3 reputable studies indicate that exposure to THC in the womb may cause brain damage, and it is statistically more dangerous than exposure to lead.
Respected studies indicate that 20% of American women smoke marijuana while pregnant.
It is estimated that 75% of African Americans smoke marijuana regularly.
Where are the “Black Lives Matter” folks when you need them? How about Hollywood doing some Public Service warnings in the interest of children?
Nah. Too busy bashing Trump and railing about Net Neutrality (as if they know what they are talking about!) to actually, you know, take time to help pregnant women protect their children . . .
According to recently published data from Kaiser Permanente (see I actually cited a study), marijuana use among pregnant women increased from 4.2 percent in 2009 to 7.1 percent in 2016.
According to a 2015 study by the CDC, 10 percent of pregnant women drink alcohol during their pregnancy — with 3 percent of those women binge drinking.
I don’t drink or do drugs, but I had to speak out against Craig’s thinly veiled racism, statistical malpractice and reefer madness.
You either can’t read or you are trying to obfuscate.
Your citation clearly says it is PREGNANT WOMEN UNDER 18 YEARS OLD. It’s the first sentence of the second paragraph. The third paragraph gives the correct 7 percent statistic I cited.
You don’t want to protect black children. You want to shame Black Lives Matter and Hollywood. So get off your high horse.
Good point. Pregnant women under 18 years old don’t count.
So, if I get this straight, you would tell pregnant women, including pregnant black women, that they can consume THC without any risk to their children.
Got it.
January 4, 2018 at 6:08 pm
UW says:
Like or Dislike:
1
2
You didn’t get it right, Craig.
January 8, 2018 at 7:01 am
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
Sorry, stoners, but Craig is right. If you think this story by Fox, er, Faux News (I spelled it wrong so you can recognize which media outlet I was citing) is false or misleading, refute it with a scientific study by a credible source….
Researchers are still studying the long-term effects of marijuana. But what is known is that the younger a person begins using pot, such as in the teen years, the greater the declines in general knowledge, impaired thinking, learning difficulties and lowered IQ.
and, later in the article is THIS important fact:
And no matter what proponents of marijuana use will tell you, marijuana use can lead to the development of a substance use disorder. Between 9 and 30 percent of users may develop some degree of this disorder. Those who start using marijuana before the age of 18 are four to seven times more likely than adults to develop a marijuana use disorder.
OK UW and SAF; discredit the Faux News article & author with personal attacks on his character! Ready, steady, … GO!
January 3, 2018 at 5:16 pm
Captain Planet says:
Like or Dislike:
2
2
Sally,
I’ve had this go-around with Craig before. He sounds just like that cop in “Boyz in The Hood”. I tried to explain substance abuse isn’t necessarily a color thing. It is due to the socio-economic conditions this country has created and perpetuates.
Craig still can’t read for comprehension. I don’t think any pregnant woman should use any substances. I just had to point out his thinly veiled racism, statistical malpractice and reefer madness. Bigotry influenced his entire post..
Bigotry. What a fool. Guess the race of my son? Guess the race of my girl friend.
Name calling. The refuge of the internet.
January 4, 2018 at 11:20 am
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
1
3
@SAF: you cited a Kaiser Permanente study without providing a link to it. Please provide a link so we can determine whether or not you interpreted it properly, and the related details you may have censored.
The study cited with link by Craig is within the article dated 12/26/17. It refers to a 2009-2016 KP North of CA study period.
January 4, 2018 at 2:10 pm
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
1
3
Someone down voted my request to post a link to a study cited. What is wrong with that? Answer: nothing, for someone who isn’t a snowflake.
January 5, 2018 at 7:30 am
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
1
2
I await a link to SAF’s source article.
This provides another opportunity for snowflakes to down vote without replying.
January 3, 2018 at 5:25 pm
Craig Cornell says:
Like or Dislike:
1
2
Actually, I know the science. THC is in fact dangerous to children in the womb. Why not warn people? Seems compassionate to me to just tell the truth.
And if you don’t believe it, let me know what you would tell a pregnant relative about marijuana.
