Tigers X - Number one Source to Talk Auburn Tigers Sports
The Library => Haley Center Basement => Topic started by: djsimp on March 08, 2012, 12:09:02 PM
-
http://news.yahoo.com/pat-robertson-wants-smoke-pot-legally-143457144.html (http://news.yahoo.com/pat-robertson-wants-smoke-pot-legally-143457144.html)
..Pat Robertson Wants You to Smoke Pot Legally
By Alexander Abad-Santos | The Atlantic Wire
Pat Robertson and marijuana legalization make for strange bedfellows, but he's actually been championing the cause—specifically its place in the conversation about prison reform—since 2010.
Yes, according to an interview with The New York Times on Wednesday, the strict evangelical who believes gay people cause hurricanes and that mac 'n cheese may be a "black thing," is also for the legalization of marijuana. But it isn't because he's tried the stuff. It's a bit more complicated than that. “I really believe we should treat marijuana the way we treat beverage alcohol,” Robertson told The Times. "I’ve never used marijuana and I don’t intend to, but it’s just one of those things that I think: this war on drugs just hasn’t succeeded." This has been a talking point for Robertson for some time now.
Back in December 2010, The Atlantic's Chris Good wrote about "Pat Robertson's Christmas Present to Marijuana Legalizers', his take on a recent airing of The 700 Club where Robertson said, "We're locking up people that take a couple of puffs of marijuana, and the next thing you know they've got ten years ... it's costing us a fortune and it's ruining young people. Young people going to prisons--they go in as youths and they come out as hardened criminals, it's not a good thing." Back then Robertson's spokesman said it wasn't a call to decriminalize pot.
So, fast forward to last week on The 700 Club where Robertson, as The Atlantic's Andrew Cohen writes, "devoted nearly nine minutes of the broadcast to commentary and a (really well produced) piece on the topic." Adding, "He's also right in identifying the notion that decriminalizing pot possession is one of the easiest ways to break the cycle of incarceration that ruins people -- and government budgets." Following that broadcast, Robertson told The Times' Jesse McKinley, " I just want to be on the right side... And I think on this one, I’m on the right side."
-
Go Pat, Go Pat...we gonna' party like it's yo burfday.
-
He really is the most evil son of a bitch on the planet.
It's not enough that he's total blowhard, psycho-pseudo-Christian that ruins the faith for so many people. He had to go and make me agree with him on something.
-
He really is the most evil son of a bitch on the planet.
It's not enough that he's total blowhard, psycho-pseudo-Christian that ruins the faith for so many people. He had to go and make me agree with him on something.
You said it, not me.
But this x1000.
-
All pot heads to prison now! Lock 'em up, throw away the key!
-
He really is the most evil son of a bitch on the planet.
It's not enough that he's total blowhard, psycho-pseudo-Christian that ruins the faith for so many people. He had to go and make me agree with him on something.
This guy has left the reservation so many times, he has relegated himself to insignificance. Does anybody actually pay attention to anything this guy says anymore?
-
He really is the most evil son of a bitch on the planet.
It's not enough that he's total blowhard, psycho-pseudo-Christian that ruins the faith for so many people. He had to go and make me agree with him on something.
Pretty much what I was thinking.
I don't smoke it either and also don't intend to. But I just don't see why we can't regulate the shit out of it like Alkeehawl and Tobacco. There is some money to be made doing that, it thins out the prisons a bit and also gives police one less thing to bust on. Of course, like Alkeehawl, if you have smoked it and are barely able to drive a car, you will get in trouble, etc etc. There are prescription drugs out there today that are much worse for you than Mary Jane, and those are actually addicting people in record numbers (Xanax, Oxycotin, etc).
-
Pretty much what I was thinking.
I don't smoke it either and also don't intend to. But I just don't see why we can't regulate the shit out of it like Alkeehawl and Tobacco. There is some money to be made doing that, it thins out the prisons a bit and also gives police one less thing to bust on. Of course, like Alkeehawl, if you have smoked it and are barely able to drive a car, you will get in trouble, etc etc. There are prescription drugs out there today that are much worse for you than Mary Jane, and those are actually addicting people in record numbers (Xanax, Oxycotin, etc).
It's a gateway drug. It's bad! BAD!
-
There are prescription drugs out there today that are much worse for you than Mary Jane, and those are actually addicting people in record numbers (Xanax, Oxycotin, etc).
For realz. There are by far many worse or addicting drugs that are prescribed by the local quack.
As a Christian, I have never liked to listen or watch Pat or the 700 club. Like Gman said, the guy has pretty much put himself over in the corner of irrelevance. This little article about his support of legalizing the weed surprises me though.
-
It's a gateway drug. It's bad! BAD!
Got to got to getaway.
Legalize and regulate. What 2001 said.
-
You know, I've only tried weed once. It didn't do anything for me. If it were legal, I'm pretty sure I would try it again.
Does this mean I need to go ahead and check myself into rehab for heroin addiction?
-
It's a gateway drug. It's bad! BAD!
Ever watched Intervention?
Many of those Meth, Heroin and Blow users started with Alcohol and painkillers. Is Mary J a gateway drug? Sure it can be. But so are narcotics and booze. Narcotics moreso than pot and booze now simply because they are much more addictive. Last time I checked, Pot wasn't considered addictive in nature, like Heroin or Cigarettes. Nicotine is one of the most addictive drugs out there - perfectly legal too.
Look at how many people (mainly celebrities) who have died from too much script drugs in their system and/or alcohol. How many deaths can be attributed directly to pot?
-
Ever watched Intervention?
Many of those Meth, Heroin and Blow users started with Alcohol and painkillers. Is Mary J a gateway drug? Sure it can be. But so are narcotics and booze. Narcotics moreso than pot and booze now simply because they are much more addictive. Last time I checked, Pot wasn't considered addictive in nature, like Heroin or Cigarettes. Nicotine is one of the most addictive drugs out there - perfectly legal too.
Look at how many people (mainly celebrities) who have died from too much script drugs in their system and/or alcohol. How many deaths can be attributed directly to pot?
Yeah! Pot's healthier than Vitamin C. They should force people to take it! It'll be good for 'em!!!
-
Yeah! Pot's healthier than Vitamin C. They should force people to take it! It'll be good for 'em!!!
Not sure where you got Vit C from but I think pot is no more inherently evil than cigarettes or narcotics. Between cigars, cigarettes, pipes, joints - we're really just talking about different types of leaves that grow from the ground in the end. Maybe you should do some research on the chemical makeup of the narcotics I speak of. Also look up deaths related to them and also deaths related to alcohol abuse. Then tell me pot is THE dangerous taboo one.
