This is ridiculous [Archive] - FreeWebspace.net

Ben

January 15th, 2008, 23:22

I don't know how many people have been following this, but I didn't realize the hearing was this soon.

http://www.cannabisculture.com/noextradition/

Extradition Hearing To Begin January 21
by Jodie Emery (21 Jan, 2008)

Three Canadians face extradition to, and life imprisonment in, the United States - but they've never been there!

Michelle Rainey, Marc Emery, and Greg Williams
Michelle Rainey, Marc Emery, and Greg Williams
The extradition hearing is scheduled to begin on January 21st - January 25th, 2008. Please phone (613) 957-4222 to tell the Canadian Minister of Justice it would be "cruel and unjust", an insult to Canada's sovereignty, to extradite Canadians Marc Emery, Michelle Rainey and Greg Williams to the United States to face life in US prison, especially when a $200 fine -- not jail time -- is the BC Supreme Court precedent for selling cannabis seeds (See R. v. Hunter, 2000). You can quote, "If Canadians have broken the law in Canada, they should be given a fair jury trial in Canada. If they wouldn't face any imprisonment in Canada for the charges laid, they should not be extradited to another country to face life imprisonment."

Marc Emery, Michelle Rainey, and Greg Williams are Canadian citizens who were heavily involved in anti-prohibition activitism for over ten years. The United States Justice Department and DEA want Canada's government to extradite these three political activists to face 10 years up to life in US prison! Canadians and Americans MUST do their part to help prevent the extradition from happening -- even a phone call makes a difference!

When will our government understand -- it's just a ----ing plant! These people were running a business, they aren't "typical drug dealers."

[edit]
I should also mention that Emery's signed a plea bargain to remain in a Canadian prison for 5 years.

bigperm

January 15th, 2008, 23:48

We should send them straight to guantanamo bay.

Criminals.

Invade Canada, they are destroying our youth.

Blank Verse

January 16th, 2008, 01:19

Marc Emery should go to jail, because he's a HUGE ----ING DOUCHEBAG.

Meksilon

January 16th, 2008, 03:15

When will our government understand -- it's just a ----ing plant! These people were running a business, they aren't "typical drug dealers."Looks to me like they're drug dealers, and I believe drug dealers deserve life in prison. When will people realize cannabis is not "just a plant"?

AMC

January 16th, 2008, 03:29

Wow guys, I think the point is that extradition and trial in the US in unfair , considering that they are canadian citizens. Whether they are criminals or not they should maintain the right to a trial in their country of citizenship. Would you feel any differently ?

This reminds me of a Case in the UK a while back, called the Natwest (I think I have the right bank) 3, I dont have time to explain it. But basicially they commitied a crime against an English Bank, (there was some minor ties to a corporation called Enron). The Bankl had even dropped charges, and the US still utilised a Bill intended for Terrorists to have them extradited to the US so they could face trial there.

Meksilon

January 16th, 2008, 07:34

It reminds me that the High Court has determined that Japan's current whaling is breaking Australian law. Personally I think if Japan wants to whale that's their business so long as its done in international waters.

AMC

January 16th, 2008, 07:39

I have to disagree, The reason I feel that that is a bad example, is because that is a conservation issue. WHich many should argue should transend Nationality, Drug dealing/growing on the other hand, is a criminal offence, And should be dealt with by the offenders country of residence, Unless the crime was committed on another's soil, when I feel they should be given the right to try the accused.

utcrazy

January 16th, 2008, 07:58

When will those Canadians learn.

Ben

January 16th, 2008, 09:58

Looks to me like they're drug dealers, and I believe drug dealers deserve life in prison. When will people realize cannabis is not "just a plant"?

http://www.webmd.com/mental-health/news/20030701/heavy-marijuana-use-doesnt-damage-brain

SOURCES: The Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, July 2003. Igor Grant, MD, professor of psychiatry, University of California, San Diego School of Medicine; director, UCSD Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research Center. Tod Mikuriya, MD, president, the California Cannabis Research Medical Group, Oakland; former director of non-classified marijuana research, the National Institute of Mental Health Center for Narcotics and Drug Abuse Studies. Lester Grinspoon, MD, professor emeritus of psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Boston; author, Marijuana: The Forbidden Medicine and Marihuana Reconsidered.

So tell me, Meksilon. Is ignorance as blissful as they say it is?

themoose

January 16th, 2008, 11:12

Looks to me like they're drug dealers, and I believe drug dealers deserve life in prison. When will people realize cannabis is not "just a plant"?

What about liquor store owners? They deal drugs, and I consider Alcohol to be a lot more dangerous that cannabis.

iBrightDev

January 16th, 2008, 11:16

if they never came here, and weed is legal in Canada, then there should be no reason to bring them to the US. that is just not right IMO.

Ben

January 16th, 2008, 11:20

What about liquor store owners? They deal drugs, and I consider Alcohol to be a lot more dangerous that cannabis.

Well, considering nobody has died from Cannabis. EVER. I'd say you're right.

themoose

January 16th, 2008, 11:23

Ben

January 16th, 2008, 11:30

We had one of those drug talk things at school from a police officer, and he actually said to us that weed was better for you than alcohol.

Now a lot of you will call him irresponsible but I admire him for being responsible and telling us teens the truth [it's not like we didn't know it already, it's just nice not being lied to].

