• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana [W:91]

Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana [W

No, the effects of pot and alcohol are different.

Why I have to tell YOU that is any ones guess.

You folks seem to place your entire argument on those distinctions.

I can drink 1 or two Scotch and waters ( Dewars White Label Please ) and still remain mentally sharp and with little to no long term effects on my motivation or my intellectual capabillities.

Marijuana's effects are ultimately A-motivational. Stupifying and addicting.

The REAL reason States are choosing NOT to go

A person can smoke some of a joint and still stay mentally sharp and not have long term effects to their intellectual capabilities so I don't know the point you're trying to make here other than your pushing propaganda to support you big government desires
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana

Keep in mind legalizing it and regulating it will take the drug dealer out of the picture. It won't take a criminal to get weed, and also less kids will get their hands on it when it is regulated and you get it with an ID at the store. Alcohol is generally harder for minors to get their hands on than weed is. Weed is not chemically addictive at all; you can die from alcohol withdrawals. You can not overdose on weed, but people die from alcohol poisoning all the time. There is really no way around the fact that alcohol is worse for you.
My main issue with weed is that smoking it is nearly or perhaps more harmful than smoking tobacco, due to various chemicals (although not the THC (sp?)).
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana

he and most supporters think legalized pot is less harmful than alcohol, when it fact it is probably much worse. My uncle died at 47 from lung cancer and pot was all he smoked.

Aren't libertarians the one's that advocate for minimal government intrusion? Are they the ones the generally advocate that the nation's drug war is a lost cause? So much for the theory that libertarian is just a conservative that wants to get laid and smoke dope....
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana [W

No, the effects of pot and alcohol are different.

Why I have to tell YOU that is any ones guess.

You folks seem to place your entire argument on those distinctions.

I can drink 1 or two Scotch and waters ( Dewars White Label Please ) and still remain mentally sharp and with little to no long term effects on my motivation or my intellectual capabillities.

Marijuana's effects are ultimately A-motivational. Stupifying and addicting.

The REAL reason States are choosing NOT to go

Really? Have you tried pot?

I have and it didnt have that affect on me...'a motivational' or whatever that is. And hey...I didnt get addicted!
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana

My main issue with weed is that smoking it is nearly or perhaps more harmful than smoking tobacco, due to various chemicals (although not the THC (sp?)).

Do you have a source for that? I'm pretty sure this is not true.
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana

Do you have a source for that? I'm pretty sure this is not true.
I recall reading a bit about it somewhere.

Still, it makes sense - they filtered cigarettes not because of the addictive part (nicotine) but because of the various toxins in the smoke, especially tar(?).

Basically it's not the drug, but the ingestion method - smoking - that I have an issue with.
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana

Why are we wasting the Peoples' Tax monies on public policies that don't provide for the general welfare or the common defense?
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana

he and most supporters think legalized pot is less harmful than alcohol, when it fact it is probably much worse. My uncle died at 47 from lung cancer and pot was all he smoked.
Sorry for your loss, but if alcohol was all your uncle drank, he would have died a lot sooner.

I don't know which is more harmful...neither is good for you, IMO.

The point should not be which is worse.

The point should be does the government have the right to tell a sane adult what they can put into their own bodies?

I say 'NO'.
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana

I recall reading a bit about it somewhere.

Still, it makes sense - they filtered cigarettes not because of the addictive part (nicotine) but because of the various toxins in the smoke, especially tar(?).

Basically it's not the drug, but the ingestion method - smoking - that I have an issue with.

Even if marijuana smoke was as bad for your lungs as cigarette smoke, and I don't believe it is, why does that mean it should be illegal? Should we make cigarettes illegal? Should we make alcohol illegal? Even if your answer to those questions is yes, making things that millions of people want to have access to illegal does nothing but empower the black market. Look to prohibition and the absolute failure of the drug war. Making these things illegal does not fix the problem; it makes the problem worse, because you're giving criminals a means of making money. The only reasonable thing to do is make it legal and regulate it.
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana

Life-long users of cigarettes, alcohol, and pot are more than likely to become a drain on our medical resources, insured or not.
Does the Federal government have a responsibility to protect insured non-users from insured/uninsured users with respect to insurance rates ?
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana

Even if marijuana smoke was as bad for your lungs as cigarette smoke, and I don't believe it is, why does that mean it should be illegal? Should we make cigarettes illegal? Should we make alcohol illegal? Even if your answer to those questions is yes, making things that millions of people want to have access to illegal does nothing but empower the black market. Look to prohibition and the absolute failure of the drug war. Making these things illegal does not fix the problem; it makes the problem worse, because you're giving criminals a means of making money. The only reasonable thing to do is make it legal and regulate it.
I didn't say anything about that meaning it should be illegal.

