Check it here. I never ever thought that marijuana was planted in such a large scale in the U.S. Always thought that most of it came from South America (not that it isn't the truth). Anyway, I find it mindblowing. How does people hide such plantations?
[ December 26, 2006, 10:00 AM: Message edited by: Eduardo_Sauron ]
Posted by Raia (Member # 4700) on :
Good grief. That's quite a story. :/
Posted by Tante Shvester (Member # 8202) on :
So by supporting that industry, you are really supporting small, local, family farms that manage to stay profitable without government subsidies?
Hmm.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Eduardo_Sauron: Check it here. I never ever thought that marijuana is planted in such a large scale in the U.S.
I remember reports about it being California's biggest cash crop back 20 years or more ago.
quote:Originally posted by Eduardo_Sauron: Always thought that most of it came from South America (not that it isn't the trugh). Anyway, I find it mindblowing.
Heh. No pun intended.
quote:Originally posted by Eduardo_Sauron: How does people hide such plantations?
<shrug> I'm guessing that a lot of people, who realize that hemp being illegal is one of the stupidest things we've ever done in this country, are basically complicit in saying nothing about what they know. I certainly wouldn't tell anyone if I knew something about it.
Also, it's probably the hardiest crop known to man. It's highly climate independent, and will grow well in every one of the fifty states, which isn't the case with other crops.
You realize that Congress was actually tricked into making it illegal, right? No one would have voted to make hemp illegal, so the folks who wanted to ban it started calling it marijuana, a term that most people were unfamiliar with.
Hempseed oil is probably the healthiest oil around, and clothes made out of hemp last longer than other fibers. Paper made from hemp doesn't get yellow with age the way wood pulp paper does, and using it would do a lot to help with the problem of deforestation and the pollution that's a result of processing wood pulp paper.
And you can make plastics out of it. Instead of wasting what petroleum we have left.
Wikilink Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
I remember reading a few years back that it's a billion dollar industry in Kentucky, and basically entire counties are aware of and okay with it.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
People often grow pot in the midwest within corn crops as the plants look similar early on from above. The marijuana matures faster then the corn and so it can be harvested quite a bit earlier then the corn.
Often times people will actually plant the stuff within the corn field of a farmer and the farmer is completely unaware. If you have ever been to the midwest and seen the size of some of those fields it is hardly surprising.
With alittle know how its possible to grow some in your own basement and enhance your income by selling it, most people are not stupid enough to use garages anymore.
Then again, in Utah it seems Meth labs are the latest thing.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
The difference is, Meth is dangerous, both to make and to use. Pot is neither.
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
Okay, I know why they made hemp illegal (tobacco and alcohol industries lied to congress a long time ago) but why is it still illegal? I don't understand.
Heck, we repealed proabition and less of the country was behind it than is now behind the legalization of hemp.
Posted by General Sax (Member # 9694) on :
It speaks well of the rising potency of the American crop that we do not need to import so much any more, however if it were legal the value of the crop would fall back into line with tobacco or any other legal drug crop so the number is more of an indication the skew created in making it illegal, if it were purchased by the bale it would soon be a very different story.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa: The difference is, Meth is dangerous, both to make and to use. Pot is neither.
Oh agreed on both counts. I was merely noting that in Utah meth is king whereas in the midwest its pot.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Stone_Wolf_: Okay, I know why they made hemp illegal (tobacco and alcohol industries lied to congress a long time ago) but why is it still illegal? I don't understand.
I once heard a talk from a DEA guy (I think it was), and he said something I'd never heard before, and have never heard since. But I wonder if there isn't a grain of truth in it.
He said that in a lot of other countries, pot is considered a Really Bad Thing. Countries that have no problem with opium. He said that if we were to legalize pot, they'd absolutely flood us with heroin.
The thing is, I'm not sure how they could do that without making the price plummet. But you're right -- there has to be some reason. Hemp is everything that soy was, and more, and without the downsides of soy. And there's already a private testing company set up that will certify hemp products as THC-free, or at least THC-very-low. So it's not as if the drug worry is all that serious or realistic.