In Craig’s defense, what he was arguing is that it’s not a good idea for pregnant women to smoke pot because it’s bad for the baby. It’s not a color issue in this case, I don’t think anyone here would say it’s a GOOD idea for pregnant women to smoke pot or ANYTHING for that matter, or consume alcohol while pregnant.
I’ve stated my views on pot before…I did my share of it in college 20+ years ago. All it did for me was make me appreciate Pink Floyd and the Grateful Dead a lot more, plus dramatically increase my pizza budget. I’ve always thought that if alcohol and tobacco are legal (which are responsible for MANY more deaths and problems than pot), you might as well legalize pot and tax the heck out of it. Consume it responsibly, don’t smoke it around kids, don’t smoke and drive, and I don’t have a problem with you. I choose not to partake, but I won’t judge those who do.
January 4, 2018 at 2:12 pm
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
0
4
It’s important to legalize pot, to enhance one’s experience of music, despite the increased risk of auto accidents, and proven impact on mental capacity later in life? Really? Answer: no, not really; that’s just a ….. pipe dream of stoners.
January 3, 2018 at 3:22 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
2
4
Craig, just saw a story yesterday that one of these Medical Marijuana dudes broad sided a young woman while doing 82 MPH and high on his Medical Marijuana. She’s dead and he wasn’t hurt. Why was he allowed to drive and kill someone while high on this mind altering drug?
Was he allowed to? Or was he arrested for impaired driving?
Again from the CDC: Every day, 28 people in the United States die in motor vehicle crashes that involve an alcohol-impaired driver. This is one death every 51 minutes. The annual cost of alcohol-related crashes totals more than $44 billion.
WASHINGTON (AP) — Attorney General Jeff Sessions is rescinding the Obama-era policy that had paved the way for legalized marijuana to flourish in states across the country, two people with knowledge of the decision told The Associated Press. Sessions will instead let federal prosecutors where pot is legal decide how aggressively to enforce federal marijuana law, the people said.
Hooray for the rule of law, and common sense regarding unhealthy actions which are buttressed by the most recent, credible, unbiased, scientific studies!
Back to alcohol use and related deaths as compared to the number of pot-related deaths;
Alcohol (legal in 50 (57?) states) is more widely used than pot (illegal in ALL 50 (57?) states, despite a few recently enacted statutes that violate Federal Laws), so more deaths in auto accidents related to alcohol abuse are expected relative to lesser used pot related deaths. That’s a simple statistical concept.
Speculation, indirectly supported by recent studies (not linked, not cited); pot use results in inestimable Billions of dollars of lost work place productivity in long-term pot users whose mental capabilities have been diminished. That’s speculation. But it’s been observed in stoners in work places, and there are conclusive, credible studies that indicate diminished mental capacity (a UK based groups’ study was the most recent one I’ve seen, circa September 2017) for long-term pot users.
I am old enough to remember when true Conservatives wanted less federal control and leave more of this these issues to the individual states.
January 4, 2018 at 2:20 pm
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
2
3
Another useless blanket statement/ generalization! For example, following your generalization, Conservatives wouldn’t want regulation of furs taken by hunters, fish taken by fishermen, use of dangerous drugs…. uh, and, driving while impaired that risks injury and death to other users of the roads and highways.
Federal controls are necessary when dangerous drugs can cross state lines undetected, thus hidden from one state where it is illegal. Yours is another Straw Man Argument.
@SAF: re: your opening remark…. Agent implied the at fault driver / stoner was ‘allowed’ to use the vehicle. Was your comprehension impaired by something when you read his comment?
Your rebuttal, using the old lame attempted excuse ‘alcohol is legal, and so should be pot’ indicates you lack reasoning skills, and possibly truly believe what you read from others who post the same $%#@ on the internet.
You are implying dangerous activities after use of alcohol are occurring because ALCOHOL USE is legal. However, dangerous activities do not always occur because the user acts responsibly (designated drivers, use alcohol at home, and don’t drive or operate machinery after use). And, the otherwise legal activity of driving, for an example, is not legal when under the influence of drugs or alcohol.
