High Times Ahead: Marijuana Use in the NFL
by smileyman on Mar 26, 2010 10:00 AM PDT
in San Francisco 49ers News
Email
Print
It was 1995. Warren Sapp was the nation's top defensive prospect and a surefire top 5 pick. Then, on March 13, just 40 days before the draft, reports were leaked to the press that he tested positive for marijuana. Suddenly concerns about his character were being asked. Bill Polian (then with Carolina) said that when rating players he didn't see any difference between marijuana use and cocaine use and that either of those problems could cause a player to slip an entire round on his draft board or possibly not get drafted at all.
Sapp would end up going 12th overall to the Bucs, but the difference in money between the 12th pick and top 5 pick is enormous.
Flash forward 15 years. It's 2009 and teams are looking at players to draft when word comes that WR Percy Harvin and DeSean Jackson have both tested positive for marijuana at the combine. Harvins' status wasn't affect at all, and the big concern about Jackson wasn't any marijuana use, but his size and whether or not he could handle playing in the NFL.
Times haven't changed any. One NFL coach interviewed by Sports Illustrated says that a full third of his draft board had either admitted to marijuana use, or tested guilty. What does this mean for players and teams, and what can be done about this (and should anything be done about it?). Join me after the jump.
There have been many high profile athletes (and a couple of US presidents) who have admitted to smoking marijuana. The most well-known NFL player is Ricky Williams who was caught by the league multiple times and in 2004 retired early, in part because he didn't want the hassle of dealing with the league while smoking marijuana and either using masking agents or facing fines and suspensions. He's now being tested three times a week by the league. His kids are on a first name basis with the league officials who administer the thrice weekly tests.
He's not the only high profile athlete to admit to marijuana use. Michael Phelps was caught at a party in November of 2008 smoking a bong and a huge uproar was created--but in a rather remarkable turn of events he received no sanctions from the governing body of swimming and his sponsors have stuck with him, one calling it a "non-issue" and a "personal matter", and another referring to him as a valuable member of the team.
Randy Moss has admitted to using marijuana. Lomas Brown (18 season vet, 7 time Pro Bowler) says that at least 50% of the players in the NFL use marijuana. Some studies suggest that the figure is much lower at 20%, but that's still a sizeable chunk of players who are using.
Back to the draft.
Sports Illustrated recently did a story where they interviewed several NFL executives, ranging from general managers to head coaches.SI.com interviewed four NFL head coaches, four general managers and two other high-level club personnel executives for this story. Due to the sensitivity of the topic, all requested anonymity in order to speak candidly about the issue.
All of them describe marijuana use as much more prevalent than ever before with athletes being much more open about it. Out of possible first round picks in this year's draft as many as 11 have tested positive to marijuana during college (and there may be some that have tested positive at the combine that we haven't heard about).
"Marijuana use is almost epidemic, with more guys having tested positive for marijuana at some point in their college background than I can ever remember,'' said a longtime team personnel man. "It's almost as if we are having to figure out a new way to evaluate it as part of the character and background report, because it's so prevalent. There're enough instances of it that it's hard to know how to set your board. You can't throw out that many guys. You have to go case-by-case and do your homework on them.''
In this era of decriminalization and legalization it's no surprise that marijuana use among athletes has risen. There are currently 14 states that allow marijuana for medicinal use. (California lead the way in 1996).
1. Alaska
Passed 1998
2. California
Passed 1996
3. Colorado
Passed 2000
4. Hawaii
Passed 2000
5. Maine
Passed 1999
6. Michigan
Passed 2008
7. Montana
Passed 2004
8. Nevada
2000
9 New Jersey
Passed 2010
10. New Mexico
Passed 2007
11. Oregon
Passed 1998
12. Rhode Island
Passed 2006
13. Vermont
Passed 2004
14. Washington
Passed 1998
Rhode Island and Hawaii just passed legislation this year that has decriminalized marijuana (essentially reducing it to the status of a traffic fine). There are 12 other states that have also decriminalized marijuana.
California is leading the way again on the marijuana issue with a ballot measure that will appear on the November ballot to completely legalize marijuana. Richard Lee, the campaign's organizer said this about the campaign.
"We're one step closer to ending cannabis prohibition and the unjust laws that lock people up for cannabis while alcohol is not only sold openly but advertised on television to kids every day,"
So what does this mean for the NFL? I suspect it's drug policy won't change as it still tests for substances that are legal. As more and more players use marijuana will penalties and fines lessen or go away all together? Who knows?
Personally I feel that alcohol is much more unsafe than is marijuana use and that marijuana has many medicinal properties, especially for relief of pain. I think that last point is one that bears emphasizing since NFL teams have no problem shoving pain killers down athletes throats to keep them playing on Sundays when a puff from a joint might work just as well and have fewer side effects.
This is an issue that I'm very interested in since my wife has multiple sclerosis and many of her issues could be relieved by smoking marijuana.
There are several interesting questions that go along with the debate. I can't really put them in a poll, so I'll ask them here and you can answer them in your replies.
1.) Should marijuana be legalized across the country? Should it be a federal initiative or state-by-state?
2.) If it shouldn't be legalized should an exception be made for medicinal marijuana?
3.) If it's not legalized completely should it be decriminalized?
4.) Assuming that marijuana is legal or decriminalized in an athlete's state, should he/she be allowed to smoke marijuana for relief of pain symptoms should they choose to do so, instead of taking narcotics?
5.) Should the NFL stop placing heavy fines and punishments on players who test positive?
6.) If you live in California do you plan on voting for or against the proposed ballot measure?
Here are some very interesting articles that I suggest everyone read.
From Sports Illustrated--Marijuana use 'epidemic' in draft class.
From SI's Vault--Up in the Air (about Warren Sapp before the 1995 draft)
From the NYTimes--Ricky Williams is Hoping to Heal Others, and His Image
434 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Legalization
Given how awful the California budget situation is, I would think legalizing marijuana and taxing it would help a little bit. Maybe it won’t make up the whole shortfall, but it can’t hurt, financially.
There was an article yesterday that I loved about how marijuana growers up in Humboldt County are up in arms over this because it would hurt them economically. Drug-dealers in general can’t like this (well unless they also some of the harder stuff).
Yeah
I’d imagine that illegal growers are pretty upset since this will definitely cut into their profits.
As a side note my dad grew up in Humboldt county and my brother was born there.
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
What
Did your dad grow up in Humboldt?
by mr. instigator on Mar 26, 2010 10:34 AM PDT up reply actions
Legalize
But hell, i dont care, i got my Club Card, and access to some of the most potent weed known to man=)
It's just a plant, it grows in the earth, and if you happen to set it on fire there are some effects...
Yea i'm up here in oregon and they just opened up there first marijuana-shop
and i’m hearing there about 2 open up 2 because of over-crowding lol
It also cuts deeply into the profits
of the Mexican drug cartels :)
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life son."
by bakoninerfan on Mar 26, 2010 12:35 PM PDT up reply actions
Now matter how we feel the pros & the cons some say maker it legal others say no
it gave me a chance and others to open up a part of are lives that we probably wouldn’t have or maybe i wouldn’t have and thats always a good thing i look forward 2 getting on here and see what fooch or drew,ninjames, smileyman and others have written about .Yea ive had my rough days on here and drew and fooch can atest 2 that but over-all feel like there good people i hope the feel the same about me.So shots go out to NN family or la familia 4 my spanish friends.Hands down THE BEST niner blog on the net.
Well, if you ask me, the likelihood of marijuana getting the crap taxed out of it is one of the only ways it comes close to legalization. It’s not going to get legalized on any other basis. Help the economy – help the potheads.
I don’t know. My feelings about marijuana are generally not very strong.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Mar 26, 2010 10:36 AM PDT up reply actions
Slap a sin tax on it
like on tobacco and alcohol (only higher). Does a couple of things—it brings in lots of extra revenue via taxes. Boosts the economy as the grower and retail market expands.
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
I don't get it.
If the only reason to legalize pot is for taxing purposes, wouldn’t people just keep buying illegal stuff of the streets like they do now to avoid a huge tax? Also wouldn’t legal drug use just be another excuse for citizens to sue the state government for “getting them addicted” and ruining their lives or dabble in crime and getting arrested? Also wouldn’t said addicted citizens expect some sort of government backed rehab program to get them off pot. There are just too many problems for me to legalize drug use.
I survived the David Carr Press Conference Thread 3/06/2010
Credit to iaalexeeff
Also surviving member of the underwhelming Jed York Conference Thread 3/22/2010
Eat Shitake!
by Hoopers Judge on Mar 26, 2010 6:50 PM PDT up reply actions
Dude this is weed Not Crack !! If someone is Hooked like youre saying They have a Addictive Gene
In them or a addictive personality ive been smoking weed on/off 4 30yrs and ive never come across somebody thats addicted like your saying ,yea ive come across weed-heads but Gone 2 the depts that your talking about then they would have 2 be a addict before weed.All this suing the goverment thats not a addict thats a lazy (bleep) who don’t want 2 get off there (bleep) and get a job!!!
I don't get the addiction argument
There are also tobacco-addicts and alcohol-addicts.
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
by SportsChicken on Mar 26, 2010 9:10 PM PDT up reply actions
No
Lots of people who might smoke if it were legal don’t smoke because it’s not (my wife is one of ’em). Legalization will bring costs way down—compare an ounce of marijuana in California to the cost of an ounce of marijuana in British Columbia.
People like the convenience of having everything ready for them. How many people do you see who still smoke pipes or roll their own cigarettes or brew their own beer?
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
It makes sense that growers are going to become concerned..
but a lot of people i know are going to start growing in preparation for the new law
could be a bad idea
I imagine growers are going to be pretty strictly regulated. It would still be illegal to buy off the streets.
Sharlon Schoop - de favoriete Nederlandse honkbalspeler van McCovey Chronicles.
You always have to be one step ahead of your drunk friends
--Daisy Owl
or, really
to sell off the streets
Sharlon Schoop - de favoriete Nederlandse honkbalspeler van McCovey Chronicles.
You always have to be one step ahead of your drunk friends
--Daisy Owl
.
Growing is legal for me. When you get your cannabis card, you have the option of getting your growers permit too.
by forty9ers3298 on Mar 26, 2010 11:07 AM PDT up reply actions
Yea but its a (bleep) to find growers and if you don't have a house or property your at the mercy of someone else
and theres shady people i just want 2 find a dude whos honest and aint looking to (bleep) over me because in the end its buisiness and i just want a peron to be honorble like i am.
I imagine that if you wanted to grow your own you could
similar to brewing your own beer.
Most won’t and would rather just walk into the shop and order a pack.
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
.
unless you want to make money instead of spending it. Then you grow to smoke instead of buy it for rediculous prices at the cannabis clubs
by forty9ers3298 on Mar 26, 2010 11:09 AM PDT up reply actions
Can you imagine if CA did legalize Marijuana?
they would have to package it for selling legaly in stores like cigarettes
The price would actually go up fo the packaging, and taxes
Ca would go totally out of debt but who would care as everyone would be legally stoned out of their ever lovin minds.
Police would have to put out a new public service commerical like the one they have for drinking and driving.. now it will be for Toking and driving… go to jail.
"Whether you think you can, or you think you can't, either way, YOU'RE RIGHT !"
Do you know up here in oregon that you can have a ounce of weed and as long as its not in individual baggies
its still a mistemenor theres so much harder drugs (meth,crack,cocaine) that weed shouldn’t be a major priority .
Sorry dude
The bill dictates for a $50 an ounce tax. Weed wouldn’t have to be packaged like cigs… it would be sold more like shag tobacco though you could buy prepackaged. And it will PLUMMET in price as demand won’t go up much cause everybody who smokes doesn’t care if its illegal anyway.
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Mar 26, 2010 2:53 PM PDT up reply actions
The price of marijuana is high because
of the risk of imprisonment involved in producing, transporting, and selling it. Once those risks are removed the price will drop considerably even with taxes and packaging costs.
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life son."
by bakoninerfan on Mar 26, 2010 3:01 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah
People can also grow tomatoes in their back yard, but most don’t.
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life son."
by bakoninerfan on Mar 26, 2010 12:31 PM PDT up reply actions
I do...
I have tomatoes, oranges, lemons, limes, chilies, and avocadoes.
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
by SportsChicken on Mar 26, 2010 9:13 PM PDT up reply actions
Exactly Smileyman
People don’t even grow their own cooking herbs and those are cake. People would be much happier to let the Phillip Morris marijuana production team preroll joints into 20 packs for them.
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Mar 26, 2010 2:51 PM PDT up reply actions
The initiative allows anyone
to cultivate a 25 square foot plot for their own personal use. Regulation and taxation of marijuana sales will be up to the individual counties.
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life son."
by bakoninerfan on Mar 26, 2010 12:33 PM PDT up reply actions
Growing weed
Is not like growing tomatos. You better have taken some good horticulture classes and need a good setup if you wanna grow good tree.
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Mar 26, 2010 2:49 PM PDT up reply actions
In the 70s grow lights were great.. in my closet
"Whether you think you can, or you think you can't, either way, YOU'RE RIGHT !"
I disagree
But I won’t go in further detail
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
by SportsChicken on Mar 26, 2010 9:13 PM PDT up reply actions
Finally fooch ya'll have wrote a article that i'm a specialist in lol ( i have me marijuana card )
but i’m not one of those dudes who really don’t need it i got shot ten years ago and i’m paralyzed from the waist down, but i’m good .And by saying that i really don’t think smoking weed is a major problem in sports and people would be surprised the percentage of people that do smoke in sports me personally i think its more weed smoking in the NBA than in the NFL i don’t have any numbers or written proof 2 back that up but thats just my guess .If i were a coach i wouldn’t want any of my players smoking weed espicially my lineman off/def because there heavy as it is and smoking weed brings on the munchies and you could probably have them balooning up ,plus you got 2 know your plays and weed would slow your reaction 2 your plays up thats why i feel more NBA players smoke more because there play-books are smaller 2 learn so theres not that much information 2 remember but over-all weed is not a big deal 2 me but people can abuse it we look at cocaine and meth even liquor 2 a point but you can abuse weed i have friends who abuse it everyday .