But Schwartzenegger just vetoed a bill in California that was passed by both houses, which would have made it much easier to grow hemp for industrial purposes. It just seems like such a stupid thing for him to have done.
Posted by Phanto (Member # 5897) on :
Let me add that according to my sources, a book called Daily Life in the US during the 20s+30s (something like that) prohibition *did* reduce alcohol use by 60%!
(I just reminded myself of a certain character from the Magic School Bus book series )
Posted by Flaming Toad on a Stick (Member # 9302) on :
Bah. Pot makes more money when it's illegal. Best to keep it that way.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Phanto: Let me add that according to my sources, a book called Daily Life in the US during the 20s+30s (something like that) prohibition *did* reduce alcohol use by 60%!
(I just reminded myself of a certain character from the Magic School Bus book series )
You reminded me of her as well.
But just because it reduced alcohol use doesn't mean it was a good thing. It wasn't repealed because so many people were violating it; it was repealed and so many people were violating it because it was a dumb law.
Posted by Launchywiggin (Member # 9116) on :
ummm...Drugs are baad...mmmkay?
Posted by ricree101 (Member # 7749) on :
quote:Originally posted by Phanto: Let me add that according to my sources, a book called Daily Life in the US during the 20s+30s (something like that) prohibition *did* reduce alcohol use by 60%!
(I just reminded myself of a certain character from the Magic School Bus book series )
When you're banning something that's used by so many people, you'd really better reduce consumption by over 60%. If you don't, you've done nothing more than make criminals out of a bunch of people.
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
Isn't that exactly what happened with Marijuana?
I wonder by how much Marijuana consumption was reduced when it was made illegal. I'd be intersted to know the stats over the decades too, i.e.- what the percentage reduction was back then, and what percentage of the population uses today.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Launchywiggin: ummm...Drugs are baad...mmmkay?
Please tell me you're kidding.
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
I'm pretty sure it's a South Park reference Lisa.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
Ah. I've never seen South Park.
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
It became a pretty popular "pop culture" saying for a while.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa:
Hempseed oil is probably the healthiest oil around, and clothes made out of hemp last longer than other fibers. Paper made from hemp doesn't get yellow with age the way wood pulp paper does, and using it would do a lot to help with the problem of deforestation and the pollution that's a result of processing wood pulp paper.
And you can make plastics out of it. Instead of wasting what petroleum we have left.
I agree with you, but don't spout the propaganda of the pro-hemp if it isn't really accurate. The logging industry is not really responsible for significant deforestation- in fact the logging industry is what maintains many national and state parks and keeps them from the hands of developers and "environmentalists" who want to build cabins in the woods. I agree that the logging industry is artificially buoyed by anti-hemp legislation, but to go so far as to say that hemp would stop deforestation is stretching your powers of foresight a little. As long as clear-cutting is stopped, the logging industry does more to keep the forests safe than they get credit for.
Also hemp based fibres make very uncomfortable clothing, imho.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: I agree that the logging industry is artificially buoyed by anti-hemp legislation, but to go so far as to say that hemp would stop deforestation is stretching your powers of foresight a little.
I don't think I actually went so far as to say that it'd stop deforestation, did I? If I did, I didn't mean to. But the pollution required in the processing of wood pulp paper is a huge problem, and isn't required in the processing of hemp paper.
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: Also hemp based fibres make very uncomfortable clothing, imho.
Sure, as a lining. But for the outer part of clothing, they're incredibly durable.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
I believe that there is a legal hemp, and that the hemp clothing we know comes from that.
