Protecting the cannabis user's image

[Guest]

Hey ya'all

I think you should all listen to Mars, as I think she knows what she is talking about.

I don't see how just because you smoke weed when your 13, you'll turn into a dumbass. Thats a huge blanket statement. Lets try to stick with what we know.

I agree tho... that even though marijuana may seem harmless, it still is a substance we are adding to our bodies. So, we need to just evaulate it in good light. Not to just blindly smoke without thinking. I think most people here are responsible with their usage... but thats because they are responsible in general.

Not everyone who drinks alcohol everyday is an alcoholic...also not everyone who smokes pot is a pot head.

Although, I think the negative impacts on society are less with a pothead than an alcoholic... So in that sense, if thats what you want to do...smoke pot all day...then I don't see the harm? As long as your not hurting anyone or neglecting people you should neglect.

Personally, I think I'm in that small percentage of people who have to be really careful with weed. I think its becuase I naturally have problems with anxiety. And, certain types of weed can just trigger that, and make it worse. I haven't had caffeine in 5 weeks now, and honeslty my anxiety is almost nil now... I think any stimulant messes with me. So what I've learned, is I have to be careful with what types of marijuana I smoke.

When it comes down to it, reguardless of studies...we are our own doctors, and our bodies are our own laboratories. Figure out what works for you, and what doesn't.

 

[Jam Master Jaco]

Alright, that's fair.

Mars, read through your post again and it just came off to me like you were defending people who get kids high. Sorry man that was me misunderstanding.

Getting back on topic with this thread, the main problems with getting weed legalized is...as embarrassing as it is to admit...my peers. I have met only ONE other person my age who can responsibly smoke weed.(and they're not female ) I'm not denying the fact that there are other people in their late teens/early twenties who smoke responsibly, but the ones who smoke irresponsibly sure stick out a hell of a lot more.

www.norml.org there rules on how to be a responsible pot user are dead on.

 

[Laxpunker]

I'd agree with their rules. However I'll admit I drive while stoned way to often. With that said the only accident I've been in (while I was driving that is) was when I was 19 or 20, a line of traffic came to a stop, so did I. The fat bitch behind me plowed into the back of my car going 55mph. Surprisingly the airbags didn't go off, and I was so high I thought I had stalled until I saw my bumper fly over the roof of my car.

Reason she didn't stop was because she was to busy eating her fast food (If I recall it was a Big Mac or some other large burger) and not paying attention to the road.

 

[pieceofmyheart]

You are right, I can't prove it. I can't PHYSICALLY prove it. I think it is one of those things I.M.Boggled asked, "what do you know to be true but you can't prove it?"

But the topic of the thread was people on forums, or in public for that matter acting a fool and making marijuana users look bad. And those people he was referring to happened to be kids.

 

[naga_sadu]

I don't see how just because you smoke weed when your 13, you'll turn into a dumbass. Thats a huge blanket statement. Lets try to stick with what we know.

I started way too young. I too don't know what pot does to young minds tho. But I kno as a practice, in my country, when a kid starts vomitting his food out or has eating problems, you used to get a "vaidhiar" (traditional Indian doctor) and he'd normally blow smoke on the kids face. After that, the normal practice would be to feed the kid some bhang (cannabis) laddu, bhang paste or any preparation made w/ cannabis. I too have received such treatment. This practice was around even since the Mohinjidaro + Harappa days.

Either ways, I would not give cannabis to a kid for recreational uses, just because they have a tendency to confuse recreation w/ life. But when the kid has eating problems or vomits when he eats food (happens when u contact disease like chikungunya), I'd much rather he ingest something natural (like cannabis byproducts such as bhang laddu or bhang paste) rather than something synthetic (like pills or injections).

Of course, I'd never administer anything to children + would much rather have a vidhiar do it. But now, thanks to Uncle Sam, cannabis was removed from the official list of ayurvedic medicines and so I wouldn't do it nowadays because vaidhairs aren't allowed to use it as medicine officially and I'd never administer anything myself to kids because my training in ayurvedic medicines is 0.