Oh - don't leave out Cancer deaths as related to tobacco.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6cp79y3qg0#ws (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6cp79y3qg0#ws)
There is much more to this story thats in this clip. I will go ahead and say that I would do the same if it were my child. The reason for me posting this is the fact that such hard ass drugs are given by prescription but the j is illegal? Makes no damn sense to me..at all. Not enough research done on pot to prescribe as medicine? Bullshit.
-
Ever watched Intervention?
Many of those Meth, Heroin and Blow users started with Alcohol and painkillers. Is Mary J a gateway drug? Sure it can be. But so are narcotics and booze. Narcotics moreso than pot and booze now simply because they are much more addictive. Last time I checked, Pot wasn't considered addictive in nature, like Heroin or Cigarettes. Nicotine is one of the most addictive drugs out there - perfectly legal too.
Look at how many people (mainly celebrities) who have died from too much script drugs in their system and/or alcohol. How many deaths can be attributed directly to pot?
Maybe I should have used this in my posts: :sarcasm:
There's no evidence it's addictive. The evidence that pot can impair your ability to drive is sketchy at best, and not quantifiable like alcohol. That said, the people I deal with, who are solely pot smokers, and while on probation continue to test positive for it, all have one thing in common...they're fucking dumbasses! The fact that they are not addicted, yet risk jail time KNOWING they'll test positive is cod lock proof. When I hear a pot head try to ask for rehab, I tell them as much too. I actually understand addiction, and as you noted, many addicts come by their addiction legally, and honestly through prescription drugs, but pot smokers are just fucking dumbasses.
-
Maybe I should have used this in my posts: :sarcasm:
There's no evidence it's addictive. The evidence that pot can impair your ability to drive is sketchy at best, and not quantifiable like alcohol. That said, the people I deal with, who are solely pot smokers, and while on probation continue to test positive for it, all have one thing in common...they're fucking dumbasses! The fact that they are not addicted, yet risk jail time KNOWING they'll test positive is cod lock proof. When I hear a pot head try to ask for rehab, I tell them as much too. I actually understand addiction, and as you noted, many addicts come by their addiction legally, and honestly through prescription drugs, but pot smokers are just fucking dumbasses.
I knew you were being sarcastic. I was agreeing with you.
-
Maybe I should have used this in my posts: :sarcasm:
There's no evidence it's addictive. The evidence that pot can impair your ability to drive is sketchy at best, and not quantifiable like alcohol. That said, the people I deal with, who are solely pot smokers, and while on probation continue to test positive for it, all have one thing in common...they're fucking dumbasses! The fact that they are not addicted, yet risk jail time KNOWING they'll test positive is cod lock proof. When I hear a pot head try to ask for rehab, I tell them as much too. I actually understand addiction, and as you noted, many addicts come by their addiction legally, and honestly through prescription drugs, but pot smokers are just fucking dumbasses.
I agree with this. Pot makes you stupid. That's the only problem I have with legalizing the stuff. It's not more dangerous than alcohol. We have far more problems out of alcoholics than we do pot heads. BUT, my buddy gets shit faced nearly every weekend, to the point that I can't stand to be around him. Yet he functions properly throughout the week without a trace of being smashed from 5pm Friday through Sunday morning, every weekend.
Pot heads are stupid all the time. When they are not smoking? They are fucking worthless. The American civilization is on the way down as we type, but make pot legal? It will take only years as opposed to decades.
-
I agree with this. Pot makes you stupid. That's the only problem I have with legalizing the stuff. It's not more dangerous than alcohol. We have far more problems out of alcoholics than we do pot heads. BUT, my buddy gets shit faced nearly every weekend, to the point that I can't stand to be around him. Yet he functions properly throughout the week without a trace of being smashed from 5pm Friday through Sunday morning, every weekend.
Pot heads are stupid all the time. When they are not smoking? They are fucking worthless. The American civilization is on the way down as we type, but make pot legal? It will take only years as opposed to decades.
We're goin' dooowwwn, man. I mean, it's like....what I'm sayin' is if people don't stop smokin' weed, you know you could like....cizivilation is gonna' cnease to exnist....I'm hungry.
-
Pot makes you stupid.
No, being a bammer makes you stupid. That is all. One day Token, you will figure this out and make that conversion complete.
-
. Pot makes you stupid.
I don't know if it's that, or that stupid people like to smoke pot. I do think it kills all drive to to anything productive.
-
We're goin' dooowwwn, man. I mean, it's like....what I'm sayin' is if people don't stop smokin' weed, you know you could like....cizivilation is gonna' cnease to exnist....I'm hungry.
Hey man! Hey man! Hey man! What if like, I mean, what if like the world really existed in like a drop of dew man on like a single blade of grass? Wouldn't that be like, I mean, man.....totally blows my mind man! Let's go get some Taco Bell bro!
-
Hey man! Hey man! Hey man! What if like, I mean, what if like the world really existed in like a drop of dew man on like a single blade of grass? Wouldn't that be like, I mean, man.....totally blows my mind man! Let's go get some Taco Bell bro!
Could I buy some pot from you?
-
Not sure where you got Vit C from but I think pot is no more inherently evil than cigarettes or narcotics. Between cigars, cigarettes, pipes, joints - we're really just talking about different types of leaves that grow from the ground in the end. Maybe you should do some research on the chemical makeup of the narcotics I speak of. Also look up deaths related to them and also deaths related to alcohol abuse. Then tell me pot is THE dangerous taboo one.
Oh - don't leave out Cancer deaths as related to tobacco.
I've been through it all before. The research... The debates... The arguments... The comparisons... It bores me...
I don't get stoned, buzzed or high from cigars. That's not why we smoke them. Knowledgeable people don't compare tobacco from cigarettes with that of cigars. The tobacco in cigarettes is processed differently and treated with chemicals that make the tobacco addictive, more harmful and carcinogenic. Cigar smokers don't inhale or expose themselves to the same chemicals or levels of harmful substances as cigarette smokers, and you're just not going to find very many cigar-only smokers dying from advanced stages of cancer introduced solely by their tobacco use. Moving on... Perhaps, there is a chemical dependency with nicotine in cigarettes. Technically, nicotine itself is relatively harmless aside from a few moonbat propaganda studies. The addictive affect only becomes an issue when the nicotine is consumed with other harmful substances. But, let's stop this right there...
The problem with pot and alcohol is the desire by some for the chemical impairment... The buzz... That stoned or drunk feeling... Neither substance is really addictive, but both can lead to substance abuse problems. Big deal... Of all the things that we need to worry about as a nation, do we really need to waste the time and money building a regulatory infrastructure for the legalization of pot? Do we really believe that the War on Drugs will end with the decriminalization of marijuana? With all of the issues and problems caused by tobacco and alcohol, do we really need something else to worry about??? I mean, gay marriage is so much more important than this...
-
Could I buy some pot from you?