Didn't know you were paralyzed
One thing that I’m amazed at is how many people are ok with doctors prescribing multiple narcotics for pain but are horrified at the idea of using marijuana for pain relief.
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
+1
never been a fan of pharmaceuticals. basically concotions created to distract us from our problems. I think the brain is more powerful than any drug, and that’s what it all boils down to…what can wire your brain to deal with your current state? Wether it be positive thinking or knitting or any number of preoccupations….doctor prescribed drugs always give you more problems via “the side effects”. Pot also has it’s side effects- but they seem pretty harmless to me, when you compare them to the side effects of drug company “drugs”.
Thats so true and after a long period of time pharmisutical drugs can really kill your body after awhile but they
don’t tell you that you have 2 ask you have 2 ask are you kidding me that information should be told the minute they prescibe it to you it just shows you how the game is but there gambling with your life!
it is really crazy that people are more afraid of marijuana than opiates.
by hellaninersfan on Mar 26, 2010 5:11 PM PDT up reply actions
My mother has severe stomach problems because of all the medications she has to take (she’s old).
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
by SportsChicken on Mar 26, 2010 9:33 PM PDT up reply actions
You watch who comes out the wood work when they try and legal-lize weed the people making
the most noise will be the pharmysutical companies because they no that there pain meds will drop down .
Yea its cool smiley i wasn't supposed 2 even be alive but still here ( ten years later actually march 15,2000 was the day i got shot
but alot of these doctors want you hooked on pain medicine and its ten times harder 2 get off meds than it is bud and i actually had 2 stop taking some of my pain meds after awhile and it was a (bleep ) to get off this pain medicine but if you try 2 get them 2 sign off on a marijuana card they look at you like your a drug dealer i actually had 2 go thru 2 of my doctors 2 get them 2 sign off on it and it shouldn’t have been that hard period espicially if i’m in a wheelchair
No kidding
Like I said earlier I’m especially interested in this topic because of my wife’s health. She takes anywhere from half a dozen to a dozen pain killers a day for her pain, yet doctors are ok with that.
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
Smiley thats about how much i was taken and ive had doctors when ive went in to emergency rooms
look at my list of meds and say damm your on a high dosage of pain-meds i’m surprised you need that much thats when i start looking 4 alternatives because that same doctor told me its not good 2 take that much 4 a long peroid of time.I start doing more physical-rehabilatation i went thru terrible with draws when i stopped taking moriphine and oxycodone so i totally feel what youre talking about smiley
Man, when I took Oxy for a couple weeks after my wisdom teeth, I had enough problems stopping it. I can’t believe doctors will sometimes prescribe that stuff like candy… It’s pretty damn addictive.
Proud Member Of The Drew K Hates Marijuana Thread And Will Prove You Wrong If You Defend It With Harvard Law Material Even If You Are A Chemist By Trade. Because Drew K Knows All.
by Rod Blogojevich on Mar 26, 2010 3:11 PM PDT up reply actions
Smiley - that pisses me off bout docs being so willing to toss people
opiate after opiate after opioid for pain but not accept pot as a pain killer. Pot actually works better for my radicular nerve pain caused by a herniated disc. My doc didn’t even question me. He took my symptoms and my laundry list of prescription pills, my time in service which just ended and said I should have brought in my medical record but I’m good.
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Mar 26, 2010 2:58 PM PDT up reply actions
I thank this was a really good subject 2 write about ( not because its about weed ) just because it opens
people lives a little people talk-about what has happen in there lives and honestly i think it brings us a little closer about as close as you van get online and thats always a good thing and it might sound cleshay but thats what weed does it brings people closer you might have walked down different paths but thru bud we share somethig in common can we legal-lize it already lol.
its already going retail...
…as soon as its legal it will drive the price point down and it will be like stopping at the bakery or the butcher. In Canada I can collect medical users to grow for; each one qualifying for 10 – 20 plants. The Gov has no concept that it should be regulated by wattage, not number of plants. I’ve seen 2 1/2 lbs per plant, at that rate your average “medical user” can easily clear over $100,000/yr tax free. People are making a killing.
I'd be for Legalization
Particularly given how many athletes use marijuana as a pain reliever. I’d much, much rather have people smoking marijuana then getting addicted to pain killers and alcohol and the extra destruction those legal means bring.
NFL
As far as the NFL is concerned, if marijuana is legalized on a state-by-state basis, it becomes hard to deal with until it’s legal everywhere. Say it’s legal in California, but illegal in Maryland. If a 49er tests positive and a Raven tests positive, how do you handle that?
that was the point I was going to bring up
how do you handle the drug tests. If it’s legal in California does that mean 49ers or Raiders players wont be drug tested while every other team in the NFL is. That seems unfair and possibly illegal?
"All during film, I'm calling him Bam-Bam, like from 'The Flintstones,' because he hits everything. He is the truth" - Chad Ochocinco on Patrick Willis
The Williams case in Minnesota would seem to argue against that
The reason they haven’t faced any action from the NFL is because the state AG is arguing that the NFL can’t punish a player in their state for something that’s not illegal there. Depending on how that works out in court it would have an impact on testing across the league.
Apparently it’s pretty easy to mask marijuana for the tests the NFL uses. In one of the articles I read Ricky Williams said that he got caught because he was tired of going through the hassle of masking it and just wanted to be done with it all.
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
Do you know cheech and chong is on the '' Get It Legal Tour '' and Tommy Chong sits on the '' NORML's ''
advisory board ???
Not sure they're the best advocates
they fit the stereotype too much
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
That just means
Every player in the league will want to play for the niners, raiders, or chargers. I’m okay with that
when will the Kenny Thomas Reign of Terror end?!!??
by diehardkingsfan5 on Mar 26, 2010 2:47 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Haha, the Bengals would have to find a new talent pool
Proud Member Of The Drew K Hates Marijuana Thread And Will Prove You Wrong If You Defend It With Harvard Law Material Even If You Are A Chemist By Trade. Because Drew K Knows All.
by Rod Blogojevich on Mar 26, 2010 3:13 PM PDT up reply actions
I'd imagine the NFL would be able to say that it's rules trump state laws
for instance, if they wanted to ban all players from ever going skydiving they probably could, it’s not really discriminatory, they’d be protecting their assets.
by foosball4949 on Mar 26, 2010 11:02 AM PDT up reply actions
Just because a state legalizes does not force national and federal workplaces to recognize it
Anything “National” can set their own regulations. If you fly a plane from Sacramento to Boston and back and you piss hot for weed during a random test when you get back you think the NTSB is going to give a hoot if its legal in California? Your employer is federally regulated.
Federal law.
The real question is if you’re a state employee of California who goes on loan to the Feds how it will be dealt with.
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Mar 26, 2010 3:03 PM PDT up reply actions
Same way
If you come home from the military on leave to Cali and you smoke all the green grass in Humboldt then come back and piss hot you’re not gonna be able to argue it was legal where you are. You’re a federal employee and can’t have it in your system. Otherwise anybody that ever pissed hot could have just said I was in Amsterdam over the last 4 day weekend. Must still be in my system. Shrug shoulders
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Mar 26, 2010 3:05 PM PDT up reply actions
This post is going to attract a brand new demographic of people to the site through Google.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
Well I've been here for a while....
but this definitely applies to my demographic haha
.
1.) Should marijuana be legalized across the country? Should it be a federal initiative or state-by-state?
It should be legalized in california. It pretty much already is, i have my medical cannabis card and getting it was a joke. ANYONE reading my posting right now could go to green releif in San francisco and get a card today if they wanted
2.) If it shouldn’t be legalized should an exception be made for medicinal marijuana?
Yes
3.) If it’s not legalized completely should it be decriminalized?
Yes
4.) Assuming that marijuana is legal or decriminalized in an athlete’s state, should he/she be allowed to smoke marijuana for relief of pain symptoms should they choose to do so, instead of taking narcotics?
No, i dont think NFL players should be smoking marijuana. It will affect there play in a negative way
5.) Should the NFL stop placing heavy fines and punishments on players who test positive?
YESSS
6.) If you live in California do you plan on voting for or against the proposed ballot measure?
Oh hell yea im going to vote to pass to legalize it. I wish i could count as 1,000 votes lol
by forty9ers3298 on Mar 26, 2010 11:00 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
You can also go to Medicann
In Concord or Sf. And yes it is a joke, as long as you can act a little bit you will be fine…
It's just a plant, it grows in the earth, and if you happen to set it on fire there are some effects...
cost players a lot more than they know
First it cost them top dollar potential. Second your coming into the league with a strike against u. No matter what u say mary jane still considered gateway drug. With that being said, more money means a greater chance for cocaine. if u cannot quit smoking to play football, you need a bigger rush.
Let's make a good team, a Great Team!
by chriscream on Mar 26, 2010 11:14 AM PDT via mobile reply actions
Gateway drug
I hear this argument all the time and it’s BS. Have any of the players mentioned above that tested positive for weed also tested positive for cocaine or any other drug use? No they have not.
Michael Irvin was supposedly linked to coke
but its funny never heard him and marijuana in the same sentence… Seemed pretty big on that other gateway drug – ALCOHOL – though
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Mar 26, 2010 3:07 PM PDT up reply actions
I dont agree with it at all
What’s next cocaine? They’ll find a need for medical use there? Herion? Those both come from natural plants too. A drug is a drug is a dug is a drug. Raise taxes on other things if your state is hurting that much, don’t start legalizing the use of drugs to fix it.
And as for the players thing, Same rules should apply to them whether they have signed with an NFL team or not. We all have to take drug tests before we get a job and chances are if we dont pass, we arent getting the job. If they are found with it in their system before the draft, they should be ineligiable to play for X amount of games, potentially making their stock fall even further. If a player is dumb enough to get caught, then he should pay the price both literally and figuatively speaking.
Too many freaks, not enough circuses.
So you would make tobacco illegal
but not alcohol? Even though alcohol causes as many deaths each year as tobacco?
That’s a bit inconsistent don’t you think?
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
If it was me, I would make all of it illegal. I think even with alcohol
more bad things come out of it to superceed the positives. I could live easily live in a world where those things (all of them) were illegal. So no, not inconsistent one bit.
Too many freaks, not enough circuses.
Just making sure
and yes I do agree that there should be consistency across the board. Alcohol and tobacco are far worse in my opnion than marijuana.
I think marijuana has a great many useful medical properties. Like I said in the post I’m pretty interested in this subject because my wife has multiple sclerosis and take a ton of medication including a fistufl of narcotics everyday.
I’d rather her smoke a joint or two a day than take all those pills with their nasty side effects.
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
National Multiple Sclerosis Society states that there is no convincing evidence that marijuana provides any health benefits for those with MS. However, they have recently funded a new study to further explore any benefits marijuana may have for MS patients
http://www.ehow.com/about_4688712_harmful-effects-marijuana.html
Furthermore:
The risk of experiencing a heart attack is four times greater within the first hour of smoking marijuana. There are harmful effects on the lungs as well. Marijuana contains more carcinogens than tobacco smoke, thus increasing a person’s risk for developing lung cancer, lung infections and emphysema.
Too many freaks, not enough circuses.
One more piece of it
However, in a study conducted by the Institute of Medicine in 1999, it was concluded that there is no medical value attached to marijuana in the treatment of these conditions. It is the belief of the British Medical Association that due to these widespread misconceptions, the public has been fooled into believing that marijuana is safe to use, when in actuality its effects have been proven harmful to health. There are undoubtedly many harmful effects of marijuana use, but the subject is far from being black and white, and more research—and less propaganda on either side of the issue—is much needed.
Too many freaks, not enough circuses.
and Drew
the idea of you lecturing me on multiple sclerosis is kind of offensive.
Since my wife has lived with it for 15 years and I’ve lived with it for the 5 years we’ve been married and the 2 years that we were dating before we got married.
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
I am not lecturing on anything
I am stating a FACT based on a study coming directly from the NMSS. Just because I refuted and discredited your point, doesn’t mean it’s personal or should be taken that way.
Too many freaks, not enough circuses.
I dont have to think it, I just showed you in plain english in black and white.
Too many freaks, not enough circuses.
Whatever. Anything inhaled is not good for you. Putting anything foreign like that in to your body cannot be good. It’s been illegal for decades and decades… reason? Because it is HARMFUL TO YOUR BODY.
Too many freaks, not enough circuses.
Drew just inhaling this air foreign drew so whats the point
i know your personal feelings on this and i respect that but 4 every argument you got against it we throw anotrher argument 4 it and both of are arguments can be backed-up with studies feel me
is it the government’s job to chose what risks I should take?
and Marijuana legalization helps budget issues in a far more significant way than taxation. Our prisons are overcrowded with Marijuana offenders. if we didn’t have to jail them anymore, it would provide very significant savings.
by hellaninersfan on Mar 26, 2010 5:42 PM PDT up reply actions
It's illegal because it affects judgement
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
by SportsChicken on Mar 26, 2010 9:39 PM PDT up reply actions
eHow
Basically the New England Journal of Medicine. LMAO!!!!!
How about Harvard... is this good enough?
Marijuana’s harmful heath effects are not the falsified tales of scaremongers. In the short term, the drug causes drowsiness and memory problems, and, in high doses, (usually when eaten) can lead to impaired memory and hallucinations. A user has four times the usual risk of a heart attack in the first hour after smoking, and, in the long run, marijuana causes the same respiratory problems as tobacco and makes you three times more likely to develop neck and lung cancer
Same thing.
Need more? Cause I can go on all day finding the same thing over and over again.
Too many freaks, not enough circuses.
Man Drew, you gotta smoke a doobie or something and help yourself chill. You don’t need to get into stuff like ‘hallucinations’ and ‘lung cancer.’ Marijuana is a choice- if someone can smoke it and remain a useful member of society, that’s their business. The main problem with weed is that it saps the individual motivation of the user if it is used too frequently. But at the end of the day, EVERY PERSON IS DIFFERENT.
by Rod Blogojevich on Mar 26, 2010 12:19 PM PDT up reply actions
Sorry to say it, but that’s a very “Whoa… dude…” argument.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Mar 26, 2010 12:20 PM PDT up reply actions
“Chill out, man. Smoke a joint. Marijuana’s, like, a choice, man. Everyone is different. Everyone can handle their own thing. That’s the beauty of the world. Like… whoa, dude…”
It’s just not based on a whole lot other than the idea “it can help you chill out” and “people can make their own choices” and “it’s not so bad if you can handle it”. Which don’t seem very strong to me. But which do seem like the kind of things I’ve heard potheads tell me repeatedly.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Mar 26, 2010 12:27 PM PDT up reply actions
That was more of a joke than anything. Next time, I’ll denote it with tildes.