I will do a little research, but I am pretty sure I am right.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
"Industrial hemp is an incredible resource. Hemp is harvested for its fibers for hemp clothing and seeds for hemp oil. With a relatively short growth cycle of 100-120 days, it is an efficient and economical crop for farmers to grow, however, industrial hemp cannot be commercially grown in the United States because it is erroneously confounded with marijuana. In fact, industrial hemp and marijuana are different breeds of Cannabis sativa. Smoking large amounts of hemp flowers can produce a headache but not a high! " http://www.hemp.com/ Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
This site is a bit more objective. It seems that it is the same plant, b ut when grown closer together, produces less leaves(hemp), and when grown for oil or recreational use, it is grown farther apart. http://www.downbound.com/Hemp_s/39.htm
The thing to know is, marijuana(cannabis) is a weed. It is just born to grow, and to spread itself far and wide.
Frankly, I feel it is a fairly benign drug, but still a drug, and still illegal. No matter what you feel about what its status should be, the fact remains that it is illegal, and will get you in bog trouble.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
Or big trouble.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
*snort*
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
No, Riv, I think you smoke it, you don't snort it.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Elizabeth: Or big trouble.
You know you can edit your posts, right?
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
:inhales:
Actually though I usually sound off pro-marijuana and pro-hemp in general, you have to see past the propaganda on both sides of the issue and realize that marijuana can be a dangerous drug, particularly for people with depression or dependency issues.
I've had all kinds of experience with it, from friends who are perfectly fine smoking once in a while, who realize the danger and who don't kid themselves about when it is appropriate to use and when not, to friends who have ended up smoking it all the time (as in all day every day) and dealing it so they can afford the habit. It seems to me to be if not as dangerous as alcohol (you don't hear about college freshmen smoking themselves to death!) marijuana is at least differently dangerous and not to be underestimated in its power over some people.
That's what makes the issue so tough- marijuana continues to be grown and used by those who want it, but the culture surrounding is continually fueled by lies and wishful thinking about its effects on the mind, both about its positive qualities and its negative ones. On one hand it isn't going to make you homeless if you are a stable intelligent person who uses it in moderation, but on the other hand it just might if your the kind of person who should best not start fiddling with their brain chemistry.
I'll go ahead and admit I've smoked pot, more in my later high school and early college years, and my feelings have always been mixed. I sometimes liked it, but didn't like the idea of some of my friends doing it, or of encouraging anyone else to do it, which is how many potheads justify themselves doing it. I didn't like being a part of a subculture I didn't find tasteful (all the aliens and glow-in-the-dark bongs and dirty t-shirts etc), and finally I just didn't like doing it when I could be doing fulfilling things instead, even if it was only reading or schoolwork.
Posted by Nato (Member # 1448) on :
quote:Originally posted by Elizabeth: Frankly, I feel it is a fairly benign drug, but still a drug, and still illegal. No matter what you feel about what its status should be, the fact remains that it is illegal, and will get you in big trouble.
If you're a college student, you can lose your eligibility for federal student aid, but in many places it's been practically decriminalized. Here in Oregon, for example, possession of small amounts will merely get you a fine at the most.
Marijuana plantations that are hidden away on public lands do some significant damage to the environment and society, with fertilizer seeping into streams and the occasional armed guard. Government agencies spend tons of money each year trying to search out and eradicate these plantations. (Not to mention the millions spent on investigating and arresting people for simple possession of marijuana--786,545 arrests for marijuana in 2005, about 694,000 for possession. For reference, the total number of violent crime arrests that year was 603,503: figures from csdp.org/)
Posted by Katarain (Member # 6659) on :
Sure, the crop won't be as valuable if it's legal, but I foresee that the taxes from it would be substantial and the government would be saving a lot of money by not putting users in jail. I think the tobacco companies would start making marijuana cigarettes--they already have all of the right equipment! I think most people wouldn't bother to grow it themselves if they can buy it already rolled.
I'd certainly be okay with regulation. Teenagers don't need to be smoking it--as if they need anything else to decrease their motivation. But adults should be able to make the decision for themselves (perhaps even with the advice of a doctor), and it doesn't *always* decrease motivation. For some people, it increases their motivation and optimism, and without it they're stuck in a deep and angry depression.
But I'm not so sure that it will ever be made legal. There are just too many people who believe the lies the federal government has fed them about it. And there are too many people who are not content simply to not use it themselves, they want to make sure nobody else does either--even if it helps that person in major ways.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
I could see it being legalized by the time my generation (mid-20s) is in power in the federal government.