Seriously had that conversation in the back yard one night a long time ago. If I had some I wouldn't sell it to you............................., but you would more than welcome to help me smoke it all up.
-
Seriously had that conversation in the back yard one night a long time ago. If I had some I wouldn't sell it to you............................., but you would more than welcome to help me smoke it all up.
Don't bogart the doobage, dude. I'll be right over.
-
The problem with pot and alcohol is the desire by some for the chemical impairment... The buzz... That stoned or drunk feeling... Neither substance is really addictive, but both can lead to substance abuse problems. Big deal... Of all the things that we need to worry about as a nation, do we really need to waste the time and money building a regulatory infrastructure for the legalization of pot? Do we really believe that the War on Drugs will end with the decriminalization of marijuana? With all of the issues and problems caused by tobacco and alcohol, do we really need something else to worry about??? I mean, gay marriage is so much more important than this...
Alcohol most certainly is addictive. There's no evidence marijuana is.
-
Technically, nicotine itself is relatively harmless aside from a few moonbat propaganda studies. The addictive affect only becomes an issue when the nicotine is consumed with other harmful substances. But, let's stop this right there...
Wait, what? Are you saying that cigarettes aren't harmful? Are you seriously saying there's no link between cigarette smoking and lung cancer?
With all of the issues and problems caused by tobacco and alcohol, do we really need something else to worry about??? I mean, gay marriage is so much more important than this...
Love this catch-all argument from you. "With all the problems we've got do we really need to worry about this one?" Like it's mutually exclusive. Like the absence of a senseless law is going to bog down the legal system more than the presence of one. You're right, we've got other more important shit going on. Which is exactly why we should stop sending people to jail over a virtually harmless substance.
-
Wait, what? Are you saying that cigarettes aren't harmful? Are you seriously saying there's no link between cigarette smoking and lung cancer?
Nope... Didn't say that. Stop jumping to half-whited conclusions or listening to the bullshit propaganda and learn for yourself... Here's a brief article that addresses it... http://www.articlesbase.com/cancer-articles/does-nicotine-cause-lung-cancer-1398708.html (http://www.articlesbase.com/cancer-articles/does-nicotine-cause-lung-cancer-1398708.html)
Love this catch-all argument from you. "With all the problems we've got do we really need to worry about this one?" Like it's mutually exclusive. Like the absence of a senseless law is going to bog down the legal system more than the presence of one. You're right, we've got other more important shit going on. Which is exactly why we should stop sending people to jail over a virtually harmless substance.
You likely call it senseless because you either are a user or know someone who is. Do you really think it would be beneficial to society to make another impairing substance available? We already have 50% of our society sucking off the government teat paying virtually no federal income tax. Nervermind that... Yeah sure, nearly 50% of all drug arrests are associated with Marijuana. The fact is the vast majority of those who are actually convicted or incarcerated are not people who were caught with a single joint in their pocket. They were also involved in other criminal activities at the time of the arrest. Making pot legal won't change that.
-
Alcohol most certainly is addictive. There's no evidence marijuana is.
I don't completely buy into that. You could argue that anything in large enough doses is addictive to some extent, even pot. It becomes more of a psychological addiction rather than a legitimate chemical addiction.
-
I don't completely buy into that. You could argue that anything in large enough doses is addictive to some extent, even pot. It becomes more of a psychological addiction rather than a legitimate chemical addiction.
Plenty of scientific data out there to dispute what you choose to believe.
-
Plenty of scientific data out there to dispute what you choose to believe.
I'm not disagreeing with that. They also used scientific data to claim that the earth was flat at one time... It didn't mean that the world was flat back then.
Oh, and if you research a little bit more into the concepts of alcohol addiction and alcoholism, you'll find pretty substantial support that it tends to be more psychological than anything else. I really didn't make that up...
-
I've been through it all before. The research... The debates... The arguments... The comparisons... It bores me...
I don't get stoned, buzzed or high from cigars. That's not why we smoke them. Knowledgeable people don't compare tobacco from cigarettes with that of cigars. The tobacco in cigarettes is processed differently and treated with chemicals that make the tobacco addictive, more harmful and carcinogenic. Cigar smokers don't inhale or expose themselves to the same chemicals or levels of harmful substances as cigarette smokers, and you're just not going to find very many cigar-only smokers dying from advanced stages of cancer introduced solely by their tobacco use. Moving on... Perhaps, there is a chemical dependency with nicotine in cigarettes. Technically, nicotine itself is relatively harmless aside from a few moonbat propaganda studies. The addictive affect only becomes an issue when the nicotine is consumed with other harmful substances. But, let's stop this right there...
The problem with pot and alcohol is the desire by some for the chemical impairment... The buzz... That stoned or drunk feeling... Neither substance is really addictive, but both can lead to substance abuse problems. Big deal... Of all the things that we need to worry about as a nation, do we really need to waste the time and money building a regulatory infrastructure for the legalization of pot? Do we really believe that the War on Drugs will end with the decriminalization of marijuana? With all of the issues and problems caused by tobacco and alcohol, do we really need something else to worry about??? I mean, gay marriage is so much more important than this...
No sir. Nicotine is 2nd only to heroin in addictiveness. Alcohol is right behind them.
And yes, you get a buzz off cigarettes and alcohol, even narcotics. Ive been in a much worse state to the general public being drunk as a skunk in Auburn than some pothead who smoked a joint.
And I have never been the person arguing with you that it would end the War on Drugs. It won't. But it would damn sure let the cops worry about bigger fish to fry to a degree. JR was a cop, he knows this. Resources are tight in Public Safety depts right now in most cities, and if given the choice I would much rather my local police be tracking down meth labs, armed robbers and child predators than some 19 year old dumbass kid who wants a buzz.
BTW - if regulated, it would just fall in line under the ATF. Just one more Line of Business. And when taxed, would bring in BILLIONS.
-
I don't completely buy into that. You could argue that anything in large enough doses is addictive to some extent, even pot. It becomes more of a psychological addiction rather than a legitimate chemical addiction.
GarMan, pot legalization is a Sacrament to libertarians. You would make more headway arguing with Pope Benedict XVI that transubstantiation in the Eucharist is not real.
Everything written about this issue has been written over and over and over again on this board it seems.
-
you'll find pretty substantial support that it tends to be more psychological than anything else. I really didn't make that up...
Is that why alcoholics that try to quit have withdrawal symptoms from the "physical dependency"?
-
No sir. Nicotine is 2nd only to heroin in addictiveness. Alcohol is right behind them.
Is this a response to my post? I'm definitely not following you on that one.
And yes, you get a buzz off cigarettes and alcohol, even narcotics. Ive been in a much worse state to the general public being drunk as a skunk in Auburn than some pothead who smoked a joint.
