Pauline: It wouldn't pose a moral paradox to me at all if a hypothetical family member of mine needs an illicit drug for medicinal purposes. Under the penal code, it is not a crime to import drugs such as opium for medicinal purpose. The line is only drawn when these drugs are abused for recreational purposes.
Benjamin: I admit, I do not know about the difference and since all of you are adamant that there is a world of a difference, I'd take you at your word and agree that marijuana is just a hyped up version of tobacco.
Still, I wonder why the tone of this board so far has been one of kindness towards drug abusers. I am wondering if all of you actually emphatically approve it. On the other hand, there is a blanket condemnation of something as innocuous as smoking cigarettes. It makes me wonder if there is some kind of hypocrisy involved here. _________________ Hillary Clinton is an acquired taste which I have clearly yet to acquire.
Location: San Francisco, Noord-Kalifornië, Noord-Amerika
Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 9:34 am Post subject:
Benjamin wrote:
If anything, I'd say that the effects of marijuana (which is arguably less addictive than tobacco anyway) are far closer to the effects of tobacco than to the effects of heroin. What do you think, Deborah? You know far more about this subject than me.
Sorry to disappoint you, but I've never smoked tobacco, so I can't compare its effects with those of smoking marijuana. And it's been a very long time since I've used the latter (34 years since I used it on any sort of regular basis and 22 years since the last isolated time I tried it). But I do recall that it felt quite different from drinking. For one thing, I didn't lose motor skills. When I had a lot of it, I lost the energy to do a lot of physical activity, but when I could motivate myself to stand up (say, to go to the kitchen for something to eat), I never experienced the lack of coordination that comes from drinking too much. I knew a few people in my dance company who'd take ballet classes when they were high, though I couldn't imagine how they managed that.
I just went on a search for enlightenment (on the internet ) on the subject of describing a marijuana high to someone who had never experienced it, and came across a couple of threads in some forum in which people did just that. The answer I found that most succinctly described how I felt when I smoked it is that it enhanced whatever I felt. For instance if I felt happy, being in company I liked and doing things that I liked to do, it just felt better if I was high. It makes food taste incredibly good, which is a good thing, since marijuana tends to stimulate your appetite. (The only time I ever really enjoyed popcorn was when I was high.) I remember going with my boyfriend to see Disney's Lady and the Tramp when we were high, and we were in ecstasies (occasionally vocally, to the amusement -- I hope -- of the people around us) every time some beautifully drawn background appeared on the screen.
The first sign of feeling high, as I recall, was one of euphoria and giddiness. Eventually the giddiness would mellow out (I always pictured it as spreading out) and I'd get very relaxed. (Hmm, it's all coming back to me...) I read someone's comment about feeling "connected" to things -- to the other people in the room, to nature, to the universe -- and remembered that I did often feel like that with the people I was smoking with. Ironically, these days, if I go to a party where people are smoking marijuana, they seem very detached to me.
Just as with alcohol, you can get a little high or very high. But I never heard of anyone who was very high on marijuana getting violent, as very drunk people often do. And I never had anything like a hangover from marijuana. I also never felt anything like a dependence, either physical or psychological, on marijuana. As time went by, the euphoric feeling decreased and would feel mainly the physical reactions -- relaxation and the munchies. Finally I stopped doing it, when I was 22.
I hope that gives you some idea of what marijuana is like, Benjamin. But of course that's only how it felt to me.
loic wrote:
Still, I wonder why the tone of this board so far has been one of kindness towards drug abusers. I am wondering if all of you actually emphatically approve it. On the other hand, there is a blanket condemnation of something as innocuous as smoking cigarettes. It makes me wonder if there is some kind of hypocrisy involved here.
Good questions. But I wonder just what you mean by drug abusers, as opposed to users, or whether you would even make that distinction. And would you make a distinction between alcohol or tobacco users and abusers? I don't approve of drug abuse, but my definition might be quite different from yours.
As for smoking marijuana compared to smoking cigarettes, ever since I stopped smoking the former, I haven't liked being around the smoke. In fact, I didn't even like it when I was smoking it, but I put up with it because I liked getting high. But the thing about people smoking marijuana is that people tend to share it. The last time I went to a party where people were smoking, it was in the kitchen and there was just one joint (as I still think of it -- what in the world do people say today?) being passed around. But no one passes around a cigarette, so there were several of those in that confined space and I had to leave. Secondhand marijuana smoke doesn't irritate my airways the way cigarette smoke does.
If anything, I'd say that the effects of marijuana (which is arguably less addictive than tobacco anyway) are far closer to the effects of tobacco than to the effects of heroin. What do you think, Deborah? You know far more about this subject than me.
Sorry to disappoint you, but I've never smoked tobacco, so I can't compare its effects with those of smoking marijuana.
