hoyatables
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,603
|
Post by hoyatables on Oct 25, 2013 11:10:36 GMT -5
Seaweed for the win.
I don't know what to say about pot legalization. Never participated myself, so I have no appreciation for how mind-altering it is or addictive it can be. My understanding is that it is typically no more mind altering than alcohol or tobacco, and less addictive than tobacco. Like alcohol and tobacco, once legal it has to be regulated to ensure it is (a) safe, (b) not abused by children who aren't able to understand or appreciate the concepts of moderation and personal responsibility, and (c) not used in a way to harm others.
I think the level of regulation will need to vary based on the addictive properties. Again, no idea whether it is like alcohol, where many / most people are generally able to enjoy recreationally but not depend on it, or tobacco, where it is addictive to all people.
I will say this -- the whole country would probably be a whole lot happier and healthier if we all just took the time to nuture personal relationships, exercise and meditate/pray every day to regulate our happiness levels and enjoy other items in moderation rather than rely on stuff (drugs, booze, sex, chocolate, salt, fat, internet, TV, whatever) to get quick artificial fixes. But I am the pot calling the kettle black on that one as much as the next guy given that I have already had two peanut butter cups before lunch.
|
|
thebin
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,848
|
Post by thebin on Oct 25, 2013 11:29:20 GMT -5
Pot is more mind-altering than cigarettes but less than alcohol as long as we are understanding that you can obviously get a little or a lot drunk or stoned. But generally speaking you don't lose control or inhibitions as much with pot as alcohol. Not even close. I say that as someone who frankly prefers alcohol and very rarely partakes these days in the other. But it needs to be said- without a doubt alcohol is the more powerful drug which is why I get infuriated with people who think beer and wine are god-given but that pot is the demon weed. The hypocrisy of it is staggering.
As to addictiveness then. It is beyond dispute that pot is the LEAST addictive of all three you mention. It is far less addictive than cigarettes, or coffee come to think of it.
|
|
|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Oct 29, 2013 10:56:48 GMT -5
There is currently a presumption that driving after smoking = impaired, no matter how impaired they are at that moment. In a post legalization scenario, zero tolerance may not work and someone may need to create a reasonable standard for gauging whether your use has affected your ability to operate - a la blood alcohol levels etc FWIW, Colorado and Washington both have marijuana DUI laws. www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/02/too-stoned-to-drive-marij_n_3001016.htmlI favor legalization/regulation but I disagree with thebin that DFW's arguments are totally off-base. I recently reviewed the most recent drug trends study for my state. Since it's still on my desk I'll share these numbers with you. 73% of Texas high school students have tried alcohol, versus 26% for marijuana. I would argue that it is currently easier for high school students who want to buy drugs to purchase marijuana (be it actual marijuana or the terrible chemical-sprayed synthetic marijuana) than it is to purchase alcohol. But there are a lot of unlocked liquor cabinets in America, as well as older brothers and sisters, so it's easier to acquire alcohol than it is to acquire marijuana. Societal acceptance of adults drinking alcohol also makes teenagers more likely to want to consume that particular drug. Legalization of marijuana would therefore probably increase use among teenagers. OTOH, studies suggest that this increased use will just replace teenage alcohol use, which isn't necessarily so bad because marijuana use among teenagers is arguably better for society than alcohol use among teenagers. ON EDIT: (Better because alcohol-poisoning cases are common among teenagers and because driving with a lot of THC in one's bloodstream, while certainly a terrible idea, isn't quite as terrible as driving with a lot of alcohol in one's bloodstream.) Also on the DWI front, it should also be pointed out that the legal limits for alcohol and marijuana are "per se" limits, meaning you are "definitely" intoxicated past that point. However, one may be considered intoxicated in many jurisdictions even if one is below that limit. Don't drink (or smoke/inject/whatever) and drive, y'all.
|
|
thebin
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,848
|
Post by thebin on Oct 29, 2013 12:55:51 GMT -5
"Societal acceptance of adults drinking alcohol also makes teenagers more likely to want to consume that particular drug."