I suppose it's all about quantity, tolerance and the color of panties you wore that day...
And I have never been the person arguing with you that it would end the War on Drugs. It won't. But it would damn sure let the cops worry about bigger fish to fry to a degree. JR was a cop, he knows this. Resources are tight in Public Safety depts right now in most cities, and if given the choice I would much rather my local police be tracking down meth labs, armed robbers and child predators than some 19 year old dumbass kid who wants a buzz.
It's a bit of a stretch to believe that we have police squads overburdened because they're busy tracking down 19 year old dumbasses who smoke dope. Oh, and if we did legalize it, chances are the legal consumption age would be 21. The 19 year old dumbasses would still be criminals.
BTW - if regulated, it would just fall in line under the ATF. Just one more Line of Business. And when taxed, would bring in BILLIONS.
Would you rather the drug traffickers smuggle 500 kilos of dope into the United States or 500,000 doses of meth? Would you rather the schoolyard drug pusher introduce joints to kids, or would you prefer cocaine or crack? Just asking...
-
Would you rather the drug traffickers smuggle 500 kilos of dope into the United States or 500,000 doses of meth? Would you rather the schoolyard drug pusher introduce joints to kids, or would you prefer cocaine or crack? Just asking...
Looks like you've solved the problem.
Let's outlaw cookies, so the drug dealers will be selling those to our children instead.
-
Is this a response to my post? I'm definitely not following you on that one.
I suppose it's all about quantity, tolerance and the color of panties you wore that day...
It's a bit of a stretch to believe that we have police squads overburdened because they're busy tracking down 19 year old dumbasses who smoke dope. Oh, and if we did legalize it, chances are the legal consumption age would be 21. The 19 year old dumbasses would still be criminals.
Would you rather the drug traffickers smuggle 500 kilos of dope into the United States or 500,000 doses of meth? Would you rather the schoolyard drug pusher introduce joints to kids, or would you prefer cocaine or crack? Just asking...
People that drink huge amounts of hard liquor now wear panties? Says the guy that brags about smoking but doesn't inhale. Seriously though, I was a MUCH bigger danger to society in that state than Chad would be if he took a couple of tokes. It is what it is. Again, I personally don't like Pot. I think it fucking reeks and people who smoke it are typically morons. But who the hell am I to tell someone else they can't have something that is generally the same level of danger if not less, than things that are already legal? You are using Prohibition level logic here. All of yours and Tarheel's arguments against have been debunked by others on here - addictive? Of narcotics, cigs and alcohol, its the lesser of the 4. danger? again, no more than those 3. What exactly IS your issue with it?
Don't mistake my cop resource argument with why I think it should be legal in some form. That is more of a side effect, not the reason. Ask any cop on the resource issues in most towns. One less thing to worry about is always a good thing. Any kind of bust no matter how minor will take up resources. The prison thing is more the good side effect to me than the patrol stops. Again, this is a possible good side effect, not the reason I am advocating it happen.
-
Question. How is someone tested on a traffic stop for grass? I'm talking about someone who blazes up at home and then gets in the car. Let's say the cop just looks at someone, eyes red, acting impaired, decides to test. Can you test at the scene for marijuana? Asking because I don't know. If someone is tested through blood or urine samples, doesn't THC stay in the system for quite a long time? Like weeks?
-
Is that why alcoholics that try to quit have withdrawal symptoms from the "physical dependency"?
Umm... Withdrawal symptoms are not necessarily an indication of addiction, and addiction does not always mean chemical dependency. You might want to look into that. Oh BTW, you can also suffer from withdrawal symptoms after long term persistent marijuana use, and that doesn't necessarily mean that there was any sort of addiction to marijuana.
-
Question. How is someone tested on a traffic stop for grass? I'm talking about someone who blazes up at home and then gets in the car. Let's say the cop just looks at someone, eyes red, acting impaired, decides to test. Can you test at the scene for marijuana? Asking because I don't know. If someone is tested through blood or urine samples, doesn't THC stay in the system for quite a long time? Like weeks?
Yes. There's no equivalent to a breathalizer. But it stays in your urine for up to several months, depending on your tolerance/immune system/metabolism.
And GH, I agree with you, but how did I become your hypothetical pothead? I can count on one...ok maybe two hands the number of times I've smoked.
-
Also, the dangerousness of a stoned person vs. a drunk, reminds me of this song.
Warning: British people trying to rap
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCbDF-OPDX4#ws (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCbDF-OPDX4#ws)
-
Looks like you've solved the problem.
Really?
Let's outlaw cookies, so the drug dealers will be selling those to our children instead.
Well, if there's enough of a demand, there's likely a potential profit in it.
-
Umm... Withdrawal symptoms are not necessarily an indication of addiction, and addiction does not always mean chemical dependency. You might want to look into that. Oh BTW, you can also suffer from withdrawal symptoms after long term persistent marijuana use, and that doesn't necessarily mean that there was any sort of addiction to marijuana.
Actually, the withdrawal symptoms are signs of physical dependency...and that goes for all drugs or whatever the foreign ingredient is. The drugs or alcohol trigger the brain to release a chemicals it usually releases in natural instances. You put enough of the foreign in, the brain adjust by not producing its own thus when the use of the false chemical ceases, the body usually suffers from some sort of withdrawal. The psychological part comes in by one having to change habits that included the drug or habit.
-
Well, if there's enough of a demand, there's likely a potential profit in it.
The Girl Scouts will be pissed.
-
Yes. There's no equivalent to a breathalizer. But it stays in your urine for up to several months, depending on your tolerance/immune system/metabolism.
And GH, I agree with you, but how did I become your hypothetical pothead? I can count on one...ok maybe two hands the number of times I've smoked.
Could I buy some pot from you?
-
Question. How is someone tested on a traffic stop for grass? I'm talking about someone who blazes up at home and then gets in the car. Let's say the cop just looks at someone, eyes red, acting impaired, decides to test. Can you test at the scene for marijuana? Asking because I don't know. If someone is tested through blood or urine samples, doesn't THC stay in the system for quite a long time? Like weeks?
Field sobriety test in addition to the officer's observations concerning slurred speech, dilation of eyes, odor of marijuana, etc.
It's no different than when they pull you over and charge you with drunk driving even though you never took a breathalyzer test to see what your actual BAC was; you can still be charged with a DUI based off of the officer's other observations, and his determination that you are too impaired to drive.
-
Yes. There's no equivalent to a breathalizer. But it stays in your urine for up to several months, depending on your tolerance/immune system/metabolism.
And GH, I agree with you, but how did I become your hypothetical pothead? I can count on one...ok maybe two hands the number of times I've smoked.
Just an example since you are on the legalization side of the argument. I could have used simp or JR as well. No reason really.
