• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Can we talk about marijuana?

i think you should drop the discussion and talk about the evils of alcohol. your students are being killed while drinking and driving. save a life and leave pot alone. the 90min wasted on an anti-weed campaign gets no points from me.

30min talking about alcohol abuse is so much more productive and rewarding. my son smokes, but does not drink... i can handle that. he is very productive and his employer recently told me that he wishes he had more workers like him!

that same employer has another worker in the ICU at Stanford after rolling his new truck 7x while drunk.

he'd gladly trade a drinker for a smoker! just sayin'
 
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]

That link froze my computer! And then made strange screens that I've never seen before pop up. Did it know it was I who was going there?

And as a teacher, how can you NOT teach them about the medicinal values? I thought teachers were supposed to be unbiased and teach the whole story? You leaving out great important finds about this is doing a disservice to your students. Would we teach about how Hitler started a war but now how he treated people?

Please read my posts. This is a 90 minute class. We're talking about the illicit use of drugs. We're not trying to get marijuana legalized. Trust me that they already know a great deal about this side of the story. We will touch on it nonetheless, but there is more they need to be learning about the flip side. You know, the side many think is gov't propaganda. Which of course I'm part of.

As fer alcohol, we already spent a week on that. And I agree. I'd rather hang with a stoner than a drunk any day. And I think that alcohol is far more dangerous. But that's not a justification for smoking weed. Just puts me on the fence about it's legalization. The fact that alcohol is legal is absurd, but we all know what would happen if it weren't. Legalization of marijuana would probably have more benefits than it's being illegal. Most likely help the economy. And the illegality of it certainly isn't keeping people from using it.

Then again if it were legal, all the dealers would have to resort to selling harder drugs, or robbery to be able to afford their cars, cell plans, and lifestyle. I take it back. Let them keep their jobs. Keep it illegal.
 
I gave links to a completely unbiased Senate Committe report done by the Canadian government. DA has obviously not read it yet.

I suggest anyone with an interest in the topic to read it. No matter what side of the debate you are on.

You asked me to read a 55 page report. I asked you to kindly summarize it. I have a life. If it's important enough to you, then tell me in a few sentences what it says. Is this asking too much? I don't think so.
 
That link froze my computer! And then made strange screens that I've never seen before pop up. Did it know it was I who was going there?



Please read my posts. This is a 90 minute class. We're talking about the illicit use of drugs. We're not trying to get marijuana legalized. Trust me that they already know a great deal about this side of the story. We will touch on it nonetheless, but there is more they need to be learning about the flip side. You know, the side many think is gov't propaganda. Which of course I'm part of.

As fer alcohol, we already spent a week on that. And I agree. I'd rather hang with a stoner than a drunk any day. And I think that alcohol is far more dangerous. But that's not a justification for smoking weed. Just puts me on the fence about it's legalization. The fact that alcohol is legal is absurd, but we all know what would happen if it weren't. Legalization of marijuana would probably have more benefits than it's being illegal. Most likely help the economy. And the illegality of it certainly isn't keeping people from using it.

Then again if it were legal, all the dealers would have to resort to selling harder drugs, or robbery to be able to afford their cars, cell plans, and lifestyle. I take it back. Let them keep their jobs. Keep it illegal.

We could also devote that much more of our police concentration toward those other drugs. Plus, a lot less people are going to be willing to ever try anything harder than weed or alcohol.

Sorry that the link froze your computer - it's worth reading, anyway, if you ever get the chance. It's been posted in a few places, IIRC, if you search for the title. (Granny Storm Crow's list of articles, or something to that effect.)

In any case, it seems that dissuasion is your intended direction, and honestly, for the age group you're talking to, I'm basically in favor. Teens don't need any of that stuff in their brains when it's such a bumpy time anyway. That said, they still will do those substances regardless (they're teens), which is why they need as realistic and honest a perspective on it as is possible. That's your job. If you demonize, they will know, and they'll ignore it, or worse. Acknowledge both sides, give them facts, discuss it openly, and then offer reasonable arguments to avoid it. But then, you know your own job.
 
In summary, it shows you are blowing smoke out your ***. Is that short enough for you? You obviously have no interest in informing yourself. You are only interested in defending your biased uninformed position.

And the report is much longer than 55 pages. But for someone who is wanting to be informed, and teach about the subject in an unbiased fashion, that shouldn't be an issue. I also said if you wish to skip the main body and read the conclusions of the report, it begins on page 35 of the summary.
 
So maybe the benefit of drugs isn't all it's cracked up to be. I maintain that citing the fact that you met people you ultimately became friends with as a positive aspect of drug use is is ludicrous.

I'd expect that sort of response from someone like you. You've never striked me as a person who is, or ever was, into that sort of thing given your persona on TB. And that's fine, but I think it's leaving you somewhat close minded to the whole discussion. Moderate and careful drug use can be an okay thing, but, like anything, when it's taken to an extreme it can turn bad quick. You seem to think that it always has to turn bad, when in actuality it really doesn't.
 
from the report... the last bit of page 35, and page 36 of the Summary.