I only said that the smoke issues were my main problem with marijuana.
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana [W

Really? Have you tried pot?

I have and it didnt have that affect on me...'a motivational' or whatever that is. And hey...I didnt get addicted!


So legalizing it wont lead to a increase in the amount of chronic users ? Legalizing it wont lead to a increase in the amount of young people becoming chronic users ?
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana [W

A person can smoke some of a joint and still stay mentally sharp and not have long term effects to their intellectual capabilities so I don't know the point you're trying to make here other than your pushing propaganda to support you big government desires


WRONG !!

Unbelievable. Wow, your'e really going overboard with your justifications now. ( You actually went full on left field when you compared marijuana to "SODA" )

Your'e telling me that a group of kids after smoking a joint, EACH, will test the same as a group of kids who never smoked weed in their life ?

It's called "dope" for a reason.
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana [W

No, the effects of pot and alcohol are different.

Why I have to tell YOU that is any ones guess.

You folks seem to place your entire argument on those distinctions.

I can drink 1 or two Scotch and waters ( Dewars White Label Please ) and still remain mentally sharp and with little to no long term effects on my motivation or my intellectual capabillities.

Marijuana's effects are ultimately A-motivational. Stupifying and addicting.

The REAL reason States are choosing NOT to go

Really? Have you actually tried weed, or are you just repeating rhetoric you've heard? I smoke most nights and I have a great job, great family, great home, and am happy and fulfilled in my life.

Also, I can smoke .01 grams, .1 grams, 1 gram, 10 grams, etc, just like you can select how much you poor into your scotch glass. Alcohol makes me dehydrated, have a headache, and makes my liver physically hurt. Weed just makes me relaxed and feel great, and I'm willing to bet I'm still dramatically better at math while stoned than you are sober.

Aren't libertarians the one's that advocate for minimal government intrusion? Are they the ones the generally advocate that the nation's drug war is a lost cause? So much for the theory that libertarian is just a conservative that wants to get laid and smoke dope....

Rocketman is NOT a libertarian. He does not even remotely resemble one, he's a statist who clicked "libertarian" from the dropbox.

My main issue with weed is that smoking it is nearly or perhaps more harmful than smoking tobacco, due to various chemicals (although not the THC (sp?)).

There are no harmful chemicals. If you'd like to make an accusation, please be specific. THC is not dangerous, nor are the Cannabinoids, which occur naturally in the body.

I didn't say anything about that meaning it should be illegal.

I only said that the smoke issues were my main problem with marijuana.

Then don't hang around stoners. Seems like an extremely easy solution to a fabricated problem.
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana [W

Really? Have you actually tried weed, or are you just repeating rhetoric you've heard? I smoke most nights and I have a great job, great family, great home, and am happy and fulfilled in my life.

Also, I can smoke .01 grams, .1 grams, 1 gram, 10 grams, etc, just like you can select how much you poor into your scotch glass. Alcohol makes me dehydrated, have a headache, and makes my liver physically hurt. Weed just makes me relaxed and feel great, and I'm willing to bet I'm still dramatically better at math while stoned than you are sober.



Rocketman is NOT a libertarian. He does not even remotely resemble one, he's a statist who clicked "libertarian" from the dropbox.



There are no harmful chemicals. If you'd like to make an accusation, please be specific. THC is not dangerous, nor are the Cannabinoids, which occur naturally in the body.



Then don't hang around stoners. Seems like an extremely easy solution to a fabricated problem.

:2wave:
Hi Alpaca.....

I will concede that there are exceptional people out there that can smoke weed daily and still function. Even maintain a level of ambition that allows them to grow professionally and personally, but again, they are the exception.

Since we've discussed this issue before and I do respect your opinion on this issue and a variety of others I'll try to keep this brief.

I'm not concerned about the small amount of people that can control their habit and still function, my concern is that the legalization of marijuana will lead to a devolution of the SAME society that I have to raise my family in. A society dumbed down by a pretty potent chemical that's had it's stigma removed by a bunch of dishonest pro-legalization narratives.

It's a bit hyperbolic and "it's" also a hilarious movie, but THIS, in some variation, is what I think the legalization of marijuana will eventually lead to ...

Check out " President Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho "....LOL !!
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana [W

PRESIDENT, Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Camacho, 5 times Smack Down Champion....


 
Last edited:
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana [W

So legalizing it wont lead to a increase in the amount of chronic users ? Legalizing it wont lead to a increase in the amount of young people becoming chronic users ?

That's the price of freedom. Did legalizing alcohol increase the amount of chronic users? Yes. Did legalizing it lead to an increase in the amount of young people becoming users? Yes.