I’m no stoner, but since I’m from the West Coast of Canada, I am certain I have been exposed to enough information about marijuana to formulate my opinions. I think the main thing here is that it IS a choice, and if someone can productively contribute to society while being a pot-head, that’s completely at their discretion. I would love to see it get taxed.
In Canada, a grow-op is one of the most risk-free money makers there is. If you can secure an average of 80 000 dollars to rent a house, redirect electricity, buy seeds and horticultural gear, the potential profit is obscene- grow ops can generate seven figures annually. The economic side of the marijuana ‘industry’ is fascinating.
On the other hand, when I see someone like Drew using flawed ‘academic’ articles written by Harvard Law, I cannot help but get a little bemused. I’ll take the people I see on a daily basis who manage to both use marijuana and also be useful members of society than some ‘holier-than-thou’ argument from Drew backed by elitist sources.
by Rod Blogojevich on Mar 26, 2010 12:35 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Well, I can see that I clearly mistook your opinion on this. You’re definitely well-informed and capable of making some seriously great points. Please, carry on.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Mar 26, 2010 12:38 PM PDT up reply actions
well said Rod
"All during film, I'm calling him Bam-Bam, like from 'The Flintstones,' because he hits everything. He is the truth" - Chad Ochocinco on Patrick Willis
I used medically backed sources as well. I still have not seen one credible source refuting any of my points. It’s all been
opinionof people who are obviously supporters of the concept.
Too many freaks, not enough circuses.
Haven't seen any yet
I hven’t seen you post a link to a medical organization or a peer reviewed medical journal yet
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
I don’t understand what the point is. What are you trying to prove, Drew? I mean, come on. Villifying someone for their stance on something as petty as marijuana use by using ‘academic sources’ is beyond desperate and in very bad taste. Why characterize someone based on whether or not they smoke weed? Why try to belittle someone for their stance on a subject that has little bearing on how you live your life? Seeing how you’ve already attacked drums7890, and have a growing group of people obviously not happy with how you are resorting to personal shots instead of admitting that MAYBE you don’t agree with people who smoke weed, but at the end of the day, there is no reason to say its bad for you when you know that there are thousands of sick people out there who could care less about the effects on their lungs or psychological health when they are in agonizing pain every day. If marijuana happens to be the best alternative to strong painkillers to help them cope with their conditions, then maybe this discussion is something you should just avoid. Isn’t today #74 in the draft 100 countdown? Maybe you should just stick to that, because you are clearly fighting a losing battle here by trying to argue with a political stance as your weapon against people whose personal convictions regarding marijuana use outweigh any political legislature or opinion you could ever back yourself up with.
by Rod Blogojevich on Mar 26, 2010 12:59 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Good idea.
I really didn’t even want to involve myself in this post for obvious reasons but some how I got sucked in to the vortex of it all with stating one comment. And now look what happened. Sometimes my contraversial opinion opens things up beyond where they should probably go.
Too many freaks, not enough circuses.
But I also think the topic went out of bounds a bit in the segment. Being that this is a football blog, it should have just stuck to the parts regarding the athletic side of it. Just my take on it.
Too many freaks, not enough circuses.
Well, that was all you who decided to bring Harvard into the discussion.
Proud Member Of The Drew K Hates Marijuana Thread And Will Prove You Wrong If You Defend It With Harvard Law Material Even If You Are A Chemist By Trade. Because Drew K Knows All.
by Rod Blogojevich on Mar 26, 2010 3:19 PM PDT up reply actions
That was well put rod ,thats whats wrong with people (not just you drew)
they picture people who smoke weed as lazy sitting around on there couch all-day smoking on a joint (and there are people like that ) theres white collar people who handle there buisiness at work.Then they like 2 come home un-wind with a nice glass of wine and then roll-up a fatty you can function on weed its just all depends on the persons drive yea you can be lazy with weed but those people were lazy regardless .My mom got 2 masters degree at S,F State and was the head buyer for U.C Medical and Kaiser all-the time smoking weed but she handled her buisiness ( i love my mom) everyday.
gotta say jay as much as I was annoyed by your grammar and stuff at the beginning
I’m glad you stuck around. You have a lot to add to the conversation. I guess you could say you’re “growing” on me jay lol
"All during film, I'm calling him Bam-Bam, like from 'The Flintstones,' because he hits everything. He is the truth" - Chad Ochocinco on Patrick Willis
This
Is the problem when the non-scientific community starts dabbling in way over their heads.
wow drew sometimes when someone tries to argue with you or oppose what you say you come off like a jerk
"All during film, I'm calling him Bam-Bam, like from 'The Flintstones,' because he hits everything. He is the truth" - Chad Ochocinco on Patrick Willis
why did you ask him if he was a scientist?
by hellaninersfan on Mar 26, 2010 5:44 PM PDT up reply actions
Give
me your email and I’ll send you a picture of a screen shot of your troll post right next to my labratory space time stamped with todays date.
I’m a troll? I am a writer for the site in case that’s slipped your attention.
Too many freaks, not enough circuses.
What does that have to do with anything? I make plenty of money in my line of work aside from the site, so your question is irrelevant
Too many freaks, not enough circuses.
I think he was asking what you get paid to write for the website.
Many people don’t realize that we don’t get any money for this. Not even Fooch gets paid for writing for the site.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Mar 26, 2010 12:47 PM PDT up reply actions
Fooch chose him to be a writer because he is knowledgeable, specifically on the draft and scouting, and a good writer. compensation is irrelevant.
by hellaninersfan on Mar 26, 2010 5:46 PM PDT up reply actions
That was unnecessary Drew
Why are you doubting druma’s occupation?
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
oh he's a writer for this site
he can do what he wants, didn’t you know?
"All during film, I'm calling him Bam-Bam, like from 'The Flintstones,' because he hits everything. He is the truth" - Chad Ochocinco on Patrick Willis
Why don't you believe him drew is it that far out the realm 4
a person 2 smoke weed and handle there buisiness i’m not saying you smoke weed drums, you got millionaires who run companies world-wide who smoke weed drew you don’t have 2 be a bum if you smoke weed.
LAWYERS STILL KNOW MORE THAN CHEMISTS
by Rod Blogojevich on Mar 26, 2010 12:27 PM PDT up reply actions
I think I know
something that would help you all get along….
Senior I/O Psych Major
with focuses on Bio and Physics and a minor in Math.
And I agree with this man. Please stop being silly Drew, you are a great writer but obviously don’t know that much about the subject =(.
"[...] coordinator Bud Foster has never had problems filling holes."
This is the same university that published a study
that says marijuana cuts lung cancer tumor growth in half.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/04/070417193338.htm
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
Yup
Drew isn’t recognizing that Marijuana can be cooked into butter and ingested in a completely healthy way in baked good. And that a substance in marijuana kills off cells that start to mutate and turn cancerous.
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Mar 26, 2010 3:15 PM PDT up reply actions
In Drew K's nanny state....
We would sure have to get to work on all of those shiny new prisons we are going to need after we jail 80 percent of the population. And watch out as all of the drug cartels do their drive-by’s so they can protect their valuable cigarette selling turf…
by thatguywiththebeardandthebanjo on Mar 26, 2010 1:38 PM PDT up reply actions
I fail to see how my comment necessary or relevant. Black markets and more people in prison are the consequences of the drug war.
by thatguywiththebeardandthebanjo on Mar 26, 2010 2:02 PM PDT up reply actions
Thats a cocaine war yea i know cartels deal in weed 2 but thats that
doo-doo brown crap they don’t deal on that good-good green you have 2 go up in the hills 2 get that but in general these drugs wars are basically dealing in cocaine and now meth,weed takes longer 2 grow as far as cocaine and meth you can cook up way faster than weed.
just answer me this drew and answer this honestly what drugs tear up more families
alcohol or marijuana ?
And you quote the NMS as saying that there's no
benefit to marijuana at the same time you quote them as saying they’re conducting a study to examine the benefits.
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
Sources
I know this isn’t as reputable as ehow or wikipedia (sarcasm) but how about government funded studies from the American Journal of Public Health, Addiction, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.
Not trying to be offensive but are you familiar with the peer-reviewed process for scientific literature? I would be pretty embarassed to cite ehow to be honest.
http://bluehoney.org/2010/01/18/top-10-cannabis-studies-the-government-wished-it-had-never-funded/
Includes sources to the original studies so you can read them yourself.
Another
The main respiratory consequences of smoking marijuana regularly (one joint a day) are pulmonary infections and respiratory cancer, whose connection to marijuana use has been strongly suggested but not conclusively proven. The effects also include chronic bronchitis, impairment in the function of the smaller air passages, inflammation of the lung, the development of potentially pre-cancerous abnormalities in the bronchial lining and lungs, and, as discussed, a reduction in the capabilities of many defensive mechanisms within the lungs.
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/evidence99/marijuana/Health_1.html
Like I said, I can go on all day because there is just that much evidence to prove all of this true.
Too many freaks, not enough circuses.
Read
The original studies. And why are you citing harvard law? Since when are lawyers qualified MD’s or scientists?
Sad
Honestly, if you could provide one credible peer reviewed scientific journal, JUST ONE, then I would respect your opinion. Until then…..
WebMD
The risks of smoking marijuana go up with heavy use. Although the link has never been proven, many experts believe heavy pot smokers are at increased risk for lung cancer.
Interesting, same thing.
Heavy marijuana use lowers men’s testosterone levels and sperm count and quality. Pot could decrease libido and fertility in some heavy-smoking men.
Contrary to what many pot smokers may tell you, marijuana is addictive, at least psychologically. Even among occasional users, one in 12 can feel withdrawal symptoms if they can’t get high when they want to. Among heavy pot smokers, the rates of dependence are higher.
Too many freaks, not enough circuses.
Need more?
http://www.webmd.com/mental-health/marijuana-use-and-its-effects
Too many freaks, not enough circuses.
Drew K needs
to smoke a blunt. Life’s too short
by GMARCH on Mar 26, 2010 12:36 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Nah the blunts will kill you faster spitting out loogies
nah give him some of the extra long zig-zags they even got (handle bar zig-zags 4 rookies )they have a built in wire that you can bend down and hold the wire while you blow it works really good with roaches 2 (roaches are the last part of your joint 4 rookies who don’t know)
web md is not a peer reviewed journal
they’re a new aggregater. Basically they do the same thing you and I do for draft and what not.
If you want to see real studies go to the peer reviewed journals
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
So what?
It’s obviously the same thing over and over and over in every single source that I have listed here. I still have seen zero evidence to discredit the claims.
Too many freaks, not enough circuses.
Thats only because your looking up from the negative
side of things but im pretty sure somebody could look-up the pros&cons from the positive side of things
Drew you shouldn't live by papers so much thats how
the goverment ends (bleeping) you over you can’t believe everything your read thats being a little 2 naive.
And
Just to clarify I’m not advocating for legalization or even medical marijuana I’m just sick and tired of seeing people like you try to pass propaganda off as “science”
Alcohol is killing more people than Weed Will Ever Kill And We Haven't
Brought-Up Nicotine
You
Just DONT get it. WebMD saying “experts say” does not equal a peer reviewed source. I’m sorry but you just don’t get it and it’s not your fault. It’s due to the lack of science education in schools
Are personal attacks really necessary?
If that is all you have, then maybe you’re statement above is true in reference to yourself.
As far as I knew, there was scientific related classes in schools across the nation. I don’t think Marajuana studies will ever be a course topic legal or illegal.
Too many freaks, not enough circuses.
Drew you started with the personal attacks
when you doubted his occupation
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
Thanks
That was all I was trying to say. Everyone deserves their own opinion no matter how poorly founded it is.
or poorly funded...
i live with a biologist, and admire his passion for the potential of good scientific research and development. i wish you and your peers had more support in what you do.
lol wow Drew
so since you are a writer for this site its cool for you to use personal attacks but when someone else does it it’s unnecessary?
"All during film, I'm calling him Bam-Bam, like from 'The Flintstones,' because he hits everything. He is the truth" - Chad Ochocinco on Patrick Willis
And drew if they can have a college course in hip hop or tupac
they can have a class on marijuana espicially since weed has been around longer than the 2 so never say never.
Wiki
Trying to help…. honestly
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peer_reviewed
I have to disagree I was heavy on weed and stopped immediately for a job and haven't thought about it once.
I know pwople that went cold turkey on heroin, which is tough as (site decorum). It’s the individual not the drug in the case of weed, and that’s just my opinion formulated from myself and others I have watched.
-Black Sand Ninja
Which is kind of the definition of psychological dependency.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Mar 26, 2010 2:07 PM PDT up reply actions
You can die from withdrawls going cold turkey on heroin
Never heard that about weed lol. After smoking for years I quit cold turkey with the only side effect being a couple days of a smaller appetite.
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Mar 26, 2010 3:20 PM PDT up reply actions
Because you don’t die from psychological withdrawals. Again, kind of the definition of psychological dependency.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Mar 26, 2010 3:26 PM PDT up reply actions
I totally agree with that even though i got a weed card
i go thru days when i don’t smoke and ive never got the shakes or withdraws but if i don’t take my pain medicine 4 a few days my whole body hurts just like a junkie.
Oh COME ON
“Many Experts” believe that global warming doesn’t exist per popular news outlets. I would relate WebMD with them before I relate it to a scholarly journal.
Google Scholar works wonders, I promise.
"[...] coordinator Bud Foster has never had problems filling holes."
American Medical Association
is the largest professional group of doctors in America issued a report on the benefits of marijuana.