“Agent implied the at fault driver / stoner was ‘allowed’ to use the vehicle. Was your comprehension impaired by something when you read his comment?”
SAF did acknowledge that.
The questions are:
1. Did the state allow this person?
2. Is driving under the influence of medical marijuana legal where this occurred?
If the answers are “yes”, then I agree with you and Agent that this would be a significant problem.
January 8, 2018 at 8:47 am
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Addition:
..allow this person to drive while under the influence of medical marijuana ?
January 8, 2018 at 3:56 pm
Back2Reagan84 says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Polarbear, you literally comment on every single post on this forum. Why? Do you hate your job that much?
Be productive for once and sell a policy or settle a claim and stop pushing your opinions to everyone. Discuss with actual people in the real world, like people used to do, instead of fighting with anonymous people on the internet.
January 8, 2018 at 4:11 pm
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
0
1
@Ron; the ‘state’ doesn’t allow or prevent people to act on their own free will, unless they are incarcerated by the state. In the latter case, there is no free will, and the state prevents, not allows, freedom to drive a car, walk down the street, etc.
January 4, 2018 at 1:44 pm
Craig Cornell says:
Like or Dislike:
4
2
I’m old enough to remember when liberals wouldn’t assume I was a racist for disagreeing with them, especially when they didn’t even know me in the first place.
I’m old enough to remember when liberals who cared about black people actually tried to limit the number of liquor stores in black communities; today, those same liberals want pot shops set up in black neighborhoods. As if that will help blacks realize equality in America.
I’m old enough to remember when liberals would try to learn more about a subject when the issue was whether or not children were damaged. Today they just nit-pick the details and ignore the important conclusions.
I also remember when liberals said they “believed in science”. Not so much when the science says regular use of marijuana doubles your chance of serious mental illness (citation: Los Angeles County Department of Health statistics. Check it out.)
And as a conservative, I support informed decisions by local voters. Key word: informed.
This MUST be Fake News because it’s from Fox News, or is that Faux News?, and because it has multiple studies referencing several adverse effects of pot, including it being a gateway drug. (heavy dose of sarcasm)
Attention stoners! Please state your medical licensing details for comparison to that of Dr. Mark Siegel, Contributor to Fox, er, Faux News. Dr. Siegel’s comments are an integral part of the Fox, er, Faux News report in the above link.
What’s your point in posting that link? I don’t think anyone here would argue with him on these points:
1) “…alcohol impairs a driver much more…” So driving while drunk is worse than driving while high, although they’re both dangerous. Agreed.
2) “marijuana use during pregnancy can be harmful to your baby’s health” Duh. Yeah, obviously. Pregnant women shouldn’t do drugs or alcohol while pregnant. Agreed.
3) “Marijuana is a useful drug medically when it comes to treating chronic pain, as well as the debilitating pain of cancer and the nausea of cancer treatments. But it should not be used to treat morning sickness, and recreational use of any kind should include consideration of potential side effects.”
Great. He admits it’s useful medicinally and you shouldn’t use it recreationally unless you’re aware of the potential side effects (which you should do with EVERY SINGLE DRUG that you buy or is prescribed to you by your doctor)
The only part of that article I question is this line: “…there is evidence that marijuana is a gateway drug to other drugs…” I would like to know details such as what is the name of the study (so we can figure out who was in the test group, who was in the control group, how long was the study conducted, etc).
That’s the only part of the article I disagree with, and there’s no way to research if his conclusion is valid without knowing anything about the studies conducted that determined that to be true. I’m not talking one-off “evidence” either, such as “my friends Bobby and Joe now smoke crack and they smoked weed first” since I have many friends who only smoke weed and don’t do any other drugs (aside from alcohol).
Respected research indicates that 20% of pregnant women under age 24 smoke marijuana while pregnant.
Since marijuana use among African Americans is much higher generally, it is reasonable to assume that more than 20% of babies born to black Americans are exposed to the possibility of brain damage.
So you say “Duh”. But apparently, your liberal buddies didn’t spread the word very far when the legalized marijuana in California.
