How many times does this have to be said before somebody does something about it?

If the people would stop relying on their cowardly elected representatives to repeal the laws prohibiting cannabis, and get measure put on the ballot so the citizens could voice their own opinion on it, maybe we could see some progress.

Until then, we'll keep seeing dumb ass politicians kowtowing to the alcohol and tobacco lobbies.

I really would love to see nation wide recall elections, scrub out everyone who's been in office for more than a year. Most incumbents rely on their status in office to get reelected by lazy voters and party leaderships. Recall elections would off balance voters and likely force out anyone in office. To hell with term limits, lets just throw these asses out like the trash they are.

I love weed but this is a tad biased. Smoking anything can cause lung cancer because setting fire to stuff, any stuff creates lots of carcinogens. And my memory is terrible, i'm only in my 30's but i have the memory of someone in their 70's. Weed is lovely but lets be honest it isn't good for you.

>> ^piscatorius:
I love weed but this is a tad biased. Smoking anything can cause lung cancer because setting fire to stuff, any stuff creates lots of carcinogens. And my memory is terrible, i'm only in my 30's but i have the memory of someone in their 70's. Weed is lovely but lets be honest it isn't good for you.


Let's be honest, it isn't all that bad for you, either.

My life would be a lot better if I could just go down to the store and buy some herb--no worry about the cops, no worry about criminals--then come home and smoke it in peace.

You probably don't believe that. I don't care. You don't know my life.

And yes, weed can impair your short-term memory if you smoke a lot of it all of the time, but back when I was smoking weed, it had little or no effect on my studies.

Your memory problem might be related to something else: are you reading every day? Are you doing something besides watching television and surfing the net all night?

No offense, but I am sick of this bullshit. The illegalization of cannabis is doing us all much more harm than good.

Alcohol is legal and it's responsible for countless deaths and suffering (and a lot of my stupid comments here) .. yet, I am not allowed to make my own whiskey. I bet if pot were ever legalized I would still not be allowed to grow my own.

Good for you, bad for you - hell, it's YOUR choice. That's all there is to it. As long as you take care of yourself and the consequences of your decisions (barring any adverse impact on anyone else), you should be allowed to do what you want.

End of story.

>> ^burdturgler:
Alcohol is legal and it's responsible for countless deaths and suffering (and a lot of my stupid comments here) .. yet, I am not allowed to make my own whiskey. I bet if pot were ever legalized I would still not be allowed to grow my own.


I'm with you on the booze/stupid comments thing.

And I do think that they won't let any of us grow our own, which is stupid, but the "capitalists" must have their way and control of "their" markets.

Heaven forbid that anybody does anything to deny a handful of people from owning and controlling the whole shebang.

It would be unAmerican.

Until these types of videos become honest with the subject matter, then they're not going to be taken seriously by the 'important' people. ONLY the positives of marijuana use are ever covered, but when negatives are discussed, it's the minor effects like: slow movement, poor memory, etc.

I've spoken in passing to a transthoracic surgeon about it in my work who have explained that 'pot lung' is common in such smokers. This is a thick oily coating left on the lung tissue due to the nature of the smoke, impairing function. Now, this effect may not be as deadly as cancer, but if it's enough to be of concern to a surgeon, then shouldn't we not skim over the details? Lets not be ignorant and think that injestion of any smoke in to the body has nil side-effect.

Don't get me wrong, I am all for ending the drug war and the legalisation of drugs - SO LONG AS there is education given to the public on exactly the pros/cons of each kind. This video seems little more than biased propoganda, or at least selective reading of the facts, to both of which I do not respond well.

>> ^BoneyD:
I've spoken in passing to a transthoracic surgeon about it in my work who have explained that 'pot lung' is common in such smokers. This is a thick oily coating left on the lung tissue due to the nature of the smoke, impairing function.


BoneyD, I don't want to be confrontational here at all, but I'm just wondering if you smoke cannabis, or if you have ever smoked it?

