Pot users often have worse symptoms than non pot users in smoking because they smoke cigarettes like they do pot, which increases the exposure to smoke, therefore more likeliness of cancer etc.

Do some research before you support illegal drugs.

What exactly are you disputing? I never said it happens all the time or even that often. That is just the usual cause of death. I saw it in a documentary I watched in a class "War on Drugs" and I study drugs alot, so many, many sources.
Too much water at one time? That's called hyponatremia, thats really hard to do to oneself, but I don't doubt it's happened.

I drink maybe once a month. Weed is much better. People still call it LSD where we live if its just acid, but either way, I am 99% sure people still make LSD.

Lung cancer? That is a very ignorant statement. If a blunt were 100 cigarettes, I wouldn't be breathing right now. But I am, I am still able to run 2-6 miles each day and I am now competing Mixed Martial Arts. That is enough proof to me that weed is NOT severely harmful to lungs. However, I do notice its effects on my lungs as hindering my peak performance, but I still do fine.

Do you know humans evolved taking drugs? We have defenses against toxins. The biggest issue with drug use is not being ignorant about what you're doing. If you are educated about doses and uses then you should have no trouble. Everything in moderation.

That is an awful and false generalization. I don't smoke cigarettes and will never pick up the habit, along with many of my pot smoking friends. And second, as mentioned, weed does not cause cancer as cigarettes can.


What is that even supposed to mean JordanN? I'll have you know I have researched this more than any other individual I know who hasn't become professional in the subject. I know that these are not necessarily harmful and have great benefits to use if done correctly and in the right amounts. It is all about being responsible. I'll have you know, this drug war is causing great damage in America. If we instead legalize, educate and regulate, people can be happy with what they do, they will not get in needless trouble, and many can keep healthy. Also, addicts will not be treated as criminals, they will be treated as medical patients, as they should be. Do you know how many things marihuana can help?
One thing I don't do is coke. America was stupid to synthesize it as a stimulant because it is so damaging. However, if you instead use a coca plant the way it has been used for thousands of years, the effects are GREATLY reduced to a point where a high is noticeable, nutrition is gained and it ISN'T harmful.

Inferno is young, his belief is not doing drugs isn't a bad one. He may not be that informed on the matter, but I see no reason to argue as if his opinion "don't do drugs" is wrong. I believe his conclusion, whether it be based on the incorrect reasons, lack of reasons or not, is a fair one.

I never said we should all do drugs -though I think it would help break a lot of social barriers and bring our society to a new phase since things are so messed up now- but my point was that we have the capability of doing drugs IN MODERATION without being harmed.

Wait are we talking about medical drugs, or the kind that cripples your body.

I haven't heard that particular name for it before, but I've heard that being called water intoxication. There was one case of it within the past year that was on the news in the USA and had nothing to do with anyone being under the influence of drugs either. It had something to do with a contest at a radio station where the people who were over there that were picked to participate would drink water at intervals and see who could go the longest without having to go to the restroom to relieve themself. The winner would get a Nintendo Wii. There was one participant, a mother trying to get a Wii for her children, who eventually died from the effects of drinking too much water.

Well, hyponatremia is caused from water "intoxication". "Hypo" meaning "lack of", "natrium" meaning "sodium". Too much water dilutes your sodium which is vital to your nervous system.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. What drugs are you thinking about that cripple people? Almost any drug can be medical.. I think we are mostly talking about common drugs like marihuana, ecstasy, shrooms, cocaine, lsd (or lysergic acid), etc.

Ah, I didn't realize that was referring to sodium, since that isn't quite the word natrium in there. I suppose that probably has something to do with why her head started hurting at some point (that information was from a phone call to a friend of hers, which was the last anyone had talked to her before she died). I don't think sodium is the only thing, though. I've read that even if the water does have sufficient sodium in it, it still can cause that though (but if the sodium gets filtered out first, then that would explain why it would still happen).

Anything at the wrong amounts can hurt you, and likewise almost anything can be beneficial in certain quantities.

Vitamin A, in terms of (µg substance)/(kg body weight) lethal dosages in rats, is more deadly than THC at higher quantities.

THC isn't deadly at all.

Since always, you dumbass. Hallucinogens are either psychedelic, dissociative, or deliriants.

This argument is so completely asinine I don't even know where to start picking it apart. First of all, Marijuana isn't psychedelic. It's a psychoactive. (Psychedelics are all psychoactive, but not all are psychoactives are psychedelics) Secondly, psychedelics are a class of hallucinogen, and marijuana is not a hallucinogen. LSD, however, IS a psychedelic.