My generation seems to be uniquely distrusting of the status quo (in fact, if I could assign us a motto, it'd be "Prove it"), and even my most conservative friends (in a pretty conservative state, at that) recognize that marijuana is just not as dangerous as all other popular recreational drugs (cocaine, heroin, opium, and meth).
Posted by DarkKnight (Member # 7536) on :
If marijuana is legalized then in a few years people will be suing Big Marijuana just like Big Tobacco for all the harm it causes them and we will be flooded with stories how Big Marijuana hid the truth from everyone.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by El JT de Spang: I could see it being legalized by the time my generation (mid-20s) is in power in the federal government.
My generation seems to be uniquely distrusting of the status quo (in fact, if I could assign us a motto, it'd be "Prove it"), and even my most conservative friends (in a pretty conservative state, at that) recognize that marijuana is just not as dangerous as all other popular recreational drugs (cocaine, heroin, opium, and meth).
Is anyone else over the age of 30 laughing their rear ends off at this?
No offense, JT, but when your generation gets to be in their 30s and 40s (to say nothing of their 50s), they'll be just as jaded and conservative as the current crop. Maybe more.
The hippies were the generation before me, and they went corporate, too. Enjoy being young and idealistic. Very few of us stay that way.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
I'm well aware of what happened with previous generations, and I stand by my previous post.
I'll read the newspaper article to you old folks when it happens (in a very loud voice ).
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa:
quote:Originally posted by El JT de Spang: I could see it being legalized by the time my generation (mid-20s) is in power in the federal government.
My generation seems to be uniquely distrusting of the status quo (in fact, if I could assign us a motto, it'd be "Prove it"), and even my most conservative friends (in a pretty conservative state, at that) recognize that marijuana is just not as dangerous as all other popular recreational drugs (cocaine, heroin, opium, and meth).
Is anyone else over the age of 30 laughing their rear ends off at this?
Well, it was more of a polite snicker. But yeah, every generation claims this.
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
quote:Originally posted by El JT de Spang: I'm well aware of what happened with previous generations, and I stand by my previous post.
That's interesting, JT. I'm skeptical of the larger claim (though I wouldn't be surprised to see pot legalized in the next 20 years or so), but not so skeptical as to dismiss the assertion out of hand. What would you say that the difference is between people in their mid-20s now and, say, the hippies of the late 60s that will cause your generation not to accept the status quo as they get older?
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by El JT de Spang: I'm well aware of what happened with previous generations, and I stand by my previous post.
JT, in all sincerity, I hope you're right.
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
Why is it that young idealisum dies on the alter of status quo consumerisum you guys think?
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
It's not consumerism (edit: or not only consumerism, anyway). It's just that as you get older, you learn to choose the causes you're willing to spend your energy on. Also, with greater experience often comes a greater understanding of the other side of various questions.
[ December 27, 2006, 12:51 PM: Message edited by: Lisa ]
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
quote:Originally posted by Lisa:
quote:Originally posted by El JT de Spang: I'm well aware of what happened with previous generations, and I stand by my previous post.
JT, in all sincerity, I hope you're right.
I'll second that.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
I have become more idealistic and liberal as I have gotten older.
Posted by BlueWizard (Member # 9389) on :
It seems rather obvoious but I will point it out anyway. When we are talking about 'cash crops' we are really talking about 'cash'. Please note that corn, soybean, wheat, etc... do not net the farmer $500 per pound the way marajuana is likely to do.
There was a time when Pot was about $150 per Kilo for good stuff. But the US governement kill Mexican production, and the price went to $300 per Kilo for Columbian. Now Columbian has pretty much been cut off and the supply comes from more diverse and dangerous sources, consequently the more than likely $500 per pound.
Corn is like $3 per bushel, Pot is $500 per pound, at that rate it doesn't take many pounds to add up to huge amounts of money. So, it is not the size of the crop that makes in expensive, it is the value of the crop.