Ummmmm.....agree to disagree.
|
|
|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Oct 29, 2013 13:34:16 GMT -5
"Societal acceptance of adults drinking alcohol also makes teenagers more likely to want to consume that particular drug." Ummmmm.....agree to disagree. No problem, feel free to come up with an explanation for the statistics which fits your view. The fact remains that teenagers use alcohol, a drug that is currently legal for adults, at a far greater rate than drugs that are illegal for adults. Is there a reason to think that legalizing additional drugs for adults would not increase the percentage of teenagers who use those drugs? Again, I don't think this is a huge risk (though certain politicians will claim it to be a calamity of the highest order) because research indicates that marijuana use would replace alcohol use among some teenagers. In other words, roughly the same number of teenagers and adults are going to continue to use drugs (including alcohol), legalization would just change the mix. And that's where I think DFW's argument falls short. He wrote that "I would oppose it on public health grounds in that the nation doesn't need any more people on the roads or in the workplace under the influence." This assumes that marijuana legalization would increase the overall number of people using drugs, an assumption I believe is flawed. The people who don't drink at work right now aren't going to spontaneously start smoking marijuana at work just because it's legal. So yes, I believe marijuana legalization would probably increase marijuana use, but not overall drug use, among all age groups. I've seen no study that indicates overall drug use would rise as a result of legalization and regulation. The fun thing now is that we have two test labs (Colorado and Washington) which will provide reliable statistics within a few years. I think both states have a pretty good regulatory structure in place. What remains to be seen is if increased use by minors (which I expect) is considered by the Justice Department to be "distribution to minors," (see DOJ memo linked below) even if dispensaries aren't selling directly to 17 year olds. If so, that could potentially threaten the rollout of marijuana legalization/regulation in other states. www.justice.gov/iso/opa/resources/3052013829132756857467.pdf
|
|
Nevada Hoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 18,429
|
Post by Nevada Hoya on Oct 29, 2013 18:34:29 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Nov 5, 2013 14:45:07 GMT -5
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,450
|
Post by TC on Jan 17, 2014 18:22:30 GMT -5
I'l admit TC- I was pretty surprised to see gay marriage above single digits in 1996. Fair enough. At the same time methinks pot acceptance is on a rocket ship to 80% and gay marriage acceptance has more determined opposition and will be creeping up more slowly. Gay marriage at even poll numbers..... in Utah. www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/57391605-78/marriage-sex-percent-state.html.csp
|
|
|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Nov 5, 2014 12:05:03 GMT -5
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,450
|
Post by TC on Nov 6, 2014 22:16:13 GMT -5
Will this increase applications?
|
|
ksf42001
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 901
|
Post by ksf42001 on Nov 7, 2014 10:03:02 GMT -5
So the Corp's plans of expanding into the pot dispensary business will have to go on hold for now...
|
|
|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Nov 7, 2014 15:29:46 GMT -5
Will this increase applications? Let's hope not: I would think that burgeoning stoners make up a pretty small percentage of the Georgetown applicant pool. I guess someone could look at whether applications declined once DC raised its drinking age to 21, but my guess is that there's little to no relationship between drug laws and college applications when it comes to selective schools. It's not like it's that difficult to obtain alcohol, marijuana, or other drugs on college campuses, regardless of legality, so I doubt occasional smokers care whether marijuana is legally obtainable. Any person who really really really cares about weed probably doesn't belong at Georgetown and probably doesn't have the grades to get in anyway.
|
|
quickplay
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 733
|
Post by quickplay on Nov 7, 2014 15:40:42 GMT -5
Will this increase applications? Let's hope not: I would think that burgeoning stoners make up a pretty small percentage of the Georgetown applicant pool. I guess someone could look at whether applications declined once DC raised its drinking age to 21, but my guess is that there's little to no relationship between drug laws and college applications when it comes to selective schools. It's not like it's that difficult to obtain alcohol, marijuana, or other drugs on college campuses, regardless of legality, so I doubt occasional smokers care whether marijuana is legally obtainable. Any person who really really really cares about weed probably doesn't belong at Georgetown and probably doesn't have the grades to get in anyway. I think this does a serious disservice to people working on legalization due to its disproportionate and intensely damaging effect on minority communities. It's fun to be all jokey and sanctimonious about it but there are certainly deeper and more legitimate issues that go beyond your caricature.
|
|
tashoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 12,320
|
Post by tashoya on Nov 7, 2014 21:11:35 GMT -5
Anyone who really, really, really cares about weed also doesn't worry about obtaining it. The "belonging" part and grades part is debatable but probably not worth the debate.