Control of nausea
helps with glaucoma
especially helpful for the following MS symptoms
motor control
spasticity
neurlogical based pain
tremor
helps patients with epilepsy have fewer and less violent seizures
reduces migraines, menstrual cramps, abdominal pain,
http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/no-index/about-ama/13625.shtml
June 2008 there was a study published in the medical Journal of Pain that showed the benefits of marijuana and pain.
http://www.jpain.org/article/S1526-5900(08)00369-6/abstract
That’s for starters
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
UCSD just finished a study
Works for inferred nerve pain. And I can tell you it does.
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Mar 26, 2010 3:21 PM PDT up reply actions
NMS
is not an accurate source—trust me.
There’s been an extreme amount of evidence from MS patients who have said that marijuana relieves their pain (a major symptom of MS), clears up their migraines (another side affect of MS), as well as helping them to think more clearly (people with MS have brains that are wired differently than most people).
I’ll tell you what my wife takes right now and you tell me if you think those are any more safe than marijuana.
oxcyotin (3 times a day)
hydrocodone (4-6 times a day)
tramadol (3 times a day)
adderal (amphetamine)
adderall xr (stronger dose of amphetamine)
effexor (anti-depressant that helps her think better)
zoloft (anti-depressant to combat the side effects of the narcotics)
maxalt (to relieve intense migraine pain)
depakote (to manage migraine pain)
Those are just some of the pills she takes.
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
Of course its and accurate source
Those effects have been medically proven to be true. Deny it all you want though.
Too many freaks, not enough circuses.
Derailing this on purpose
Based on your stance smileyman I assume you are all for your wife taking marijuana and getting off at least some of the narcotics. What is her stance? Are you in a state that doesn’t allow medical usage and if so why not move?
Seriously it’s not a pleasant disease by any means, I’d personally think her health is a major issue for her quality of life and would think a move would be in order.
I'm all for it
My wife is unsure—but she hasn’t given it as much thought as I have.
I live in Idaho which is a non-use state. I’d like to move to another state, but both of our families are all here within 10 miles and she doesn’t want to move away from hers.
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
Lots of close states have it legal
I don’t claim to know Idaho law, but I know Nevada had a problem when California passed the original medical marijuana laws. In Nevada law before then a prescription allow the possession of controlled substances (basically their drug laws were intertwined with a prescription loophole for things like oxycotin). Their initial arrests were (mostly terminal) cancer patients with prescriptions that never got to court.
Family distance can be rough, might be worth a road trip to test things out. I’m sure you can find a reputable doctor willing to facilitate her having a personal test of sorts.
It's tough in Idaho
there are only two neurologists within a 75 mile radius of where we live. One is my wife’s MS doctor and the other isn’t accepting new patients (or I’d switch).
She did have her sleep doctor say that if we were in another state he’d recommend marijuana to her, but it’s Idaho and the courts come down hard on any kind of drug users.
I’m hoping to wear her down and see if we can’t get a move to the Oregon coast where we go every year for vacation. She loves it there.
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
I totally agree with that smiley i'm from S.F but i live in Portland Or.
i got injured in portland my mom and my little brother and sister moved up here (sister is in the army now ) then my girl and my youngest son moved up here from S.F my girl wants 2 move back to S.F the marijuana laws are better in frisco but all my doctors are up here plus my mom and brother has been up here 4 ten years ,so even though the marijuana laws are better plus the weed isbetter (but oregons got some good green bud)but my doctors are up here and when you have those relationships like i do going onm ten years now you don’t want 2 lose them so i see were your coming from smiley
Smiley oxycontin was THE hardest drug 4 me to get off and the cold part
was my doctor had me on it for 5 years then one day he brings me in and says we have 2 find another pain medicine 4 you then they put me on moriphine 2 stop me from with draws DIDN’T WORK i was like a herion addict (never been on herion ) .So the doc brings me in and you know what his plan was a higher dose of moriphine all this time i had quit smoking weed since getting paralyzed im no longer taking moriphine (ever trip moriphine has " phine ‘’ in it because thats what it turns you into) and i’m back on the weed no moriphine i steal get pains that will never stop but the weed does help and i don’t have 2 worry about kicking like a ‘’phine’ if i do want 2 stop so weed does help some people .When oxycontin came out up here a dude i got shot point blank in the day-time in down-town portland oregon as soon as he got his prescription ive seen more bad with oxys then good.
Yeah man, as bad as people think weed is, I’d rather see people using a natural plant (although weed growing is such a science now to produce great strains) instead of some liver-destroying, physically addictive painkiller like Oxy or Moprhine. I don’t smoke weed myself because there is a history of schizophrenia in my family, and I don’t want to risk messing around with my brain in case I am predisposed to it, but I don’t have an issue at all with people who smoke weed to deal with pain. If it works for them, thats their choice.
Proud Member Of The Drew K Hates Marijuana Thread And Will Prove You Wrong If You Defend It With Harvard Law Material Even If You Are A Chemist By Trade. Because Drew K Knows All.
by Rod Blogojevich on Mar 26, 2010 3:04 PM PDT up reply actions
^Knows what he is talking about
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Mar 26, 2010 3:23 PM PDT up reply actions
I wonder whos in here that lives in Canada i watched this documentry about weed
on the discovery channel and this dude in canada had a huge property where he was growing all kinds of different buds and he was making cookies,butter,bread all kind of foods on top of the weed so if some body in here is from CANADA tell us your LAWS please
Marijuana is illegal in Canada for recreational use. However, medicinal marijuana is legal, and often covered by the Canadian Health Care plan.
However, despite the fact it is illegal, marijuana is widely tolerated. Police rarely make arrests- they simply tell the smoker to put the joint out if they are in public. Fines are minimal. It is also illegal to drive while impaired by marijuana.
Proud Member Of The Drew K Hates Marijuana Thread And Will Prove You Wrong If You Defend It With Harvard Law Material Even If You Are A Chemist By Trade. Because Drew K Knows All.
by Rod Blogojevich on Mar 26, 2010 3:53 PM PDT up reply actions
Thanks rod 4 clearing that up 4 me this dude had a humongous piece of land
so he must have a liscense
But your talking about your personal feelings towards it because you don't indulge in it
but theres alot of things that weed do for you i would rather band oxycontin before i band weed since that drug (oxycontin) its been responsible 4 more bad then good its highly addictive people getting killed pharmacies getting robbed theres alot different pain medicines that people can use instead of oxys but 2 me weed has helped me from taking all those other pain meds doctors had me on (moriphine and oxy-contin) .Half the reason obama had to pass a new law 4 medical insurance is because the high cost these pharmacy companies forcing people 2 pay for there drugs weed is WAY CHEAPER to make than these companies that are making these pain medicines .
Morphine and oxycontin will mess you up.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Mar 26, 2010 2:26 PM PDT up reply actions
So... You've never heard of prohibition Drew?
Alcohol was just as big then as it is now.
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Mar 26, 2010 3:08 PM PDT up reply actions
I would to
But you can’t really tell people what to do.
Prohibition didn’t really work out now did it?
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
by SportsChicken on Mar 26, 2010 9:38 PM PDT up reply actions
i think Drew K is mormon...
…not that there’s anything wrong with that
WHOA. I did not see this earlier. You think tobacco should be illegal? I have Mormon family members who are as anti-substance abuse as one can get and they still respect the fact that other people enjoy tobacco.
Proud Member Of The Drew K Hates Marijuana Thread And Will Prove You Wrong If You Defend It With Harvard Law Material Even If You Are A Chemist By Trade. Because Drew K Knows All.
by Rod Blogojevich on Mar 26, 2010 3:22 PM PDT up reply actions
It’s a beverage… and it too was illegal at one point in U.S. History. It defintely causes it’s fair share of problems and kills people, even controls some peoples lives similar to marajuana. I have an occasional drink (socially) but I don’t get ever hammered. Some people abuse the tar out of alcohol too though. And it’s one of those things that if you legalize weed, then I just think it’s going to trickle down the line to other things. I just think its a bad idea. And I dont agree with it.
Too many freaks, not enough circuses.
I’ll actually be getting hammered tomorrow.
I don’t really believe in the supposed “trickle down” effect. I can’t think of any significant example in the history of the United States where something arguably negative came about via trickle down.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Mar 26, 2010 11:46 AM PDT up reply actions
Come on HTS...
several laws throughout the history of this country have been opened up by other laws. I am not going to go digging through archives to show you, but I am sure there are hundreds, if not thousands of examples.
Too many freaks, not enough circuses.
And I can think of plenty of good examples of trickle down laws: plenty of equal rights laws only came about after trickling down from other ones.
I just can’t think of a precedent that applies in any relevant way to the idea the legalized marijuana will trickle down negatively.
There are plenty of great arguments for keeping marijuana illegal. I’ve just never heard a convincing “trickle down” argument for the case.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Mar 26, 2010 11:53 AM PDT up reply actions
Well, a significant number of the arguments against alcohol consumption also apply to marijuana. You’re of course not dealing with a string physical addition, but there is such a thing as a psychological addiction.
Much of the reason that prohibition failed is actually not because alcohol is a benign enough drug to warrant illegality. By all accounts, alcohol is a destructive force on par with plenty of illegal substances. The reason that prohibition failed is because alcohol has a cultural history that was so deeply ingrained in the societal mold that people actually felt entitled to alcohol consumption – even to the point of destruction. “We’ve been doing it for thousands of years… getting drunk isn’t bad…” – that kind of thing.
One of the reasons that marijuana has struggled so much to become legal is that it doesn’t enjoy that history. It’s never been accepted as a social norm, and significant masses of people have never felt the powerful entitlement to it to challenge perfectly reasonable restriction on a mass – even violent – level.
But you get so many of the same things: loss of motor function, loss of reasoning, loss of energy, psychological addiction. With marijuana you even have a compelling gateway argument to make that doesn’t seem to exist with alcohol.
Anyway, that’s just one angle. I’m not going to step too far into this, because like I said I’m not trying to argue either way. I just want to create as much context as possible as long as the discussion is being had.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Mar 26, 2010 12:10 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
history
I don’t know that there’s a real lack of history of smoking, just that alcohol lends itself to much more social enjoyment. The more social the drug , the more society will defend it.
It’s not just that. We have thousands of years of socially acceptable alcohol consumption behind us. Alcohol isn’t a drug that lends itself to a social environment because of its natural properties. Being hammered isn’t a very social way to be. Alcohol is considered a social enjoyment because it’s been domesticated as one in the public opinion for thousands of years.
There is plenty of marijuana style smoking throughout history, but not much of it has the long history of cultural – and cross cultural – acceptance that alcohol does. Opium comes to mind as the most relevant example. Hundreds and hundreds of years of history for Opium, but even its heyday, it was considered socially destructive by many.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Mar 26, 2010 12:31 PM PDT up reply actions
I get that you’re impartial and not trying to argue, but marijuana’s supposed lack of history is not a “great argument” for it being illegal.
It’s not its lack of history that’s important there. It’s the fact that it actually does share many of the same properties that other illegal drugs contain. I got a little sidetracked talking about alcohol, but the point was mostly that the only legal drug that marijuana can be compared to in a satisfying way is alcohol. And the legality of alcohol is itself not a product of the drug being beneficial in any way.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Mar 26, 2010 1:26 PM PDT up reply actions
I get what you're saying
But it still isn’t a great argument. My point is that there really isn’t a great argument for keeping it illegal.
Perhaps. I think I’m going to make it a point to cool my jets in this thread though. I really didn’t want to get my blood going in this thread, and since I’ve clearly failed at that (see: the rest of this thread) I think it’s time for me to step back. So I hope you don’t mind if I stop pursuing the point with any energy.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Mar 26, 2010 1:37 PM PDT up reply actions
Here's my opinion once we get past the rhetoric
I think it should be legalized everywhere for medicinal use only.
I think it should be removed from the Schedule 1 list (which includes drugs like heroin and cocaine).
I think that for non-medicinal use it should be decrmininalized and fined.
I also think that as long as alcohol and tobacco are legal then there should be no arguments against legalizing marijuana because it’s not nearly as deadly as either of those two substances are.
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
by smileyman on Mar 26, 2010 1:37 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I bet you if you took a poll ( not here of course just a random ) and asked
have their been more families torn apart from alcoholism or marijuana use alcoholism will double marijuana all day long
Haha, no doubt.
Proud Member Of The Drew K Hates Marijuana Thread And Will Prove You Wrong If You Defend It With Harvard Law Material Even If You Are A Chemist By Trade. Because Drew K Knows All.
by Rod Blogojevich on Mar 26, 2010 3:09 PM PDT up reply actions
And I’m not arguing against that at all. But the roadblocks that keep alcohol legal are much, much more deeply ingrained in our society than those that could work to make marijuana legal.
Alcohol’s legality has nothing to do with its destructive force. I drink, but I also recognize that alcohol is a terrible drug.
Unfortunately, that has very little to do with the fight for marijuana.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Mar 26, 2010 3:29 PM PDT up reply actions
It’s an argument for consistency in our drug laws.
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life son."
by bakoninerfan on Mar 26, 2010 3:36 PM PDT up reply actions
But it’s an argument that stands much more strongly for the re-illegalization of alcohol than it does for the legalization of marijuana.
“See this? See how horrible and awful this is? Well, that’s legal.
That’s not an argument for legalizing something. That’s an argument for making alcohol illegal.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Mar 26, 2010 3:43 PM PDT up reply actions
It’s true that the consistency argument can be made for either the decriminilization of marijuana or the recriminalization of alcohol. As you stated above the use of alcohol is ingrained in western culture and the people would never go for a ban on it. With that in mind why not be consistent about it? If it is legalized I think people will realize it’s no big deal. A poll from last year already shows that 56% of Californians are in favor of legalizing. As a public health/safety concern marijuana use is on the bottom of the list.
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life son."
by bakoninerfan on Mar 26, 2010 4:02 PM PDT up reply actions
It was kinda the social norm...
Our founding father on the 1 dollar bill smoked grass
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Mar 26, 2010 3:25 PM PDT up reply actions
Make the most of the Indian hemp seed, and sow it everywhere!
and he said in another note that he “rather too late” attempted to separate the male and female plants… that’s a man that knew how to grow some dope.
