Yeah, most potheads just want to get high, but doesn't the fact that it cures a fucking shit ton of ailments bring legitimacy to the cause? I mean why would that not be a huge talking point and why would you expect supporters to not constantly use it as a reason?
About 15 years ago a friend and I were in line at a bank during our lunch break, with a 50-60 year old lady behind us. This guy walks in, about in his mid-twenties and gets in line. A couple of seconds after he arrives the scent of pot starts wafting through the air. My friend and I just looked at each other, figuring we knew what he was doing on his lunch break. The lady behind us looks at us, looks at him and says, "I smell pot." Dead silence. Then the guy does this weird giggle behind his hand and says, "It was me." He paused a moment, and I guess it was too much for him, so he turned around and quickly walked out of the bank. We looked at the lady and she just shrugs her shoulders and said, "I don't care, I'll say it." It was hysterical, mostly because we were kind of thrown she addressed the elephant in the room and I had never heard a guy quite giggle like he did. It was all high-pitched and everything. Poor fella never even got to cash his check.
And they do. I've never looked to it as a "cure" for anything. It's a pacifier. It's proven to help with certain things, like Tourette's, epilepsy, glaucoma, Iritis, etc. but it doesn't cure them, just relieves it. Lots of these "Pot Demographic" dirtbags shout through bullhorns that cannabis oil is this magic ingredient that cures AIDS and Cancer, and heals wounds 10x quicker if you rub it in. All bullshit.
The list of ailments that there is medical consensus that it "cures" is pretty slim. Almost all of its medicinal properties that are widely agreed upon are in the "alleviation" category (nausua, pain, appetite loss, anxiety etc.). The main exceptions are glaucoma and MS, but these are still disputed/largely unproven. So while it's useful in treating many diseases, it doesn't really "cure" in the traditional sense of the word.
Well the bill of goods as originally sold for medical marijuana was that it was for cancer and AIDs patients. Im half on that lunatics side from CNN when you see how hilariously bad people flaunt skirting medical marijuana laws in Cali. You really aren't going to win anyone to your side with the antics people pull out there on top of the fact that all of those same people claim it is a cure all. I'm curious how medical pot dispensaries are regulated by the FDA on this subject. That dress wearing dispensary owner on Nat Geo claimed it cured everything. I thought there were laws against snake oil salesmen when it came to medical claims for, you know, schedule one drugs (this isn't exactly Head On or some other homeopathic bullshit).
Most of the folks that vote "NO!" against legalization of pot are geriatrics who watched "Reefer Madness" in a high school gym in the 50's and accepted it's message as gospel truth. To listen to the generation that preceded mine, pot is the worst thing ever. Sadly, these folks still get hooked up to their portable oxygen tank and get driven to the voting booth every couple of years. I've tried a number of times to have a conversation with people vehemently opposed to legalization, or at the very least legalizing it for medical purposes. It's like talking to a brick wall. How fucking brainwashed do you have to be if it has been proven to help ease the pain of a terminally ill person and you still vote "Fuck no!"? That makes no sense whatsoever. "Hey! This person is dying and this will help ease their suffering." "No." What the fuck?
It 'cures' nothing that I'm aware of - it lessens pain and increases appetite, which there are a whole host of other drugs that do that as well, and many better than that. That's why I don't expect it to be used as a reason, because it's factually incorrect. Further, there is a pill form that can be administered which doesn't have the side effect of getting high. That's not what people are looking to legalize. And ALL potheads want to get high, not just most. That's why they're called 'potheads.' I don't think most people would look at a stage 5 cancer victim and say 'look at that Pothead!' I don't know, maybe they would. And again, I'm for legalizing it, I just get tired of this particular justification for its legalization. I have no moral objection to it (or the use of any other recreational drug) per se, just the idiotic nonsense that is often used to justify it. You want to get high? Get high, it's been great for my record collection. Just don't tell me you're doing an unfunded scientific study and not really looking to get high.
Agreed, the whole thing reminds me of when CA was trying to make porn stars wear condoms and the porn industry fought the law saying that not wearing condoms in sex films had to do with freedom of expression. I mean I agree that was a retarded law as well but let's just call it what it is rather than trying to make it about something else.
What annoys me most is when stoners say weed smoke isn't carcinogenic. It is. All smoke is intrinsically carcinogenic. I saw a BBC special, and arguably weed smoke is more carcinogenic than cigarette smoke because there is more tar in it.
Another dumbass stoner lie. Of course inhaling smoke is bad for you no matter the variety. IT'S FUCKING SMOKE!!!! Would you breath heavily over a campfire because you love the smell of cedar? No. Any smoke is bad, and filthy bearded hippies have to stop lying.
When the weed shops open up out here, I'm going to stroll in, view the selection, make nice pick, hopefully nothing too intense because I don't smoke weed and haven't really since I was 19, go back to my apartment and enjoy. Meanwhile I'll be reminded that no one outside the state of Colorado has that luxury and all you guys are forced to go to your weed dealer and get whatever they have available while making a guess as to what it really is and hoping that its not laced with something. Genuine question, anyone here buy some weed thats been laced with something else before? It impossible that it hasn't happened to a few people on here.
I'm pretty much against all vice laws. Legalize drugs. Legalize prostitution. Hell end dry counties. I find it hard to say that we enjoy personal freedom when we are dictating what adults can do with and to their bodies. And the arguments about what people do under the influence of these things is fucking annoying. I don't see how how this is confusing for people. Shoving heroine up your veins is stupid but doesn't affect anyone else. Stealing is bad and affects other people negatively. It doesn't matter if you're stealing for your next score or because you want to donate it to Feed The Children. The action is an innate social injustice. The action is what must be addressed and punished. Until people cross over into those social ills they should be given the benefit of the doubt. Criminalizing drugs because of what people MIGHT do under their influence is akin to criminalizing sports because people might make illegal bets while watching them.