Also in rural + semi urban India, the medical quality is sometimes not up to the mark and using expired pills, fake pills and/or reusing syringes leads to a problem. Reusing syringes can cause AIDS and in many parts of the country, is the leading cause of AIDS more than prostitutes etc. One kid had a feever and his ma just gave him some pills. The kids arms + legs swelled way outta proportion and the kid's life ended in a few months. Such bullshit never happens in a natural product.

So, considering these risks, an any ayurvedic solution seems to be better than an alopathic one for children. But as I maintained, I would not favour children using cannabis recreationally till the kid becomes a man- i.e. when he can differenciate life from recreation.

I'm very skeptical about the "legal" ages implemented in the US though. Instead of some magical number like "18" or "21" its' best to let the parents or guardians and the kids themselfs do the deciding. Some mature when they're 14. Others have difficulty doing this even when they're 45. It's not like when ur 17.5, you're immature and when u touch 18, the ghost of Josef Stalin fires magical thunderbolts at u which showers u w/ wisdom all of a sudden. And another reason why I'm skeptical about US "legal" ages is because it says u have to be 18 to vote or get conscripted but 21 to drink beer.

As in, going by US legal ages' logic, electing the leader of the country, who determines the future for America or getting enlisted in the army and getting entrusted w/ a machine gun and being shipped to a foreign land to do battle requires less maturity than drinking a beer

 

[o.gkushowns]

Thanks to everyone who's agreeing. It's people like you who can have a positive impact on the image of tokers. Mars the reason I say pot isn't for children is because normally they are not as responsible as adults (smokin up before test, not studying doing general stupid things) and because it CAN have negative effects on growing minds. Piecesofmyheart and Sadu seem to get the jist. Your entitled to your opinion but just relieze that your opinion is harming our image.
peacenpot

 

[PazVerdeRadical]

you think that I and I is worried about what modern-day society thinks about cannabis users? that is as if a Hobbit would want to preserve some kind of image so that Orcs think nicer of them ... or something!

 

[o.gkushowns]

Sorry Pazverderadical I have no idea what you just said lol. I understood the first phrase tho.
peace

 

[Guest]

I understand where Mars2112 is coming from. The scientific community demands hard proof of any statement. Proof in the form of experimentation conducted by any researcher and get the same results. In the scientific community, a statement isn't worth beans unless you can infallibly prove the hypothesis consistently.

It's not so much as, "let's get kids high - woohoo." That is obviously an irresponsible thing to do. Most children can't handle the sugar high from a glass of Kool-Aid. I understand it's acceptable for the FDA to test drugs such as risperdal on small children in order to gain some statistics on dosage fatalities. However, the AMA, APA, and others in their white coats feel they must test everything on everyone before they endorse something's properties and/or claims.

Unfortunately, there aren't very many formal studies on the effects/results of marijuana use - unless they can come up with some reasonablly steady negative results for propaganda use. In retrospect, they won't conduct those studies because their hypothesis can't be proven. It's much easier to just tell the public what to think without proof and if they don't like it they can rot in gulag. Nobody is going to fund nor approve proper scientific studies on the positive effects of marijuana. Not when the government controls the grant programs.

As far as media is concerned, you're only going to see the stereotype of the failed marijauna user whom can't hold a job because he's too stoned to spell his name. Not the professors, scientists, doctors, and other success stories whom have spent their entire lives suckin on a bong and haven't any social or cognitive abnormalities. Ironically, I'd imagine if it hadn't been for some good ganja, many pre-med students wouldn't have survived their assigned theses on the physicologic effects of a lonely toadstool during christmas time.

However, there is no way one of those closet stoners in positions of universal respect are coming out to say to the world, "I am a stoner and have been all my life and I would like funding/permission to conduct research on the effects of marijuana to settle the conflict once and for all" Unless they are looking to get fired and some "M.I.B" arriving at their door demanding, "Ok, pothead, hand over your Nobel Peace Prize."

 

[PazVerdeRadical]

man, mars2112 is always giving positive contributions. her posts on this thread have all been perfect and right on point. there is simply No scientific evidence that states that cannabis will damage the growth of a human.

as Naga states, cannabis has been used for 1000s of years for medicinal reasons, and in ayurveda, the term 'medicinal' goes beyond the mere relief of physical symptoms, and passes into the well-being and health of the spiritual self, so to speak. there are cases where 'hallucinogens' are fed to kids all over the world in order to help them cross into a better mode of being.
in the Amazon, new-born babies are fed drops of ayahuasca by the elders of certain tribes, so that they are welcomed into a higher mode of human existing.

peace.