Above the Influence commercials around here are abandoning the "CRACKAJUANA KILLS!" approach and starting to say things like "You won't die, you just won't do anything" implying that instead of hurting you, you will get addicted and have a perpetual supply of indica-dominant cannabis. To those that don't know, indica-dominant cannabis leaves you in a "couch locked" state with an intense body high, it's the kind that makes you just want to sit and watch TV for 2-3 hours. And you can get addicted to anything ...

themoose

January 16th, 2008, 11:45

Ben

January 16th, 2008, 11:58

Cannabis doesn't have anything in it that makes it addictive, it's just that people get used to it and that. Hell, even jaffacakes have a hotline on them if you get addicted (I'm not joking; it's called jaffaholics anonymous).

Like I said, people can get addicted to anything. Heavy users of cannabis often take week- or month-long breaks to get their tolerance back down. If they were truly addicted, they wouldn't last that long ...

Meksilon

January 16th, 2008, 19:12

http://www.webmd.com/mental-health/news/20030701/heavy-marijuana-use-doesnt-damage-brain

So tell me, Meksilon. Is ignorance as blissful as they say it is?
You can believe whatever you want. I happen to know people who have and/or do suffer from drug addiction. I also know /(and or) have known alcoholics too. Alcohol is not illegal, pot is. I stand by what I said - drug dealing is a reprehensible crime.

Also I don't appreciate being told I'm ignorant, I've read/studied drugs to an extent well beyond that required to have a completely balanced view. I've also found those who use drugs are far more likely to think they're okay - for instance I've run across many, many people who swear coke as their drug of choice - is it harmless? They also claim it is when used "responsibly". Personally, I think that's a bunch of ignorant BS - but ignorance is where you find it, right Ben?

Well, considering nobody has died from Cannabis. EVER.
There is not one single verifiable reported death due to the red-back spider's venom. It doesn't mean it isn't deadly.

We had one of those drug talk things at school from a police officer, and he actually said to us that weed was better for you than alcohol.

Now a lot of you will call him irresponsible but I admire him for being responsible and telling us teens the truth [it's not like we didn't know it already, it's just nice not being lied to].
There are other words I could use to describe him.

Cannabis doesn't have anything in it that makes it addictive, it's just that people get used to it and that.
Are you kidding? You actually believe that's true?

themoose

January 16th, 2008, 19:24

There is not one single verifiable reported death due to the red-back spider's venom. It doesn't mean it isn't deadly.

How many people have been bitten by it?

Are you kidding? You actually believe that's true?

Uh yes, it's a widely accepted scientific fact. Cannabis does not contain any addictive substance.

Johnson

January 16th, 2008, 19:25

There is not one single verifiable reported death due to the red-back spider's venom. It doesn't mean it isn't deadly.

True, but red-back spider venom isn't in every dorm in the country, being used by millions (?) of people either.

There are other words I could use to describe him.

Who needs facts when you have a slick comeback like that?

Are you kidding? You actually believe that's true?

Please refute then.

I wouldn't have jumped in this thread if Meksilon didn't post in it, his arguments always suck. And just for the record, I don't use drugs, but agree that some should be legal -- it works. Look at Amsterdam. They have a very low crime rate, a very high standard of living, and almost everything is legal there.

utcrazy

January 16th, 2008, 19:31

True, but red-back spider venom isn't in every dorm in the country, being used by millions (?) of people either.

Who needs facts when you have a slick comeback like that?

Please refute then.

I wouldn't have jumped in this thread if Meksilon didn't post in it, his arguments always suck. And just for the record, I don't use drugs, but agree that some should be legal -- it works. Look at Amsterdam. They have a very low crime rate, a very high standard of living, and almost everything is legal there.

Gotta love Amsterdam.

iBrightDev

January 16th, 2008, 19:44

i have decided not to like Meksilon due to his annoying manner and how he constantly tries to act like he knows everything and tries to belittle everyone. go learn some facts before you try to have an intelligent conversation on the FWS boards please.

Gayowulf

January 16th, 2008, 20:17

Canada is Tired of him and doesn't want to deal with him anymore. There are other places to buy seeds.

I think it's safe to say Marc Emery got the shaft. Owned, even. :lol:

Meksilon

January 16th, 2008, 23:04

How many people have been bitten by it?
Thousands, every year.

Uh yes, it's a widely accepted scientific fact. Cannabis does not contain any addictive substance.
Who have you talked to? The drug users I've talked to have all told me it is addictive. I've seen what it's done to people close to me (as well as others not so close to me). I don't have much sympathy for drug users, as far as I'm concerned it's a crime.

You claimed it's not as bad as alcohol, I'm still waiting for you to prove it. Tell me, how long does pot stay in your system? And what about alcohol?

^^methodcomptech, whatever. I'm sick of hearing the same BS over and over about drugs from people who think they know it all. Even my closest friends have been very disrespectful to me in the past. So I don't care - pot is illegal, dealing it is drug dealing, drug dealers deserve life in prison. That's my opinion, and I'm entitled to it.

iBrightDev

January 17th, 2008, 00:15

are your disrespectful friends the reason you look for reasons to act immature here. you know, you may have heard of a guy named iyeru that has gotten a lot of ---- from people here, but, seems to have possible changed his ways. are you just trying to take his place an be even more obnoxious? and yes, you are entitled to your opinion, but, do you need to and find any possible way to be rude and demeaning to others that have a different opinion that you? yeah, pot is illegal, and i wouldnt smoke it even if it was legal, still doesnt change the fact that the situation that was originally posted, in this thread, is messed up.