Also note that as Pot has gotten harder and harder to come by, and has gotten more and more expensive, cheaper but far more dangerous drugs have crept in to take it's place; drugs like Crack and Meth.
Personally, I suspect if Pot was reasonably available and reasonably priced, then Crack and Meth would quickly fade away.
I would never go so far as to say Pot was good for you. Certainly anything foreign that gets in your lungs is going to produce long term damage. Pot is also not great for maintaining plentiful and healthy brain cells. It is also not condusive to creating highly motivated people.
Yet of all the drugs out there, when used in moderation, I think it is one of the least dangerous and that includes alcohol.
As I side note; I will point out the Pot was never illegal until they decided to make alcohol legal again after Prohibition. The alcohol companies didn't want the competition from a drug they couldn't control and distribute, so part of the deal of making alcohol legal again included the rider that Pot would be illegal.
Just a few thoughts.
Steve/BlueWizard
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
quote:That's interesting, JT. I'm skeptical of the larger claim (though I wouldn't be surprised to see pot legalized in the next 20 years or so), but not so skeptical as to dismiss the assertion out of hand. What would you say that the difference is between people in their mid-20s now and, say, the hippies of the late 60s that will cause your generation not to accept the status quo as they get older?
It's just a gut feeling on my part (my gut being mostly made up of youthful idealism, of course ), but if I had to articulate it I'd say that the difference between my generation the hippies of the 60-70s is that they traded their idealism for realism when they realized being poor was only a fun way to go through your youth. No one wants to raise a family in a cardboard box just to stick it to the Man and make a statement against rampant consumerism.
I really don't see that level of glassy-eyed idealism in my generation (of course, I recognize that I could be too close to see it, but I'm usually pretty good at seeing the big picture) -- I think the mean falls pretty solidly in the 'realist' camp, maybe even leaning towards 'pessimist'. Which is why I used the example of conservatives; I'm talking young WASPy mo-fo's. It's no surprise that potheads want to see it legalized, but when I can get the majority of the blue-blazer club to admit it wouldn't be a bad thing if pot got legalized I think the truth is starting to be pretty well known.
Not to mention my generation doesn't particularly have to sell out as we get older in order to feed and clothe ourselves; we're already big time capitalists.
Of course, I was mostly joking with my response to Lisa -- I definitely wouldn't be surprised to see my generation get more conservative as we age.
It's my guess, though, that part of the move towards 'more conservative' will be accomplished by having the middle ground shift a little to the left, leaving a chunk of people on the opposite side of the fence without them having to move.
------
If you're skeptical of the larger claim, Noemon, what do you think will facilitate the change?
Posted by Altáriël of Dorthonion (Member # 6473) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: I have become more idealistic and liberal as I have gotten older.
ditto
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: I have become more idealistic and liberal as I have gotten older.
I have to agree. I am still pretty idealistic, but definitely a tempered idealism.
I think that my generation(I am 43) has made some changes which are based on who we "were," and I think the hippie generation, though many went corporate, did as well.
What many younger people don;t know about hippies is that a good number of them came from corporate America. It is a lot easier to follow The Dead around when you have a trust fund, believe me.
So, I tend to shudder when I hear youthful idealism scoffed at, with a "wait til you're my age" approach. I think that is sad and condescending.
And for all the talk of technology making people stupid, I think the current "younger generation" is one of the kindest large groups of people we have seen in a while. I think that, in general, they listen to what older people tell them, and think about it. Again, major generalizing here on all sides, but there you have it.
And yes, Lisa, I know I can edit.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote: I have become more idealistic and liberal as I have gotten older.
Whereas I have become more idealistic and conservative as I have gotten older.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
Ha ha. That hit my funny bone hard!
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:Ha ha. That hit my funny bone hard!
Um, why? I was being entirely serious.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
Ha, I thought you would ask why. It made me laugh because it is usually the opposite, so it hit the ironic/juxtaposition funny bone. And, it is really sweet, and hit that funny bone as well.
