Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Don't just go off the tittle......
(0 votes) (report abuse)
|
Weed and driving
|
(0 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
| I'm not sure weed, taken in moderation is all that bad for you. I certainly don't think it's the "silent killer" they made it out to be in high scool. But it does seem like you are trying to justify driving under the influence because there are "worse" things. It's like saying it's worse to be driving after 15 drinks than it is 10. I guess that's true also, but it's ignoring the fact that you are still impaired. If I'm ignorant for saying all this, maybe it can be blamed on the loss of brain cells for having partaken of alcohol in my earlier, less responsible, but perhaps more entertaining life when I was younger. | |
|
Query
|
 (1 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
|
Were you high when you wrote this? Either that or you didn't edit. |
|
|
Not high
|
(0 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
| Not high, but sitting on a Grey Hound bus with a dying laptop....and I guess the editing part fell through the cracks.... | |
|
Not to worry about editing...We're not paid for our opinions
|
(0 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
|
My concern about "weed," is that it is a "gateway drug." I have no concern about the ill effects it might have on a persons health. People eat Twinkies and other garbage every day, gives em' high cholesterol and depending on how many they eat, they might gain some weight. But, it isn't my business because it's not likely a "Twinkie Addict" is going to rob a store to get money to buy more Twinkies. Again, "weed" has been proven to be a "gateway drug." I think it is reasonable to worry that if a person likes one kind of "high," they might decide to try other drugs which are deadly and addictive. (Is "weed" addictive?) But I think some people are on a quest for "highs," and maybe that is our neanderthal (sp?) genes. This energy can be directed towards sports, or other activities. |
|
|
RE: Not to worry about editing...We're not paid for our opinions
|
(0 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
| ok using that argument, then cigarettes and alcohol should be illegal. Both are addicting and both are bad for you. But since you and I both grew up with them in our everyday society they are more except able. Weed is what alcohol was in the old prohibition. A drug that was bad, but not as bad as people made it out to be. It was outlawed because of politics rather than common sense. | ||
|
Less Gov't?
|
(0 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
|
I think there are several regular BozemanTalks readers who espouse the notions of "less government", and freedom to make personal decisions. With that said, I think laws like regulating marijuana, wearing seat belts, wearing motorcycle helmets (in some states) infringe on those "personal" rights. I think johnbrownraider may be onto something. |
|
|
Apologies
|
(0 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
|
Ouch. Wasn't high but didn't edit as charged, cwrite. Apologies. I did need one more cup of coffee. |
|
|
Marijuana
|
(1 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
| Johnbrownraider is basically right. The "gateway" attributed to marijuana is really any gate one chooses to abuse. There are truly so many positive uses for this plant, that I find it a sad testimony against society for it to be so severely blackballed. We have millions upon millions of people currently taking dozens of different antidepressant drugs, with some really scary side effects, when a hit or two or a cup of marijuana tea would do quite well instead. As far as it being illegal, we are so screwing ourselves out of a plant that is extremely rich in resources, from the multitude of medicinal benefits to the top notch fiber content to the seed oil uses in food and biofuels. And it grows like, um, weed. Pretty killer cash crop with sooooo many uses. I guess that's why it needs to be controlled in such an extreme manner. After all, this is Amerika. | |
|
"gateway theory outdated and invalid"
|
(0 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
|
The "gateway theory" has been invalidated and is an old argument. If one looks into the history of drug laws in this country, this theory was only put into play as a scare tactic to validate taking away personal rights. THere is no direct causal link between "weed" and and drug "Y"--which completely debunks that theory. Question: What did George Washington and Thomas Jefferson grow in their fields? Can you imagine--if our founding fathers were alive now, they would promptly be transported to the nearest prison!! Oh, and Ben Franklin's kite string...well where would we be without hemp? |
|
|
Thought only
|
(0 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
|
My concern is that weed obviously get's people "high." Forget health ramifications, if there are any. I just don't think people should be getting "high" period. For most of us, we need to be in the "here and now" of everyday living, to make good decisions. Those decisions include driving without putting other people at risk by being high on drugs or alcohol. I include any prescriptions that can affect a persons decisions. JB, how about those people who drive while holding a phone to their ear. I do not answer my phone if I am driving, nor do I make calls. There have been recent cases where cameras in intersections have photographed accidents in bigger cities, where the person who caused the accident was shown talking on the telephone. Maybe a bit off the subject. My point is that many people who do not use drugs, endanger the lives of others and themselces every day, by talking on their phones. This IS distracting. |
|
|
Get off the driving thing.....
|
(0 votes)
(report abuse)
|
|
|
The original argument wasn't for the legalization of driving while high. It was the legalization of weed for personal use....like alcohol. Common knowledge would say don't drive like impaired under any physical or mind altering substance.... Yes or no is weed really the silent killer that was the question |
||
|
Straight Shooter
|
(0 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
| Glad to see that you're on the ball, berrymountain. However, under your ideals, we should just head back to good ol' Prohibition. | |
|
Moderation and Responsibilty
|
(0 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
| Marijuana doesn't need to be smoked, and anything smoked directly into the lungs is a "silent killer" of sorts, but then again so is nearly everything you do and many things you don't do. The potential arguments are certainly endless, so the real point comes back again to freedom of personal choice or not. I will say that mankind has displayed a very long history of both responsible and irresponsible use of pschoactive substances, from festivals to meditative uses, to just relaxing and taking away physical/emotional stress. The problems always arise when people are selfish, greedy, and overindulgent no matter what the particular activity or substance in question is. Discussions like this are great for enlightening each other on our different points of view, but what seems to keep coming to the center is "why should I worry about if that guy over there is smoking weed?" or, "why should you worry if I am?" If weed being a "silent killer" means that it impairs people to such an extent that they can't even realize it and they need me to throw them in jail for their own good, or that it causes people to act dangerously, then HELL NO! Definitely not a silent killer of any sort! | |
|
by the way
|
(0 votes)
(report abuse)
(reply) |
|
Someone want to find the exact statistics on fatal/non-fatal car accidents due to the driving under the influence of alcohol vs. pot? Just curious, seeing as how any person I've seen that was "high," was too lazy to leave the house and had their munchies delivered. Cafe Courier to the rescue! |
|