Ben

January 17th, 2008, 00:19

Thousands, every year.

Who have you talked to? The drug users I've talked to have all told me it is addictive. I've seen what it's done to people close to me (as well as others not so close to me). I don't have much sympathy for drug users, as far as I'm concerned it's a crime.

You claimed it's not as bad as alcohol, I'm still waiting for you to prove it. Tell me, how long does pot stay in your system? And what about alcohol?

^^methodcomptech, whatever. I'm sick of hearing the same BS over and over about drugs from people who think they know it all. Even my closest friends have been very disrespectful to me in the past. So I don't care - pot is illegal, dealing it is drug dealing, drug dealers deserve life in prison. That's my opinion, and I'm entitled to it.

I already posted the link to a university study proving that it's not dangerous. You even quoted the link.

And I'm a Cannabis user. I'm also in a university that holds very high standards of entrance. I have a job as well. But the mere fact that I am a consumer of cannabis makes me a criminal? And I know first hand it's not addictive physically like nicotine or alcohol - I regularly go extended periods of time with zero withdrawal symptoms.

Anyone whose life has been "ruined" by pot needs to be held accountable for their mistakes and inherent lack of self control and not push the blame onto a harmless drug. If they hadn't "ruined" their lives with cannabis overconsumption, they'd have found something else. Like gambling or alcoholism.

Oh, and in this case, your opinion is supporting the incarceration of thousands of people that don't deserve it.

In fact, why don't you do your own search on the LD50 of d9-THC and post the results, including sources, in here?

iBrightDev

January 17th, 2008, 00:24

Ben

January 17th, 2008, 00:27

now now Ben, those are all signs of a pot head. all i read there is blah blah blah, im a lazy pothead that does nothing but sit on the couch, smoke weed, and am a complete drain on the economy, blah blah blah. oh wait, one of my best frieds smoked weed every day, graduated HS a year early, has a genius IQ and is now getting a job as a rocket scientist, so, i guess my buddy is an addicted idiot, just like you Ben ;)

damn pot heads, you ruin everything. lol

btw, just in case some of you pot heads cant tell, im being sarcastic. we all know you arent smart enough to realize it, so, i had to spell it out. haha

I was doing this when I read the first few sentences: :eek2:

Then I realized you were kidding.

Also, at my school, all the alcoholics are in "lower" majors like Business Admin. The guys in Chemistry, Biology, and Engineering all have a constant supply of cannabis and LSD. Well, not everyone, and not exactly constant, but you get the picture.

iBrightDev

January 17th, 2008, 00:30

yeah, i would never smoke myself, but, i know some people that are really smart that smoke all the time.

bigperm

January 17th, 2008, 00:43

Ben

January 17th, 2008, 00:55

I had and uncle who died from lung cancer.

He smoked weed everyday, and never smoked a cigarette.

Weed is bad for you. Fun, but bad for you. I did it for a long time, and gave it up and do not regret it one bit.

IMO, every day is a bit over-doing it. I equate it to people who get drunk every day.

Everything in moderation. Twice a week at most is great.

However, if you must indulge every day, I'm not opposed to eating it.

Meksilon

January 17th, 2008, 01:21

I already posted the link to a university study proving that it's not dangerous. You even quoted the link.Proving what? There are no studies that conclusively prove anything to do with the long-term effects; only the short term. Lack of information doesn't prove something's harmless.

Oh, and in this case, your opinion is supporting the incarceration of thousands of people that don't deserve it.
That's your opinion - my opinion is that every drug dealer deserves life in prison. And the only reason general society doesn't feel pot is a bad drug is because of other drugs - if there were no opiates, no meth, no lsd - no other illicit drugs at all, you can bet societies' view of pot would be far more negative then it currently is.

iBrightDev

January 17th, 2008, 01:35

i normally wouldnt suggest anyone dong drugs, but, you should go smoke a joint and chill out a little.

Ben

January 17th, 2008, 01:39

Proving what? There are no studies that conclusively prove anything to do with the long-term effects; only the short term. Lack of information doesn't prove something's harmless.

That's your opinion - my opinion is that every drug dealer deserves life in prison. And the only reason general society doesn't feel pot is a bad drug is because of other drugs - if there were no opiates, no meth, no lsd - no other illicit drugs at all, you can bet societies' view of pot would be far more negative then it currently is.

Do you have an aversion to reading articles? Read the ----ing article.

No, wait. Here's the first three paragraphs. You don't even have to click the link.

July 1, 2003 -- Long-term and even daily marijuana use doesn't appear to cause permanent brain damage, adding to evidence that it can be a safe and effective treatment for a wide range of diseases, say researchers.

The researchers found only a "very small" impairment in memory and learning among long-term marijuana users. Otherwise, scores on thinking tests were similar to those who don't smoke marijuana, according to a new analysis of 15 previous studies.

In those studies, some 700 regular marijuana users were compared with 484 non-users on various aspects of brain function -- including reaction time, language and motor skills, reasoning ability, memory, and the ability to learn new information.