It was not a Laugh-at, by any means, I just thought it was sweet and cute.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
OK. Posted by GaalDornick (Member # 8880) on :
"Pot is $500 per pound"
$500 a pound?? That's like $30 an ounce...Can I buy from you?
It should be illegal to smoke weed and drive, like with alcohol, and be restricted to minors. But why should it be illegal to smoke it in your own house?
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
that's not how drug dealing(or business in general) works GD. Those are wholesale prices.
[ December 27, 2006, 09:32 PM: Message edited by: Strider ]
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Strider: that's not how drug dealing works GD. Those are wholesale prices.
I'm learning so much here at family friendly Hatrack.
Posted by Danzig (Member # 4704) on :
Crack and meth (and coke and heroin, for that matter) would not fade away were pot legalized. People use different drugs for different reasons, and speaking as a cocaine and opioid enthusiast, no one who likes the hard stuff will suddenly start smoking pot just because it was made legal. People who want to use pot as a substitution drug do it already. As far as experimentation, instead of underage kids smoking pot because dealers don't ID, you will have underage kids trying all sorts of drugs because dealers don't ID. Not that they don't already, but the problem would get worse.
The reasons to legalize cannabis are moral and economic. Legalisation of pot will not win the rest of the drug war for the prohibitionists.
Posted by SoaPiNuReYe (Member # 9144) on :
Pot is everywhere where I live.
Posted by GaalDornick (Member # 8880) on :
Man, so I've been getting ripped off all these years..
Now I'm curious to know how many of Hatrackers have tried some sort of recreational drug. Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
Never tried, or even seen drugs (other than on tv).
Smoked maybe half a tobacco cigarette when I was 16, and since then have never touched one.
Smoked a cigar when my brother's best friend got married a couple years ago.
And I can count on one hand the number of times I've been drunk.
Posted by GaalDornick (Member # 8880) on :
Was that because of a personal choice? Or just never hanging out with friends that would do it and never really getting exposed to it? Or both?
Posted by Avadaru (Member # 3026) on :
It's been said before, but my basic opinion is that marijuana should be legalized in a similar manner to alcohol. Having had plenty of experience with it, I just can't be made to believe that, used in moderation, marijuana is any more unsafe than alcohol. I know when I'm ok to drive after smoking just as I know when I've had too much to drink. Unfortunately a lot of people don't know their limits, but that goes for drugs, alcohol, whatever. I just don't see the point in making one substance (and I personally find marijuana to be far less dangerous than alcohol) legal under restriction while the other carries heavy penalty for using and/or possessing it.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
quote:Originally posted by GaalDornick: Was that because of a personal choice? Or just never hanging out with friends that would do it and never really getting exposed to it? Or both?
Combination of the two. Personal choice defined the kind of people I hung out with. It's not something I was ever interested in, or in being around at all, so I became friends with like minded people.
When some of my friends from high school started partying a lot, we drifted. And I don't hang out with anyone at work because they're high most of the time they aren't at work. I like all my brain cells right where they are.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
I always wanted to know what getting high was like, so I tried it in high school. Turned out I had a really big resistence to it, and it took an entire bongful and then sitting in a car with the windows closed as my friends smoked and we drove to see a movie (incidentally, "Scanners" and the "Exterminator" may be a cool double feature, but not when you're stoned).
The next day at school, I couldn't remember how to do a calc integral I'd learned the previous day. I decided then and there that getting high wasn't worth it. Geeky, I know, but I don't forget things like that.
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
quote:It should be illegal to smoke weed and drive, like with alcohol, and be restricted to minors.
I think you mean it should be restricted from minors; i.e. restricted to adults.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
Actually, the way he put it could be interesting.
Posted by Andrew W (Member # 4172) on :
quote:I always wanted to know what getting high was like, so I tried it in high school. Turned out I had a really big resistence to it, and it took an entire bongful and then sitting in a car with the windows closed as my friends smoked and we drove to see a movie (incidentally, "Scanners" and the "Exterminator" may be a cool double feature, but not when you're stoned).