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Mar 26, 2010 3:28 PM PDT up reply actions
Well, “never” is always the wrong word to use. I really need to learn.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Mar 26, 2010 4:20 PM PDT up reply actions
He also owned slaves...
…
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
by SportsChicken on Mar 26, 2010 9:49 PM PDT up reply actions
also
he never told a lie.
"All during film, I'm calling him Bam-Bam, like from 'The Flintstones,' because he hits everything. He is the truth" - Chad Ochocinco on Patrick Willis
That's actually not true
The cherry tree story is not true.
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
by SportsChicken on Mar 26, 2010 11:03 PM PDT up reply actions
well he did have wooden teeth
"All during film, I'm calling him Bam-Bam, like from 'The Flintstones,' because he hits everything. He is the truth" - Chad Ochocinco on Patrick Willis
I don't know about that
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
by SportsChicken on Mar 28, 2010 1:51 PM PDT up reply actions
he's on Mount Rushmore?
if that’s not true then I got nothin’
"All during film, I'm calling him Bam-Bam, like from 'The Flintstones,' because he hits everything. He is the truth" - Chad Ochocinco on Patrick Willis
Washington did have wooden teeth. That’s a documented fact. He had dentures that were made out of wood.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Mar 29, 2010 10:43 AM PDT up reply actions
Not 2 mention the 70s and piece&love along with the hippie generation
help tarnish the luster of weed thats also a reason why its hards 4 weed 2 be totally accepted but alcohol and cigarettes do way more damage then what weed does.
All I said was that I couldn’t think of any. I’ll gladly take examples.
I’m also not trying to argue for or against the legalization of marijuana. I’m just trying to provide as much nuance to the conversation as possible.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Mar 26, 2010 11:51 AM PDT up reply actions
I understand… and to be honest, I am coming across more outspoken on the subject than I’d like too. I really have no say-so in the matter. And I certainly can’t change whatever happens in California. Currently it is still legal in all facets in AZ, but if they try and pass the bill here, I will be voting a big fat “no”.
Sometimes I post a comment and it blows up in to something colassal.
Too many freaks, not enough circuses.
I am coming across more outspoken on the subject than I’d like to
That’s nothing new to me! See my activity in the “overtime rule” thread. Really, I barely even care about overtime. What was I even doing in that thread?
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Mar 26, 2010 12:42 PM PDT up reply actions
Lack of studies
I think the trickle down affect is based on a survey of prison inmates which found that nearly all of the heavy drug users had also used marijuana.
Of course they didn’t dig into it to see if the marijuana use precipated the heavier drug use—they just published those findings and as we all know correlation does not equal causation.
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
Yeah, but that’s about trickle down use, not trickle down laws. I think there’s a distinct difference to be made there, and one that is probably quite relevant to the conversation. The idea of trickle down use is a very compelling reason to keep marijuana use illegal. The idea of trickle down laws seems much more far fetched to me.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Mar 26, 2010 11:54 AM PDT up reply actions
That would be the old slippery slope argument
I’ll have to think about it a bit.
Civil rights legislation is one area where there was a trickle down affect in laws. I’m trying to think of others.
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
But again, civil rights legislation is an undeniably positive move. I do believe that we have often trickled down in the right direction. I’m just not convinced that it runs the other way quite so cleanly.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Mar 26, 2010 11:59 AM PDT up reply actions
One could invoke Godwin's Law
and bring up the slow erosion of civil liberties in Pre WWII Germany
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
Well, I’m glad we’re not a fascist state around the turn of the 20th century, then.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Mar 26, 2010 12:13 PM PDT up reply actions
Yes alcohol was illegal at one point.
Do you neglect to mention the reason why prohibition was eventually repealed?
It certainly happens to be one of the strongest reasons to legalize marijuana.
Please keep reading, because I talk about it quite a bit.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Mar 26, 2010 12:32 PM PDT up reply actions
I did read your stuff and I didn't quite see what I was referencing. I may have missed it.
That is the increase in organized violent crime that occurs as a result of prohibition. The fact that it’s illegal makes the price skyrocket making it extremely lucrative and puts its distribution in the hands of hardened criminals that resort to violence to protect their market territory. Take the distribution out of the hands of criminals and put it in drug stores where it can be regulated as a legal product and you cut off a large portion of the money these criminals make. Not only that, you free up police resources to focus on more important matters than the ounce of pot you may or may not have stashed in your glove box.
I’m with you, Drew, in wishing that all of these substances were banned. They’re all harmful in some sort of way, no matter how minor. But I do firmly believe that banning these substances actually does more harm than good.
Is legalization some sort of fix-all? No. We’ll probably see the same problems that we see with alcohol (possibly with slightly less violence because marijuana users might be too stoned/hungry to fight with friends or beat their wives/children) but those are probably outweighed by the reduction in violence due to a reduced presence of gangs and police forces that are better equipped to fight the remaining ones. If I had a relative who smoked pot, I would rather they bought it from a drug store where it would be regulated and much cheaper than from a criminal on the corner who could rip him off or blow his brains out at any moment.
And part of the reason that the crime scene around alcohol consumption was so unbelievably lucrative during prohibition was because such a large majority of the population felt entitled to alcohol consumption regardless of the law.
Again, that context does not exist with marijuana. if it did, then we would be seeing violent crime on the scale of prohibition-level destruction right now. Because it actually is illegal.
I’m sorry. I don’t see any Al Capones running around creating nationwide terror because marijuana is not legal. Yes, there is some violent crime associated with marijuana, but it has next to nothing to do with prohibition-style problems.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Mar 26, 2010 12:58 PM PDT up reply actions
I mean, the sooner people can separate the fact that illegalized marijuana in 2010 does not equal illegalized alcohol in 1920 in any way, shape, or form, the better. We’re talking about different social contexts, different legal contexts, different consumption contexts, different era contexts, and different criminal contexts between them – and none of those contexts are really all that close to each other.
Here’s a little message to anybody who wants to argue in favor of the legalization of marijuana:
Prohibition: It has nothing to do with marijuana. Not even a little bit. So please stop acting like it does. You actually make your argument worse when you compare the two.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Mar 26, 2010 1:04 PM PDT up reply actions
This.
I’m going to have to vehemently disagree with, I think comparing the two is apples and oranges, yes. But to say there are no Al Capone’s running around and/or it has little to no effect to our nation is an extremely misinformed opinion.
If you look at the FBI’s top ten most wanted list, 3 of them are wanted for marijuana trafficking and violent crimes associated with it.
If the crimes on our soil are next to nothing of what the Prohibition era had I suggest you look at El Paso, Nuevo Laredo, even Houston. Mara Salvatrucha is the bloodiest gang in American history, and more than half of it’s income and power stems from marijuana profits.
If there is a banned substance, there is a black market for it, I don’t see how you can’t correlate the current demand for marijuana to that of the demand for alcohol back in that era.
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get me.
by atxgiantsfan on Mar 26, 2010 2:46 PM PDT up reply actions
I never said that it has little to no effect on our nation. I never denied that there is violent crime associated with marijuana being illegal. I don’t believe we have Al Capones running around – individual men with that much power causing that much trouble – individual men with the clout and reputation to act as a brand name for the entire criminal organization. Although maybe that has more to do with the Capone mythology than the historical reality. In any case, I’ll relent. Yes, there are problems. Yes, there are parallels. I don’t mean to deny that, and maybe I was a little too black and white in my stance.
However, personally, I just don’t think that it’s a useful callback. There are too many differences in too many contexts. Even worse, it’s become a crutch. It’s the Godwin’s law of marijuana arguments. It’s referenced to the point of meaninglessness.
If you want to argue for marijuana, I honestly believe that you have to argue for it in a modern context. You have to show how it is being damaging today and how legalization would be beneficial today. Pointing to an issue that revolved around a different drug over 80 years ago – while convenient – seems more like a way to escape actually talking about relevant issues than it is a way to make a legitimate point.
Most of the time.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Mar 26, 2010 3:40 PM PDT up reply actions
And re-reading, I see that some of my language was stronger about “this bad stuff doesn’t exist” than I meant it to. I definitely overstated a number of points.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Mar 26, 2010 3:45 PM PDT up reply actions
Take a look at our neighbors to the south
18,000 dead in four years. Marijuana makes up 60 percent of their profits. The drug would not be that profitable if it was not for marijuana prohibition.
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life son."
by bakoninerfan on Mar 26, 2010 1:09 PM PDT up reply actions
Funny thing: Mexico also doesn’t equal the United States. And the fact that we again, do currently have marijuana prohibition without these problems kind of attests to that rather convincingly.
That country has some serious and longstanding governmental problems that extend notably into their ability to control drug crimes in virtually any way. Not just for marijuana, either. Lately, Mexico has been sort of a free-for-all of criminal activity.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Mar 26, 2010 1:15 PM PDT up reply actions
I mean, it baffles me when the arguments start to go in the direction of “well, IF we make marijuana illegal, we’ll have problems like they have in Mexico or like we had during prohibition.”
Ummm, excuse me. Marijuana is actually illegal. Where are we having these problems you speak of?
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Mar 26, 2010 1:17 PM PDT up reply actions
PROTIP: Marijuana actually is illegal in the United States and we don’t have major criminal or social problems to account for it. If you are going to argue for the legalization of marijuana, your case starts and ends with the benefits of legalization, and has nothing to do with the detriments of illegality. Because, well, it is illegal. And if those detriments were valid: we’d be seeing them.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Mar 26, 2010 1:22 PM PDT up reply actions
I was saying our prohibition is what is causing a good chunk of the violence down there. The violence is starting to spread into our country but thats not the main point I was trying to make. Are you saying it’s ok for our policy of prohibition to cause violence as long as it’s not in the US?
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life son."
by bakoninerfan on Mar 26, 2010 1:26 PM PDT up reply actions
No, I thought you were saying something else altogether. It was a reading comprehension error on my part. That’s actually a nice little argument.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Mar 26, 2010 1:28 PM PDT up reply actions
I don't know about that 60% would have 2 be cocaine
please 4 the people who’s trying 2 use marijuana as a part of the reason 4 violence your totally wrong cocaine trafficing brings way more violence than weed does now i know weed trafficinng also brings violence but not as much as cocaine i’m not buying that.
You just hit on something ( now mind me i don't plan on doing this with my kids ) my
mom always smoked weed and when i got about 16yrs old i start smoking weed and my mom always left weed roaches in the strangest places up by a mirror maybe by a window sill.But i would always take one of her roaches and blaze one before i went 2 school (moms was always gone 2 work before i left ) and one day i found a roach (thats a small peice of a joint 4 those who don’t know that phrase) that was really the size of a joint and something told me i i take this she might know just because this was big enough 2 remember (and before she never questioned me on all those other roaches ).So when i got back from school it was me and my homeboy 2 (lol i remember this like it was yesterday ) she had this look and i knew it was trouble she said tell your friend 2 wait out-side 4 you so she’s like ’ did you find my joint i left by the window’’ i’m like yea she’s like where is it i said its gone gone where i smoked it she was pissed off sh’e like how long you’ve been smoking weed i said about a year she said ‘’ i don’t won’t you smoking weed but if you do i would rather you smoke it in here than 2 go outside and be somewhere where you can get hurt (we lived in a bad part of frisco over in the filmore district )now i would never do this with my kids but you have 2 remember where living in way different times than now and i never got high with my mother but i did smoke weed in my room.And i can honestly say that it kept me out of alot of BS growing up because i didn’t have 2 go thru dangerous places 2 get weed or 2 get high.So there is something when you say i wouldn’t want my family going 2 dangerous places 2 get weed .
How does this reconcile
with your views on steroids, given that steroids are very damaging to athletes’ health as well?
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
I was mainly talking about HGH
and it has been unproven that there are health risks attached to that. It’s not like your everyday citizen is going to be using that either, it’s mainly just athletes
Too many freaks, not enough circuses.
I will grant you that HGH
is different.
But just like HGH hasn’t had many studies done regarding harmful side affects neither has marijuana—and the studies that have been done on marijuana were poorly conducted studies done in the 60s.
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
Doesn’t HGH appear to affect organ size? Which can be extremely harmful.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Mar 26, 2010 11:46 AM PDT up reply actions
I'm not sure
I’d have to dig around to find out but I don’t think that there are many studies on HGH
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
HGH
http://www.buzzle.com/articles/human-growth-hormone-hgh-side-effects.html
Not sure how reliable this information is but here are the side effects they mention when HGH is used too much.
- Acromegaly (overgrowth of facial bones and connective tissue) Premature death (in case of acromegaly)
-
- Heart enlargement (due to prolonged use of HGH. Can’t be reversed) Low blood sugar with risk of going into a diabetic coma
-
- Excessive hair growth all over the body Excessive water retention
-
- Liver damage Thyroid damage
-
Enlarged heart could be bad, same with the liver and thyroid damage but I don’t know how much you’d have to take to hit those side effects.
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
Hate the automatic editing that SBN Nation does
This is why you should always preview your comments.
Acromegaly (overgrowth of facial bone and connective tissue)
Premature death (in case of acromegaly)
Heart enlargement (due to prolonged use of HGH. Can’t be reversed)
Low blood sugar with risk of going into a diabetic coma
Excessive hair growth all over the body
Excessive water retention
Liver damage
Thyroid damag
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
How about HGH making you imputent that right there makes it worse than weed lol
if anything weed brings the freak out in a women all those other drugs cocaine,crack,meth,even alcohol from what i heard kills your sex drive (along with your banlk account )alcohol makes a woman sloppy i don’t won’t know sloppy sex so any time i had sex off weed it was the bomb.That right there is enough 2 legal-lize it ‘’ the sex alone ’’
I believe that cocaine was originally a medical drug, actually. It’s in the same family as other cains, like Novocain and Lidocain.
It has since been disavowed of medical purpose for being too addictive and too destructive.
The case for marijuana is convoluted and complicated, but it has about as much to do with any cocaine laws as I have to do with Kanye West.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Mar 26, 2010 11:43 AM PDT up reply actions
Yup
cocaine used to be perscribed regularly in the early 1900s.
Of course they also prescribed lobotomies and electric shock therapy regularly too so take that for what it’s wroth.