Again, it makes NO sense to make pot illegal while keeping alcohol legal.

You just want to apply draconian authoritarian measures against weed because you don't like it and you like alcohol.
 
Last edited:
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana [W

That's the price of freedom. Did legalizing alcohol increase the amount of chronic users? Yes. Did legalizing it lead to an increase in the amount of young people becoming users? Yes.

Again, it makes NO sense to make pot illegal while keeping alcohol legal.

You just want to apply draconian authoritarian measures against alcohol because you don't like it and you like alcohol.


Wow....are not Pot and Alcohol DIFFERENT ? DISTINCT ? IS THIS NOT THE ONE POINT PRO-LEGALIZATION PEOPLE CONSISTENTLY HARP ON ?

Plus, pot is illegal IN 48 States and Federally. It's not an issue of "FREEDOM".

Why are you arguing for the mass implementation of a additional societal crutch ? Justifying away the cumulative drop in IQ that legalization will no doubt lead to ?

After Obama's re-election I didn't think Americans could get any stupider, but I may be wrong.

You need to realize first, that the only reasons States are "legalizing " it is due to budget constraints, THAT'S ALL.
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana [W

Wow....are not Pot and Alcohol DIFFERENT ? DISTINCT ? IS THIS NOT THE ONE POINT PRO-LEGALIZATION PEOPLE CONSISTENTLY HARP ON ?

Plus, pot is illegal IN 48 States and Federally. It's not an issue of "FREEDOM".

Why are you arguing for the mass implementation of a additional societal crutch ? Justifying away the cumulative drop in IQ that legalization will no doubt lead to ?

After Obama's re-election I didn't think Americans could get any stupider, but I may be wrong.

You need to realize first, that the only reasons States are "legalizing " it is due to budget constraints, THAT'S ALL.

Yet again your displayed ignorance on pot shows more about you than me. Prolonged abuse of alcohol is ALSO shown to cause lower IQ in teens as well. That is why it is an adult substance., The fact it is illegal in 48 states is NOT a reason for it to be illegal.

Seems you like YOUR substance and don't want to allow the freedom for others to enjoy their substance. Your authoritarianism is quite clear for all to see and is quite anti-American in nature.
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana [W

:2wave:
Hi Alpaca.....

I will concede that there are exceptional people out there that can smoke weed daily and still function. Even maintain a level of ambition that allows them to grow professionally and personally, but again, they are the exception.

Since we've discussed this issue before and I do respect your opinion on this issue and a variety of others I'll try to keep this brief.

I'm not concerned about the small amount of people that can control their habit and still function, my concern is that the legalization of marijuana will lead to a devolution of the SAME society that I have to raise my family in. A society dumbed down by a pretty potent chemical that's had it's stigma removed by a bunch of dishonest pro-legalization narratives.

It's a bit hyperbolic and "it's" also a hilarious movie, but THIS, in some variation, is what I think the legalization of marijuana will eventually lead to ...

Check out " President Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho "....LOL !!

First and foremost, my experience is not the exception, but rather the rule. A few statistics for you:
Source
95,916,972 American adults have used marijuana
22,003,805 American adults have used marijuana this year
8,120,045 American adults have likely used marijuana today

22 million American adults have used Marijuana this year. That's 7% of the population, meaning statistically, one of your friends or family members, if not more than one, smoke on a semi-regular or regular basis, and you have no idea about it.

Most smokers are like me, we do it in the privacy of our homes, and we keep quiet about it. We have to, because we'll be fired and judged for it. You would never suspect I smoked if you met me in real life. I'm a high stress, motivated engineer that works in electronics research. I use my brain all day long to its fullest potential, and at night I want to calm it down and relax.

You're trying to fit 22 million people into a stereotype that you can throw stones at. Only a small portion of people ever get arrested for cannabis, and when they do, it's usually only for having cannabis, and not for their actions on it. You think that everyone who smokes has no motivation and is a criminal, because all you see is the criminals. You don't see the other 98% of the smokers who mind their own business, keep to themselves about it, and subsequently don't get caught.

Do you have no respect for liberty? Do you want the government to be so powerful that they can control what we can and can not put into our own bodies? Whether you want to smoke or not is your decision, but why you would want to make criminals out of 96 million Americans that have harmed nobody blows my mind altogether.

You need to realize first, that the only reasons States are "legalizing " it is due to budget constraints, THAT'S ALL.

This is completely incorrect. Most of the medical marijuana initiatives, and both of the legalization initiatives in CO and WA were citizen ballots. That means the CITIZENS of those states decided as a majority to legalize. The CO governer openly and vehemently disagrees with legalization, but he respected the will of the people. Do you respect democracy and the will of the people, or do you want to override them to push your agenda?
 