....Thirty years later, we confirm this conclusion and add that continued
criminalization of cannabis remains unjustified based on scientific data on the danger it
poses.
The Commission heard and considered the same arguments on the dangers of
using cannabis: apathy, loss of interest and concentration, learning difficulties. A
majority of the Commissioners concluded that these concerns, while unsubstantiated,
warranted a restrictive policy. Thirty years later, we assert that the studies done in the
meantime have not confirmed the existence of the so-called amotivational syndromeand add that most studies rule out this syndrome as a consequence of the use of
cannabis.
The Commission concluded that not enough was known about the long-term and
excessive use of cannabis. We assert that these types of use exist and may present some
health risks; excessive use, however, is limited to a minority of users. Public policy, we
would add, must provide ways to prevent and screen for at-risk behaviour, something
our policies have yet to do.
The Commission concluded that the effects of long-term use of cannabis on brain
function, while largely exaggerated, could affect adolescent development. We concur,
but point out that the long-term effects of cannabis use appear reversible in most cases.
We note also that adolescents who are excessive users or become long-term users are a
tiny minority of all users of cannabis. Once again, we would add that a public policy
must prevent use at an early age and at-risk behaviour.
The Commission was concerned that the use of cannabis would lead to the use of
other drugs. Thirty years' experience in the Netherlands disproves this clearly, as do the
liberal policies of Spain, Italy and Portugal. And here in Canada, despite the growing
increase in cannabis users, we have not had a proportionate increase in users of hard
drugs.
The Commission was also concerned that legalization would mean increased use,
among the young in particular. We have not legalized cannabis, and we have one of the
highest rates in the world. Countries adopting a more liberal policy have, for the most
part, rates of usage lower than ours, which stabilized after a short period of growth.
Thirty years later, we note that:
- Billions of dollars have been sunk into enforcement without any greater effect. There
are more consumers, more regular users and more regular adolescent users;
- Billions of dollars have been poured into enforcement in an effort to reduce supply,
without any greater effect. Cannabis is more available than ever, it is cultivated on a
large scale, even exported, swelling coffers and making organized crime more
powerful; and
- There have been tens of thousands of arrests and convictions for the possession of
cannabis and thousands of people have been incarcerated. However, use trends
remain totally unaffected and the gap the Commission noted between the law and
public compliance continues to widen.
It is time to recognize what is patently obvious: our policies have been ineffective,
because they are poor policies.
 
You want to close this cause people are giving you information that contradicts your original thoughts? No wonder why the us is as close to a police state and Communist control then ever before. Who is the government to trample my rights and freedoms that my parents fought and died for? Why is our constitution being ripped up and thrown in the trash? 16 states have made medical marijuana legal, events Washington DC, yet the federal government is doing everything they can to stop them. Why? Because there is no money in cures, only treatment. Did you guys know Hemp was the BIGGEST crop when we first inhabited America? There was even a law saying you had to grow x amount of crops of it to help our new country flourish. Then as soon as someone thinks it will ruin their business (William Randolph Hurst) they print propaganda against it and no one even looks into it? Come on. Even the studies that the government paid for came out and said there is nothing harmful enough in marijuana to make it illegal, but then they threw that study out the window cause it didn't jive with their message that it would make you go insane and rob and kill(much like the propaganda about alcohol during prohibition) .
 
I could argue some of the findings in that post, but even as is, there's not much I'd even want to challenge. Part of what it says is why I'm on the fence about it being legalized. There probably would be many benefits, especially in the realm of it being a gateway drug. If people were buying it legally, they wouldn't have to cross that legal/illegal line, and they wouldn't be going to dealers who make other drugs easily accessible.

We note also that adolescents who are excessive users or become long-term users are a
tiny minority of all users of cannabis. Once again, we would add that a public policy must prevent use at an early age and at-risk behaviour.

My job.
 
I'd expect that sort of response from someone like you. You've never striked me as a person who is, or ever was, into that sort of thing given your persona on TB.

Wrong. 30 years ago I realized that drugs and alcohol provided absolutely nothing positive in my life. Further, I've watched them destroy numerous lives around me. I'm fully aware of the recreational aspects of drug use, but there is no long-term benefit to it. Maybe after you see enough of it you'll come to the same realization, but right now you're still in your immortal and omniscient phase.
 
Before you decide to argue anymore on the subject, you should read the report and see where all the information came from. The witnesses who gave testimony, etc. After you read it, then come back here and argue against all the evidence presented in that Report. I expect we will hear crickets.
 
Before you decide to argue anymore on the subject, you should read the report and see where all the information came from. The witnesses who gave testimony, etc. After you read it, then come back here and argue against all the evidence presented in that Report. I expect we will hear crickets.

I will absolutely read it, because I'm curious and want to know for myself. It's not going to happen right away though, and I really want to stop arguing here. I'll tell you this though, and then you can enjoy your crickets. I have a lot of experience with pot. I'll take a guess that it's more than you do, but I don't know that for sure. I know how it's affected me, and many others in my life. My experience is 1000% more real, and much more valid than anything I'll ever read. I know beyond the shadow of a doubt how marijuana has affected my life, and how my stopping has been undeniably and unarguable beneficial. All the studies and printed words in the world aren't going to change my mind regarding that. If it has helped others then that's great, and I'm interested in reading about it. My mind is made up from experience however that the the risks involved are not worth the percieved benefits. Your experience is defferent than mine. I'm happy the way I am. You're happy the way you are. Great.

I feel it's my responsibility (actually didn't choose this teaching job, just landed there) to teach as best I can what I know about the dangers of marijuana usage. If you're ever in a position where you can teach teens about the pros of smoking weed, well, I guess that's what you'd be happy to do. Not in my plan book though.

Going to do my best to stay out of this thread after this, for real. I'm wasting a lot of time. Time that I could in fact be reading that report. There. Ended on an up note for you.

Enjoy your crickets.