• 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 free Log in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Cannabis

#101
rr5025 said:
Where was the break? I was given Vicodin for my foot and it was absolutely useless.
Click to expand...

I broke my three outer meta tarpals of my left foot. Vicodin was fun for the first couple of days, but I couldn't sleep on it, and after awhile it just stopped working. My foot is about as healed as it's going to get now. I can do everything I could do before, but I still get a lot of pain when I push it.
 
#102
MakiSupaStar said:
I broke my three outer meta tarpals of my left foot. Vicodin was fun for the first couple of days, but I couldn't sleep on it, and after awhile it just stopped working. My foot is about as healed as it's going to get now. I can do everything I could do before, but I still get a lot of pain when I push it.
Click to expand...

I broke my fifth metatarsal and vicodin did nothing for me :atoz: first time I took it it gave me bad night sweats then nothing I was really let down. I still get a bit of pain if I push mine too.
 
#104
A note from the dark side. I've never known a heroin addict who smoked pot. Okay, maybe one or two, but it really wasn't their drug of choice. That just wasn't the effect they were going for. Different personalities tend to go for different drugs and folks that go for the hard stuff often don't care for the soft stuff. Sure, someone might start with milder drugs, but if they're the type to want the hard stuff, they'll find it, regardless. Conversely, I've known many who never went near softer drugs before getting into the nastier stuff. So the myth of pot leading to hard stuff is bogus, IMO. Let's face it, we've all known the type that's gonna get themselves f***ed up on whatever, be it booze, pot and what have you. Then there are the more moderate folks who simply enjoy a mild edge-taker-offer at the end of the day or week. Pot has proven to be a very effective aide for pain, and we all know there are many well documented cases to support this. Aside from the inherent health risks of smoking, I don't believe pot is any more harmful than other mild drugs. It was unfortunate that it got caught in a broader ban on other drugs back in the day. Had it not got caught in that, I think it would be widely recognized today as a very effective reliever for a variety of ailments. But of course, like any drug, it needs to be used wisely and responsibly. ;)

Edit: in many cases, pot is a heck of a lot milder and safer than a lot prescription pain meds out there!
 
#105
TBrett said:
A note from the dark side. I've never known a heroin addict who smoked pot. Okay, maybe one or two, but it really wasn't their drug of choice. That just wasn't the effect they were going for. Different personalities tend to go for different drugs and folks that go for the hard stuff often don't care for the soft stuff.
Click to expand...

right there. thats it. body chemistry is so varied and so neglected.

dude on acid thinks he can fly; jumps out of window. hmm... im bipolar and, last time i dropped (4-6yrs ago), my two buddies were thrashed off 4 hits and 14 barely rattled my cage. my uncle is also bipolar (though probably more skitzophrenic if you ask me), and my mom recalls him proclaiming himself to be jesus christ on a hit or two (yeah, purity changes, but still...).

i also know many former pot heads who hit opiates and gave the middle finger to thc. its similar but not the same, but if youre seeking oblivion, cannabis wont do it for ya.

as for myself? i will go ahead and list the garbage ive put into my system, not because it makes me cool (seriously got NOT COOL QUICK), or gives me some kind of master knowledge that trumps anything whatsoever (because it doesnt), but because i really have been through a journey, and i think my insight on cannabis is fairly valuable.

the first thing i did was a half shot of tequila a week or two before my senior year (month shy of 18). i had the opportunity plenty of times before (really... plenty), but it took my friend, his dad, his sister, and some family friend to get me to drink (not bitter anymore, but thats seriously FUKT UP... adults should really act conservatively).

first time i drank i put down the tequila and 9+ beers. i had a headache. after that, between my friends, who already drank (i knew it... just didnt care... was fine driving tards around) i was apparently a "heavyweight." i found i was "good" at drinking. i was the dude who never drank 2mo ago, but who now was there holding a 1/5th of jd in a paper bag (and i always cashed it... not gonna bring a bottle back to mommy and daddy...).