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
Well, I was just trying to contextualize the point. Cocaine actually was used medically, and it was disavowed of having any medical benefit, and only became illegal when it was understood exactly how dangerous and destructive a drug it actually is. Marijuana seems to have taken the exact opposite path in American history.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Mar 26, 2010 11:49 AM PDT up reply actions
Marijuana?
Not it doesn’t.
There isn’t any tar or resin in marijuana
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
Have you ever seen a pothead scrape their pipe so they can smoke the resin? Where do you think the rest of that resin goes when you inhale it? …or in Bill Clinton’s case “not inhale it”, sorry had to get that jab in. haha.
Too many freaks, not enough circuses.
Now you're being pedantic
There’s resin in most everything if you take it to that extreme.
Doesn’t mean it’s harmful.
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
Read what I blocked out for you above
and then the entire article. I ecourage you to
Too many freaks, not enough circuses.
The body
naturally produces endocannabinoids. That is why we have the receptors in the first place. The are produced in the soma (cell body) of nerve cells using cell membranes, and released into the synaptic cleft (space between a nerve ending and the next nerve cell) to produce inhibitory effects.
Scientifically, the reason for the existence of these endocannabinoids is not well known, but they do exist naturally, unlike, say, alcohol.
Just thought I’d throw that out there.
"[...] coordinator Bud Foster has never had problems filling holes."
question
you seem to know your neurotransmitters…
Cocaine does not have a natural receptor, and in fact blocks pain receptors, producing the euphoric effect from an excess of free-floating chemicals (which chems, I do not know)…do you have any light to shed on the discrepancy between the brain’s reception of cannabis and cocaine?
Yes
Cocaine blocks the reuptake of Dopamine, which is implicated in reward and pleasure (the reward center of the brain is a dopaminergic pathway). Comparatively , THC (cannibol, basically), is NOT an addictive substance because it does not stimulate a reward center, which would be relative to operant conditioning. Instead, it blocks a more general subset of receptors in various parts of the brain, so it has effects more similar to those of alcohol (which binds to GABA receptors, thus inhibiting function), than those of Cocaine, which increase dopamine levels in a very prone portion of the brain.
"[...] coordinator Bud Foster has never had problems filling holes."
The FDA had legalized drugs that kill people every day. From the Drug companies
most everything that the FDA approves has worse side effects that what they are being used to treat.. and often don’t actually help what is being treated..
So, given that.. why not legalize Marijuana? The FDA would then approve forms or types of MJ… after millions of dollars of testing.. ummm Who wants to sign up for legalized Drug company testing for types of Marijuana?
"Whether you think you can, or you think you can't, either way, YOU'RE RIGHT !"
.
Yea Drew K sorry to say but your post above is a joke. I dont even want to get into an argument with you. You sound like a prosecutor
.
Responsable citizen? Does that make me unresponsable because i am a medical marijuana user?
by forty9ers3298 on Mar 26, 2010 11:31 AM PDT up reply actions
reply
Make sure and use the reply button.
by David Fucillo on Mar 26, 2010 11:30 AM PDT up reply actions
.
heroin cocaine crack, all have chemicals and crazy shit mixed with them to make. marijuana just needs water and sun and your good. natural plant like a poppy seed
....
So sorry fooch, didnt even realize
by forty9ers3298 on Mar 26, 2010 11:32 AM PDT up reply actions
that's fine
Just keep that in mind going forward. It’s in the form you agree to when you register.
by David Fucillo on Mar 26, 2010 11:34 AM PDT up reply actions
gotcha
I thought you meant you didn’t realize it was against the rules. No problem.
by David Fucillo on Mar 26, 2010 11:42 AM PDT up reply actions
Regarding Percy Harvin
were there many reports of him missing games due to his migraines before coming to the NFL? I’m willing to guess that he smoked marijuana for relief of those migraines.
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
He's going to miss a lot of NFL games too.
I don’t know if pot actually helps with migraines though.
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
by SportsChicken on Mar 26, 2010 9:54 PM PDT up reply actions
There's some evidence to suggest that it does
not any proper studies though.
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
Well then I guess he can try to get it prescribed?
Is it legal in Minnesota?
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
by SportsChicken on Mar 26, 2010 10:05 PM PDT up reply actions
Well, if all else fails, any player who tests positive for marijuana can simply pack up their scarves and mittens and head up here to Canada. They can join the legends of the CFL (Cannabis Football League) such as Ricky Williams.
by Rod Blogojevich on Mar 26, 2010 12:14 PM PDT reply actions
Used to feel strongly about this, but for some reason my smoking use has decreased an incredible amount since graduating high school, I just don’t find it as fun anymore :( But I do believe legalizing it would have a huge impact on the U.S. economy and would take away ALOT of income and power away from the drug cartels to the south of us, and the power of many gangs here in Texas. So if it ever gets on a ballot in the Lone Star state, it’ll have my support.
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get me.
as far as pot use in terms of NFL players, they can already do whatever they want (Stallworth, Vick, countless others) and get away with it. So I don’t think anything anybody does or says will make a difference.
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get me.
by atxgiantsfan on Mar 26, 2010 12:29 PM PDT up reply actions
^5
Peace out brother
"Whether you think you can, or you think you can't, either way, YOU'RE RIGHT !"
another thing about legalizing it
will also make it legal to grow and cultivate Hemp, which farmer’s having been wanting to start growing again for years. The hemp will probably make more money for CA then the actual marijuana.
"All during film, I'm calling him Bam-Bam, like from 'The Flintstones,' because he hits everything. He is the truth" - Chad Ochocinco on Patrick Willis
Yet another thing about legalizing it:
It will free up jail space so we can keep the real bad guys in there longer.
by madmatt on Mar 26, 2010 12:53 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Bingo.
And, in doing so, will save millions of taxpayers’ dollars.
Ridiculous for someone to be in prison for three marijuana strikes.
Alaska is a state, dammit! Can I get a Niner game on TV up here?
What if they legalize it...
…but it’s still illegal to grow it without some sort of license?
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
by SportsChicken on Mar 26, 2010 9:55 PM PDT up reply actions
That's a good idea too
You have to pay x amount of dollars for a license, and the amount you pay is based on how much you intend to grow. For a personal license it could be just minimal—like registering a car or a gun. Higher amounts for small business type of license and then major license money if you’re going to have one of the big agriculture companies move in and grow.
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
When is this going to be on the polls?
I’m sure everyone in my family is going to vote yes.
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
by SportsChicken on Mar 26, 2010 10:08 PM PDT up reply actions
From what I understand it's going to the polls in November
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
Thanks.
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
by SportsChicken on Mar 26, 2010 11:04 PM PDT up reply actions
Some more peer reviewed articles for Drew
Nov 6, 2009 Journal of Pain conducted a double-blind review. Conclusion
This study shows that THC:CBD extract is efficacious for relief of pain in patients with advanced cancer pain not fully relieved by strong opioids."
Aug 2008
Neuropsychopharmacology medical magazine conducted a double-blind study.
“In a double-blind, randomized, clinical trial of the short-term adjunctive treatment of neuropathic pain in HIV-associated distal sensory polyneuropathy, participants received either smoked cannabis or placebo cannabis cigarettes…
Among completers, pain relief was significantly greater with cannabis than placebo. The proportion of subjects achieving at least 30% pain relief was again significantly greater with cannabis (46%) compared to placebo (18%). It was concluded that smoked cannabis was generally well-tolerated and effective when added to concomitant analgesic therapy in patients with medically refractory pain due to HIV-associated neuropathy.”
June 2008 Journal of Pain
Double Blind Study
“This study’s objective was to examine the efficacy of two doses of smoked cannabis on pain in persons with neuropathic pain of different origins (e.g., physical trauma to nerve bundles, spinal cord injury, multiple sclerosis, diabetes). In a double-blind, randomized clinical trial participants received either lowdose, high-dose, or placebo cannabis cigarettes…
Thirty-eight patients underwent a standardized procedure for smoking either high-dose (7%), low-dose (3.5%), or placebo cannabis; of these, 32 completed all three smoking sessions. The study demonstrated an analgesic response to smoking cannabis with no significant difference between the low and the high dose cigarettes. The study concluded that both low and high cannabis doses were efficacious in reducing neuropathic pain of diverse causes.”
March 2007
European Journal of Neurology
Double Blind Study
“Symptoms relating to spasticity are common in multiple sclerosis (MS) and can be difficult to treat. We have investigated the efficacy, safety and tolerability of a standardized … cannabis-based medicine (CBM) containing delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD), upon spasticity in MS. A total of 189 subjects with definite MS and spasticity were randomized to receive daily doses of active preparation (n = 124) or placebo (n = 65) in a double blind study over 6 weeks…
The primary efficacy analysis… showed the active preparation to be significantly superior…
We conclude that this CBM [cannabis-based medicine] may represent a useful new agent for treatment of the symptomatic relief of spasticity in MS.”
Feb 13, 2007
Neurlogy
“Objective: To determine the effect of smoked cannabis on the neuropathic pain of HIV-associated sensory neuropathy, and an experimental pain model…
Patients were randomly assigned to smoke either cannabis (3.56% thc) or identical placebo cigarettes with the cannabinoids extracted three times daily for 5 days…
Conclusion: Smoked cannabis was well tolerated and effectively relieved chronic neuropathic pain from HIV-associated sensory neuropathy The findings are comparable to oral drugs used for chronic neuropathic pain."
September 2005
Neurology
“BACKGROUND: Central pain in multiple sclerosis (MS) is common and often refractory to treatment…
CONCLUSIONS: Cannabis-based medicine is effective in reducing pain and sleep disturbance in patients with multiple sclerosis related central neuropathic pain and is mostly well tolerated.”
December 2004
Journal of Pain
“The objective was to investigate the effectiveness of cannabis-based medicines for treatment of chronic pain associated with brachial plexus root avulsion. This condition is an excellent human model of central neuropathic pain as it represents an unusually homogenous group in terms of anatomical location of injury, pain descriptions and patient demographics…
The primary outcome measure was the mean pain severity score during the last 7 days of treatment. Secondary outcome measures included pain related quality of life assessments. The primary outcome measure failed to fall by the two points defined in our hypothesis. However, both this measure and measures of sleep showed statistically significant improvements.
The study medications were generally well tolerated with the majority of adverse events, including intoxication type reactions, being mild to moderate in severity and resolving spontaneously. Studies of longer duration in neuropathic pain are required to confirm a clinically relevant, improvement in the treatment of this condition.”
August 2004,
Multiple Sclerosis
“The primary outcome measure was a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score for each patient’s most troublesome symptom. Additional measures included VAS scores of other symptoms, and measures of disability, cognition, mood, sleep and fatigue. Following CBME the primary symptom score reduced from mean (SE) 74.36 (11.1) to 48.89 (22.0) following CBME and from 74.31 (12.5) to 54.79 (26.3) following placebo [ns].
Spasticity VAS scores were significantly reduced by CBME (Sativex) in comparison with placebo (P=0.001). There were no significant adverse effects on cognition or mood and intoxication was generally mild."
August 2004
Multiple Sclerosis (different study)
“In the 50 patients included into the intention-to-treat analysis set, there were no statistically significant differences associated with active treatment compared to placebo, but trends in favour of active treatment were seen for spasm frequency, mobility and getting to sleep.
In the 37 patients (per-protocol set) who received at least 90% of their prescribed dose, improvements in spasm frequency (P = 0.013) and mobility after excluding a patient who fell and stopped walking were seen (P = 0.01). Minor adverse events were slightly more frequent and severe during active treatment, and toxicity symptoms, which were generally mild, were more pronounced in the active phase.
CONCLUSION: A standardized Cannabis sativa plant extract might lower spasm frequency and increase mobility with tolerable side effects in MS patients with persistent spasticity not responding to other drugs.”
Feb 2003
Clinical Rehabilitation
“OBJECTIVES: To determine whether plant-derived cannabis medicinal extracts (CME) can alleviate neurogenic symptoms unresponsive to standard treatment, and to quantify adverse effects…
Measures used: Patients recorded symptom, well-being and intoxication scores on a daily basis using visual analogue scales. At the end of each two-week period an observer rated severity and frequency of symptoms on numerical rating scales, administered standard measures of disability (Barthel Index), mood and cognition, and recorded adverse events.
RESULTS: Pain relief associated with both THC and CBD was significantly superior to placebo. Impaired bladder control, muscle spasms and spasticity were improved by CME in some patients with these symptoms. Three patients had transient hypotension and intoxication with rapid initial dosing of THC-containing CME.
CONCLUSIONS: Cannabis medicinal extracts can improve neurogenic symptoms unresponsive to standard treatments. Unwanted effects are predictable and generally well tolerated. Larger scale studies are warranted to confirm these findings.”
Those are just the proper Double-Blind Studies. I can list more if you want me too.
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
All any of those really say is that further studies to prove that they are not harmful. Which means they are still looking for loop-holes to get around what already has been proven in what I stated above. That is all it really says to me. And there is absolutely nothing in there that refutes anything I listed above. Do you understand that there are similar articles in defense of the tobacco companies. If laws are passed more and more for this, I think in about 15-20 years from now, some of those people will start coming back with tracable symptoms caused by the medical marajuana to cancer.
Too many freaks, not enough circuses.
OK Drew
You listed two studies and said it proved black and white that there were no medical benefits to marijuana.
I’ve listed well over a dozen peer reviewed studies from medical doctrs. Double-Blind studies too and all you can say is “it needs more study”?
Yes, I full agree that it needs more study, but the evidence is pretty conclusive that there are many benefits to medical marijuana, which directly contradicts your claims that there are none.
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
Two studies? It was more like five. And yes, there’s nothing in anything you posted above to refute any of mine that I listed because RESEARCH is still being conducted.
Look I get it. You want it leagalized… I don’t. Period end of story. Nothing we say here is going to change whatever happens anyway. I just think it’s going to open up a whole new set of problems in this country.
Too many freaks, not enough circuses.
You claimed that there was aboslutely no medical benefits of medical marijuana
and said I couldn’t find any studies that showed there was.
I’ve got well over a dozen, yet you still can’t admit that your original statements were wrong.