And GarMan, you are dead wrong on the dependency. Some drugs are pysch. and some are physical. Some are both such as Heroin. Alcohol's dependency itself is physical. The reason they might start could be in their head.
-
People that drink huge amounts of hard liquor now wear panties? Says the guy that brags about smoking but doesn't inhale.
You can take it sweetheart... And, if you know of anyone who claims to consistently inhale cigar smoke, they're lying to you. There's no reason to inhale. It makes for a miserable experience, and there's no benefit whatsoever. It's stupid.
Seriously though, I was a MUCH bigger danger to society in that state than Chad would be if he took a couple of tokes. It is what it is.
How do you compare consuming huge amounts of hard liquor with a couple of tokes from a joint? This doesn't make any sense to me.
Again, I personally don't like Pot. I think it fucking reeks and people who smoke it are typically morons. But who the hell am I to tell someone else they can't have something that is generally the same level of danger if not less, than things that are already legal? You are using Prohibition level logic here. All of yours and Tarheel's arguments against have been debunked by others on here - addictive? Of narcotics, cigs and alcohol, its the lesser of the 4. danger? again, no more than those 3. What exactly IS your issue with it?
Well, you say debunked, but it's just a matter of personal opinion. The vitriol used by the pro-pot crowd has made me numb to the entire issue. I don't see a logical argument for pot legalization. I don't see a reasonable plan for how decriminalization could be achieved. Other than Tarheel, nobody has had a serious review of the regulations and infrastructure that would be necessary to support or enable legalization. So, I'll ask again... Why? What's the purpose? Where's the benefit? Give me a tangible reason other than, you wanna new drug, man.
Don't mistake my cop resource argument with why I think it should be legal in some form. That is more of a side effect, not the reason. Ask any cop on the resource issues in most towns. One less thing to worry about is always a good thing. Any kind of bust no matter how minor will take up resources. The prison thing is more the good side effect to me than the patrol stops. Again, this is a possible good side effect, not the reason I am advocating it happen.
Well, that's you... But, many on the pro-pot side believe that the War on Drugs would be far less costly if marijuana were to be decriminalized. The fact is, we'd really just be shifting the costs from policing it to regulating it. We'd still have bans on illegal imports. We'd still have bans on the illegal distribution of it. We'd have to regulate it's manufacture, processing and distribution. We'd likely even have to put the FDA in charge of it. And as for taxes, after you put all of those controls, regulations and new laws in place, the tax revenue would likely be insignificant when compared to the costs necessary to support it. If I'm wrong, give me a legitimate analysis. Show me how it could work.
-
Actually, the withdrawal symptoms are signs of physical dependency...and that goes for all drugs or whatever the foreign ingredient is. The drugs or alcohol trigger the brain to release a chemicals it usually releases in natural instances. You put enough of the foreign in, the brain adjust by not producing its own thus when the use of the false chemical ceases, the body usually suffers from some sort of withdrawal. The psychological part comes in by one having to change habits that included the drug or habit.
Pretty much... Although, not all withdrawal symptoms can be attributed to physical dependency. Some are psychological... beta-male stuff...
-
And GarMan, you are dead wrong on the dependency. Some drugs are pysch. and some are physical. Some are both such as Heroin. Alcohol's dependency itself is physical. The reason they might start could be in their head.
Well, the last 5 rehab clinic/center websites that I just pulled up on teh GoogleWebz don't exactly disagree with me. They seem to recognize both, a psychological and chemical dependency, with alcohol, and they appear to suggest that it's the psychological dependency that's harder to break. The 12 step program stuff...
-
Well, the last 5 rehab clinic/center websites that I just pulled up on teh GoogleWebz don't exactly disagree with me. They seem to recognize both, a psychological and chemical dependency, with alcohol, and they appear to suggest that it's the psychological dependency that's harder to break. The 12 step program stuff...
Again its both, and all depends on how long a person has been hooked on alcohol. Same goes for pot, but pot takes a lot longer to gain a physical dependency on. Ironically, its the drugs that the quacks prescribe you that is the most addictive and physically dependent.
The argument I have with pot being illegal is the fact that it can be just as productive as prescription drugs in many cases and do less harm on ones body. I tend to think that weed as a prescribed medicine throughout all the states is the way to go and not a total, all out, legalization. Maybe one day in a step by step method but not all at once because they're way too many stupid ass people out there.
-
Just personal opinion here but I think the level of chemical and/or psychological dependency varies from person to person. I know AU1 and I have had many conversations about drinking. I'll admit to going long periods where I'm an every night drinker to a certain extent. It may be a few beers. It might be a couple of glasses of wine. Or I may hammer back some fine burrbin and delicious coke product. It's as much a habit with me as anything else. It's routine to finish the work day, go work out, come home and eat, help the kid with homework...whatever, then time to relax and have a few. Yeah, I realize my liver hates me. But...having said that...when I make the commitment to stop for a while, I never, ever have had a physical craving for it. Never any physical problems whatsoever. But it's far more a situation of when it gets to be about 8:30 or 9:00 and I sit down to turn on a game...I'm going, "What do I do now? Something's missing. I'm supposed to be gettin' my buzz on"
So with me, I really see where alcohol can cause a psychological dependency. Now, meth....I'm not addicted. I've been doing that for 10 years and I can quit any time I want.
-
You can take it sweetheart... And, if you know of anyone who claims to consistently inhale cigar smoke, they're lying to you. There's no reason to inhale. It makes for a miserable experience, and there's no benefit whatsoever. It's stupid.
How do you compare consuming huge amounts of hard liquor with a couple of tokes from a joint? This doesn't make any sense to me.
Well, you say debunked, but it's just a matter of personal opinion. The vitriol used by the pro-pot crowd has made me numb to the entire issue. I don't see a logical argument for pot legalization. I don't see a reasonable plan for how decriminalization could be achieved. Other than Tarheel, nobody has had a serious review of the regulations and infrastructure that would be necessary to support or enable legalization. So, I'll ask again... Why? What's the purpose? Where's the benefit? Give me a tangible reason other than, you wanna new drug, man.
Well, that's you... But, many on the pro-pot side believe that the War on Drugs would be far less costly if marijuana were to be decriminalized. The fact is, we'd really just be shifting the costs from policing it to regulating it. We'd still have bans on illegal imports. We'd still have bans on the illegal distribution of it. We'd have to regulate it's manufacture, processing and distribution. We'd likely even have to put the FDA in charge of it. And as for taxes, after you put all of those controls, regulations and new laws in place, the tax revenue would likely be insignificant when compared to the costs necessary to support it. If I'm wrong, give me a legitimate analysis. Show me how it could work.
The tangible reason is actually for you to prove. You are the accuser, so show me burden of proof.