And here's the conclusions:

"I just re-published a paper of the first survey for marijuana toxicity done in 1863 by the British government in India that was the most exhaustive medical study of its time in regards to possible difficulties and toxicity of cannabis. And it reached the same conclusion as Grant," Mikuriya tells WebMD.

"This is merely confirming what was known over 100 years ago, as well as what was learned by various government findings doing similar research -- marijuana is not toxic, but it is a highly effective medicine."

In fact, marijuana was available as a medicinal treatment in the U.S. until the 1930s.

Lester Grinspoon, MD, a retired Harvard Medical School psychiatrist who studied medicinal marijuana use since the 1960s and wrote two books on the topic, says that while Grant's finding provides more evidence on its safety, "it's nothing that those of us who have been studying this haven't known for a very long time.

"Marijuana is a remarkably safe and non-toxic drug that can effectively treat about 30 different conditions," he tells WebMD. "I predict it will become the aspirin of the 21st century, as more people recognize this."

And LSD isn't exactly terrible, either.

I don't normally say this, but your opinion is absolutely absurd.

Meksilon

January 17th, 2008, 02:55

No, wait. Here's the first three paragraphs. You don't even have to click the link.
That's far too small a sample size for drawing any serious conclusions. I don't remember claiming pot led to brain damage, the only thing I'm aware of it causing long term is depression - and so little is actually known about depression anyway, I'm sure you could claim it's only a "contributing factor" and not a cause.

I don't normally say this, but your opinion is absolutely absurd.
Right. Go talk to scientologists who claim you shouldn't take ANY drugs (medicinal, legal or illegal), even if your doctor prescribed it, and THEN tell me my opinion is absurd.

Speaking of this, I have a friend who takes Effexor at the highest dose, under prescription from his G.P., and I have a huge problem with that. I happen to believe it is only effective or beneficial when taken for a fixed short-term period. Clearly I don't have the authority to tell him to get off it; because that would be contradicting his doctor who has prescribed for him the best course of action he could. Still, it disturbs me that someone he sees twice a year can make that decision (involving a field of medicine that is not his speciality), and I've pushed him to seek a 2nd opinion - namely to go to a physiologist (who has the authority to take him off the drug and put him onto something more suitable), regularly and seek that opinion. You want to know why Effexor doesn't work? It's logic - it acts as an emotional inhibitor - so while you can't feel really, really bad - you can't feel really, really good either. The effect to suppress negative emotions wears off over time, while Joy is inhibited all the more due to higher doses. It causes suicidal thoughts. It is very addictive. And I could go on.

But this discussion is not about medicinal drugs like that, it's about Pot. So while you are entitled to your opinion, I make no apologies for holding mine.

Dan

January 17th, 2008, 05:16

And I will make no apologies for holding my opinion either.

Effexor antidepressants are relatively new in the field of medicine. I was on them before.
Like all medicines, especially antidepressants, they have a different effect on everyone. They work for some and not for others. They didn't work for me.

Regarding your friends G.P. not having "The Authority" to put him on or off these medicines, you are far from right.

G.P.'s or General Practitioners are Authorised and trained in all areas of Medicine and have every authority to treat their patients the way they feel is necessary and sufficient for that particular patients needs.

Speak to any G.P. and they will tell you the same.

Regarding Pot, I also feel Hash and Weed should be legalised but only for medical purposes.

Meksilon

January 17th, 2008, 05:48

Regarding your friends G.P. not having "The Authority" to put him on or off these medicines, you are far from right.
I didn't say they don't have the authority, I said they should not have it. Very different. Prescribing powerful mind-altering drugs should IMHO require a psychiatrist (I believe I mentioned psychologist in the previous post - that was silly as they can't prescribe drugs - psychiatrists can).

By the way, I hold the opinion that any antidepressant - Effexor or not - cannot be used effectively long-term. This is because they suppress your ability to feel emotions strongly; and do not distinguish between good and bad emotions. I bet if you put someone who's very optimistic and happy all the time onto them they'd get pretty depressed pretty quickly.

Regarding Pot, I also feel Hash and Weed should be legalised but only for medical purposes.
I hold a similar opinion, with the exception that I do not have an opinion over what drugs should or shouldn't be used medicinally. For instance, I understand that morphine is used medicinally instead of cocaine or heroin. I also understand that while crystal meth is one of the very worst street drugs, methamphetamines can be prescribed by a GP.

Ben

January 17th, 2008, 10:37

I didn't say they don't have the authority, I said they should not have it. Very different. Prescribing powerful mind-altering drugs should IMHO require a psychiatrist (I believe I mentioned psychologist in the previous post - that was silly as they can't prescribe drugs - psychiatrists can).

By the way, I hold the opinion that any antidepressant - Effexor or not - cannot be used effectively long-term. This is because they suppress your ability to feel emotions strongly; and do not distinguish between good and bad emotions. I bet if you put someone who's very optimistic and happy all the time onto them they'd get pretty depressed pretty quickly.

I hold a similar opinion, with the exception that I do not have an opinion over what drugs should or shouldn't be used medicinally. For instance, I understand that morphine is used medicinally instead of cocaine or heroin. I also understand that while crystal meth is one of the very worst street drugs, methamphetamines can be prescribed by a GP.
I've heard of amphetamines being prescribed, but not methamphetamines. Adderall...

