Cannabis itself actually helps the brain function because cannabinoids lock into cannabinoid receptors inherent in our brains and makes brain function more flowing and quick (explains why many stoners have racing thoughts, incredible music abilities, fast computer skills, etc etc etc). I don't know where the fallacy that all potheads are braindead comes from...I think that was just a result of the hippie generation and their "fuck everything, do nothing" attitude...that image stuck into people's minds and even though most potheads nowadays aren't anywhere near the stereotype (actually quite the opposite), people still think they're like that. It's pretty sad. =/

Niccotine does the same thing by the way.

Cheers

With all this talk about how drugs are great, can I assume that the drug advocates would allow children to use drugs? After all, marijuana apparently has no side effects.

I'm telling you it does, it limits judgement and distorts perspective. What happens when you drive with marijuana? Well, in Eugene, in the last few years, four people have been killed in automobile related accidents where at least one of the drivers was using marijuana. But, as a plus for the marijuana users, none of the killed were using marijuana.

Cheers

Oh yeah, in addition to a DUI, the drivers were put away for manslaughter and murder.

Cheers

Response to Super Baby: Cannabis has no harmful side effects...I didn't say it didn't have any side effects at all, just not harmful ones, contrary to popular belief. As far as "children" using drugs though...if you're talking about kids under the ages of 13, then no they shouldn't...any older than that though, you really have to go by a case-by-case basis, figuring out whether the teen has enough maturity and responsibility to be allowed to use drugs. If the kid is able to do all the work school (and possibly also a job) piles on, he/she should be allowed to enjoy him/herself on their free time. To say they don't is highly hypocritical of the alcohol addicts known as adults who drink themselves into happiness after work and yet deny their kids to enjoy themselves in a similar way with a substance far less dangerous.

Response to jeblackstar: It depends on the user. Once again, we are getting into the different elements of society...the intelligent sector and the average sector (both of which are rarely heard about as far as being related to drugs), and the moron sector (the type you see on judge judy getting nuked when they try and wiggle their way out of blame). The drivers were stoners, drove, and killed people (and thusly got put away) were going to end up doing that eventually no matter if they were stoners or not. Plus trying to pin it on cannabis is a very hard thing to do in actuality, because cannabis wears off fairly quickly for most users, and not only that but cannabis can stay in your system for up to 30 days after ONE SINGLE USE. That means that one person in each of those accidents may have tested positive for cannabis, but that means nothing when you're talking about if they were actually high on the substance while they got into the accidents and caused the killings.

If you still don't think that driving stoned is a good idea, you might want to look at this for a bit: http://www.cannabisculture.com/articles/1775.html

p.s.: jeblackstar, nicotine does not do the same thing as cannabis. Cannabis causes a much different effect than tobacco could ever possibly hope to deliver to the user...tobacco will never come close to cannabis as far as its positive effects on the psyche and the amount of magical mental clarity for the creative mind which can be achieved from using cannabis. There's simply no comparison there, just wanted to clear that up for you.

Response to Super Baby: Cannabis has no harmful side effects...I didn't say it didn't have any side effects at all, just not harmful ones, contrary to popular belief. As far as "children" using drugs though...if you're talking about kids under the ages of 13, then no they shouldn't...any older than that though, you really have to go by a case-by-case basis, figuring out whether the teen has enough maturity and responsibility to be allowed to use drugs.

If it has no bad side effects, then why can't kids use it?

Ummm, actually they know they were using marijuana because the joints were lit and in the car with them. One of the men was a thirty year old exec. Two were kids of wealthy families, and the last one was a hippy. So far, three fourths of the people arrested a charged with murder didn't fit your rule of loser stoner types.

Cheers

Joints don't stay lit, but hey, either way, no one should be driving while stoned, drunk, talking on a cell phone, or eating a big Mac.

Super Baby: You don't give pot to kids for the same reason you don't give alcohol or coffee or anything like that to kids...they are too young to understand what it's about...most kids have never even heard of the word "responsible" at those ages, much less understand the concept of it, and therefore you can't trust them with any substance, harmful or not. The reason I differentiate between children and teens is because teens are a much different species, if you will, than smaller kids, and you must adjust the way you deal with each accordingly.

Remember, just because something doesn't have bad side-effects doesn't mean it SHOULD be used. It simply means that if someone chooses to use, it will not hurt them.


jeblackstar: Sounds like reefer madness. Do you have proof?

Super Baby: You don't give pot to kids for the same reason you don't give alcohol or coffee or anything like that to kids...they are too young to understand what it's about...most kids have never even heard of the word "responsible" at those ages, much less understand the concept of it, and therefore you can't trust them with any substance, harmful or not. The reason I differentiate between children and teens is because teens are a much different species, if you will, than smaller kids, and you must adjust the way you deal with each accordingly.

You're comparing marijuana, a supposedly harmless drug, to alcohol? Are you implying that alcohol is harmless as well? As for coffee, what's wrong with giving children coffee? Last time I saw, it wasn't against the law.

jeblackstar: Sounds like reefer madness. Do you have proof?

I'll try and find the newspaper articles. They're old and I don't save my newspapers. That combined with the fact that the local paper doesn't have internet archives.

Cheers

Coincidentally enough, I just got finished opening up a blog here devoted to this very topic: it's called:
The Ones Who Said Yes

http://drugs.joeuser.com

SuperBaby: Your conclusion about people giving drugs to children is unfounded. Just because some of us find spiritual solace in recreational chemistry does not mean we would also believe that this would be appropriate for children. I strongly believe people who choose to become parents (or who become parents without choosing to) should forego drugs completely as their children should come first. I chose myself to get an operation to prevent pregnancy from ever happening because I know what my tendencies are. (I also do not own or drive any motor vehicles, EVER.)

What America lacks is a good system of role models for the people who DO choose to use drugs. What we have now is a good/sober bad/unsober behaviour dichotomy that causes people who get high to be more likely to give up on learning to become well-rounded, functioning people in society. People quickly blame the drugs, but what if we're helping make drug users learn to be jerks by never allowing a positive image of a drug user in a TV show or movie. If we had more responsible user models perhaps we'd have more responsible users. Just a thought.

The problem I have is potheads can't decide whether or not pot is a safe drug. Some say it is harmful, but not as harmful as other drugs, while others say it's not harmful at all, and some actually believe pot makes people better.

What America lacks is a good system of role models for the people who DO choose to use drugs. What we have now is a good/sober bad/unsober behaviour dichotomy that causes people who get high to be more likely to give up on learning to become well-rounded, functioning people in society. People quickly blame the drugs, but what if we're helping make drug users learn to be jerks by never allowing a positive image of a drug user in a TV show or movie. If we had more responsible user models perhaps we'd have more responsible users. Just a thought.

So if television never showed drunken winos, one can assume that there'd be less drunken winos in the country?

No, THC can't kill. Just remember my friend who was bathing her baby after smoking a joint. She fixed her eyes on the wall in front of her and drifted off into her thoughts, as one will do on marijuana, and did not realize the baby's head was under water. You fill in the rest..............

IF we were to release non-violent marijuana offenders alone, think of the money and space that would clear up in the legal system.