Legalize first. Damage children second. Correct whenever. (PS The highest percentage of first-time teen users of marijuana is in what state? Colorado. Congratulations again.
Yes – I say “DUH” to the fact that those who are pregnant should not smoke weed, smoke cigarettes, drink alcohol or continue to take any medication (even over-the-counter stuff) until they discuss the potential impact(s) it will have on the fetus with their physician.
Of course, I can only speak for myself – I am not a black pregnant woman under 24 so I can’t comment about what that group of people are doing (especially since you didn’t provide a single link to your “respected research” for me to review).
And when you vote for society to make a change, you should consider the impact on everyone, not just yourself.
January 8, 2018 at 3:34 pm
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
I still fail to see what you’re trying to argue here – has ANYONE here ever tried to argue that smoking weed while pregnant is safe? No.
Will people still take risks while pregnant aside from pot, like having one glass of wine every month? Definitely.
Young people make stupid decisions all the time (heh, that’s probably why they got pregnant int he first place :) but “women under 24 who are pregnant” is just one really small subset of people in the entire country.
January 8, 2018 at 4:13 pm
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
The point of posting a link is to provide a rebuttal to stoners who CONTINUE to claim there are no adverse effects of smoking illegal pot.
I don’t believe anyone has ever made the argument that weed is 100% safe. Arguments are that it’s less addictive than other class-1 substances, has medicinal properties, and is less dangerous than alcohol (especially when driving, which that link confirms). Stop arguing things nobody is arguing (that there are NO adverse effects), i.e. stop making straw man arguments.
January 8, 2018 at 1:53 pm
MightyQuinn says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
The current pot is estimated to be 10+ x more powerful than that of the sinful 60’s.
This stuff is freakin’ dangerous and I can attest to that from my son’s mental illness which is not genetic but which stems to his attending college in Hawaii in 2002-2005 and, unfortunately, using more than a mild amount of pot…..which he never smoked before he went there from CA.
Laughable. Unlike booze or other drugs, every numb skull can grow pot in his garage. Regulation-controlled pot at legal dispensaries will be for the organic kale crowd.
Everyone else will buy the ass-kicking, cheap, tax-free stuff from their next door neighbor.
But they won’t know how much THC or CBD are in those black market strains, so people who solely want to get psychedelic highs would still want to go to a shop to find strains that have high THC and low CBD percentages. Those who want to get sucked in their couch would also want to find strains with specific numbers of THC (low) and CBD (high). I doubt any dealer has tested their supply to know those numbers.
Exactly. Just like they are doing now. No change. Except for the increased usage due to societies endorsement of one more intoxicant . . .
January 8, 2018 at 3:47 pm
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
In addition, people do make their own alcohol, legally, today. If you want to purchase this from some idiot down the street because it is cheaper than the liquor store, then go ahead and take your chances.
Sure dude. When was the last time anyone bought beer or whiskey from their neighbor. Man, are you high already?
January 9, 2018 at 9:34 am
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
“When was the last time anyone bought beer or whiskey from their neighbor.” Answer: Prohibition. What happened when that was repealed? people started going back to the liquor store.
Once marijuana is legalized, most people will stop going to the local dealer and purchase regulated marijuana, just like alcohol. Those that want to purchase from their next door neighbor, do so at their own peril, just like alcohol.
January 8, 2018 at 3:59 pm
Back2Reagan84 says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
And how many people are making beer, spirits, and now liquid nicotine in their garage? Are you oblivious to that fact?
Yeah Ron – what an empty claim you made saying you assume regulated marijuana will be less harmful than the black market stuff! Idiot. Wait. What’s that? You never actually said that and Polar is making yet ANOTHER Straw Man Argument? Sounds about right to me.
My sympathies, Quinn. My son had a very similar (worse) experience with pot. Once his troubles started, we were amazed at how many people told us stories about other kids who dropped out of college or worse due to marijuana.
While parents in upscale neighborhoods are slowly learning about the dangers, Democrats keep opening dispensaries in lower-income areas (and then prattling on about racism).