And you're right, you didn't outright claim that it causes brain damage, you just said it ruins lives and wasn't "just a plant". That implies some kind of physical damage and addiction. I have first-hand experience that cannabis doesn't cause depression. And to answer a question I missed before: the inactive metabolites of THC stay in your system for about 4 days, compared to about 24 hours for alcohol. The reason? THC is fat soluble while alcohol is water-soluble. Alcohol adds to this by being a diuretic.

themoose

January 17th, 2008, 12:20

I think this thread (namely Melkinson) has developed too far for me to butt in again, but I must say Melkinson's argument as "I'm not obsurd because scientologists are more obsurd" actually made me laugh out loud.

Melkinson, why are you trying to fight science? Don't you want to learn, or do you want to be a close minded person? I simply don't understand. You seem to be going out of your way to find irrelevant arguments in order to avoid the arguments that somebody but you wins.

Of course, all drugs are dangerous. In fact, everything is dangerous. It all comes down to moderation.

I would say smoking marijuana daily isn't very well moderated, and is dangerous. But smoking it weekly (eg at a party every friday) is absolutely fine and won't cause any harm.

Just like eating cake every hour is dangerous, as apposed to perhaps once a day.

P.S. You said that thousands had been bitten by that spider and nobody had died. Doesn't sound very dangerous to me.

iBrightDev

January 17th, 2008, 12:53

you shouldn't use a cell phone, it will cause brain cancer. YAY!

Ben

January 17th, 2008, 13:02

you shouldn't use a cell phone, it will cause brain cancer. YAY!

This brings up a good point.

Why should the government have any business what I do with my body? Even if a study comes out saying cannabis is actually dangerous and proves it in a peer-reviewed setting, then I'll still smoke. Why? Because I enjoy it.

iBrightDev

January 17th, 2008, 13:08

just like old buildings have asbestos, and it is such a huge deal to get rid of it cause it is harmful, but yet, you find it in most car brakes, and no one makes a big deal about that. so, it is bad to breath asbestos, but, if i go outside, what do you think we are constantly breathing.

so, lets put aside the fact that the USA is one of the only countries that has weed as being illegal, and focus on if it is harmful or not. hmmm, not really, besides killing brain cells, and maybe cause weak lungs or lung cancer eventually, possibly.

you think alcohol is so much better? it destroys your liver, and kills brain cells, messes with coordination, and is addicting. so, i would never smoke weed, but, alcohol is worse IMO.

Keagle

January 17th, 2008, 13:53

Y'know, I'm going to have a long debate next time our drug guy comes in. Thanks for the balanced(ish) debate guys. :)

No, I'm not contributing anything. I don't have anything to contribute, I don't care about other people doing drugs, but I don't have any need to do them myself. I guess I'm one of those happy and optimistic people eh?

Meksilon

January 17th, 2008, 18:16

Melkinson, why are you trying to fight science? Don't you want to learn, or do you want to be a close minded person? I simply don't understand. You seem to be going out of your way to find irrelevant arguments in order to avoid the arguments that somebody but you wins.
That's because you have a concept that there's a winner and a loser in an argument, I hold no such concept. As for science - it depends on where and how it is used in the argument - in relation to pot the long-term effects of it have not been sufficiently studied by anyone, anywhere in the world. That doesn't mean I can't argue that from my life experience pot causes depression.

I would say smoking marijuana daily isn't very well moderated, and is dangerous. But smoking it weekly (eg at a party every friday) is absolutely fine and won't cause any harm.
Everyone thinks they're an expert. Anyway, you've proven that pot is worse then alcohol - because alcohol can be consumed every day (in moderation), without being dangerous in any way, and positively not negatively influencing your health.

P.S. You said that thousands had been bitten by that spider and nobody had died. Doesn't sound very dangerous to me.
As I said, its venom is deadly and can kill a human. And you spell my name Meksilon.
so, lets put aside the fact that the USA is one of the only countries that has weed as being illegal, and focus on if it is harmful or not.
Only illegal in the USA? It is illegal all over the world - many countries do not prosecute it to the same extent as Ice or Coke, but that's only because they prioritize other drugs more highly. If you took them away then they'd soon prioritize cracking down on pot.

Ben

January 17th, 2008, 18:25

I love it when you ignore me, bby.

Everyone thinks they're an expert. Anyway, you've proven that pot is worse then alcohol - because alcohol can be consumed every day (in moderation), without being dangerous in any way, and positively not negatively influencing your health.You can consume cannabis without smoking it, effectively removing any risk of lung damage associated with smoking.

That's because you have a concept that there's a winner and a loser in an argument, I hold no such concept. As for science - it depends on where and how it is used in the argument - in relation to pot the long-term effects of it have not been sufficiently studied by anyone, anywhere in the world. That doesn't mean I can't argue that from my life experience pot causes depression.
Unfortunately, because of its legal status in the United States it is very difficult to do any sort of research on cannabis. Until these constraints are relaxed, the study I linked to is all you're getting. And it's sufficient enough for me.