|
|
|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Nov 11, 2014 2:04:08 GMT -5
Let's hope not: I would think that burgeoning stoners make up a pretty small percentage of the Georgetown applicant pool. I guess someone could look at whether applications declined once DC raised its drinking age to 21, but my guess is that there's little to no relationship between drug laws and college applications when it comes to selective schools. It's not like it's that difficult to obtain alcohol, marijuana, or other drugs on college campuses, regardless of legality, so I doubt occasional smokers care whether marijuana is legally obtainable. Any person who really really really cares about weed probably doesn't belong at Georgetown and probably doesn't have the grades to get in anyway. I think this does a serious disservice to people working on legalization due to its disproportionate and intensely damaging effect on minority communities. It's fun to be all jokey and sanctimonious about it but there are certainly deeper and more legitimate issues that go beyond your caricature. I'm sorry if my off-the-cuff response to a brief question on an Internet message board, which you perceived as jokey and sanctimonious, offended anyone. As stated previously in this thread, I support legalizing and regulating marijuana. But regular and heavy use of marijuana is about as poor an idea as regular and heavy use of alcohol, tobacco, or hydrocodone, and this fact deserves to be acknowledged by proponents and opponents of legalization alike. www.nytimes.com/2014/11/02/education/edlife/this-is-your-brain-on-drugs-marijuana-adults-teens.html?_r=0I hope it's clear that I'm not asserting that most marijuana users use the drug in this way, just as most alcohol users aren't doing keg stands on a regular basis. On the other hand, marijuana culture and marijuana addiction are real things (just like alcohol culture and alcohol addiction are real things), and it's my opinion that anyone who gets swept up in those things is likely to experience social/work/school/family problems. I have absolutely no problem with the casual, private, and safe use of marijuana (or any other drug). Drug abuse and addiction, on the other hand, are serious medical problems which we should collectively seek to reduce. It is my opinion that legalizing the recreational use of marijuana and using tax revenues to fund drug education and treatment programs would put us closer to that goal than marijuana prohibition. If you'd like to reduce the discussion of marijuana legalization to the issue of ending criminal penalties which overwhelmingly affect minority communities, then we won't really be having a discussion at all. Statistics clearly indicate that most marijuana possession charges are filed against minorities, and almost everyone agrees that this is wrong regardless of his or her position on marijuana legalization. Do you believe, as your comment implies, that the Marijuana Policy Project pushed the ballot measures in Alaska, Oregon, and DC mainly to assist minority communities? Do you believe that the 52% of Alaska voters who voted for marijuana legalization did so exclusively due to racial disparities in marijuana arrests? Is turning out the youth vote important to MPP solely because young people are less likely to hold racial biases than their parents? Or is it that eighteen year old voters are more likely to hotbox their mom's SUV on the way to the polls? Is it possible that you are demanding that this issue be "deep" and nuanced when for many voters it isn't? Again, I'm very sorry for stating my apparently unpopular opinion that modeling one's life after a Jim Anchower column isn't a good idea, and that teenagers who do so aren't likely to be admitted to Georgetown. I guess it's not good enough to support a legal framework which allows people to purchase and smoke cannabis products; I have to hold the right opinions, too. Additional apologies to all those offended by my continued discussion of subject matter which isn't "legitimate" or "deep." I plan to go back to limiting my Hoyatalk posts to the shallows of the CFB thread.
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,746
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Nov 11, 2014 7:31:11 GMT -5
Again, I'm very sorry for stating my apparently unpopular opinion that modeling one's life after a Jim Anchower column isn't a good idea, and that teenagers who do so aren't likely to be admitted to Georgetown. I guess it's not good enough to support a legal framework which allows people to purchase and smoke cannabis products; I have to hold the right opinions, too. Additional apologies to all those offended by my continued discussion of subject matter which isn't "legitimate" or "deep." I plan to go back to limiting my Hoyatalk posts to the shallows of the CFB thread. I would encourage you to stay in the dialogue. I hold equally unpopular if altogether contrary opinions on the subject (namely, that the social penalties for drug usage should be escalated, not lessened, though not necessarily by jail) but good dialogue is better than no dialogue at all. Unfortunately, this board tends to assume an orthodoxy on certain issues that is difficult to overcome, including basketball.
|
|
hoyainspirit
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
When life puts that voodoo on me, music is my gris-gris.