3 reputable studies indicate that exposure to THC in the womb may cause brain damage, and it is statistically more dangerous than exposure to lead.
Respected studies indicate that 20% of American women smoke marijuana while pregnant.
It is estimated that 75% of African Americans smoke marijuana regularly.
Where are the “Black Lives Matter” folks when you need them? How about Hollywood doing some Public Service warnings in the interest of children?
Nah. Too busy bashing Trump and railing about Net Neutrality (as if they know what they are talking about!) to actually, you know, take time to help pregnant women protect their children . . .
Compassion!
Craig is making up his “reputable studies.”
According to recently published data from Kaiser Permanente (see I actually cited a study), marijuana use among pregnant women increased from 4.2 percent in 2009 to 7.1 percent in 2016.
According to a 2015 study by the CDC, 10 percent of pregnant women drink alcohol during their pregnancy — with 3 percent of those women binge drinking.
I don’t drink or do drugs, but I had to speak out against Craig’s thinly veiled racism, statistical malpractice and reefer madness.
You called me a racist? Seriously? Guess what color I am . . .
That Kaiser Study says 22% of pregnant women. See below.
And I am arguing in FAVOR of protecting black children. Yikes.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health-and-fitness/health/more-women-smoking-pot-while-pregnant-us-study-finds/article37432188/
You either can’t read or you are trying to obfuscate.
Your citation clearly says it is PREGNANT WOMEN UNDER 18 YEARS OLD. It’s the first sentence of the second paragraph. The third paragraph gives the correct 7 percent statistic I cited.
You don’t want to protect black children. You want to shame Black Lives Matter and Hollywood. So get off your high horse.
Good point. Pregnant women under 18 years old don’t count.
So, if I get this straight, you would tell pregnant women, including pregnant black women, that they can consume THC without any risk to their children.
Got it.
You didn’t get it right, Craig.
Sorry, stoners, but Craig is right. If you think this story by Fox, er, Faux News (I spelled it wrong so you can recognize which media outlet I was citing) is false or misleading, refute it with a scientific study by a credible source….
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/01/07/pot-is-dangerous-not-funny-doctor-tells-us-why.html
Excerpts:
Researchers are still studying the long-term effects of marijuana. But what is known is that the younger a person begins using pot, such as in the teen years, the greater the declines in general knowledge, impaired thinking, learning difficulties and lowered IQ.
and, later in the article is THIS important fact:
And no matter what proponents of marijuana use will tell you, marijuana use can lead to the development of a substance use disorder. Between 9 and 30 percent of users may develop some degree of this disorder. Those who start using marijuana before the age of 18 are four to seven times more likely than adults to develop a marijuana use disorder.
OK UW and SAF; discredit the Faux News article & author with personal attacks on his character! Ready, steady, … GO!
Sally,
I’ve had this go-around with Craig before. He sounds just like that cop in “Boyz in The Hood”. I tried to explain substance abuse isn’t necessarily a color thing. It is due to the socio-economic conditions this country has created and perpetuates.
Craig still can’t read for comprehension. I don’t think any pregnant woman should use any substances. I just had to point out his thinly veiled racism, statistical malpractice and reefer madness. Bigotry influenced his entire post..
Bigotry. What a fool. Guess the race of my son? Guess the race of my girl friend.
Name calling. The refuge of the internet.
@SAF: you cited a Kaiser Permanente study without providing a link to it. Please provide a link so we can determine whether or not you interpreted it properly, and the related details you may have censored.
The study cited with link by Craig is within the article dated 12/26/17. It refers to a 2009-2016 KP North of CA study period.
Someone down voted my request to post a link to a study cited. What is wrong with that? Answer: nothing, for someone who isn’t a snowflake.
I await a link to SAF’s source article.
This provides another opportunity for snowflakes to down vote without replying.
Actually, I know the science. THC is in fact dangerous to children in the womb. Why not warn people? Seems compassionate to me to just tell the truth.
And if you don’t believe it, let me know what you would tell a pregnant relative about marijuana.
Walk the Walk.