Yenku, let me just tell you right now, that your opinions are incredibly ridiculous to me, and you have the exact opposite morals that I and most people that society would consider "good" have.

I mean, how can you seriously think that everyone taking drugs would be a good thing? Once again, I'll say a saying that I've grown to like:

If it would kill the entire species if they all started practicing it, then it is almost always a bad thing.

And I know you are going to deny that if everyone was on drugs more people would start dying, but as I already said, in my mind, your opinion makes absolutely no sense, and the only reason you are defending drugs is because you take them yourself.

And it's not like we can get anything logical from arguing with a bunch of druggies anyway.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Dec 12 2007, 1:52 am by Falkoner.

"So if the entire world would start smoking pot everyone would die?"
Enlighten me.

"And it's not like we can get anything logical from arguing with a bunch of druggies anyway."
Totally ignorant statement.
More along the lines of arguing with a bunch of ignoramus's with a superiority complex.

Do you think the world would function the way it is now if everyone started smoking pot? There'd probably be major ecological consequences because not everyone is working and basically LIVING the way that they need to to keep society working.

Well, if everyone smoked pot, no one would remember anything. But, Falkoner, I don't think the Categorical Imperative works very well here to prove the point you wish to prove.


That does not make his opinions worse or "most people's" better.


Then why did you post here?

Everyone being high is almost the equivalent of everyone being drunk, and do you guys think that everyone being drunk wouldn't cause problems?

Sorry, but Alcohol intoxication != THC intoxication.

Get 100 Alcoholics and have them get the drunkest they've ever been.
Get 100 Potheads and have them get the most stoned they've ever been.


Lets see who gets in more car wrecks.


Get out of here Falkoner you have no idea what the fuck you're talking about

... Falkoner, that is just sick.

Yes, and your opinions just look stupid when you fail to even argue against him ( Yenku ) .

There was a time when slavery of others wasn't considered 'immoral.' So, your point there is?
And Hell, even I'm not so pessimistic as to think that general society doesn't understand the importance of moderation.
He's already given a reason. Reasonable drug use acts as a relaxant and socializer for people, meaning an overall less stressed-out populace, and a more socialable one too. For an extreme oversimplification, more relaxed people are happier people, and more relaxed people annoy other people less, and happier, less annoyed people are more productive.
Also, in such a situation, there'd be far less resource, such as money, wasted on trying to 'strike down' drug-use. They'd be far more controlled. We could benefit from them economically, as they would be another legal means of promoting the movement of currency ( from what I understand, this is considered to be a fairly good measure of economic health ) , and we'd have a better understanding of just what dangers they have, how to avoid such dangers, and how to treat them.

I don't know enough about hard drugs to know whether or not they'd be beneficial overall. I don't know how much trouble there'd be with people trying to take more drug than is healthy even if they were controlled as well as they would be in such a situation. I don't know how age affects their effects. But I do know that I know of more positive affect such a situation could have than negative, leaving it to people on your side to fix that, if it really needs to be fixed.
Har, harbloodyhar.
Guess what. I just defended them, and I've never knowingly touched a hard drug. I don't plan to, either. Hell, I don't even support them.
He presented arguments. You just said, 'that sounds stupid.' Who's failing to provide anything 'logical' here? ( and such an ironic statement, coming from you, Falkoner )

Yeah, obviously if you have a group of people who are extremely disoriented and a group that just isn't down to earth enough to care into vehicles the disoriented ones will crash more, and that all comes down to what kind of drug is being used, different drugs do different things to your head.


And notice how slavery is now considered immoral? And there was also a time when smoking pot wasn't considered immoral, and now it is. Great example, thanks.


Yeah, and I can say that poop tastes good, does that make it true? I've found that people who are smoking tend to waste a lot more time than those who do not, which you can easily see by looking at schools, kids who don't smoke get good grades and succeed in life, kids who smoke often get bad grades and are unsuccessful, notice that I said often, not always.


Or we can avoid the dangers all together since smoking does not truly help out as much as it hurts.


Did I ever say that everyone who is defending them is taking them? No, I just said that the reason he is defending them so badly is because there is no case for them, he is only defending his own actions by trying to say how great they are.

Post has been edited 1 time(s), last time on Dec 12 2007, 11:54 pm by Falkoner.