 

[mars2112]

Mars the reason I say pot isn't for children is because normally they are not as responsible as adults (smokin up before test, not studying doing general stupid things) and because it CAN have negative effects on growing minds. Piecesofmyheart and Sadu seem to get the jist. Your entitled to your opinion but just relieze that your opinion is harming our image.

asking for scientific research is harming our image? so, blindly accepting claims and assumptions is helping our image?

btw, i didn't say anything about being responsible. i replied only to the brain development issue.

because it CAN have negative effects on growing minds

this is what i'm talking about. i could also post that pot CAN have negative effects on eyesight or hair color or show size.. but that doesn't mean it's true. i asked, several times, how you know that pot can harm developing minds - and this proof you mentioned, that's all. and many of you saw that as me somehow defending people who give drugs to kids. and apparantly, my wanting scientific facts is now harming our image. wow! pardon me for wanting the TRUTH!!

However, there is no way one of those closet stoners in positions of universal respect are coming out to say to the world, "I am a stoner and have been all my life and I would like funding/permission to conduct research on the effects of marijuana to settle the conflict once and for all" Unless they are looking to get fired and some "M.I.B" arriving at their door demanding, "Ok, pothead, hand over your Nobel Peace Prize."

no, but researchers like Dr. Donald Abrams, Dr. Ethan Russo and Dr. Lyle Craker have applied to the DEA for permission to conduct research with actual cannabis many times

 

[naga_sadu]

man, mars2112 is always giving positive contributions. her posts on this thread have all been perfect and right on point. there is simply No scientific evidence that states that cannabis will damage the growth of a human.

as Naga states, cannabis has been used for 1000s of years for medicinal reasons, and in ayurveda, the term 'medicinal' goes beyond the mere relief of physical symptoms, and passes into the well-being and health of the spiritual self, so to speak. there are cases where 'hallucinogens' are fed to kids all over the world in order to help them cross into a better mode of being.
in the Amazon, new-born babies are fed drops of ayahuasca by the elders of certain tribes, so that they are welcomed into a higher mode of human existing.

peace.

Mars and Paz are right 100000%. The only reason, tho, why I still wouldn't give a kid bhang is because we're living in a more or less nuclear setup today. "Back in the day" (from 4000BC till the early 90s AD), at least here, people lived under the joint family setup. So, even if a person "fucked up (i.e. gets too much into the habit- very rare but still happens)" there was always a safety net for him to fall back on and family members would gladly give that person cover without hesitation.

In today's nuclear family setup tho, it's simply more beneficial if the person acquires some sense of responsibility first because the extended family and in many cases, even the immediate family just sucks ass nowadays. As in they treat their children like an underperforming employee in a firm if he's not doing too well.

I hate nuclear families and have begun reversing the process, but I believe about 90% plus households in all corners of the globe are nuclear...

 

[pieceofmyheart]

I was only responding to o.gkushowns topic of this thread. I generally don't debate well when it come to logical and scientific proof and all of that. It's not my bag man. I go from the heart and I would say my opinion of children and weed comes from me being a mom and from "been there done that" experience. So anyway, it has gotten off topic as far as I am concerned so Iwill kindly retreat from this thread.


BTW, if you people would go back and reread the thread from the beginning I think you may see what I mean. And the whole children and weed thing that is being debated grew from a post on a marijuana forum from a teen parent who is getting their 2 year old baby high.

 

[o.gkushowns]

It shows who the older more mature members are (I'm not one of them). Some people seem to thing weed is either the greatest the thing in the world or the worst thing in the world and aren't willing to accept the facts. I don't wanna start a big thing here so I'm gona leave it at that.
peace

 

[Guest]

Everyone is arguing different points. POMH is on the right track in her last sentence ^

Everyone is taking their angle on these various issues brought up and trying to argue them their own way.

The thread starter had the intention, I believe, of getting the point across that there are tons of stupid kids and adults giving us true Canna-lovers, activists and conoisseurs a bad name by acting like the stereotypical Half-baked idiots and saying irresponsible things on the net.