I'm very suspicious of what that surgeon told you, because most people (not all, but most) smoke a very small amount per day, or a few times a week.

If you took an average cigarette and pinched off about 1/10th to 1/15th of that, that's about how much it takes for a person to smoke in order to catch a buzz.

I'm not saying there might not be some problems with heavy use, but there is no way to compare pot smokers to cigarette smokers.

And remember, with vaporizers, people aren't even inhaling smoke.

Oh! And cannabis can be consumed orally in candies and elixers.

There's no level of honesty or seriousness that will make a difference. Pot, and the attitudes and laws around it, are driven by money and power like everything else.

There is no reason for tobacco to be legal. I'm not going to bother looking up the numbers but I'm pretty sure that tobacco (nicotine) is the number one drug on the planet that is legally sold and is responsible for the most deaths year after year. But it's legal, and there's a tax stamp on every pack. The massacre cigarettes cause is like a plague.

But pot is bad. So .. on and on we go burying the dead and paying for tobacco related cancer/emphysema etc patients not to mention the cost of processing and jailing minor pot offenses on and on and on ..

Nothing will ever change until there is money to be gained from it.

If you want to smoke, it's simple. Grow your own and keep your mouth shut about it. It's not only extraordinarily satisfying, but it's easy to do. And virtually free. A few shop lights, an empty closet and some dirt in whatever container. A little google here and there and some water and next thing you know .. who gives a fuck if they say I'm allowed to grow a plant or not.

I've lived in Holland, where dope-smoking is legal, and I've lived in the USA where it's as illegal as it gets. I saw WAAAAAAAAY more drug use in the USA than in Holland -- almost everybody smoked up in the States. Only a small percentage of people smoked in Holland.

I'm just sayin'.

>> ^burdturgler:
If you want to smoke, it's simple. Grow your own and keep your mouth shut about it. It's not only extraordinarily satisfying, but it's easy to do. And virtually free. A few shop lights, an empty closet and some dirt in whatever container. A little google here and there and some water and next thing you know .. who gives a fuck if they say I'm allowed to grow a plant or not.


I hear you, but they can and do catch people by watching their electric bills.

I've done a little research, and to do it right you need lights of a certain power, which is a pretty big draw, and you have to alternate those lights on a strict schedule, on and off every twelve hours I think, for about three months.

Believe it or not, the electric company actually watches for that.

Hell, I'd love to grow my own. It would be fun.

But where I live, it's really hard to find weed let alone seeds.

Crack? Meth? Not much of a prob. But weed's scarce.

As far as pot and lung function I'll answer that with a video post in a few minutes, it'll be from Dr Tashkin of the UCLA medical center, the same Dr Tashkin who is the source for most marijuana and lung function research in the US over recent decades.

As far as change it's been in reach for years, it's just hard to get people involved and get them to care. We always wonder how such a minority as the far religious right got to be so powerful but it's pretty damned simple actually. They started at the local level. They took over local political organizations, most are starved for volunteers and as their numbers grew so did their influence. That allowed them to first control who was elected at the local level then later who appeared on the ballots for primaries and so on.

Very few vote in off elections compared to normal ones but other than President everyone else is still on the ballot and that's half of where the nation is run from. Those who get involved in the off years have a MUCH larger voice than those who join the crowd in the busy ones. Stay home and they make the choice for you.

Real change takes time, but it also takes being there. We've got to quit asking when the politicians are going to do it and stop asking why we don't have better choices. If we want better ones we've got to put them there ourselves.

>> ^burdturgler:
Alcohol is legal and it's responsible for countless deaths and suffering (and a lot of my stupid comments here) .. yet, I am not allowed to make my own whiskey. I bet if pot were ever legalized I would still not be allowed to grow my own.