Since I've smoked both cigarettes and marijuana, I have to say that it's Benjamin's statement is not valid. While smoking tobacco as a negative effect on the body in the long run, it has no immediate effects. The only side effects I ever felt with cigarettes was a slight and short feeling of dizziness when I smoked a cigarette after not having smoked for a long time. And I seriously doubt whether marijuana is less addictive than tobacco. You have to smoke tobacco for quite a period, and on a daily basis, before becoming addicted.
Quote:
But I never heard of anyone who was very high on marijuana getting violent, as very drunk people often do.
I have. In fact, I frequently read about this in our newspapers, and have written stories on such incidents myself. Many perpetrators of violent crimes here, especially rape, have admitted in court that they smoked marijuana before the time. But then of course they smoked a lot of it. People who smoke it at parties, usually don't smoke enough of it to get violent. In terms of this, alcohol certanly is more dangerous.
Hehe, I experienced similar "symptoms" as Deborah both times when I smoked dope. And I also became very loving... But I did feel out of control, more so than with alcohol, which I disliked.
The bottomline is, any substance is bad for you when abused, whether it's marijuana, alcohol, tobacco or heroin, and holds a health risk. It's only the degree which varies.
And I agree that there is a difference between people using a substance, and abusing it. The problem is that many people move from using it to [/abusing[/i] it. That goes for all drugs (including tobacco and alcohol).
All drugs should be strictly controlled, if it's not banned. In South Africa, it is already illegal to sell cigarettes to minors (16 and younger), and it will soon become illegal for stores to visibly display cigarettes. Very few places are left where smoking is allowed, and there is even talk of making it illegal to smoke in houses where minors live, to smoke in cars, etc. _________________ Toe ek jonk was, het ek al die antwoorde geken. Nou verstaan ek nie eens die vrae nie.
I hope that gives you some idea of what marijuana is like, Benjamin. But of course that's only how it felt to me.
Lol, you make it sound like a good idea! But thanks for the explanation!
André in Zuid-Afrika wrote:
Since I've smoked both cigarettes and marijuana, I have to say that it's Benjamin's statement is not valid. While smoking tobacco as a negative effect on the body in the long run, it has no immediate effects. The only side effects I ever felt with cigarettes was a slight and short feeling of dizziness when I smoked a cigarette after not having smoked for a long time. And I seriously doubt whether marijuana is less addictive than tobacco. You have to smoke tobacco for quite a period, and on a daily basis, before becoming addicted.
Fair enough. I was trying to find some way of explaining how I didn't think that marijuana ought to be lumped in with heroin, whilst tobacco and alcohol being considered much 'safer'. But that probably wasn't the most appropriate way to do it.
I drink sometimes and that's it :) Like Deborah I also almost never drink if someone else isn't drinking with me. Since I spend comparatively little time in my studio and plenty of time out and about that means the alcohol in my fridge just sits there till someone comes over and we decide to have a drink or two.
For me the concept of regulation, especially for non-hard drugs like tobacco and marijuana, is heavily tied in with the idea of the social contract and the "you have every right to swing your fist around till it hits my nose" basis upon which many/most laws are built. I'm not for prohibition but I am for tough secondhand smoke restrictions (this also means I'm not against legalization of marijuana as a substance but I would not favor it being allowed in smoke form in the places where smoking tobacco is also not allowed. However, special brownie cafes would be fine by me--no one consuming a pot brownie is forcing anyone else to participate in the action but themselves so that seems fair). By this point in the game with the evidence there is out there for the harm secondhand smoke causes any society which is serious about this significant public health issue is obligated to restrict where secondhand smoke may occur and I support further restrictions.
In the past few months the US has seen its first red states, Colorado and Arizona, pass comprehensive statewide workplace smoking bans (by "comprehensive" I mean all indoor workplaces including restaurants and even bars), which had thitherto only been seen in something like 13 coastal blue states such as California, Washington, and New York. This "move to the middle" means that such secondhand smoking restrictions are moving past their "crazy California health nut" origins and into an accepted public health norm. This is a very encouraging development.
And now that Arizona is civilized I can visit my relatives there without being unwillfully exposed to the indoor smoke everywhere!
It's funny that you posted this thread because I was going to start something similar myself. In America, it is not usually acceptable for teenagers to drink, let alone legal. Some parents allow their kids to drink in moderation while at home and under their watch, but most parents don't allow their kids to drink. My mom will occassionally let me drink one beer or one glass of wine, but that's only on special occassions. I was sort of a rebel for a few years, so I drank all the time before, although my mother never new of course. I think anything that tastes so foul as to make you grimmace should not be drunk, even if makes you look "cool" or "manly". I like beer a lot, especially an ice cold Pacifico! Um, yum, delicious. And I like some wine, particularly begginner's wine like Riesling. That's yummy too. But I've tried stuff like Jack Daniel's and it's just revolting.