Only illegal in the USA? It is illegal all over the world - many countries do not prosecute it to the same extent as Ice or Coke, but that's only because they prioritize other drugs more highly. If you took them away then they'd soon prioritize cracking down on pot.
A recent Supreme Court precedent allows small amounts of cannabis for personal use in Alaska. It may have been overturned, but AFAIK it hasn't. Feel free to prove me wrong. In several governing districts in the US it has also been moved to the lowest level of enforcement.

[edit2]

No significant physical, biochemical, or mental abnormalities could be attributed solely to their marihuana smoking. Some abnormality of pulmonary function was demonstrated in many of the subjects which could not be correlated-with quantity, frequency or duration of smoking marihuana and/or tobacco cigarettes. (One other investigation recently completed uncovered no abnormalities in lung or heart functioning of a group of non-cigarette smoking heavy marihuana users). Many of the subjects were in fair to poor physical condition, as judged by exercise tolerance.

The performance of one-fifth of the subjects on a battery of tests sensitive to brain function was poorer on at least one, index than would have been predicted on the basis of their IQ scores and education. But a definite relationship between the poor test scores and prior marihuana or hallucinogen use could not be proven.

In the Jamaican study, no significant physical or mental abnormalities could be attributed to marihuana use, according to an evaluation of medical history, complete physical examination, chest x-ray, electrocardiogram, blood cell and chemistry tests, lung, liver or kidney function tests, selected hormone evaluation, brain waves, psychiatric evaluation, and psychological testing. There was no evidence to indicate that the drug as commonly used was responsible for producing birth defects in offspring of users. This aspect is also being studied further.

Heavy smoking, no matter if the substance was tobacco or ganja, was shown to contribute to pulmonary functions lower than those found among persons who smoked neither substance. All the ganja smokers studied also smoked tobacco. In Jamaica, ganja is always smoked in a mixture with tobacco; and many of the subjects were heavy cigarette smokers, as well.

In a study of a Greek hashish-using population preliminary findings revealed poor dentition, enlarged livers, and chronic bronchitis. Further study is required to clarify the relationship of these to hashish use, alcohol or tobacco use, or general life style of this user population.

Similarly, the Jamaican and Greek subjects did not evidence any deterioration of mental or social functioning which could be attributed solely to heavy very long-term cannabis use.

These individuals appear to have used the drug without noticeable behavioral or mental deviation from their lower socioeconomic group norms, as detected by observation in their communities and by extensive sociological interviews, psychological tests and psychiatric examination.

Overall life style was not different from non-users in their lower socioeconomic community. They were alert and realistic, with average intelligence based on their education. Most functioned normally in their communities with stable families, homes, jobs, and friends. These individuals seem to have survived heavy long-term cannabis use without major physical or behavioral defects.

I'm tired of posting excerpts. Here's the whole study: http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/studies/nc/ncmenu.htm

themoose

January 17th, 2008, 18:26

I guess you're right about the daily thing.

edit: Reading Ben's post, I'm not sure what'd happen if you ate cannabis every day, but it does at least sound a lot less harmful than smoking it :p

And if that venom can supposedly kill a human but never has, seriously, doesn't sound dangerous to me. Heck, if it had any positive affects I'd make it bite me.

Status in the UK is currently Class C, and you'd only really get arrested for dealing it (although possession is still illegal).

Richard

January 17th, 2008, 18:59

"America - World Police"

F*ck yeah.

Decker

January 17th, 2008, 19:10

Status in the UK is currently Class C, and you'd only really get arrested for dealing it (although possession is still illegal).

Yep true, but has this deteriorated into a my drug is better or worse than your drug (and what is it with the spider!!).

Basically I can smoke in certain areas only (yep been doing it for 30 years when it had royal approval - wonder how much compensation they will pay out, or the gevernments that paid for everything from health to wars from the tax on it) and that's fair, I'm putting up with it (it's now a forced UK law in Scotland first, way before they dared in England, refer to UK government and lab mice for everything wrong with that) even in my own private life I only smoke outside at home as my wife doesn't smoke - and have done way before the 2nd hand arguement.

So, I have a habit I find hard to quit (nigh on impossible at times without committing a crime of at least destruction of property, as it creates rage during the process, in some, bear in mind the addictive qualities in comparison to illegal class A drugs - look it up - 20 times more), to kick it, but would love to. The people that should have been working to save us from this situation failed for so many years it's just silly that their follow on's just condemn it and say we're wrong.

So there we go - one vented spleen.

Things with medicinal use - GOOD, things recreational that cause harm - BAD

Things we enjoy but for political leen we suffer for - WRONG (that we suffer)

As it's usually the affordable stuff the rich bums can afford the better legal version of, we have a beer they have a lovely warmed 43 year old Armagnac rescued from what ever, a runaway dog or something.

If, however, a recreational drug of any kind be it gas-fluid-solid is a possible that could turn nasty - meaning your health or others, including both legal and illegal - it's not on unless there is a system that - DING! (read below)

It's impossible to police all and every, your all meant to be mature enough.

I think we all know here that cracking a litre of vodka and downing it is bad - but if done on one go you would not make it out to harm someone else. Your dead, barring throwing up and if 'younger' explaining to your parents why there is a bottle but more sick than you can fit in it.

So I'm going to leave you all to it now.
I have done my bit for rebellion while growing up and getting all through many years, just ask I might have done it, save you the time.