In Craig’s defense, what he was arguing is that it’s not a good idea for pregnant women to smoke pot because it’s bad for the baby. It’s not a color issue in this case, I don’t think anyone here would say it’s a GOOD idea for pregnant women to smoke pot or ANYTHING for that matter, or consume alcohol while pregnant.
I’ve stated my views on pot before…I did my share of it in college 20+ years ago. All it did for me was make me appreciate Pink Floyd and the Grateful Dead a lot more, plus dramatically increase my pizza budget. I’ve always thought that if alcohol and tobacco are legal (which are responsible for MANY more deaths and problems than pot), you might as well legalize pot and tax the heck out of it. Consume it responsibly, don’t smoke it around kids, don’t smoke and drive, and I don’t have a problem with you. I choose not to partake, but I won’t judge those who do.
It’s important to legalize pot, to enhance one’s experience of music, despite the increased risk of auto accidents, and proven impact on mental capacity later in life? Really? Answer: no, not really; that’s just a ….. pipe dream of stoners.
Craig, just saw a story yesterday that one of these Medical Marijuana dudes broad sided a young woman while doing 82 MPH and high on his Medical Marijuana. She’s dead and he wasn’t hurt. Why was he allowed to drive and kill someone while high on this mind altering drug?
Was he allowed to? Or was he arrested for impaired driving?
Again from the CDC: Every day, 28 people in the United States die in motor vehicle crashes that involve an alcohol-impaired driver. This is one death every 51 minutes. The annual cost of alcohol-related crashes totals more than $44 billion.
Alcohol use is legal. Pot isn’t FEDERALLY, but is, locally. But all that is soon going to change for the better….
https://apnews.com/19f6bfec15a74733b40eaf0ff9162bfa
WASHINGTON (AP) — Attorney General Jeff Sessions is rescinding the Obama-era policy that had paved the way for legalized marijuana to flourish in states across the country, two people with knowledge of the decision told The Associated Press. Sessions will instead let federal prosecutors where pot is legal decide how aggressively to enforce federal marijuana law, the people said.
Hooray for the rule of law, and common sense regarding unhealthy actions which are buttressed by the most recent, credible, unbiased, scientific studies!
Back to alcohol use and related deaths as compared to the number of pot-related deaths;
Alcohol (legal in 50 (57?) states) is more widely used than pot (illegal in ALL 50 (57?) states, despite a few recently enacted statutes that violate Federal Laws), so more deaths in auto accidents related to alcohol abuse are expected relative to lesser used pot related deaths. That’s a simple statistical concept.
Speculation, indirectly supported by recent studies (not linked, not cited); pot use results in inestimable Billions of dollars of lost work place productivity in long-term pot users whose mental capabilities have been diminished. That’s speculation. But it’s been observed in stoners in work places, and there are conclusive, credible studies that indicate diminished mental capacity (a UK based groups’ study was the most recent one I’ve seen, circa September 2017) for long-term pot users.
I am old enough to remember when true Conservatives wanted less federal control and leave more of this these issues to the individual states.
Another useless blanket statement/ generalization! For example, following your generalization, Conservatives wouldn’t want regulation of furs taken by hunters, fish taken by fishermen, use of dangerous drugs…. uh, and, driving while impaired that risks injury and death to other users of the roads and highways.
Federal controls are necessary when dangerous drugs can cross state lines undetected, thus hidden from one state where it is illegal. Yours is another Straw Man Argument.
https://effectiviology.com/straw-man-arguments-recognize-counter-use/
@SAF: re: your opening remark…. Agent implied the at fault driver / stoner was ‘allowed’ to use the vehicle. Was your comprehension impaired by something when you read his comment?
Your rebuttal, using the old lame attempted excuse ‘alcohol is legal, and so should be pot’ indicates you lack reasoning skills, and possibly truly believe what you read from others who post the same $%#@ on the internet.
You are implying dangerous activities after use of alcohol are occurring because ALCOHOL USE is legal. However, dangerous activities do not always occur because the user acts responsibly (designated drivers, use alcohol at home, and don’t drive or operate machinery after use). And, the otherwise legal activity of driving, for an example, is not legal when under the influence of drugs or alcohol.