i state the above to tell everyone to NOT. NOT. NOT. EVER tell anyone to do anything. i know friends who spiked a bowl of bud with crack. i still deal with knowing that i may or may have not exposed a friend to meth, even though i said no first, then i (allegedly) yielded (hmm.. high? judgement...?).

meth? ya. hes not him. meth made me who i am. i am not happy with me. if i were, i would be owning my life and i would have a revenue stream that shows no sign of depletion.

this person i talk about is really the closest person to me aside from my brother (dna=win!). he is NOT, i mean NOT NOT NOT the guy i met years ago. i wont trash him, because he is borderline genius, if not a full on ****ing genius. if you rely on astrophysics, youre going to need him in the next 20-40yrs. i will put money on that.

heres my take on the drugs out there... and i have done... w/e- pm me if you are a SCEPTIC...

1. alcohol- worst there is. liver=die. a beer at dinner? not bad. a glass or 2-5 or red wine? dont care. people who abuse alcohol (and ive been one of them!)= NO NO NO NO NO NO. it MUST end.

2. thc- w/e man. good luck making any law that does anything at all period. ca economy will absolutely TANK or go NUTS if you legalize it federally. say you go 100% legal nation-wide... okay- CA wins. we were anyway, right? what, bc, ca? lol. you in our borders? you think the states would make a huge transition to let you take over? hehe....

3. my hypocratic self is effin drunk, so who cares what i have to offer...

4. i went through 2yrs of AP art with people asking me what drugs is was on (NONE). the human imagination doesnt need chemicals. human imagination plus chemicals equals plenty that im not about to answer.

5.

6. hehe/
 
#106
Coming from a country where binge drinking is practically a national past-time on weekend nights, and having worked both as a taxi driver and as a security guard in downtown areas, and if it was a choice between the two, I'd really prefer to see kids smoking a joint rather than cradling a beer. There's a lot of accidents and violence involved with heavy alcohol use, especially amongst young adults, as we probably all have seen and experienced.

Then again, I've also met the 'serious' potheads, who smoke every day, and it's not a pretty sight either. However, to me it seems like they're not about the pot, but rather about anything they can get their hands on. Being addicted to substance use, it being alcohol or pot isn't that different, but rather about the personal preference.

And what comes to "gateway drug" theory, I'm more afraid what happens when the kids are told that all drugs are as evil, and they then smoke their first joint. When they notice that cannabis isn't too bad, I suppose that they will relate this to the heavier drugs also. What I'd like to see is a clear divide between cannabis and stuff like cocain and heroin, so the kids know that touching the really strong drugs can be a very bad thing.
 
#107
OK, there's a huge debate, one side claiming that pot leads to hell and destruction, the other that it's harmless or even a little beneficial. Assuming that one is not a scientist (which I'm not), I would propose Pascal's wager on this one.

A) Pot is either harmful or harmless
B) One either smokes pot or one does not.

This gives us our range of options; 1) Pot is harmful and one uses it: 2) it is harmless and one uses it: 3) it's harmful and one avoids it; or 4) it's harmless and one avoids it. In each scenario, what are the gains and losses one incurs?

1) Huge loss, little gain.
2) no loss, little gain
3) No loss, serious gain (dodged a bullet!)
4) no loss, no gain.

In other words, as long as we're in the climate of uncertainty, there is not a whole lot to be gained by using pot and a whole lot one risks losing if it should turn out that the anti-pot warnings are right after all.

At the end of the day, what do people really want to use pot for? Recreation? We're musicians, dammit, I think we're supposed to be able to come up with the recreation with our abilities. (By the way, I was really surprised at how many people think drugs or alcohol are the best way to deal with stage fright. Man up to your calling, already!) To deal with stress? Chemically-induced moods are a way to hide from the things that stress you out, not to deal with them. Medical reasons? Ok fine, but I'll leave that to the doctors. Lots of nasty things happen when one self-medicates.

It's a false logic to say "I'd rather see someone (often kids gets put here) high than drunk." Would you rather see them high than playing soccer? Than practicing an instrument? Than... than... man, there are so many other, better things one could be doing.
 