The next day at school, I couldn't remember how to do a calc integral I'd learned the previous day. I decided then and there that getting high wasn't worth it. Geeky, I know, but I don't forget things like that.
As far as I'm aware the weed-specific effects on the memory are not so direct as that. It's more of a gradual change in the chemical makeup of the brain that can lead to a change in your short term memory. I'd probably compare your experience, if it was related to the weed at all, which of course would be very hard to - and even then you could be wrong, to that of any displacement. Such as getting very drunk the evening after learning something, or playing many hours of hard sports, or reading loads about politics or philosophy. It wasn't so much the drug itself, but merely the way that it was experienced.
AW
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
quote:Originally posted by Andrew W:
quote:I always wanted to know what getting high was like, so I tried it in high school. Turned out I had a really big resistence to it, and it took an entire bongful and then sitting in a car with the windows closed as my friends smoked and we drove to see a movie (incidentally, "Scanners" and the "Exterminator" may be a cool double feature, but not when you're stoned).
The next day at school, I couldn't remember how to do a calc integral I'd learned the previous day. I decided then and there that getting high wasn't worth it. Geeky, I know, but I don't forget things like that.
As far as I'm aware the weed-specific effects on the memory are not so direct as that. It's more of a gradual change in the chemical makeup of the brain that can lead to a change in your short term memory. I'd probably compare your experience, if it was related to the weed at all, which of course would be very hard to - and even then you could be wrong, to that of any displacement. Such as getting very drunk the evening after learning something, or playing many hours of hard sports, or reading loads about politics or philosophy. It wasn't so much the drug itself, but merely the way that it was experienced.
You could be right. I think I'll avoid the risk, though. For the record, I absolutely love the smell of pot. I used to love walking past rooms in my dorm where the smell was seeping under the door. But my memory and speed of thought is pretty much all I have.
Posted by BlueWizard (Member # 9389) on :
Thoughts on the legalization of Marajuana.
I don't really think that many people want Pot legalized becausee legalization means commercialization. I think what pro-Pot people want is for it to be decriminalized. That way it sort of stays in an underground person-to-person economy.
If Pot is made legal there are actually going to be many many many many more laws passed regulating and controlling it. Soon, big business will take over and begin adding fillers, enhancers, chemicals to make it burn uniformly and to make it keep burning even if no one is smoking it (assuming it was already lit of course). They will have to add or subtract raw THC to keep the potency uniform. Naturally the various governments are going to add their various 'sin' taxes to it. Import taxes will have to be paid. The Pot will have to be inspected for purity; to make sure it is free of bugs and other types of oganic contamination. Then it is going to have to be licensed; licenses to grow, to package, to transport, to distribute, to import, to export, to sell retail.
All in all, from beginning to end, the little guy gets screwed and the big corporations continue to make big profits.
Like I said, I think most pro-Pot people would comfortably settle for it being completely decriminalized. That way it could stay in the hands of the people.
Of course, commercialization does open the door to Pot, or in this case, more accurately, THC being available in other forms. For example, you could go to a bar and order either a glass of beer or a frothy frosty glass of fruity TCH enhanced beverage. Though it seems a ridiculous plan, they could even fortify beer with THC. Perhaps, you could order a beer and a THC brownie.
In a sense, that's what commericalization means commitees of business men sitting around thinking of new way to package and distribute THC. Thinking of new AD campains to make Pot/THC appealing to people. "Joe Camel says 'Drink Mary Jane; it's cool and all the girls will love you'".
Is that really the road we want to start down?
For what it's worth.
Steve/BlueWizard
Posted by Stone_Wolf_ (Member # 8299) on :
So our choices are between illigality and corperate whore bags?
*sigh*
I'm moving to a third world country.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
Too late.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
For the record, I'm pro-legalization and pro-government monopoly of marijuana, along the lines of how the LCBO is the only retailer in Ontario that can sell alcohol.
Private enterprise makes it, the government is the only legal consumer(wholesaler?), who then retails it (with a hefty markup) to the consumer.