-
Just personal opinion here but I think the level of chemical and/or psychological dependency varies from person to person. I know AU1 and I have had many conversations about drinking. I'll admit to going long periods where I'm an every night drinker to a certain extent. It may be a few beers. It might be a couple of glasses of wine. Or I may hammer back some fine burrbin and delicious coke product. It's as much a habit with me as anything else. It's routine to finish the work day, go work out, come home and eat, help the kid with homework...whatever, then time to relax and have a few. Yeah, I realize my liver hates me. But...having said that...when I make the commitment to stop for a while, I never, ever have had a physical craving for it. Never any physical problems whatsoever. But it's far more a situation of when it gets to be about 8:30 or 9:00 and I sit down to turn on a game...I'm going, "What do I do now? Something's missing. I'm supposed to be gettin' my buzz on"
So with me, I really see where alcohol can cause a psychological dependency. Now, meth....I'm not addicted. I've been doing that for 10 years and I can quit any time I want.
You are like that because you are not dependent on it. Same with most people who drink. I do admit its a minority that it turns into an issue for.
-
The tangible reason is actually for you to prove. You are the accuser, so show me burden of proof.
Well, if I'm understanding you and others correctly, you're the ones advocating change. Marijuana is already illegal throughout most of the United States and most civilized countries, in fact. I don't have to prove anything. If anybody is serious about decriminalizing it, the pro-pot movement/lobby/drum-circle/whatever will need to do a lot better with their arguments. I could only imagine that every time they try to organize something, they get too stoned to put together a viable strategy... The funny thing is, I'm sort of open to the idea, but I haven't seen or heard anything reasonable to justify it. And, from a pure Libertarian perspective, why not legalize everything? I could actually go for that if it could be accompanied by abolishing the FDA and all forms of welfare. How do you like 'em applez?
Here's something interesting that I've been meaning to bring up... https://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=marijuana-mouth-spray (https://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=marijuana-mouth-spray)
-
The argument I have with pot being illegal is the fact that it can be just as productive as prescription drugs in many cases and do less harm on ones body. I tend to think that weed as a prescribed medicine throughout all the states is the way to go and not a total, all out, legalization. Maybe one day in a step by step method but not all at once because they're way too many stupid ass people out there.
I'm open to that, but not as fraudulently as done in Kalifornia. I think there's a rational argument for narcotics and narcotic derivatives in medicine. Take a look at that Scientific American article that I just posted. I bet there are a ton of medical ailments that can be treated with raw or processed marijuana, tobacco, cocaine, etc...
-
I'm open to that, but not as fraudulently as done in Kalifornia. I think there's a rational argument for narcotics and narcotic derivatives in medicine. Take a look at that Scientific American article that I just posted. I bet there are a ton of medical ailments that can be treated with raw or processed marijuana, tobacco, cocaine, etc...
That would be more likely to pass in the US anyways, as stated in the article that is. The west coast states are very lenient in prescribing. I have a old friend that tells me all about it. Funny thing is, its grown by the government but thats a whole other argument. If you have a chance, take a look at the youtube clip I posted if you haven't already. Its things like that, that really opens my views up to use of teh moto in medicines.
-
If you don't think that alcohol can't be a physical dependence then watch someone go through the DTs with your own eyes in front of you.
Now personally I am in the same boat as Snaggle, for me, it's a habit. Sometimes it will be a have a drink every night, catch a buzz most of those, to stretches where I won't drink for a month, sometimes two or three. I haven't got nor do I plan on getting so far that my body has to have it.
-
Well, the last 5 rehab clinic/center websites that I just pulled up on teh GoogleWebz don't exactly disagree with me. They seem to recognize both, a psychological and chemical dependency, with alcohol, and they appear to suggest that it's the psychological dependency that's harder to break. The 12 step program stuff...
The psychological dependance may be more difficult to break, but there's definitely a physical dependance too. So, is your exposure and knowledge of chemical dependance limited to what you can find on the innnerwebz that supports your preconceived notions, or do you have any real life experience dealing with people who are addicted?
-
If you don't think that alcohol can't be a physical dependence then watch someone go through the DTs with your own eyes in front of you.
Saw a guy in his 30s seize violently while in alcohol withdrawal. Seized again 3 days later and died. I'm sure he was a beta male and it was all in his mind.
-
The psychological dependance may be more difficult to break, but there's definitely a physical dependance too. So, is your exposure and knowledge of chemical dependance limited to what you can find on the innnerwebz that supports your preconceived notions, or do you have any real life experience dealing with people who are addicted?
Real life experience with family members... Heroine... Alcohol... Pain killers... Just to name a few...
-
Real life experience with family members... Heroine... Alcohol... Pain killers... Just to name a few...
And you think it's mostly psychological?
-
If you don't think that alcohol can't be a physical dependence then watch someone go through the DTs with your own eyes in front of you.
Saw a guy in his 30s seize violently while in alcohol withdrawal. Seized again 3 days later and died. I'm sure he was a beta male and it was all in his mind.
We've already covered this boys... But, thanks for commenting!
-
And you think it's mostly psychological?
Did I say that? What is it, selective reading comprehension?
-
We've already covered this boys... But, thanks for commenting!
What you believe isn't evidence. Thanks for playing.
-
Did I say that? What is it, selective reading comprehension?
yeah, you did, unless you crawfished.
-
yeah, you did, unless you crawfished.
Nah... It's how you understand it. That's all. Alcohol withdrawal symptoms are not always indicative of an addiction. Chemical dependence, maybe... Read up on it.
-
Nah... It's how you understand it. That's all. Alcohol withdrawal symptoms are not always indicative of an addiction. Chemical dependence, maybe... Read up on it.
Trust me, I have, maybe you should.
-
Trust me, I have, maybe you should.
Swinging Richard Weekly prolly isn't a reputable source... You might consider a health or psychology publication.
-
Swinging Richard Weekly prolly isn't a reputable source... You might consider a health or psychology publication.
pffffft
-
pffffft
Last sound you hear before a pubic hair hits the ground...
-
Last sound you hear before a pubic hair hits the ground...
Also the sound heard when I dismiss an idiotic argument.
-
Also the sound heard when I dismiss an idiotic argument.
Was reading something on Amy Winehouse recently, that stated her cause of death was physical "detox seizure". It was all in her head.
-
Was reading something on Amy Winehouse recently, that stated her cause of death was physical "detox seizure". It was all in her head.
On a side note Whitney Houston has been sober for over a month now.
-
On a side note Whitney Houston has been sober for over a month now.
Wouldn't it be cool if she and Amy came back as zombies?
-
Wouldn't it be cool if she and Amy came back as zombies?
What would be different?
-
What would be different?
Don't tell Wes, but this happens on next week's episode.
-
Was reading something on Amy Winehouse recently, that stated her cause of death was physical "detox seizure". It was all in her head.