#108
hrodbert696 said:
OK, there's a huge debate, one side claiming that pot leads to hell and destruction, the other that it's harmless or even a little beneficial. Assuming that one is not a scientist (which I'm not), I would propose Pascal's wager on this one.

A) Pot is either harmful or harmless
B) One either smokes pot or one does not.

This gives us our range of options; 1) Pot is harmful and one uses it: 2) it is harmless and one uses it: 3) it's harmful and one avoids it; or 4) it's harmless and one avoids it. In each scenario, what are the gains and losses one incurs?

1) Huge loss, little gain.
2) no loss, little gain
3) No loss, serious gain (dodged a bullet!)
4) no loss, no gain.

In other words, as long as we're in the climate of uncertainty, there is not a whole lot to be gained by using pot and a whole lot one risks losing if it should turn out that the anti-pot warnings are right after all.

At the end of the day, what do people really want to use pot for? Recreation? We're musicians, dammit, I think we're supposed to be able to come up with the recreation with our abilities. (By the way, I was really surprised at how many people think drugs or alcohol are the best way to deal with stage fright. Man up to your calling, already!) To deal with stress? Chemically-induced moods are a way to hide from the things that stress you out, not to deal with them. Medical reasons? Ok fine, but I'll leave that to the doctors. Lots of nasty things happen when one self-medicates.

It's a false logic to say "I'd rather see someone (often kids gets put here) high than drunk." Would you rather see them high than playing soccer? Than practicing an instrument? Than... than... man, there are so many other, better things one could be doing.
Click to expand...

Are you by any chance a game theorist?
 
#109
hrodbert696 said:
OK, there's a huge debate, one side claiming that pot leads to hell and destruction, the other that it's harmless or even a little beneficial. Assuming that one is not a scientist (which I'm not), I would propose Pascal's wager on this one.

A) Pot is either harmful or harmless
B) One either smokes pot or one does not.

This gives us our range of options; 1) Pot is harmful and one uses it: 2) it is harmless and one uses it: 3) it's harmful and one avoids it; or 4) it's harmless and one avoids it. In each scenario, what are the gains and losses one incurs?

1) Huge loss, little gain.
2) no loss, little gain
3) No loss, serious gain (dodged a bullet!)
4) no loss, no gain.

In other words, as long as we're in the climate of uncertainty, there is not a whole lot to be gained by using pot and a whole lot one risks losing if it should turn out that the anti-pot warnings are right after all.

At the end of the day, what do people really want to use pot for? Recreation? We're musicians, dammit, I think we're supposed to be able to come up with the recreation with our abilities. (By the way, I was really surprised at how many people think drugs or alcohol are the best way to deal with stage fright. Man up to your calling, already!) To deal with stress? Chemically-induced moods are a way to hide from the things that stress you out, not to deal with them. Medical reasons? Ok fine, but I'll leave that to the doctors. Lots of nasty things happen when one self-medicates.

It's a false logic to say "I'd rather see someone (often kids gets put here) high than drunk." Would you rather see them high than playing soccer? Than practicing an instrument? Than... than... man, there are so many other, better things one could be doing.
Click to expand...

I actually really like this way of looking at it, despite it being a bit more 'anti-pot'. An interesting way of weighing it up, although some people would argue that number 2 could be no loss, serious gain.

As for the last bit, people are just saying that it is the lesser of two evils in a way I suppose. Kids are going to mess around with that type of stuff in one way or another eventually, if i have kids, providing they don't have any mental illnesses ect. that could be flared up, I would be perfectly happy for them to use cannabis recreationally on occasions, rather than get into some of the trouble I have with alcohol.
 
#111
Simo98 said:
I actually really like this way of looking at it, despite it being a bit more 'anti-pot'. An interesting way of weighing it up, although some people would argue that number 2 could be no loss, serious gain.

As for the last bit, people are just saying that it is the lesser of two evils in a way I suppose. Kids are going to mess around with that type of stuff in one way or another eventually, if i have kids, providing they don't have any mental illnesses ect. that could be flared up, I would be perfectly happy for them to use cannabis recreationally on occasions, rather than get into some of the trouble I have with alcohol.
Click to expand...