And I've never tried any drugs, nor do I intend on ever trying any of them. My father was a hard core drug addict, and it made my life miserable, so I have vowed to never let that happen to myself. But I do love the smell of marijuana, I can't help it. Especially when the stoners at school smoke reefer in the bathrooms. It replaces the nasty smell of feces with the soothing smell of marijuana, lol. _________________ Operation Northwoods - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods
Favorite languages = English/Spanish
Followed by Italian/French/Dutch
It's funny that you posted this thread because I was going to start something similar myself. In America, it is not usually acceptable for teenagers to drink, let alone legal. Some parents allow their kids to drink in moderation while at home and under their watch, but most parents don't allow their kids to drink. My mom will occassionally let me drink one beer or one glass of wine, but that's only on special occassions. I was sort of a rebel for a few years, so I drank all the time before, although my mother never new of course. I think anything that tastes so foul as to make you grimmace should not be drunk, even if makes you look "cool" or "manly". I like beer a lot, especially an ice cold Pacifico! Um, yum, delicious. And I like some wine, particularly begginner's wine like Riesling. That's yummy too. But I've tried stuff like Jack Daniel's and it's just revolting.
When you get older you can try some Jack with a mixer like Coke and you might find it more palatable :)
It's funny that you posted this thread because I was going to start something similar myself. In America, it is not usually acceptable for teenagers to drink, let alone legal. Some parents allow their kids to drink in moderation while at home and under their watch, but most parents don't allow their kids to drink. My mom will occassionally let me drink one beer or one glass of wine, but that's only on special occassions. I was sort of a rebel for a few years, so I drank all the time before, although my mother never new of course. I think anything that tastes so foul as to make you grimmace should not be drunk, even if makes you look "cool" or "manly". I like beer a lot, especially an ice cold Pacifico! Um, yum, delicious. And I like some wine, particularly begginner's wine like Riesling. That's yummy too. But I've tried stuff like Jack Daniel's and it's just revolting.
When you get older you can try some Jack with a mixer like Coke and you might find it more palatable :)
It's funny that people like Loic from diverse countries don't think of tobacco in such a negative light as we do here. Here, nearly all Americans, even smokers, will freely admit that smoking tobacco is deadly. Apparently, that is not the case in other places. People are still mislead by tobacco company propoganda. _________________ Operation Northwoods - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods
Favorite languages = English/Spanish
Followed by Italian/French/Dutch
Deborah,
I'm very sad to read, that cigarettes ruined your father's life.
I think that from the beginning of 2007 it will be illegal smoking in a restaurant in Belgium, and in all places where there's food. On cigarette packs it's written that cigarettes kill, cause cancer and make your skin old. The letters are enormous : you can recognise a cigarette pack because you will see this warning from far away.
I think that from the beginning of 2007 it will be illegal smoking in a restaurant in Belgium, and in all places where there's food
That's a step in the right direction! That's good news for Belgium.
Porthos wrote:
It's funny that people like Loic from diverse countries don't think of tobacco in such a negative light as we do here. Here, nearly all Americans, even smokers, will freely admit that smoking tobacco is deadly. Apparently, that is not the case in other places. People are still mislead by tobacco company propoganda.
Well people here are definitely still subject to and misled by Big Tobacco propaganda. Just look at Prop 86, which enjoyed pretty wide support initially and was expected to pass but Big Tobacco spent an unprecedented amount of money on Anti-Prop 86 ads which billed it as something supposedly benefiting "hospital corporations" (for Big Tobacco to imply anyone else is bad by being a big bad "corporation" is literally sick). Big Tobacco claims to want to reduce teen smoking but everyone knows they still covertly target underage smokers, as that's when the great majority of smokers still start. Higher cigarette taxes are a proven method to help deter youth smoking, one of the best ways, no matter what the money actually goes to (in Prop 86's case it would've gone to antismoking programs, smoking cessation programs, as well as giving health insurance to all children in California who are currently uninsured. The latter is not directly related to tobacco but tobacco is such a drain on public health resources that's really a drop in the bucket of a gain back). What Big Tobacco did with Prop 86 was despicable and certainly manipulative.
Porthos wrote:
Kirk, since you live in San Fran, maybe you've heard of an Asian resteraunt called "Betle Nut"?
Ketamine as a "soft" drug? I had to read that with a smile -- ketamine is a dissociative drug, in the same class as PCP (angel dust). We used it to knock out animals. There's nothing "soft" about it! (PCP was also originally an animal tranquilizer.)
I think the distinction between hard and soft drugs is mainly in their addictiveness -- all of the opiates -- morphine, heroin, opium, etc. cause physical dependence and actual withdrawal symptoms. Cocaine causes less of them, but the crash after taking it causes intense psychological cravings. Marijuana, ecstasy, and other soft drugs do not have these side effects. People may use them habitually and look forward to them every day by choice, but they do not suffer any ill effects if they don't.