Posts: 8,392
Member is Online
|
Post by hoyainspirit on Nov 11, 2014 8:13:03 GMT -5
I think this does a serious disservice to people working on legalization due to its disproportionate and intensely damaging effect on minority communities. It's fun to be all jokey and sanctimonious about it but there are certainly deeper and more legitimate issues that go beyond your caricature. I'm sorry if my off-the-cuff response to a brief question on an Internet message board, which you perceived as jokey and sanctimonious, offended anyone. As stated previously in this thread, I support legalizing and regulating marijuana. But regular and heavy use of marijuana is about as poor an idea as regular and heavy use of alcohol, tobacco, or hydrocodone, and this fact deserves to be acknowledged by proponents and opponents of legalization alike. www.nytimes.com/2014/11/02/education/edlife/this-is-your-brain-on-drugs-marijuana-adults-teens.html?_r=0I hope it's clear that I'm not asserting that most marijuana users use the drug in this way, just as most alcohol users aren't doing keg stands on a regular basis. On the other hand, marijuana culture and marijuana addiction are real things (just like alcohol culture and alcohol addiction are real things), and it's my opinion that anyone who gets swept up in those things is likely to experience social/work/school/family problems. I have absolutely no problem with the casual, private, and safe use of marijuana (or any other drug). Drug abuse and addiction, on the other hand, are serious medical problems which we should collectively seek to reduce. It is my opinion that legalizing the recreational use of marijuana and using tax revenues to fund drug education and treatment programs would put us closer to that goal than marijuana prohibition. If you'd like to reduce the discussion of marijuana legalization to the issue of ending criminal penalties which overwhelmingly affect minority communities, then we won't really be having a discussion at all. Statistics clearly indicate that most marijuana possession charges are filed against minorities, and almost everyone agrees that this is wrong regardless of his or her position on marijuana legalization. Do you believe, as your comment implies, that the Marijuana Policy Project pushed the ballot measures in Alaska, Oregon, and DC mainly to assist minority communities? Do you believe that the 52% of Alaska voters who voted for marijuana legalization did so exclusively due to racial disparities in marijuana arrests? Is turning out the youth vote important to MPP solely because young people are less likely to hold racial biases than their parents? Or is it that eighteen year old voters are more likely to hotbox their mom's SUV on the way to the polls? Is it possible that you are demanding that this issue be "deep" and nuanced when for many voters it isn't? Again, I'm very sorry for stating my apparently unpopular opinion that modeling one's life after a Jim Anchower column isn't a good idea, and that teenagers who do so aren't likely to be admitted to Georgetown. I guess it's not good enough to support a legal framework which allows people to purchase and smoke cannabis products; I have to hold the right opinions, too. Additional apologies to all those offended by my continued discussion of subject matter which isn't "legitimate" or "deep." I plan to go back to limiting my Hoyatalk posts to the shallows of the CFB thread. Nah, Austin. I agree with DFW. Stay in the discussion. I suspect there are others like me who value reading your perspective.
|
|
quickplay
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 733
|
Post by quickplay on Nov 11, 2014 9:03:04 GMT -5
"Additional apologies to all those offended by my continued discussion of subject matter which isn't "legitimate" or "deep." I plan to go back to limiting my Hoyatalk posts to the shallows of the CFB thread."
I didn't realize that criticizing your comment would result in such a tantrum. You made an off the cuff comment that I believed reduced a serious issue into a caricature. That caricature makes it more difficult to have a serious discussion (not just on these boards, but in general) about the subject. I'm sorry that is so personally offensive to you.
But you're right, if you want to bring up the many lives ruined by being sent to prison for this, or have had this used as leverage in other proceedings, I guess that is just "reducing the discussion" (for some reason) so it's not discussion at all. We should get back to your caricatures. One of the reason legalization has been such a slow process is because it's easy to derail the discussion.
"I guess it's not good enough to support a legal framework which allows people to purchase and smoke cannabis products; I have to hold the right opinions, too." That is quite the persecution complex you've got going on. I didn't realize that two sentences criticizing your attitude was the same thing as forcing you to have certain opinions.
|
|