All questions won't require a disclaimer as I did all this too long ago to get arrested, some areas may be missing if you ask.

Specific years - $25
Down to 6 months in a year PI fees and a shed load of beer

Dean

January 18th, 2008, 00:21

http://www.domain.com.au/Public/PropertyDetails.aspx?adid=2006920516

stuffradio

January 18th, 2008, 00:27

You should buy it Dean :D

Meksilon

January 18th, 2008, 03:15

You can consume cannabis without smoking it, effectively removing any risk of lung damage associated with smoking.I didn't argue on the basis of lung damage. You can sniff Coke - effectively removing any risk of vein damage...

Unfortunately, because of its legal status in the United States it is very difficult to do any sort of research on cannabis. Until these constraints are relaxed, the study I linked to is all you're getting. And it's sufficient enough for me.
Firstly, the USA is not the foremost authority on medicine - it's one of them, yes, but Australia is as well, as are many other countries I'm sure. You may be happy with that evidence - I wouldn't be. If a doctor prescribed me a drug and said to me "we do not know the long term effects" - I'd ask to take an alternative.

This reminds me of an argument I've had with friends - from time to time - when they've brought up 2nd-hand smoke. I say "there's no evidence it kills" - they disagree. Show me a study, I keep asking - but there aren't any - the largest such study was one financed by the tobacco industry, but of course people "well you can't trust that". If memory serves me correctly, those who did the study took a sample of people and then asked questions about who was or wasn't exposed to 2nd-hand smoke growing up, and who was/wasn't married to a smoker - etc, and at the conclusion of the survey found that there was no distinguishable difference in the risk of cancer between those around 2nd hand smoke, and those not around it. Yet even in the light of that very strong scientific evidence most people refuse to believe it.

Asbestos was brought up earlier - and in case you don't know who he is, Bernie Banton died recently after a long battle with asbestos related diseases, and a long battle against James Hardie. One of the things he said publicly was that a single asbestos fibre can kill because no one in the world knows a safe level of the substance. Now, if I was so inclined I could use that logic against cannabis - and say that no one can give you a healthy dose, and guarantee you won't suffer long-term side effects.

However, I don't agree with that P.O.V. - but it is one that exists, and so is worth mentioning. I don't have to prove anything to anyone here - as I've already said I have studied this and reached my conclusions. I study a lot of things, because as soon as someone makes a claim they believe - and an opposing point of view can potentially exists I want to find out more.

For instance, I'm currently making a very anti-DRM (digital rights management) website. Things like Region Coding I see as bad for the consumer, and a violation of the consumer's rights. On the other hand, a good friend of mine has just this week said the following (this is a direct quote from an email):

Now, as to all that garbage about region coding, it’s crap. The designers are just protecting what’s rightfully theirs and you know it. The premise of what the website will be about is unchristian and you should know better.

It’s STEALING.

So now I've been studying the other POV. It is very hard to reconcile because I still don't, and cannot accept that a publisher has the right to dictate what their customer can do with the product in a way of restricting the product geographically. If this was the case, every book seller in Australia - including Christian ones - would be doing something that breeches the "designer's" rights - because retail can import books from another country without permission from the copyright holders. Their copyright is still valid - so they can't import copyright-infringing works.

Okay, back on topic - the most basic conclusion I have drawn with drugs (and I use this term to represent ALL drugs) is the following:

1. All drugs are bad when abused.
2. Therefore you should never take medicine you don't need.
3. As such you should consult your doctor prior to taking any drug for the first time.
4. You should always avoid drugs where the side-effects are not controlled/known.

Yes that'll do.

In several governing districts in the US it has also been moved to the lowest level of enforcement.
That's because in the USA you have a big drug problem, and the resources are better spent fighting Crystal Meth and Opiates.

Pot is an anti-social drug. When I've been around a bunch of pot-head peers it is anti-social - they just want to watch TV and much down food (or sleep); whereas if I go down to the pub it is very social. People want to talk or shoot pool, or play cards - whatever, it is much more social. This is my point of view - when I have been around stoned peers, I just have to look at them to know I do not want to be like that.

Decker

January 18th, 2008, 04:50

I didn't argue on the basis of lung damage. You can sniff Coke - effectively removing any risk of vein damage...

I have to repeat, and no wonder your absence on forums has been many and several, you talk the biggest pile.

Get out more, see the world, get attacked by a drug crazed or just a hacked off person (same effect).

You give that land down under a bad name (by constantly dwelling on it), maybe the genetic reason has followed through with you from the worst of them, thankfully not with others.

Yes I don't like your thinking, my perogative, you just talk so much (muffled for the sake of younger folks)....

Meksilon

January 18th, 2008, 05:29

The people that should have been working to save us from this situation failed for so many years it's just silly that their follow on's just condemn it and say we're wrong.
For someone who insults me, you really do post way off topic Decker.

I think we all know here that cracking a litre of vodka and downing it is bad - but if done on one go you would not make it out to harm someone else. Your dead, barring throwing up and if 'younger' explaining to your parents why there is a bottle but more sick than you can fit in it.
Downing a litre of vodka won't kill you. It wouldn't be pretty, but you wouldn't kill yourself. Unless you do it repeatedly and don't give your body a chance to repair the damage.

So I'm going to leave you all to it now.
Then you come back just to flame?