Just as the opiates have real medicinal value as painkillers, so too does marijuana. That's not a myth -- it has medical evidence to back it up.
Cigarettes do cause physical dependency, but not the behavioral changes that other drugs do. That's why we tolerate them as a society. But having dealt with many people in end-stage pulmonary disease wheezing out their last days, weak and in constant need of inhalers, nebulizers, breathing machines that they have to wear at night, oxygen tanks that they have to wear during the day, I have to say that it's fairly obvious that the long-term effects are not pretty at all. And these aren't even the ones who have lung cancer!
Location: San Francisco, Noord-Kalifornië, Noord-Amerika
Posted: Sat Dec 16, 2006 5:20 am Post subject:
Benjamin wrote:
Deborah wrote:
I hope that gives you some idea of what marijuana is like, Benjamin. But of course that's only how it felt to me.
Lol, you make it sound like a good idea! But thanks for the explanation!
It's interesting that you had that response, because I was trying to be very neutral about it.
I want to be clear that I'm not recommending that anyone (especially minors) try drugs; it's just that I don't think they should be criminalized, and I especially object to having marijuana equated with heroine.
Actually, I wouldn't recommend any drugs to anyone, and "drugs" includes alcohol, cigarettes and coffee. Yes, coffee. I finally finished a nightmare of a job at work -- it kept putting me to sleep, and I finally had to give in and have half a cup of coffee so I could finish it, because my mild tea just wasn't doing the trick. Wow, coffee is a real mood-altering drug, and it's the most addictive substance I've ever ingested.
These days, except for my reliance on tea and, on very rare occasions, coffee to keep me from getting fired at work, I just get high on the real thing: powerful gasoline, a clean windshield and a shoeshine!
I hope that gives you some idea of what marijuana is like, Benjamin. But of course that's only how it felt to me.
Lol, you make it sound like a good idea! But thanks for the explanation!
It's interesting that you had that response, because I was trying to be very neutral about it.
I want to be clear that I'm not recommending that anyone (especially minors) try drugs; it's just that I don't think they should be criminalized, and I especially object to having marijuana equated with heroine.
Actually, I wouldn't recommend any drugs to anyone, and "drugs" includes alcohol, cigarettes and coffee. Yes, coffee. I finally finished a nightmare of a job at work -- it kept putting me to sleep, and I finally had to give in and have half a cup of coffee so I could finish it, because my mild tea just wasn't doing the trick. Wow, coffee is a real mood-altering drug,
Except for those of us who seem to escape relatively unaltered from coffee ;). In fact, when I'm tired at work I instinctively go not for coffee (which I don't usually desire when I'm tired) but green tea, which has something like 2/5 the caffeine of coffee, I believe. But I think it's because the green tea we have in the office is relatively bitter--even more so than the coffee. I think the combination of the bitterness and the hotness helps stave off the tiredness for me.
Deborah wrote:
and it's the most addictive substance I've ever ingested.
Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2006 12:22 am Post subject: Re: Drugs and you.
Harrenys Targaryen wrote:
To what extent have they affected your life?
I haven't tried the "light" ones, e.g. marijuana, ecstasy, heavy-tipped markers, etc.
I've tried them all, except heroin and PCP, simply because of fear of getting addicted to them. I don't think they've affected my life at all, except every so often I have brain farts that can only be attributed to the brain cells I've killed along the way to euphoria.
Deborah: Yes, I ought to have made a distinction between a user and a abuser. But if marijuana is illegal in a country, then a consummer is automatically an abuser already in my eyes.
On the other hand, if marijuana is decriminalised and treated as a social drug, recreational users would then lawfully exist. The most important thing is to not break the law.
Porthos: Actually, Singapore has very strict anti-smoking laws. It is also illegal to light up in enclosed areas and even night spots have been hit by a blanket ban since the beginning of this year. I am just part of a vocal minority who refuse to be like sheep led by its nose. I am also the sort who never puts on his seat belt specifically because the government tells me to. _________________ Hillary Clinton is an acquired taste which I have clearly yet to acquire.
Cocaine, Heroine and other Hard-Drugs are physically addictive.
Marijuana, Weed, Hashish etc. are Psychologically addictive.
There's a major difference between physically and psychologically. Physically means your body needs the drug to get through the daily routine.
Psychologically means your brains "tell you" to smoke Weed or Marijuana, if you are mentally sound you should be able to "tell" your brains you don't want to smoke Weed or Marijuana.
Alcohol and Nicotine are both physically addictive as well, so they could be in the hard-drugs category.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Join! (free) 
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
) on the subject of describing a marijuana high to someone who had never experienced it, and came across a couple of threads in some forum in which people did just that. The answer I found that most succinctly described how I felt when 
But I did feel out of control, more so than with alcohol, which I disliked.