You can, however, brew your own beer and make your own wine. Making whiskey is restricted not because of the intoxicating powers of the final product, but of the dangers involved in getting there. Not only is there a risk that, should you screw up, you'll end up unwittingly downing a bottle of wood alcohol (the stuff that makes you go blind, then kills you), but you might even screw up and blow up your still.


It's not a drug thing. It's a safety thing. Odds are that, if cannabis were legalized, it would be legal to grow for personal use as well as to buy and produce commercially.

>> ^HadouKen24:
>>^burdturgler:
Alcohol is legal and it's responsible for countless deaths and suffering (and a lot of my stupid comments here) .. yet, I am not allowed to make my own whiskey. I bet if pot were ever legalized I would still not be allowed to grow my own.

You can, however, brew your own beer and make your own wine. Making whiskey is restricted not because of the intoxicating powers of the final product, but of the dangers involved in getting there. Not only is there a risk that, should you screw up, you'll end up unwittingly downing a bottle of wood alcohol (the stuff that makes you go blind, then kills you), but you might even screw up and blow up your still.

It's not a drug thing. It's a safety thing. Odds are that, if cannabis were legalized, it would be legal to grow for personal use as well as to buy and produce commercially.


Distilling whiskey is no more dangerous than deep frying a turkey, yet hundreds of people burn their houses down each year because it's allowed.

It's not a safety issue, it's a control issue, and that's the same reason that prevents the re-legalization of cannabis. The people that own the lawmakers want to control exactly how you and I enjoy ourselves, and we continue to allow them by electing the same kinds of shitheads that kiss the alcohol and tobacco lobbies' asses.

If we can assume that lawmakers were to end the prohibition on cannabis, you can almost guarantee that you'll have to purchase it from a dispensary, where you'll have to endure TSA level security checks to get a dime bag.

I don't believe I ever tried to compare cigarette smokers to marijuana users. Plus, I'll also tend to consider more highly the word of an experienced and capable surgeon over random internet videos.

The sense I was trying to convey is that this video is as biased as the forces that try to block legalisation. And what I want is honest, scientific discussion about the effects of using the substance. If there really is absolutely no negative effect to any amount of use, then fine. But I just don't buy that sorry, even if it is likely less harmful than tabacco.

Should there be a safe, moderate level of use (in the way a glass of red wine can be beneficial), then what is this level? If we are going to legalise it, then people must be shown what is safe, what is excessive and what the harms are for overuse. This applies to all drugs, by the way.

>> ^rougy:
BoneyD, I don't want to be confrontational here at all, but I'm just wondering if you smoke cannabis, or if you have ever smoked it?
I'm very suspicious of what that surgeon told you, because most people (not all, but most) smoke a very small amount per day, or a few times a week.
If you took an average cigarette and pinched off about 1/10th to 1/15th of that, that's about how much it takes for a person to smoke in order to catch a buzz.
I'm not saying there might not be some problems with heavy use, but there is no way to compare pot smokers to cigarette smokers.
And remember, with vaporizers, people aren't even inhaling smoke.
Oh! And cannabis can be consumed orally in candies and elixers.

I'll agree the video is biased - but testimony from one surgeon is NOT scientific evidence nor statistically significant (and I'm not saying that you were trying to pass it off as such). That said, I agree - the dangers of the activity in question should be investigated and made known in an objective light...

The point still stands - individuals have the right to engage in potentially dangerous behavior as long as they are not harming others, and are willing to assume responsibility for said behaviors...

Some *canada content...

Adding video to channels (Canada) - requested by Zifnab.

legalise it and we will find out the dangers of it with a huge public voluntary experiment.

the fact that this experiment was going on for thousands of years already (before a minor blip in the 20th century) gives me great confidence.

I thing that legalizing... *takes a bong hit ....what was I talking about?

*dead

This published video has been declared non-functional; embed code must be fixed within 2 days or it will be sent to the dead pool - declared dead by demon_ix.

Awarding rasch187 with one Power Point for fixing this video's dead embed code.