Thanks Simo. Yes, I am more anti-pot, not the kind that's going to freak on someone who uses, but I don't use it myself and I don't see the gain. And how you weigh the wager does depend on how one sees the benefits of smoking; I don't see a lot of the pro-pot people here offering any huge benefits to using it (other than the possible medical benefits, which only apply in limited circumstances). If it's recreational, I can think of more fun things to do, and if it's for stress management or whatever, I can think of more constructive ways to deal with problems. That's why I calculated "little gain" on that side.

"Lesser of two evils" is fine as far as it goes but it presumes that one of the two evils is inevitable (and it grants that pot IS an evil, which to me seems to yield the whole point to the anti-pot argument). I do drink, moderately, and to me one of the differences is that one can drink without needing to get drunk. I never heard of someone smoking pot without the intention of getting high. Moderation is what I try to teach my own kids.

Personal anecdote: some years ago I went to my brother-in-law's wedding. The DJ got going, we got up on the dance floor and had an awesome time. In the midst of it the bride comes up to us and says, "Wow, you guys must be really drunk!" My wife laughed and said, "I've been drinking apple juice."
 
#112
hrodbert696 said:
OK, there's a huge debate, one side claiming that pot leads to hell and destruction, the other that it's harmless or even a little beneficial. Assuming that one is not a scientist (which I'm not), I would propose Pascal's wager on this one.

A) Pot is either harmful or harmless
B) One either smokes pot or one does not.

This gives us our range of options; 1) Pot is harmful and one uses it: 2) it is harmless and one uses it: 3) it's harmful and one avoids it; or 4) it's harmless and one avoids it. In each scenario, what are the gains and losses one incurs?
Click to expand...

That's a (rather elaborate) false dichotomy you've presented here. Namely, it ignores any and all effects of actually using the substance and instead substitutes a largely irrelevant point (Point A)

1) Huge loss, little gain.
2) no loss, little gain
3) No loss, serious gain (dodged a bullet!)
4) no loss, no gain.

In other words, as long as we're in the climate of uncertainty, there is not a whole lot to be gained by using pot and a whole lot one risks losing if it should turn out that the anti-pot warnings are right after all.
Click to expand...
Again, your four options don't take into account the reaction people have to the substance, and it is instead filled under, at best, something that someone can, at best, achieve a "little gain" from using.

At the end of the day, what do people really want to use pot for? Recreation? We're musicians, dammit, I think we're supposed to be able to come up with the recreation with our abilities. (By the way, I was really surprised at how many people think drugs or alcohol are the best way to deal with stage fright. Man up to your calling, already!) To deal with stress? Chemically-induced moods are a way to hide from the things that stress you out, not to deal with them. Medical reasons? Ok fine, but I'll leave that to the doctors. Lots of nasty things happen when one self-medicates.
Click to expand...
This is perfectly fine opining, but don't couch it in a straw man...

It's a false logic to say "I'd rather see someone (often kids gets put here) high than drunk." Would you rather see them high than playing soccer? Than practicing an instrument? Than... than... man, there are so many other, better things one could be doing.
Click to expand...
Like you do here. The comments about high vs drunk are clearly in reference to forms of intoxication. Playing soccer, as far as I know, isn't a recreational intoxicant. ;)
 
#113
hrodbert696 said:
"Lesser of two evils" is fine as far as it goes but it presumes that one of the two evils is inevitable (and it grants that pot IS an evil, which to me seems to yield the whole point to the anti-pot argument). I do drink, moderately, and to me one of the differences is that one can drink without needing to get drunk. I never heard of someone smoking pot without the intention of getting high. Moderation is what I try to teach my own kids.
Click to expand...

My point is exactly that it is inevitable. According to statistics, in Finland 85% of kids aged 15-16 have experimented with alcohol at least once. With alcohol, tobacco, cannabis and drugs well presented in the society, and kids' tendency to try things out, it can be said that most teenagers will at least try stuff out, and many of them smoke or use alcohol or even cannabis recreationally by the time they're 16.