He then goes on to give "facts" which "we all know" are proven and the such about everything from his amotivated friends, to stoner babies, to proven research about physical damage Cannabis causes, to morals.

Then he furthers the drama by trying to defend his opinions and assumptions and not the main point of his thread. He gets defensive and tries to tell people that their opinion of his faulty logic on several issues is wrong even though it is their opinion and his. And how can their opinion of your wrongful speculation be hurting us the same way, I'd also like to know? I had the same questions Mars, PAz and Naga had. It's funny how people ask for an opinion then get all defensive.

A teacher in college once taught a whole business class on sticking to one point and debating only that point. I think the thread starter has too many points going, many faulty conclusions, and every one has a good spin on it, but it's going nowhere..

Now my opinion on the thread...

I agree people who abuse Cannabis say stupid things. I do not agree they represent a majority of Cannabis users, nor will that ever change while Cannabis is illegal or legal.
Also, "government members or anti-cannabis persons" will never think any highly of you, me, or anyone in regards to Cannabis. Politicians make laws for money, approval and votes in today's day and age, sorry to break it to you. Voters make a difference.

Your claims that Cannabis's harm has been proven, is incorrect and that is all Mars is saying, you went too far with that one. I think you are wrong also in that assumption. Of course it is unethical and illegal in today's nuclear society (awesome word Naga) to administer anything illegal to your kid and it is not something that is tolerated in our society, that definitely would give that Canna user a bad name, and I surely would not do that. Pazverde and Naga have valuable info on how people around the world have used etheogens for millenia.

I strongly think people who swear their hearsay medical or moral assumptions are the "truth" or "obvious" are like those people who laughed at the concept the world was round...

 

[Guest]

Some people seem to thing weed is either the greatest the thing in the world or the worst thing in the world and aren't willing to accept the facts.

What? What facts....oh boy here we go again...

 

[o.gkushowns]

Alright everyone calm down...I give up. You win. Like I said I don't wanna start a thing.
peace

 

[naga_sadu]

Alright everyone calm down...I give up. You win. Like I said I don't wanna start a thing.
peace

Hey'ya man. I didn't look at this at a battle. I wanted to see how perceptions of mj are shaped by the social structures of different places more in detail. I lived in US for 6 years but still I wanted to kno more about these things in that part of the world. Also places like Europe. I was hoping to use this thread like an info bank. No meaning to compete.

All I'm saying is that from my exp. so far, havin a nuclear family makes it a requirement to understand responsibility and have a grip over financials individually before taking up a habit because in such setups, by and large, when children are going thru rough patches, they tend to get treated by pplz. including school and parents like an employee of a firm who doesn't meet his targets. More than mmj this kinda sustained burden that type of treatment gives out alongside the absence of a safety net makes it hard on the growing child. More than weed or lsd or whatevers this is something which really stunts and damages a young, growing mind.

It was not so in joint families. Also joint families seemed to realise that childrens' talents were multi faceted and not necessarily related to academics. Lotsa emphasis was given on general knowledge and practical education within the family. So noone bothered about redundant shit like smoking. U feel u can handle it do it. ANd if u make a mistake its not the end of the world and that's what families are fucking there for. I don't even think twice when it comes to shielding a little cousin from tough times instead of giving him redundant fucking "reality" sessions. They're nonsense and do nothing but make the other person feel like shit. I literally and physically bitchslapped one of my close friends in the US for doing this shit to his younger bro when he was having a rough patch.

And performance on an institution and a child's talents aren't related in the least bit. If the kid likes academics he'll excel whether he does pot or not. Mj DOES have this tendency. If u're interested in something and/or are studying something u like & enjoy, mj helps u pay more attention and adds alot of creative and practical angle to the field. But if u don't enjoy doing that, it makes u reject it outright. So, if a kid isin't doing well academically, his line simply isin't academics. It's something else where his interests and talents are.

