Clarification/Follow-up by excon on 05/24/06 4:59 pm:

Hello again:

Sure. There are downsides. Certainly, ingesting smoke, no matter what its makeup, can't be good for your lungs.

However, the serious health risks to the user are few, as the study shows. He faces a much stiffer LEGAL risk, for no apparent reason, in anyone's mind. Nonetheless, the pot carnage continues. US marijuana arrests by year follows:

2004 - 771,608
2003 - 755,187
2002 - 697,082
2001 - 723,627
2000 - 734,498
1999 - 704,812
1998 - 682,885
1997 - 695,200
1996 - 641,642
1995 - 588,963
1994 - 499,122
1993 - 380,689

People like the Wolverine think that nobody is being busted these days for pot. Just like they believe we’re winning in Iraq. Yeah, right. However, I digress....

Most of our social endeavors are not without risk. But, as long as they don't kill you, they certainly ought to be legal.

In terms of "why" we engage in social behavior in the first place, I suggest that we do it because we "like" it. It's "good" to us. If it's good "to" you, it's good "for" you. That may be a bit hedonistic for you church going men, but it’s my title, and I'm sticking to it.

Plus, the study made an oblique hint (that I believe wholeheartedly), that POT is the CURE for cancer. Wouldn’t that be a hoot?

excon

Clarification/Follow-up by excon on 05/24/06 5:21 pm:

Hello again, Elliot:

>>>- increased risk of heart attack,

- Loss of short-term memory

- Impairment of attention, judgment, and other cognitive functions

- Impairment of coordination and balance

- Loss of short-term memory<<<


Hmm. Just who is it, that’s suffering from short term memory loss? And, if such an upright dude like you has that problem, what can be so terribly wrong with it?

Uhhhhh, what was the question??

excon

Clarification/Follow-up by ETWolverine on 05/24/06 6:04 pm:
Oh... good, you noticed. But I listed short-term memory loss 4 TIMES!!! You only noticed two of them. What does that say about smoking pot? I was afraid your short-term memory was going and you wouldn't be able to remember what you read just a couple of lines earlier... and it turns out I was right.

And the short-term memory loss must really be hard on you, because you keep forgetting things, like what I have posted in the past about winning in Iraq. You seem to have also forgotten the internal al Qaeda memorandum that shows that al Qaeda themselves see that they are losing the war. You've forgotten the two elections and one constitutional vote that have taken place in Iraq, all with larger voter turnout rates than we have had here in the USA in decades. You seem to have forgotten the 140,000+ Iraqi troops that have been trained and are stating to do the job they were trained for. You seem to have forgotten that over 60% of Iraqis want us to stay in Iraq for the long haul, until they can manage their own security matters, which would hardly be the case if we were "losing" there.

In other words, the facts are in and we ARE winning in Iraq. I know its hard to remember those facts, but do try to keep them in mind.

Not that it matters... pot screws up your cognitive abilities as well, so you probably think we're losing despite the facts from the ground in Iraq.

Elliot

Clarification/Follow-up by tomder55 on 05/24/06 6:05 pm:
Plus, the study made an oblique hint (that I believe wholeheartedly), that POT is the CURE for cancer. Wouldn’t that be a hoot?

that vey well may be the case .The FDA recently approved advanced clinical trials for a marijuana-derived drug called Sativex.Prior to that it approved Marinol.I have never opposed it for medicinal reasons . If it is administered in a controlled bio-available dose then it will not likely have increased tar and other carcinogens being introduced into the body .

If there is a part of your argument I agree with is a matter of degrees . It is unclear about the so called 'gateway 'effect. For a testimonial I can state that the use of marijuana did not push me to use harder drugs even though by using it I was introduced into the drug culture and the opportunity was readily there .It was habit forming but certainly not addictive. Even if there is evidence that pot leads to involvement in hard drugs this doesn't by reason justify adopting a strict policy . But it would be irresponible to make it legal .

Clarification/Follow-up by excon on 05/24/06 6:25 pm:

Hello again tom:

I knew you were a loadie, tom....


You too, Wolverine:

Four times?? Really?? K, Dude. You got me. Actually I didn't forget. At the risk of being insensitive, I really didn't read it. I've read that crap too many times before to devote time to reading it again. But, I did catch two of your tricks as I glanced. That ain't too bad for loadie.

Besides, if this is how dis-cognitive I am loaded, I'd really kick your ass if were to stop.

excon

Clarification/Follow-up by ETWolverine on 05/24/06 7:23 pm:
In your dreams reefer-boy.

Clarification/Follow-up by ETWolverine on 05/24/06 7:57 pm:
Excon,

>>>People like the Wolverine think that nobody is being busted these days for pot.<<<

I never said that they weren't being busted for pot. I'm just arguing that enforcing the law is a good thing. If you want to be able to smoke pot, work to get the law changed. But don't break the law and tell me how it's the government's fault that you got busted. If you place your bet, you can expect to lose at least some of the time.

Elliot

Clarification/Follow-up by excon on 05/24/06 8:18 pm:

Hello again, Elliot:

The one thing you've never heard me do, is snivel. If you know somebody who snivels about getting busted go yell at them, but I don't and never have. You have never heard me blame anyone for anything. A blame game is pointless.

You may get tired of it, but THIS is what I do to end the pot carnage. I don't blame. I argue, use facts, logic, common sense and compassion for my fellow man. This war is SO wrong, it doesn't take a genius to argue against it.

I don't blame the cops for doing their job. I blame the lawmakers for NOT doing their job. But I take responsibility for my own decisions.

excon

PS> By the way, Marc Emery is no sniveler either.

Clarification/Follow-up by Fritzella on 05/24/06 9:09 pm:
Ex, a regular Einstein, I have no doubt. :)

Clarification/Follow-up by ETWolverine on 05/24/06 9:25 pm:
Excon, you certainly don't snivel on your own behalf, that is true. But you do complain on behalf of others who have been busted. You consider your position to be one of the advocate for busted pot smokers. My argument is that it is fine to be an advocate for legalizing pot, but don't be an advocate for those who were busted breaking the law as it exists today. And Marc Emery isn't a sniveler: I haven't heard him complain one whit...

And if you want to legalize pot, the solution is actually petty simple: give huge amounts of money as campaign donations to a lot of politicians and get a bunch of others to do the same. That's the REAL way to get your voice heard in Congress. Logic and philosophy don't mean a damn thing. You need money to make change happen.

Clarification/Follow-up by excon on 05/24/06 9:41 pm:

Hello again, Elliot:

Sorry, Dude. I ain't got no money. So, this is what you get.

excon