Both alcohol and pot can be used in moderation. Both can be relaxing in small amounts, like sharing a joint with a couple of friends. The effects of alcohol are evident after even a single glass of wine - I haven't met a person who doesn't enjoy the slight relaxation offered by a single glass of wine or beer. Both can also be done to extreme, and in that case, the effects of cannabis seem to be less harmful to the surroundings.
 
#114
From the few... experiments I've seen it tested on..., my tons of research, and the help of quite a large number of history, psychology, nutrition, and anatomy texts that I wouldn't really care to cite (but will if it comes down to it...), prohibition comes down to money. The reality is, we sell many many many ways for us to kill ourselves. Making marijuana illegal is like making a rope illegal. Silly? Yes it is, because at the end of the day, marijuana isn't some evil force, it is but a plant. It has little negative effect on the human body, and that isn't an empty statement. I have scientists to back that up. The only negative effects it has are sort of like a combination of a very weak alcohol and some cigarettes, however the carcinogens that marijuana produces have not once ever become cancerous.

Now! I will say this. This isn't meant to be a debate of any form I assume, so I'm just going to say a little more. I am also pro-choice, and it could be that mindset that influences my feelings about marijuana and it's legalization. However, while I don't discredit people's personal feelings and beliefs toward it's use as I wouldn't say that it is wrong for someone to avoid abortion, I do not feel it is fair or just to force anyone's beliefs or opinions on anyone else. So in other words, you can take my facts with a grain of salt, or even question them. I can go and get the text books I referred to if you really need me to (they are on my bookshelf lol).

I assume this question has been answered over and over, but knowing TalkBass, there were a lot of silly responses, so I would like to present the "other side of the argument" as respectably as possible... PM me if you want.
 
#115
Tsal said:
My point is exactly that it is inevitable. According to statistics, in Finland 85% of kids aged 15-16 have experimented with alcohol at least once. With alcohol, tobacco, cannabis and drugs well presented in the society, and kids' tendency to try things out, it can be said that most teenagers will at least try stuff out, and many of them smoke or use alcohol or even cannabis recreationally by the time they're 16.

Both alcohol and pot can be used in moderation. Both can be relaxing in small amounts, like sharing a joint with a couple of friends. The effects of alcohol are evident after even a single glass of wine - I haven't met a person who doesn't enjoy the slight relaxation offered by a single glass of wine or beer. Both can also be done to extreme, and in that case, the effects of cannabis seem to be less harmful to the surroundings.
Click to expand...

Everything is okay in moderation.
 
#118
My late father was an alcoholic and my late step father was an alcoholic. My mother never drank alcohol. It has taken me most of my life to get over some of the abuse that was inflicted on me and my younger sister by both of these men.

It wasn't until I learned about Adult Children of Alcoholics that I began to come to terms with what happened to me. Sadly, it was too late for my sister as she died in 2001. She never got over her upbringing and fell into a life of drugs and prostitution. After my stepfather passed away, she revealed that he had sexually abused her from the age of 8 until she was 11 yet he always treated me with respect. My father would beat me with a hammer yet never raised his fists against my sister.

I worked for the Department of Corrections for almost 10 years as a probation officer and a work release supervisor. We never saw violence committed by inmates who were high. We saw lots of violence committed by inmates who had been drinking.

Alcohol is the worst drug in the world and it's legal. We always felt that at least 50% of the men in prison were there because of crimes committed while under the influence.
 
#120
FWIW: realistic, moderate dosage of THC is very low. A couple of puff-puff passes. *maybe* a small bongload. *maybe* a little spoon bowl. Certainly not a half or whole cigarette-sized joint, or a blunt between a few friends.

People overdo it all too often.

That being said, it's certainly safer than alcohol - which is a poison that can cause death.

I can't weigh them both and rule one out, as most alcohol is *almost* food, but to many people the point of smoking weed is to get.messed.up.

It's a shame that so many governments in the western world are hypocrites about the issue, but such is modernity.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom
Back