Last edited:
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana [W

So legalizing it wont lead to a increase in the amount of chronic users ? Legalizing it wont lead to a increase in the amount of young people becoming chronic users ?

Anyone that wants pot now gets it. It's not hard.

Does everyone that tries cigarettes become a smoker? Absolutely not...some try it and dont like it and dont get addicted.

Does everyone who drinks become an acoholic (chronic user). Absolutely not.

There might be an upswing upon legalization but pot isnt for everyone....if it was, believe me, more people would smoking it now. It's available easily in most states. Not everyone will use pot, just like they dont now...just like everyone is addicted to cigarettes or booze.
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana [W

WRONG !!

Unbelievable. Wow, your'e really going overboard with your justifications now. ( You actually went full on left field when you compared marijuana to "SODA" )

Your'e telling me that a group of kids after smoking a joint, EACH, will test the same as a group of kids who never smoked weed in their life ?

It's called "dope" for a reason.

So? It wont be legal for kids....just like booze.

Do some get it illegally? Sure. Legalization wont make any difference.
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana [W

So legalizing it wont lead to a increase in the amount of chronic users ? Legalizing it wont lead to a increase in the amount of young people becoming chronic users ?

It won't lead to more users. It is easy enough to get now that few people who want to use it are deterred by the law or availability. If legalized it will probably become harder for young people to access since currently most sellers don't refuse to sell to teens as legal sellers will be required to do.
 
Last edited:
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana [W

First and foremost, my experience is not the exception, but rather the rule. A few statistics for you:
Source
95,916,972 American adults have used marijuana
22,003,805 American adults have used marijuana this year
8,120,045 American adults have likely used marijuana today

22 million American adults have used Marijuana this year. That's 7% of the population, meaning statistically, one of your friends or family members, if not more than one, smoke on a semi-regular or regular basis, and you have no idea about it.

Most smokers are like me, we do it in the privacy of our homes, and we keep quiet about it. We have to, because we'll be fired and judged for it. You would never suspect I smoked if you met me in real life. I'm a high stress, motivated engineer that works in electronics research. I use my brain all day long to its fullest potential, and at night I want to calm it down and relax.

You're trying to fit 22 million people into a stereotype that you can throw stones at. Only a small portion of people ever get arrested for cannabis, and when they do, it's usually only for having cannabis, and not for their actions on it. You think that everyone who smokes has no motivation and is a criminal, because all you see is the criminals. You don't see the other 98% of the smokers who mind their own business, keep to themselves about it, and subsequently don't get caught.

Do you have no respect for liberty? Do you want the government to be so powerful that they can control what we can and can not put into our own bodies? Whether you want to smoke or not is your decision, but why you would want to make criminals out of 96 million Americans that have harmed nobody blows my mind altogether.



This is completely incorrect. Most of the medical marijuana initiatives, and both of the legalization initiatives in CO and WA were citizen ballots. That means the CITIZENS of those states decided as a majority to legalize. The CO governer openly and vehemently disagrees with legalization, but he respected the will of the people. Do you respect democracy and the will of the people, or do you want to override them to push your agenda?

Your numbers in terms of what the pro-legalize crowd want ( to legalize it nationally ) are not relevant. And it's been my contention throughout this debate that the universal legalization of marijuana will have a negative impact on the society as a whole.

I like the Co, Governor's statement. When did politicians sincerely start caring about the will of the people ? C'mon, Texas will never legalize it, not in my lifetime and it's still illegal in 48 States and possession is illegal in a majority of countries.

You cant tell me the CO or Ca Governor was absolutely powerless ? Of-course the see the fiscal benefit of legalization, and it's my contention that THAT's what motivates their position on legalization.
 
Re: ISTOOK: The blunt truth — White house drug czar contradicts Obama on marijuana [W

Your numbers in terms of what the pro-legalize crowd want ( to legalize it nationally ) are not relevant. And it's been my contention throughout this debate that the universal legalization of marijuana will have a negative impact on the society as a whole.

I like the Co, Governor's statement. When did politicians sincerely start caring about the will of the people ? C'mon, Texas will never legalize it, not in my lifetime and it's still illegal in 48 States and possession is illegal in a majority of countries.

You cant tell me the CO or Ca Governor was absolutely powerless ? Of-course the see the fiscal benefit of legalization, and it's my contention that THAT's what motivates their position on legalization.

We obviously have a major issue in this country with politicians doing whatever the **** they want, or whatever the hell corporations want them to do, while ignoring the will of the people. My question is why YOU want to overrule the will of the people and keep locking people in cages for not hurting anybody in any way.
 
Back
Top Bottom