Does this disprove any of my statements? No... A few of you continue to confuse addiction with withdrawal symptoms and detox. I can't help your ignorance.
-
Does this disprove any of my statements? No... A few of you continue to confuse addiction with withdrawal symptoms and detox. I can't help your ignorance.
Listen here, Sweetcakes. I thought I was having DT seizures, but the doctor told me it was all in my head.
-
Listen here, Sweetcakes. I thought I was having DT seizures, but the doctor told me it was all in my head.
GarMan can't help the ignorance of medical scientists.
-
GarMan can't help the ignorance of medical scientists.
Like anything I've stated disagrees with those medical scientists... But, wait! Aren't you a big wiki fan? I hear they're 100% accurate like 98% of the time. Let's see what they say on the topic...
The symptoms from withdrawal may be even more dramatic when the drug has masked prolonged malnutrition, disease, chronic pain, or sleep deprivation, conditions that drug abusers often suffer as a secondary consequence of the drug. Many drugs (including alcohol) suppress appetite while simultaneously consuming any money that might have been spent on food. When the drug is removed, the discomforts return in force and are sometimes confused with addiction withdrawal symptoms, which they quite properly are not.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Withdrawal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Withdrawal)
Not?
However, addiction is to be carefully distinguished from physical dependence. Addiction is a psychological compulsion to use a drug despite harm that often persists long after all physical withdrawal symptoms have abated. On the other hand, the mere presence of even profound physical dependence does not necessarily denote addiction, e.g., in a patient using large doses of opioids to control chronic pain under medical supervision.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Withdrawal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Withdrawal) (Same as above...)
Did themz bastards just say it was psychological? Uh-oh...
Notice an absence of the word addiction in reference to DTs in the below wiki-quote?
Delirium tremens (Latin for "shaking frenzy", also referred to as The DTs, "the horrors" or "the shakes.") is an acute episode of delirium that is usually caused by withdrawal from alcohol, first described in 1813.[1][2] Benzodiazepines are the treatment of choice for delirium tremens (DT).[3]
Withdrawal from sedative-hypnotics other than alcohol, such as benzodiazepines, or barbiturates, can also result in seizures, delirium tremens, and death if not properly managed. Withdrawal from other drugs which are not sedative-hypnotics such as caffeine, cocaine, etc. does not have major medical complications, and is not life-threatening.[4] Withdrawal reactions as a result of physical dependence on alcohol is the most dangerous and can be fatal. It often creates a full blown effect which is physically evident through shivering, palpitations, sweating and in some cases, convulsions and death if not treated.[5]
When caused by alcohol, it occurs only in patients with a history of alcoholism. Occurrence of a similar syndrome due to benzodiazepines does not require as long a period of consistent intake of such drugs. Benzodiazepines are relatively safe in overdose when taken alone; however, if the overdose includes the use of other sedative drugs, alcohol in particular, it could lead to dangerous side effects.[6]
In the U.S., fewer than about 50% to 60% of alcoholics will develop any significant withdrawal symptoms upon cessation of alcohol intake, and of these, only 5% of cases of acute ethanol withdrawal progress to DT.[1] Unlike the withdrawal syndrome associated with opiate dependence, DT (and alcohol withdrawal in general) can be fatal. Mortality was as high as 35% before the advent of intensive care and advanced pharmacotherapy; in the modern era of medicine, death rates range from 5-15%.[1]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delirium_tremens (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delirium_tremens)
And, what does the U.S. National Library of Medicine (aka medical scientists) say on the topic?
Delirium tremens
DTs; Alcohol withdrawal - delirium tremens
Last reviewed: March 20, 2011.
Delirium tremens is a severe form of alcohol withdrawal that involves sudden and severe mental or nervous system changes.
Causes, incidence, and risk factors
Delirium tremens can occur when you stop drinking alcohol after a period of heavy drinking, especially if you do not eat enough food.
Delirium tremens may also be caused by head injury, infection, or illness in people with a history of heavy alcohol use.
It is most common in people who have a history of alcohol withdrawal. It is especially common in those who drink 4 - 5 pints of wine or 7 - 8 pints of beer (or 1 pint of "hard" alcohol) every day for several months. Delirium tremens also commonly affects people who have had an alcohol habit or alcoholism for more than 10 years.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0001771/ (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0001771/)
What? There's no reference to addiction? Is teh Garman possibly right, again? That sumbitch!!!
But, but, but, but my favorite pro-pot website says... :sad:
-
Listen here, Sweetcakes. I thought I was having DT seizures, but the doctor told me it was all in my head.
That was just you getting pounded in the ass by Uncle Buck.
-
If you don't think that alcohol can't be a physical dependence then watch someone go through the DTs with your own eyes in front of you.
Delirium tremens (Latin for "shaking frenzy", also referred to as The DTs, "the horrors" or "the shakes.") is an acute episode of delirium that is usually caused by withdrawal from alcohol, first described in 1813.[1][2] Benzodiazepines are the treatment of choice for delirium tremens (DT).[3]
Withdrawal from sedative-hypnotics other than alcohol, such as benzodiazepines, or barbiturates, can also result in seizures, delirium tremens, and death if not properly managed. Withdrawal from other drugs which are not sedative-hypnotics such as caffeine, cocaine, etc. does not have major medical complications, and is not life-threatening.[4] Withdrawal reactions as a result of physical dependence on alcohol is the most dangerous and can be fatal. It often creates a full blown effect which is physically evident through shivering, palpitations, sweating and in some cases, convulsions and death if not treated.[5]
When caused by alcohol, it occurs only in patients with a history of alcoholism. Occurrence of a similar syndrome due to benzodiazepines does not require as long a period of consistent intake of such drugs. Benzodiazepines are relatively safe in overdose when taken alone; however, if the overdose includes the use of other sedative drugs, alcohol in particular, it could lead to dangerous side effects.[6]
In the U.S., fewer than about 50% to 60% of alcoholics will develop any significant withdrawal symptoms upon cessation of alcohol intake, and of these, only 5% of cases of acute ethanol withdrawal progress to DT.[1] Unlike the withdrawal syndrome associated with opiate dependence, DT (and alcohol withdrawal in general) can be fatal. Mortality was as high as 35% before the advent of intensive care and advanced pharmacotherapy; in the modern era of medicine, death rates range from 5-15%.[1]
Once again, you can be physically dependent on alcohol.
From the Mayo Clinic, pretty sure those guys know a lot more than all of us X doctors.
http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/alcoholism/DS00340 (http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/alcoholism/DS00340)
Definition
By Mayo Clinic staff
Alcoholism is a chronic disease in which your body becomes dependent on alcohol. When you have alcoholism, you lose control over your drinking. You may not be able to control when you drink, how much you drink, or how long you drink on each occasion. If you have alcoholism, you continue to drink even though you know it's causing problems with your relationships, health, work or finances.