Post something on-topic if you have something to discuss.

Decker

January 18th, 2008, 06:31

At last a response to my go away you annoying git posts.

And read what you post and hopefully someday they will loosen the ties on the back of the jacket.

Downing a litre of vodka won't kill you. Depends - you love quoting stuff you don't understand, quote timescales and adsobsion rates, with body mass,etc.

Reply to above post only which is off topic :) Oh and just a flame response with no real reason.

krakjoe

January 18th, 2008, 06:35

I don't know how many people have been following this, but I didn't realize the hearing was this soon.

http://www.cannabisculture.com/noextradition/

When will our government understand -- it's just a ----ing plant! These people were running a business, they aren't "typical drug dealers."

[edit]
I should also mention that Emery's signed a plea bargain to remain in a Canadian prison for 5 years.

To be totally fair Ben, cocaine is also "just a ----ing plant", heroin is a product of Opium, again a plant .... I got nothing else to say ...

Meksilon

January 18th, 2008, 07:05

+ rep kJ

krakjoe

January 18th, 2008, 08:05

Ben

January 18th, 2008, 10:19

It would seem to me this guy is a total son of a -----, while he shouldn't be extradited to a country where he faces death for his crimes, he is definately a criminal by his own admission, as such he needs to be punished, with prison.... you're getting so caught up in his civil rights being violated that you're actually ignoring the fact that he is a criminal.

@Colin, mary jane is still very much illegal in this country, it was reclassified as a class C narchotic, however NO LAWS WERE CHANGED. Punishment for possesion of cannabis in this country can be 2 years in prison, and 14 for dealing .... while normally the police will caution you and confiscate the drug - NOTHING has changed for your pot head on the street, you're caught more than once and you face two years in jail, of which you'll serve at least a year .... just to clarify ...In Canada, the country where the crimes were committed, he would just be faced with a fine. Compare with the United States' (and apparently the UK's) archaic recreational drug laws. And yeah, I agree the "just a plant" deal is a little weak - like you said, diacetylmorphine is a derivative of morphine, found in the "Opium Poppy".

As for Meksilon, as far as I'm concerned you've thrown in the towel. You've shown me nothing that I have asked for, which includes studies debunking what I have been saying. Recent, unbiased studies - preferably done by a university. All you've done is replied with your own opinion. I'm done with you; have fun in your sheltered little world.

themoose

January 18th, 2008, 12:08

iBrightDev

January 18th, 2008, 12:25

that is the way i see it, but, thats my opinion.

TRUNKS

January 22nd, 2008, 02:56

This reminds me of a study done last year...
Alcohol is ranked much more harmful than the Class A drug ecstasy in a controversial new classification system proposed by a team of leading scientists.
The table, published today in The Lancet medical journal, was drawn up by a team of highly respected experts led by Professor David Nutt, from the University of Bristol, and Professor Colin Blakemore, chief executive of the Medical Research Council.
The authors proposes that drugs should be classified by the amount of harm that they do, rather than the sharp A, B, and C divisions in the UK Misuse of Drugs Act.
“The most striking observation is that there is no statistical correlation between this ranking of harm of drugs and the ABC classification.”
In the new system legal drugs, such as alcohol and nicotine, are ranked alongside illegal drugs.
The new ranking places alcohol and tobacco in the upper half of the league table. These socially accepted drugs were judged more harmful than cannabis, and substantially more dangerous than the Class A drugs LSD, 4-methylthioamphetamine and ecstasy.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/connected/main.jhtml?xml=/connected/2007/03/23/nalcohol123.xml

LeX

January 22nd, 2008, 03:21

This brings up a good point.

Why should the government have any business what I do with my body? Even if a study comes out saying cannabis is actually dangerous and proves it in a peer-reviewed setting, then I'll still smoke. Why? Because I enjoy it.

Sometime along my path of education, they told me that the (utopian) purpose of a government is to protect and bring forth greater well being for the general public, which is why they're empowered to do certain things, like put restrictions on stuff they deem harmful for the public.

For instance, here it's illegal to commit suicide. I mean, what the ----? A guy who decides he doesn't want to live anymore tries to kill himself, and that's a crime? If he doesn't succeed (lives), he faces charges.
It's kind of hard to explain, but basically the reason it's illegal is because the government's supposed to protect your life no matter what. I think they said it had something to do with the superior value of life or something like that.

Anyway, just thought I'd comment on that.

Kwek

January 22nd, 2008, 09:21

Sometime along my path of education, they told me that the (utopian) purpose of a government is to protect and bring forth greater well being for the general public, which is why they're empowered to do certain things, like put restrictions on stuff they deem harmful for the public.

For instance, here it's illegal to commit suicide. I mean, what the ----? A guy who decides he doesn't want to live anymore tries to kill himself, and that's a crime? If he doesn't succeed (lives), he faces charges.
It's kind of hard to explain, but basically the reason it's illegal is because the government's supposed to protect your life no matter what. I think they said it had something to do with the superior value of life or something like that.

Anyway, just thought I'd comment on that.
I find the law on committing suicide stupid. I mean, seriously, it is my life. I have absolute control over it and I don't think you have any right to control what I do with my life. It is not as though I am killing someone else or what.

To be honest, sometimes, certain laws are just too ridiculous.