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
No
I calimed that there were significant health issues (documented health issues) proven to be attached to the drug. AND MY ORIGINAL STATEMENTS WERE NOT WRONG. I know you are having a tough time wrapping your head around that cause you want so badly to be right, but there is nothing that you have said that has given you the right to claim that.
Too many freaks, not enough circuses.
OK Drew
I don’t think I’ve ever seen you admit that you were wrong in an argument.
In this case you are and the evidence shows that there are far more benefits to medical marijuana than there are risks.
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
You actually only quoted one study
from Harvard.
The ehow article said it based it’s information on a 1982 study (how’s that for cutting edg research), and the webmd article you quoted absolutely no study. You also quoted the National Multiple Sclerosis Society, but that was not a direct quote. This is their current stance and is now conducting a large study on the benefits of MS
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
Some more articles in peer reviewed magazines
These are human studies—basically doctors surveying patients.
December 2007
Journal of the National Cancer Institute
“Prior knowledge
Treatment with cannabinoids had been shown to reduce the invasiveness of cancer cells, but the cellular mechanisms underlying this effect were unclear.
Study design
Cancer cells treated with combinations of cannabinoids, antagonists of cannabinoid receptors, and siRNA to tissue inhibitor of matrix metalloproteinases-1 (TIMP-1) were assessed for invasiveness, protein expression, and activation of signal transduction pathways.
Contribution
The expression of TIMP-1 was shown to be stimulated by cannabinoid receptor activation and to mediate the anti-invasive effect of cannabinoids.
Implications
Clarification of the mechanism of cannabinoid action may help investigators to explore their therapeutic benefit.
Limitations
The relevance of the findings to the behavior of tumor cells in vivo remains to be determined.”
August 2007
Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome
“Objectives: This placebo-controlled within-subjects study evaluated marijuana and dronabinol across a range of behaviors: eating topography, mood, cognitive performance, physiologic measures, and sleep.
Methods: HIV-positive marijuana smokers (n = 10) completed 2 16-day inpatient phases. Each dronabinol (5 and 10 mg) and marijuana (2.0% and 3.9% [DELTA]9-tetrahydrocannabinol [THC]) dose was administered 4 times daily for 4 days, but only 1 drug was active per day, thereby maintaining double-blind dosing. Four days of placebo washout separated each active cannabinoid condition.
Results: As compared with placebo, marijuana and dronabinol dose dependently increased daily caloric intake and body weight in HIV-positive marijuana smokers. All cannabinoid conditions produced significant intoxication, except for low-dose dronabinol (5 mg); the intoxication was rated positively (eg, “good drug effect”) with little evidence of discomfort and no impairment of cognitive performance. Effects of marijuana and dronabinol were comparable, except that only marijuana (3.9% THC) improved ratings of sleep.
Conclusions: These data suggest that for HIV-positive marijuana smokers, both dronabinol (at doses 8 times current recommendations) and marijuana were well tolerated and produced substantial and comparable increases in food intake."
Feb 2005
Journal of Neuroscience
“Our results indicate that cannabinoid receptors are important in the pathology of AD [Alzheimer’s Disease] and that cannabinoids succeed in preventing the neurodegenerative process occurring in the disease.”
September 2004
Movement Disorders
“An anonymous questionnaire sent to all patients attending the Prague Movement Disorder Centre revealed that 25% of 339 respondents had taken cannabis and 45.9% of these described some form of benefit….
The late onset of cannabis action is noteworthy. Because most patients reported that improvement occurred approximately two months after the first use of cannabis, it is very unlikely that it could be attributed to a placebo reaction.”
August 2004
Multiple Sclerosis
The majority of patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) develop troublesome lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). Anecdotal reports suggest that cannabis may alleviate LUTS, and cannabinoid receptors in the bladder and nervous system are potential pharmacological targets. In an open trial we evaluated the safety, tolerability, dose range, and efficacy of two whole-plant extracts of Cannabis sativa in patients with advanced MS and refractory LUTS."
“Urinary urgency, the number and volume of incontinence episodes, frequency and nocturia all decreased significantly following treatment (P <0.05, Wilcoxon’s signed rank test). However, daily total voided, catheterized and urinary incontinence pad weights also decreased significantly on both extracts. Patient self-assessment of pain, spasticity and quality of sleep improved significantly (P <0.05, Wilcoxon’s signed rank test) with pain improvement continuing up to median of 35 weeks.
There were few troublesome side effects, suggesting that cannabis-based medicinal extracts are a safe and effective treatment for urinary and other problems in patients with advanced
October 2003
Nature Review—Cancer
“Cannabinoids — the active components of Cannabis sativaand their derivatives — exert palliative effects in cancer patients by preventing nausea, vomiting and pain and by stimulating appetite.
August 2003
Annals of Internal Medicine
“Patients receiving cannabinoids [smoked marijuana and marijuana pills] had improved immune function compared with those receiving placebo. They also gained about 4 pounds more on average than those patients receiving placebo.”In addition, these compounds have been shown to inhibit the growth of tumour cells in culture and animal models by modulating key cell-signaling pathways.
Cannabinoids are usually well tolerated, and do not produce the generalized toxic effects of conventional chemotherapies."
March 2003
Journal of Pain
“There has been a surge in interest in medicinal cannabis in Canada. We conducted a questionnaire survey to determine the current prevalence of medicinal cannabis use among patients with chronic non-cancer pain, to estimate the dose size and frequency of cannabis use, and to describe the main symptoms for which relief was being sought…
Of the 32 subjects who used cannabis for pain, 17 (53%) used four puffs or less at each dosing interval, eight (25%) smoked a whole cannabis cigarette (joint) and four (12%) smoked more than one joint. Seven (22%) of these subjects used cannabis more than once daily, five (16%) used it daily, eight (25%) used it weekly and nine (28%) used it rarely. Pain, sleep and mood were most frequently reported as improving with cannabis use, and ‘high’ and dry mouth were the most commonly reported side effects. We conclude that cannabis use is prevalent among the chronic non-cancer pain population, for a wide range of symptoms, with considerable variability in the amounts used.”
July 2001
Pharmacology, Biochemistry and Behavior
“Although the public debate about the legalization of marijuana has continued for as long as 25 years, few controlled studies have been conducted to assess its potential medical benefits. The present study examined the antiemetic effect of smoked marijuana cigarettes (8.4 and 16.9 mg Delta(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol [THC]) compared to a highly potent antiemetic drug, ondansetron (8 mg) in 13 healthy volunteers. Nausea and emesis were induced by syrup of ipecac.
Marijuana significantly reduced ratings of ‘queasiness’ and slightly reduced the incidence of vomiting compared to placebo. Ondansetron completely eliminated the emetic effects of ipecac. These findings support and extend previous results, indicating that smoked marijuana reduces feelings of nausea and also reduces emesis in this model. However, its effects are very modest relative to ondansetron, and the psychoactive effects of marijuana are likely to limit its clinical usefulness in the general population.”
April 1998
Journal of Pyschoactive Drugs
“The authors present case histories indicating that a number of patients find cannabis (marihuana) useful in the treatment of their bipolar disorder. Some used it to treat mania, depression, or both. They stated that it was more effective than conventional drugs, or helped relieve the side effects of those drugs. One woman found that cannabis curbed her manic rages; she and her husband have worked to make it legally available as a medicine. Others described the use of cannabis as a supplement to lithium (allowing reduced consumption) or for relief of lithium’s side effects. Another case illustrates the fact that medical cannabis users are in danger of arrest, especially when children are encouraged to inform on parents by some drug prevention programs.
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
Smileyman, I don’t think Drew will be coming back. He’ll just magically reappear tomorrow pretending nothing happened.
by Rod Blogojevich on Mar 26, 2010 1:11 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
I will be here all day. There’s nothing in here that I have to worry about in discrediting anything I said in the above thread.
Too many freaks, not enough circuses.
I think your comments today have replaced David Carr Thread in terms of memorable material.
by Rod Blogojevich on Mar 26, 2010 1:26 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Well my friend, that is up for you to determine.
by Rod Blogojevich on Mar 26, 2010 1:32 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
I will Immortalize it in my signature.
Proud Member Of The Drew K Hates Marijuana Thread And Will Prove You Wrong If You Defend It With Harvard Law Material Even If You Are A Chemist By Trade. Because Drew K Knows All.
by Rod Blogojevich on Mar 26, 2010 2:05 PM PDT up reply actions
Thanks for the acknowledgement
Proud to be that significant for you to put me in your sig. It’s not the first time. You are doing me a favor, really.
Too many freaks, not enough circuses.
I do it on my blackberry, you just access the website if you have a data plan and log in.
by Rod Blogojevich on Mar 26, 2010 1:27 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Depends on your phone too
my phone is a crappy cheap one and can’t post comments.
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
Back to the football thing
Assuming that a proper double-blind study is done with a major medical institution or government research and it’s found that marijuana is at least as effective at relieving pain as is vicodin or other narcotics.
Should NFL players be allowed to smoke it at that point for relief instead of taking a pill?
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
i taught adolescents
and one thing i remember is many of the messed up kids started out doing “harmless” marijuana. They used it to escape their problems—for most this only made things worse= more drugs, deliquency, dropping out of school, juvenile hall.
i’ve been in (alcohol anoynomous meetings) meetings, (narcotics anonymous) meetings too, and can tell you that if you are addicted there is no law that will stop a man’s desire for escape. I personally found my freedom in God and haven’t taken one look back. Whom the son sets free is free indeed.
To justify legalizing something for monetary gain is very shortsighted. Before I start I want you to know that I personally have no moral opinion against gambling but there are considerations for its effects. I live in hawaii. Here there was a push recently to legalize gambling for tax revenue (we’re hurting with revenue loss). The people of Hawaii know that while the proponents of gambling promise big $$ (much like lottery and casino officials did in CA for the schools ??) the negative effects on the society from casinos far outweigh any few positive. The ohana or family concept is one of protection. I think we have a moral obligation to protect our society from things that will hurt it—especially our youth.
Therefore, I think legalizing marijuana will have many negative effects in California. I remember on a stop over in Amsterdam we walked through the streets where it was legal. It was an ugly, ugly place. the smell was everywhere—i just remember thinking i hope the us doesn’t become this morally.
The monetary reason is just one argument
and it’s not one that I favor.
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
Legally speaking, though, I think it’s the one that’s going to carry the most weight for lawmakers.
I don't know about that, to the groin.
by howtheyscored on Mar 26, 2010 2:39 PM PDT up reply actions
Wow...there are a lot of smart people on Niners Nation
We should research that.
Alaska is a state, dammit! Can I get a Niner game on TV up here?
Of course
It’s a sports blog for a team that resides near a lot of good universities, a national research institute, a major technology center etc. The fans will represent the local to at least some degree.
It also helps that intelligent discussion occurs frequently drawing many to be involved as they have time :)
For the record I’m just a software engineer, an occupation I’m sure is well represented here.
True, true...
Then again, there are also a lot of pot smokers on Niners Nation! Not that the two categories are mutually exclusive, though.
Alaska is a state, dammit! Can I get a Niner game on TV up here?
Sports Nerds
=D. Apparently, that is what I am classified as. Gotta love it!
"[...] coordinator Bud Foster has never had problems filling holes."
Legalize it
Why, well in countries where it’s legal, with the infamous coffee shops, the majority in there smoking are Americans. People don’t smoke as often because it’s legal and has gotten old. Alcohol is far worst than marijuana, as far as affects are concerned.
-Black Sand Ninja
I don't understand that argument.
The old “Pot is not as bad as alcohol, therefore it should be legal.” I just don’t understand how citing how one vice is legal, that is grounds to legalize yet another vice (pot). And before people start jumping all over me, medical pot is O.K. to me. It’s the recreational use of pot I don’t support.
I survived the David Carr Press Conference Thread 3/06/2010
Credit to iaalexeeff
Also surviving member of the underwhelming Jed York Conference Thread 3/22/2010
Eat Shitake!
by Hoopers Judge on Mar 26, 2010 8:08 PM PDT up reply actions
Hypocrisy
lots of people see no problem going out and getting drunk on the weekends or smoking two packs a day but look aghast at someone who smokes weed. In my view that’s hypocritical.
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
I say legalize it
49ers are the best there was the best there is and the best there ever will be
by swagger on Mar 26, 2010 2:32 PM PDT via mobile reply actions
Honestly I want it legalized for a slightly different reason
I’m tired of paying for the prosecution and incarceration of marijuana users.
Those in jail should complete their sentences, it was illegal at the time, but I see the costs as being too high to be worth it.
The so called war on drugs isn’t worth it to me, concede marijuana because it’s way too prevalent to control it in a cost effective manner. Tax it, schedule it like Alcohol and call it a day.
by Dave R. on Mar 26, 2010 2:46 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
This
Our country spends nearly $15 billion enforcing prohibition (enforcement, prosecution, incarceration) not to mention the tax revenues it will generate.
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life son."
by bakoninerfan on Mar 26, 2010 3:13 PM PDT up reply actions
And how many law-related jobs will be lost over it? Seems like a wash to me.
Too many freaks, not enough circuses.
Any reduction in Lawyers...
would be a good start. You are basically saying that we should have people wasting their lives in prison for non-violent crimes such as possession so we can have more law enforcement jobs? Cant say I agree with your value system…
by thatguywiththebeardandthebanjo on Mar 26, 2010 3:25 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, but remember that Drew K values the opinion of lawyers over scientists.
Proud Member Of The Drew K Hates Marijuana Thread And Will Prove You Wrong If You Defend It With Harvard Law Material Even If You Are A Chemist By Trade. Because Drew K Knows All.
by Rod Blogojevich on Mar 26, 2010 3:26 PM PDT up reply actions
Perhaps the law enforcement community can spend their energy fighting more serious crimes.
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life son."
by bakoninerfan on Mar 26, 2010 3:28 PM PDT up reply actions
This.
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
by SportsChicken on Mar 26, 2010 9:59 PM PDT up reply actions
yes other serious crimes...
like being a teenager in the suburbs…
by thatguywiththebeardandthebanjo on Mar 26, 2010 3:34 PM PDT up reply actions
No
The initiative still outlaws driving under the influence. All DUI statutes remain in place.