“Agent implied the at fault driver / stoner was ‘allowed’ to use the vehicle. Was your comprehension impaired by something when you read his comment?”
SAF did acknowledge that.
The questions are:
1. Did the state allow this person?
2. Is driving under the influence of medical marijuana legal where this occurred?
If the answers are “yes”, then I agree with you and Agent that this would be a significant problem.
Addition:
..allow this person to drive while under the influence of medical marijuana ?
Polarbear, you literally comment on every single post on this forum. Why? Do you hate your job that much?
Be productive for once and sell a policy or settle a claim and stop pushing your opinions to everyone. Discuss with actual people in the real world, like people used to do, instead of fighting with anonymous people on the internet.
@Ron; the ‘state’ doesn’t allow or prevent people to act on their own free will, unless they are incarcerated by the state. In the latter case, there is no free will, and the state prevents, not allows, freedom to drive a car, walk down the street, etc.
I’m old enough to remember when liberals wouldn’t assume I was a racist for disagreeing with them, especially when they didn’t even know me in the first place.
I’m old enough to remember when liberals who cared about black people actually tried to limit the number of liquor stores in black communities; today, those same liberals want pot shops set up in black neighborhoods. As if that will help blacks realize equality in America.
I’m old enough to remember when liberals would try to learn more about a subject when the issue was whether or not children were damaged. Today they just nit-pick the details and ignore the important conclusions.
I also remember when liberals said they “believed in science”. Not so much when the science says regular use of marijuana doubles your chance of serious mental illness (citation: Los Angeles County Department of Health statistics. Check it out.)
And as a conservative, I support informed decisions by local voters. Key word: informed.
This MUST be Fake News because it’s from Fox News, or is that Faux News?, and because it has multiple studies referencing several adverse effects of pot, including it being a gateway drug. (heavy dose of sarcasm)
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/01/04/dr-marc-siegel-smoking-pot-routinely-may-seem-harmless-but-don-t-be-fooled-even-if-it-s-legal.html
Attention stoners! Please state your medical licensing details for comparison to that of Dr. Mark Siegel, Contributor to Fox, er, Faux News. Dr. Siegel’s comments are an integral part of the Fox, er, Faux News report in the above link.
What’s your point in posting that link? I don’t think anyone here would argue with him on these points:
1) “…alcohol impairs a driver much more…” So driving while drunk is worse than driving while high, although they’re both dangerous. Agreed.
2) “marijuana use during pregnancy can be harmful to your baby’s health” Duh. Yeah, obviously. Pregnant women shouldn’t do drugs or alcohol while pregnant. Agreed.
3) “Marijuana is a useful drug medically when it comes to treating chronic pain, as well as the debilitating pain of cancer and the nausea of cancer treatments. But it should not be used to treat morning sickness, and recreational use of any kind should include consideration of potential side effects.”
Great. He admits it’s useful medicinally and you shouldn’t use it recreationally unless you’re aware of the potential side effects (which you should do with EVERY SINGLE DRUG that you buy or is prescribed to you by your doctor)
The only part of that article I question is this line: “…there is evidence that marijuana is a gateway drug to other drugs…” I would like to know details such as what is the name of the study (so we can figure out who was in the test group, who was in the control group, how long was the study conducted, etc).
That’s the only part of the article I disagree with, and there’s no way to research if his conclusion is valid without knowing anything about the studies conducted that determined that to be true. I’m not talking one-off “evidence” either, such as “my friends Bobby and Joe now smoke crack and they smoked weed first” since I have many friends who only smoke weed and don’t do any other drugs (aside from alcohol).
Respected research indicates that 20% of pregnant women under age 24 smoke marijuana while pregnant.
Since marijuana use among African Americans is much higher generally, it is reasonable to assume that more than 20% of babies born to black Americans are exposed to the possibility of brain damage.
So you say “Duh”. But apparently, your liberal buddies didn’t spread the word very far when the legalized marijuana in California.
