt down, arrest, process people who are hurting no one but themselves will give them time to enforce the rules that need to be enforced. Not to mention the INSANE drop in crime that would IMMEDIATLY result from drugs being legal. No longer would drug dealers have financial control of our streets. Gangs wouldn't be able to financially support their illegal activities. There wouldn't be drive-by shootings over territory rights. Drug addicts would no longer need to constantly steal money to support their addictions (in fact with the billions of dollars we saved from not fighting the drug war, government could quite easily give these people enough money to buy their drugs at market prices, while STILL providing assistence to get them to break their addictions, and STILL be saving billions of dollars a year).


Its great that so many people are on a moral crusade against drugs. But I just wish they would recognize that that is exactly what it is. You think you are doing the right thing by telling someone else not to hurt themselves. You are willing to make me and everyone around you pay any price so you can feel good about yourself, dispite the fact that no evidence supports that the war on drugs does any good, and the billions of dollars could be used to really make a difference.

[Restola]

I missed where other people addressed those points (except for myself, on the first page, where I was immediatly ignored so people could argue if pot was worse than smoke tobacco).

Also I debated whether to use your quote in my post, for the exact reason that was just illustrated. I didn't want you to go on the defensive. I was also integrating making pot legal along side other drugs, which in retrospect I completely forgot to clearly spell out.

So I'm sorry you had to spend the time replying to my post as if I just accused you of abusing children. Although I still request that people read the links I provided in my earlier post, so you can see an example of someone who is good with words spell out a logical arguement to end the drug war.

[InfinatyBPS]

Shartley, Just wondering, but in your oppinion, do you think that the law is a good thing? Do you realy think that your tax dollars are being spent well on enforcing this law? Do you think that people that are smoking marijuana deserve to get punished as harshly as they do for doing something in their own home, and not hurting anyone?

[shartley]

Originally posted by Restola
I missed where other people addressed those points (except for myself, on the first page, where I was immediatly ignored so people could argue if pot was worse than smoke tobacco).

Also I debated whether to use your quote in my post, for the exact reason that was just illustrated. I didn't want you to go on the defensive. I was also integrating making pot legal along side other drugs, which in retrospect I completely forgot to clearly spell out.

So I'm sorry you had to spend the time replying to my post as if I just accused you of abusing children. Although I still request that people read the links I provided in my earlier post, so you can see an example of someone who is good with words spell out a logical arguement to end the drug war.

Okay. :)

Originally posted by InfinatyBPS
Shartley, Just wondering, but in your oppinion, do you think that the law is a good thing? Do you realy think that your tax dollars are being spent well on enforcing this law? Do you think that people that are smoking marijuana deserve to get punished as harshly as they do for doing something in their own home, and not hurting anyone?

[Restola]

That simply states another reason that pot (if nothing else) should be legal.

You're right, people regularly break the law by smoking pot, and the law against it isn't often enforced. That is not a good thing. It destroys people's respect for the law when they are willing to do something illegal and know they wont get punished for it.

You seem to have pointed out that it would be way to difficult to really enforce the ban on pot. It is. Billions of dollars have done nothing. Its still available in every school, and by your statement the cops are willing to overlook possesion (also I thought the courts were supposed to decide that...)

So why keep it illegal?

[shartley]

Originally posted by Restola
That simply states another reason that pot (if nothing else) should be legal.

You're right, people regularly break the law by smoking pot, and the law against it isn't often enforced. That is not a good thing. It destroys people's respect for the law when they are willing to do something illegal and know they wont get punished for it.

You seem to have pointed out that it would be way to difficult to really enforce the ban on pot. It is. Billions of dollars have done nothing. Its still available in every school, and by your statement the cops are willing to overlook possesion (also I thought the courts were supposed to decide that...)

So why keep it illegal?

[1stdeadeye]

Haha

people should educate themselves on what they get into if ppl OD on a drug they should have to pay for it themselves anyway they can... if they die then the gov gets their things... the drug taker should understand what it does to them...

Educate themselves? We can't even get people to wear their seatbelts. I hate to say this, but the general population just isn't smart enough to do this. Don't get me wrong, there are millions and millions of intelligent people in this country. There are also millions of dolts. Look at smokers. The pack says that they may cause cancer. Yet smokers still sue. What makes you think that recreational drug use would be any different?

When you couldn't drink, turning 21 was a major thing. You would go out with your buddies and overdue it. Make drugs legal and you don't think the same thing would happen. BTW Alcohol poisoning is much tougher to do then to OD. Leaving DWI out because drugs can cause those same kinds of death.