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life son."
by bakoninerfan on Mar 26, 2010 3:41 PM PDT up reply actions
If people can get legally stoned, how would DUI laws stop them from getting behind the wheel?
I survived the David Carr Press Conference Thread 3/06/2010
Credit to iaalexeeff
Also surviving member of the underwhelming Jed York Conference Thread 3/22/2010
Eat Shitake!
by Hoopers Judge on Mar 26, 2010 8:10 PM PDT up reply actions
DUIs
I’m guessing it would mean you can’t drive while high. You don’t have breathalyzer tests but you still have field sobriety tests and whatnot
by David Fucillo on Mar 26, 2010 8:52 PM PDT up reply actions
Another plus, IMO
Less money devoted towards government employed lawyers and whatnot.
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
by SportsChicken on Mar 26, 2010 9:59 PM PDT up reply actions
This.
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
by SportsChicken on Mar 26, 2010 9:58 PM PDT up reply actions
How much does weed cost in the States? I am talking like prime, high quality strains, not Jimmy Schwag… I’d assume its pretty pricey just because it is such a legal risk growing/selling/buying it compared to up here in Canada. An ounce of good ‘BC Bud’ (which is probably one of the best kinds of marijuana in the world) costs about $150-$160 in US dollars.
Proud Member Of The Drew K Hates Marijuana Thread And Will Prove You Wrong If You Defend It With Harvard Law Material Even If You Are A Chemist By Trade. Because Drew K Knows All.
by Rod Blogojevich on Mar 26, 2010 3:08 PM PDT reply actions
HA...one more reason to move to Canada
In NYC an ounce would run you more in the US450 to 650 range depending on quality….
by thatguywiththebeardandthebanjo on Mar 26, 2010 3:14 PM PDT up reply actions
Haha are you serious? Holy crap that’s crazy!
Proud Member Of The Drew K Hates Marijuana Thread And Will Prove You Wrong If You Defend It With Harvard Law Material Even If You Are A Chemist By Trade. Because Drew K Knows All.
by Rod Blogojevich on Mar 26, 2010 3:17 PM PDT up reply actions
In cali
You can find ounces as low as 150-200 through clubs just here in Sacto… In Oakland or Humboldt maybe even cheaper.
Gimme 1 round!
by ItBurnzWhenIP on Mar 26, 2010 3:29 PM PDT up reply actions
Damn
I need to move farther north.
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life son."
by bakoninerfan on Mar 26, 2010 3:40 PM PDT up reply actions
In Cali if you know the right people
you can get an ounce of high quality bud for $250-300. $400-500 is more common though.
"Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life son."
by bakoninerfan on Mar 26, 2010 3:26 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, like I sort of touched on above, there are economic studies from Simon Fraser University in Vancouver, BC that discuss the risk/reward for grow ops. If you have the $$$ to rent a house, divert electricity, buy your growing gear, etc, one can make hundreds of thousands of dollars. This of course, is considering the fact that the grower sells the weed directly, but this almost never happens- third, fourth, fifth, etc parties get involved with the dealing process and this dilutes the profit flow. At the end of the day, though, if a grower is caught, 1 out of 10 goes to prison for a maximum of 6 months, the rest get off with a fine averaging just over a hundred dollars. In Canada, the marijuana ‘industry’ is about as profitable as one can get.
Although now, the Hells Angels and other gangs (Asian gangs are on the rise bigtime here) have slowly taken over the weed trade, so it’s a little sketchier now.
Proud Member Of The Drew K Hates Marijuana Thread And Will Prove You Wrong If You Defend It With Harvard Law Material Even If You Are A Chemist By Trade. Because Drew K Knows All.
by Rod Blogojevich on Mar 26, 2010 3:33 PM PDT up reply actions
^
See what happens when you bring stuff like this up in a football blog.
Too many freaks, not enough circuses.
That’s like a pot calling the kettle black, no?
If anyone has any issues with me posting this stuff on a thread that had trended towards this topic, let me know. I find it interesting to see what Americans think about this subject, though, because marijuana is so openly used in Canada.
Proud Member Of The Drew K Hates Marijuana Thread And Will Prove You Wrong If You Defend It With Harvard Law Material Even If You Are A Chemist By Trade. Because Drew K Knows All.
by Rod Blogojevich on Mar 26, 2010 3:40 PM PDT up reply actions
Talking about costs of drugs that are currently illegal in the U.S. I don't think is approprite, but obviously I am the minority on the matter.
The topic was taken out of context of what I think it’s original intentions were. Because this is a football blog, the topic was regarding draft picks and their marijuana usage. Somwhere along the line, maybe provoked by certian questions, it took a turn for the worse. Maybe my firm stand gainst it contributed to that factor, but I dont believe your above comments (involving the cost of an illegal drug) was the intentions of the author.
Too many freaks, not enough circuses.
I believe it is a viable question because it is a good representation on how strict the American legal system is versus the Canadian system. The higher the risk, the more it costs.
I would have never gotten involved in this thread until I saw one of the head writers for Niners Nation attacking other people for their views on this subject.
Unfortunately, as a writer for this site, your behavior dictates much of the discussion in threads. Take it as a learning experience for next time, because I believe that just because you are a writer here doesn’t imply you are above anyone here.
I personally enjoy these exchanges, because you learn a bit about your fellow commenters. I’m happy I was a part of this for that reason. That is what a community should be about, am I right?
You were just as big of a part of this conversation getting to where it is. Don’t try to scapegoat me for asking questions about an interesting topic. If I took your side here, you’d be smiling ear to ear instead of calling me ‘inappropriate.’
Proud Member Of The Drew K Hates Marijuana Thread And Will Prove You Wrong If You Defend It With Harvard Law Material Even If You Are A Chemist By Trade. Because Drew K Knows All.
by Rod Blogojevich on Mar 26, 2010 4:15 PM PDT up reply actions
Who said I am above anyone?
there is no scapegoat, it’s a simple fact. This is a football blog. If you want to go discuss drugs, do it somewhere else.
Too many freaks, not enough circuses.
but in some states and circumstances it is legal in your country?
and I feel talking about the price point and the factors that influence it is relevant discussion. Its not like we’re trading numbers and addresses.
This topic has gotten very far away from it's original purpose
and thats the point.
Too many freaks, not enough circuses.
Here... I went to the liberty to even look one up for you all...
http://abovetheflat.com/10-signs-marijuana-affects-blog-writing/
Have at it.
Too many freaks, not enough circuses.
I think it is relative
The danger of drug use and cultivation is related to the possibility of players having an exemption for marijuana use during drug testing. The price of marijuana is a key factor in the debate, and possibility of it being legalized. Therefore, as usual $$ matters.
Calm down hater.
Wow that's expensive.
I’ve never smoked or purchased weed (and I don’t plan to if it’s legalized) but I really don’t see why people would pay so much for one ounce of grass.
Especially since it can be grown soooo easily.
One plant actually sprouted in my back yard a few years ago. I was so scared that I dug out like 3 feet of my soil just to make sure it didn’t grow back.
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
by SportsChicken on Mar 26, 2010 10:04 PM PDT up reply actions
I don't get it.
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
by SportsChicken on Mar 28, 2010 1:51 PM PDT up reply actions
I pay 50-60 an eighth for good weed. so that’s like 400 an ounce. I buy it from people who buy it from clubs though.
by hellaninersfan on Mar 27, 2010 12:46 AM PDT up reply actions
49erscan I realize this is off topic and we may face the wrath of Drew but where in canada are you
Proud Member Of The Drew K Hates Marijuana Thread And Will Prove You Wrong If You Defend It With Harvard Law Material Even If You Are A Chemist By Trade. Because Drew K Knows All.
by Rod Blogojevich on Mar 26, 2010 5:21 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Do you love me Mary Jane?
Unless the Feds decriminalize bud altogether, the NFL will have no choice but to consider it a hard drug and continue testing and fining players who use it.
on that note, booze ruins way more lives than Mary Jane ever has. Tobacco is way more harmful to your lungs and throat than bud is. Mary Jane needs to be legalized, taxed, and taken out of the hands of international drug lords raking in 100% profit.
2012 is a big year for Vegas regarding bud, but hopefully the decriminalization law passes so budsmokers won’t have the clout of feeling like a criminal and can continue to fuel the work force, as they already do now. If morons can sit around a bar and booze it up, then drive off into the night, people should be able to smoke some sweet sweet cheeba at home with no worries.
by LADubbz45 on Mar 26, 2010 5:58 PM PDT via mobile reply actions
What is the purpose of this post?
Just wondering if writers could stop posting about topics that have heavy politcal feelings. This is a football blog, not a political rally.
I survived the David Carr Press Conference Thread 3/06/2010
Credit to iaalexeeff
Also surviving member of the underwhelming Jed York Conference Thread 3/22/2010
Eat Shitake!
post
Some football topics go beyond just football. The NFL has a concern about marijuana use by incoming draft choices. Obviously this has moved well beyond football, but sometimes topics go that way.
by David Fucillo on Mar 26, 2010 8:53 PM PDT up reply actions
When an NFL coach says that a full 1/3 of his draft board
has admitted to smoking marijuana or tested positive for it college I’d say it’s a pretty big deal for football.
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
Good point.
Proud Sponsor of YoungWillis
by mountaindew77 on Mar 27, 2010 4:53 PM PDT up reply actions
Some thoughts...
Now I’ve never smoked marijuana but I have met many people that do.
They say that the best way to get rid of your “high” is to engage in physical activities (mainly running).
Wouldn’t marijuana be useless for football players since they’re participating in a very physical activity?
Or do the pain-relieving effects linger longer than the “high”?
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
That's a good question
I’ve never smoked marijuana either, so I can’t answer that—but I’d have to imagine the effects would last at least as long as a pain killer.
hydrocodone (aka Vicodin) lasts about 3-4 hrs as a pain killer.
oxycodene lasts about 5 hrs before it starts wearing off
I don’t have any experience with morphine so I can’t comment on that.
Hydrocodone and oxycodene are the two most commonly prescribed pain medications in the US.
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
funny thing...
there was a UFC fighter my friend told me about. He was high during one of his fights and won. He was subsequently disqualified as they cited the marijuana as a performance enhancer which i thought was a complete joke. There are athletes who smoke marijuana regularly and are able to compete fine. Sometimes it helps them train. I believe one friend of mine smoked during wrestling season because it helped him keep weight. I also have friends who lift weights high because it helps them get through their training.
Well I wasn't saying MJ would hurt a football player
But rather that playing football lessened the effects of the drug.
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
by SportsChicken on Mar 26, 2010 11:07 PM PDT up reply actions
Well
So long as THC is in the system, it will exhibit its inhibitory effects. Basically, it will act as a painkiller and brainkiller (much like alcohol) for as long as it is in your system. As far as I know, physical activity will do nothing to dampen it, because it is not metabolized by muscle tissue like sugars.
"[...] coordinator Bud Foster has never had problems filling holes."
Interesting
So why do people say that running around the track after smoking a joint gets rid of their “high”
I guess I’ll never know.
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
by SportsChicken on Mar 26, 2010 11:06 PM PDT up reply actions
Same reason
People say drinking coffee gets rid of their drunk. Common fallacy.
"[...] coordinator Bud Foster has never had problems filling holes."
Also
Could have something to do with increased production of the stimulants epinephrine and norephinephrine during exercise…. those might counteract the effects of cannibol temporarily. Still haven’t read or heard of that being true though. I can always be wrong though =).
"[...] coordinator Bud Foster has never had problems filling holes."
I would think they would smoke after their exercise.
by hellaninersfan on Mar 27, 2010 12:50 AM PDT up reply actions
The biggest reason why marijuana should be legal
To me at least is this… If anyone went to a drug rehab center and said “I’m here because I am addicted to marijuana”, everyone would laugh and think you are a complete idiot. People who use heroine, oxy, or mescalin know the danger and pain caused by “real” drugs. Now I would like marijuana to be legalized just so it wouldn’t be such a big taboo. Some people believe marijuana is more dangerous than prescribed drugs (my mom) and I believe that the bad stigma marijuana receives is just plain wrong.
Smileyman
I’m sorry to hear that your wife has MS.
My aunt has the same condition but since she lives in Mexico, treatment is limited.
I don’t think she’s ever considered marijuana, though.
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
I can't imagine having this disease and living in a country without adequate
medical care.
There are certainly flaws in our overall health care system, but at least I have access to treatment for my wife
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
My grandma
died from MS… It’s a terrible, terrible disease. Just eats at the body slowly… It’s hard to watch someone go through it :/
Proud Sponsor of YoungWillis
by mountaindew77 on Mar 27, 2010 4:53 PM PDT up reply actions
They applied for US resident status a few years ago.
They may have their applications accepted in less than a year.
What we've got here is a failure to communicate.
by SportsChicken on Mar 28, 2010 1:53 PM PDT up reply actions
I have to wonder how many people actually read the story
before commenting on it.
I haven’t heard anyone talk about Sapp, Ricky Williams, or DeSean Jackson, nor has anybody made reference to the excellent stories I provided links to.
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
we're all to stoned!
"All during film, I'm calling him Bam-Bam, like from 'The Flintstones,' because he hits everything. He is the truth" - Chad Ochocinco on Patrick Willis
Excellent read!
Ricky Williams is actually my friend’s hero for being a “baller even though he smokes mad bud”
I've been very impressed since his return to the game
and even more impressed with the stuff he’s doing off the field to prepare for his life outside of football.
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
Ok, the football aspects…
Smoking reduces lung capacity. If I were a professional athlete that would probably be an instant turn off.
If the NFL doesn’t want its players smoking weed they should add it to the banned substances list. If they don’t care, they shouldn’t test for it at all.
by hellaninersfan on Mar 27, 2010 12:54 AM PDT reply actions
I was all set to say that of course marijuana is on the banned substance list
but I just read through the entire section of the CBA that talks about testing and there’s no mention of marijuana there. For that matter there’s no mention of other illegal drugs such as cocaine, heroin, etc.
I’ll have to read through the rest of the CBA to see if there’s a section in there regarding the taking of illegal substances, because the banned substance list doesn’t have anything to say about it.
Member of the legendary David Carr thread, 6 March 2010
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