Most schools of today (esp. the post Socialist ones) just draw a straight line and expect every single pupil to fall in. Unlike their original intent, schools don't bring out the individual's talents, but simply guages whether or not you fall into that line they draw. Same story w/ one of my friends. When he smoked mj, he started fucking up in schools. But instead of giving him bullshit, I took him out on a Minsk Motorbike to the woods, lighted up a few Js w/ him and asked what's up like a comrad and not like a preacher. I found out he loved bikes. I got him some reading material from the UK and took him to my family's mech. He would bask in the sun and tug it out in a shed where wounds are treated w/ brake oil. He loved bikes more than u or I would love a family. He quit HS and learnt the tricks of the trade from my mech. He also attended a diploma course and then got employed w/ a big time royal enfield mech. After a while he branched out on his own and today, he's residence is in the ssame area as the state's Chief Minister's.

When he was "sober" he just "tugged" along in school and maintained some bare marks. He hated it. Mj make u reject things u don't like. It magnifies ur disgust as well as ur pleasures. So if u're doing something pleasureable i.e. something u like, mj can only heal and not harm. That's why it's called an Ayurvedh, such as what PazVerdeRadical said. It put only a good angle on my buddy. If his comrads were useless (i.e. not solutions oriented- how to make him safe), he woulda fucked up. We understood what was up and acted accordingly. Because we know ayurvedic substances won't hurt. My family also took care of my buddy when he was havin' it rough 'coz his Dad wasn't well off (he was a clerk in the elec. board). His dad did give him shit about this so called "pot abuse" but we intervened and told his dad to chill down and we'll take care of him. We did the right thing, I feel. No point bitching on why u can't perform academically if academics iisin't ur talent.

But of course, u need safety nets for that type of thinking to take shape. Which don't exist in nuclerar families. Which is sad. Our urban centres are more or less nuclear family oriented. Without a safety net, if u fuck up, there's nothing u can do. I kind of find it puzzling as to how people can live under these circumstances, but I guess diff. peeps + diff. tastes so no complaints. But I feel for children especially, joint families are far superior.

Those GPAs they issue encourage laziness amongst parents who are apparently always working. Apparently, many today think that all u have to do to understand your child's intelligence is to look at his marks sheet or GPA report at the end of each month for 2-3 minutes (or quarter) and sign it. What the fuck?! And to top it all, when something goes wrong they blame it on pot abuse. It's really sad that such thinking takes place. ANd the absence of a safety net further makes it hard on the child. And parents base all their actions on that stupid GPA report and pot rather than finding out the childrens' tru talents + interests and tuning them that way. It's easy to blame substances because you can "finish the story" in 2 words "substance abuse." But too bad in nuclear setups, most families often find very little time (esp. with dual working households) to interact w/ the child enough to even make them comfortable, leave alone find their talents and encourage them...also blaming anything on substances is easy way out because substances like mmj can't talk back. Ur child can. And so some... "extremely busy" ppls just tend to shift the entire brden on something that can't talk on its own. Which is fucked up.

I'm NOT saying every family which is nuclear like this are but a majority of them work like that, whici is very fuckt. Also, I'm not pointing this or responding to anyone else's POVs, I'm just jotting down my own based on what I've seen and experienced 1st hand.

India wasn't the only places like this, which ran on joint families, it was in Europe also. Like Yugoslavia. Parents were legally responsible for the economic upkeep of their kid till he was 27 or till he founda job earlier (even if unemployment was low). Violation was a criminal offense nota civil one. It made parents more mindful when rearing children.

Speaking of "heavy" substance "abusers", I can personally testify that Dikr practicioneering elders have implemented lot more beneficial projects for villages than IMF/ World Bank "regional experts" with multiple flashy Ivy league PG degrees. These practicioneers have been shrooming for 60+ years and they intake the substance at increasing rates every Saturday of the week right from day 1. MJ and charas? Take a wild guess. THey have no formal education. But under them, the village may not turn out to be like Las Vegas, but everyone had enough rations for a year and a roof over their heads w/ clean and hygenic water and many communal facilities like a play ground, some canteens, shops, communal kitchens etc. When the govt. started listening to world bank "experts" who claim to be recording 8% growth rates, abot 8,900 farmers committed suicide in 2 fiscal quarters. And the farming sector nationwide is in disarray to a point the govt have to import food. So apparently, over indulgence in the institution is more stupifying than any natural substance on earth, it looks like....