The market will exist one way or another, and the little guy will be screwed by either the current state of affairs, big business, or the government. Might as well screw him in a way that makes money and lowers our taxes Posted by Eduardo_Sauron (Member # 5827) on :
quote: I'm moving to a third world country.
Care to elaborate, Stone_Wolf?
Posted by quidscribis (Member # 5124) on :
In this, and quite a few other third world countries, drug offenses carry the death penalty.
Just sayin'.
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
quote:Originally posted by Stone_Wolf_: So our choices are between illigality and corperate whore bags?
*sigh*
I'm moving to a third world country.
Try Malaysia, they hang you for smoking it there.
Posted by BlueWizard (Member # 9389) on :
Stone Wolf
quote:So our choices are between illigality and corperate whore bags?
No, it's between Illegal, Decriminialized, and corporate whore bags.
Mucus
quote:For the record, I'm pro-legalization and pro-government monopoly of marijuana, along the lines of how the LCBO is the only retailer in Ontario that can sell alcohol.
Private enterprise makes it, the government is the only legal consumer(wholesaler?), who then retails it (with a hefty markup) to the consumer.
One small problem with this approach, when you have a one source monopoly the quality is usually crap. Without competition, there is no need to compete, there is no need to have a quality product. You either buy crap from us, or you go without. Once again, that only spawns an illegal underground economy.
I'm not saying the Decriminalization method is without it's own problems, but I think it is the method most Pot smokers would prefer.
As to the commercialization of Hemp, I could see that happening. Hemp is a good crop with may potential products being produced. Hemp used to be a big cash crop, especially during the war when they needed the rope. But the anti-pot people put the kibosh on Hemp farming out of fear the the farmers might sneak in a few smoking grade plants.
For the record all you get from smoking Hemp is a headache. Hemp was at one time grown in Minnesota and Iowa (plus many other states), and you still see remnants of 'ditch' weed all over the place. Commercial Hemp plants can grow to the size of trees in a single season. I saw one growing along the fense line by the Mississippi River that was easily 16 feet tall. But again -- headache.
With farmers trapped mostly in endless cycles of soybean and corn, it would be nice to have this addition, easy to grow, easy to harvest crop available to them.
Just a few random thoughts.
Steve/BlueWizard
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
Hardly, in this system, the wholesaler can buy alcohol from any number of private competing sources. Thats why we can buy Canadian beer, German beer, American beer, anything we want. The quality is exactly the same since the end consumer can always choose *what* alcohol they want to buy, just not *where* to buy it. The only thing is the government controls distribution, thus a big markup. But I think for most people, given a choice between illegal underground and expensive distribution, the choice is clearly the latter. Hence, no underground economy.
I don't care what most pot smokers want, I want what works best for most people. At least this way, non-smokers get a cut of the profit Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
In other words, you're willing to restrict the freedom of others so long as you get a cut. Nice.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
Tell that to the LCBO.
Edit to add for non-Ontarians: cigarette taxes, casino taxes, any kind of sin tax.
The amusing thing is that the previous two governments, one left wing, one right wing have both tried to sell the LCBO (i.e. privatization) for a quick short term buck, but in the end backed down due to minimal public support.
[ December 29, 2006, 10:31 AM: Message edited by: Mucus ]
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
IN a lot of states they do this with alcohol. You can buy it from distributers, but the law forces them to control their prices so they are the same. Usally higher than the consumer can buy it for home consumption.
I know in MA that is how it is done, and it sucks.
Posted by Danzig (Member # 4704) on :
Given the methods of distribution used with marijuana today, I have to wonder how effective a government pot monopoly would be. Keep in mind that this is a plant that grows almost anywhere, and anyone can grow schwag weed for home consumption. It is not like alcohol where home production takes a decent amount of skill to get a drinkable product. (Although as another poster has speculated, you can substitute cannabis for hops to brew marijuana beer.)
Personally, I favor decriminalization now, but if the government would keep their filthy paws out of regulating it I would favor full legalization.
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
).
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)