It's possible to have a problem with alcohol but not have all the symptoms of alcoholism. This is known as "alcohol abuse," which means you drink too much and it causes problems in your life although you aren't completely dependent on alcohol. If you have alcoholism or you abuse alcohol, you may not be able to cut back or quit without help. A number of approaches are available to help you recover from alcoholism, including medications, counseling and self-help groups.
I may have not typed it in a way that conveyed it, but all I have said is that alcoholism is more than being in your head. Your body can become physically dependent on it.
-
Does this disprove any of my statements? No... A few of you continue to confuse addiction with withdrawal symptoms and detox. I can't help your ignorance.
Yes, it does disprove where you implied it wasn't physical.
JR and I never said it wasn't pysch. It can be both.
-
Once again, you can be physically dependent on alcohol.
From the Mayo Clinic, pretty sure those guys know a lot more than all of us X doctors.
I may have not typed it in a way that conveyed it, but all I have said is that alcoholism is more than being in your head. Your body can become physically dependent on it.
Agree.
Most dependencies you see, most deaths, especially celebrity deaths are related to a physical dependency. None of us ever said both couldn't happen. They can. GarMan just refused to believe there could be a physical dependency. And he was wrong.
-
Once again, you can be physically dependent on alcohol.
From the Mayo Clinic, pretty sure those guys know a lot more than all of us X doctors.
I may have not typed it in a way that conveyed it, but all I have said is that alcoholism is more than being in your head. Your body can become physically dependent on it.
Again, this is really just a common confusion between the concepts of addiction, dependence and withdrawal symptoms. They are frequently used incorrectly, and that's what seems to have everyone's panties in a wad. I never said that you couldn't be physically dependent on alcohol. I just explained that any addiction would be more psychological than chemical. The chemical dependence does not result in any craving for alcohol. The chemical dependence only means that you'd likely experience physical withdrawal symptoms from an abrupt discontinuation of alcohol consumption. And, whether people want to believe it or not, you can become chemically dependent to virtually any substance, including marijuana. It only requires enough of a dosage, consumed periodically over a duration of time. This dependence would likely not imply an addiction.
-
Again, this is really just a common confusion between the concepts of addiction, dependence and withdrawal symptoms. They are frequently used incorrectly, and that's what seems to have everyone's panties in a wad. I never said that you couldn't be physically dependent on alcohol. I just explained that any addiction would be more psychological than chemical. The chemical dependence does not result in any craving for alcohol. The chemical dependence only means that you'd likely experience physical withdrawal symptoms from an abrupt discontinuation of alcohol consumption. And, whether people want to believe it or not, you can become chemically dependent to virtually any substance, including marijuana. It only requires enough of a dosage, consumed periodically over a duration of time. This dependence would likely not imply an addiction.
This sounds like your Archie Bunker bullshit way of admitting that a Physical Dependency can happen with alcohol. Glad you've come around finally.
-
Yes, it does disprove where you implied it wasn't physical.
JR and I never said it wasn't pysch. It can be both.
Again, you're just throwing generic phrases around interchanging dependence with addiction, incorrectly assuming that they are one in the same, and confusing physical withdrawal symptoms with addiction withdrawal. And, pot should be legalized?
-
Again, you're just throwing generic phrases around interchanging dependence with addiction, incorrectly assuming that they are one in the same, and confusing physical withdrawal symptoms with addiction withdrawal. And, pot should be legalized?
Me thinks someone made a dumb statement near the start of this thread and realizes it now.
When in doubt, muddy the waters, utilize wordplay and semenatic arguments - that'll show em!
-
confusing physical withdrawal symptoms with addiction withdrawal.
So, this would not be physical addiction withdrawal symptoms?
-
So, this would not be physical addiction withdrawal symptoms?
Well you see, the PHYSICAL WD symptoms have nothing to do with the addiction itself. The addiction is only in your mind and for mental reasons. When the mind decides it doesn't want booze anymore, the body has an argument with it, and they fight it out - and you get physical symptoms of a mental withdrawl. Yeah, thats it.
-
GarMan just refused to believe there could be a physical dependency. And he was wrong.
If you recall, JR was calling alcohol most certainly addictive, and I simply responded with...
I don't completely buy into that. You could argue that anything in large enough doses is addictive to some extent, even pot. It becomes more of a psychological addiction rather than a legitimate chemical addiction.
This says absolutely nothing about the dependency aspect of alcohol consumption.
This sounds like your Archie Bunker bullshit way of admitting that a Physical Dependency can happen with alcohol. Glad you've come around finally.
Really? Several in this thread confused addiction with dependence, and I'm the one coming around? :sad:
-
As I remember it, be addicted and having a dependency on it whether it be physical or mental is one in the same. Well, at least its how I remember it from the schooling days.
-
So, this would not be physical addiction withdrawal symptoms?
From alcohol, no... The withdrawal symptoms that we've been discussing are primarily a result of chemical dependency. The chemical dependency could be a result of the potential addiction, but the addiction doesn't result in these particular withdrawal symptoms.
As I remember it, be addicted and having a dependency on it whether it be physical or mental is one in the same. Well, at least its how I remember it from the schooling days.
That's frequently how the terms are confused, but that thinking is incorrect. Addiction is usually characterized by an insatiable craving for a particular substance. Chemical dependency on alcohol does not result in an addiction problem. The chemical dependency is a result of excessive use over time, and that excessive use could be an indication of an addiction.
You seemed to have it correct in your earlier posts...
-
You seemed to have it correct in your earlier posts...
Thats before I got drunk and high.
-
The only thing I've learned from this thread is what DT's actually stands for, and that it's also the name of one of my favorite high grav beers.
-
Well you see, the PHYSICAL...
Look... The pro-pot crowd, among others, gets this shit wrong all of the time. It just adds to their lack of credibility. Confusing addiction with dependency... If I'm wrong, go find a reputable source to correct me. I've been able to post a few sources that verified my facts. Are you capable of doing the same?
-
The only thing I've learned from this thread is what DT's actually stands for, and that it's also the name of one of my favorite high grav beers.
http://www.youtube.com/v/Ye3ecDYxOkg
That was likely Gail and Dale's last performance on Lawrence Welk... Spiritual...
-
I was gonna make love to you but then I got high
I was gonna eat yo pussy too but then I got high
now I'm jacking off and I know why, yea heyy,
- cause I got high
-
Does this disprove any of my statements? No... A few of you continue to confuse addiction with withdrawal symptoms and detox. I can't help your ignorance.
pffft
-
I was gonna make love to you but then I got high
I was gonna eat yo pussy too but then I got high
now I'm jacking off and I know why, yea heyy,
- cause I got high
THIS guy knows!