Legalize first. Damage children second. Correct whenever. (PS The highest percentage of first-time teen users of marijuana is in what state? Colorado. Congratulations again.
Yes – I say “DUH” to the fact that those who are pregnant should not smoke weed, smoke cigarettes, drink alcohol or continue to take any medication (even over-the-counter stuff) until they discuss the potential impact(s) it will have on the fetus with their physician.
Of course, I can only speak for myself – I am not a black pregnant woman under 24 so I can’t comment about what that group of people are doing (especially since you didn’t provide a single link to your “respected research” for me to review).
See the very beginning of this thread.
And when you vote for society to make a change, you should consider the impact on everyone, not just yourself.
I still fail to see what you’re trying to argue here – has ANYONE here ever tried to argue that smoking weed while pregnant is safe? No.
Will people still take risks while pregnant aside from pot, like having one glass of wine every month? Definitely.
Young people make stupid decisions all the time (heh, that’s probably why they got pregnant int he first place :) but “women under 24 who are pregnant” is just one really small subset of people in the entire country.
The point of posting a link is to provide a rebuttal to stoners who CONTINUE to claim there are no adverse effects of smoking illegal pot.
I don’t believe anyone has ever made the argument that weed is 100% safe. Arguments are that it’s less addictive than other class-1 substances, has medicinal properties, and is less dangerous than alcohol (especially when driving, which that link confirms). Stop arguing things nobody is arguing (that there are NO adverse effects), i.e. stop making straw man arguments.
The current pot is estimated to be 10+ x more powerful than that of the sinful 60’s.
This stuff is freakin’ dangerous and I can attest to that from my son’s mental illness which is not genetic but which stems to his attending college in Hawaii in 2002-2005 and, unfortunately, using more than a mild amount of pot…..which he never smoked before he went there from CA.
Another reason to legalize. It can then be regulated. As of now, you knows what is in what.
Laughable. Unlike booze or other drugs, every numb skull can grow pot in his garage. Regulation-controlled pot at legal dispensaries will be for the organic kale crowd.
Everyone else will buy the ass-kicking, cheap, tax-free stuff from their next door neighbor.
But they won’t know how much THC or CBD are in those black market strains, so people who solely want to get psychedelic highs would still want to go to a shop to find strains that have high THC and low CBD percentages. Those who want to get sucked in their couch would also want to find strains with specific numbers of THC (low) and CBD (high). I doubt any dealer has tested their supply to know those numbers.
“Everyone else will buy the ass-kicking, cheap, tax-free stuff from their next door neighbor.” You mean like they are doing now?
Exactly. Just like they are doing now. No change. Except for the increased usage due to societies endorsement of one more intoxicant . . .
In addition, people do make their own alcohol, legally, today. If you want to purchase this from some idiot down the street because it is cheaper than the liquor store, then go ahead and take your chances.
Sure dude. When was the last time anyone bought beer or whiskey from their neighbor. Man, are you high already?
“When was the last time anyone bought beer or whiskey from their neighbor.” Answer: Prohibition. What happened when that was repealed? people started going back to the liquor store.
Once marijuana is legalized, most people will stop going to the local dealer and purchase regulated marijuana, just like alcohol. Those that want to purchase from their next door neighbor, do so at their own peril, just like alcohol.
And how many people are making beer, spirits, and now liquid nicotine in their garage? Are you oblivious to that fact?
No, Ron, it isn’t a reason to legalize the dangerous substance that YOU ASSUME will be regulated to be less harmful. That’s an empty claim.
Yeah Ron – what an empty claim you made saying you assume regulated marijuana will be less harmful than the black market stuff! Idiot. Wait. What’s that? You never actually said that and Polar is making yet ANOTHER Straw Man Argument? Sounds about right to me.
My sympathies, Quinn. My son had a very similar (worse) experience with pot. Once his troubles started, we were amazed at how many people told us stories about other kids who dropped out of college or worse due to marijuana.
While parents in upscale neighborhoods are slowly learning about the dangers, Democrats keep opening dispensaries in lower-income areas (and then prattling on about racism).