Pot Moss

[lifeloyalsigmsu]

http://www.theantidrug.com/drug_info/dr ... ijuana.asp

Researchers have found that THC changes the way in which sensory information gets into and is acted on by the hippocampus. This is a component of the brain's limbic system that is crucial for learning, memory, and the integration of sensory experiences with emotions and motivations. Investigations have shown that THC suppresses neurons in the information-processing system of the hippocampus. In addition, researchers have discovered that learned behaviors, which depend on the hippocampus, also deteriorate.

I don't know about many of you, but I have to say that I have met more than a few people over the years (especially during undergrad) who have literally smoked themselves stupid.

The drug isn't benign and its acceptance will soon be in the same realm of cigarettes and alcohol.

[SonomaCat]

Skip Bayless makes many of the same points I was trying to make last week, but using way more words and making way more sense:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/st ... 0822&num=0

[Hell's Bells]

I wonder how many people who are up in arms over randy moss using pot are for the medical use of marajuana?

also it goes to show how unreliable drug tests can be. He is obviously using a masking agent to hide the fact that he is getting high on occasion, or he knows when his drug test is a month or so in advance. If so this is a good reason why there should be random drug testing

[SonomaCat]

I wonder how many people who are up in arms over randy moss using pot are for the medical use of marajuana?

also it goes to show how unreliable drug tests can be. He is obviously using a masking agent to hide the fact that he is getting high on occasion, or he knows when his drug test is a month or so in advance. If so this is a good reason why there should be random drug testing

What would be the point in the NFL catching more athletes? It sounds like the current system is a sort of "Don't ask, don't tell, and we won't make the tests hard to pass" regime.

What would be the upside of aggressively testing for pot to find more users? Do you see pot use among players as something that is causing a problem to anyone? If the article is right, and up to half of the players in the league use it, would stronger testing accomplish anything other than messing up a lot of fantasy leagues due to player suspensions?

I don't think all that many people are really too excited about Moss' statements, except for some in the press (it's sensational, so they were all over it). It seems like a bulk of the population (probably including 99.99% of the people in favor of medical mary jane) just shrugged their shoulders at the Moss news and said, "So what?"

[Bleedinbluengold]

Has anyone posted this?

Robert Smith, former Viking, said that when he played, the drug tests took place during pre-season camp, and then they were done for another year. Thus, it would be easy for Randy relax every once in a blue moon.

[El_Gato]

I know you're going to disagree with me here, BAC (big stretch there, eh?), but I DO think pot is ruining the NBA.

I'm sure you're going to tell me I'm stereotyping and/or generalizing but all you need to do is LOOK at guys like Allen Iverson, Jason Williams (the white one), Latrine Sprewell, Damon Stoudamire, Rasheed Wallace etc. etc. etc. and you can be pretty sure they're weed freaks. These dipsh!ts are the "stars" of the NBA when they should be on a long list of the WORST possible role models in America. Yet these guys are the ones selling the shoes and the drinks and the clothes etc. You think there's at the very least a "subliminal" message there about marijuana? Not to mention that I truly believe (and science does back this up somewhat) that pot lowers your "give a sh!t" levels. Just watch a game some night with some of the knuckleheads listed above and tell me they really give a crap whether they win or lose, as long as they make a few highlight reel plays.

Now, let's take a look at Kevin Garnett, Tim Duncan, David Robinson, Reggie Miller, Steve Nash and a few other NBA "Good Guys" and ask yourself which group gets the most ink: The "Good Guys" or the "weed guys".

My point? I'd rather the NFL get TRULY tough on ALL illegal activities before they end up declining to the level of the NBA. Remember the NBA of the 70's? If you don't, it was the biggest drug ring in America, on display nightly in arenas across America and it was a DISGRACE. If D. Stern doesn't focus some of his attention on drugs soon, he's going to see his league fade right back to that era.

[SonomaCat]

I know you're going to disagree with me here, BAC (big stretch there, eh?), but I DO think pot is ruining the NBA.

I'm sure you're going to tell me I'm stereotyping and/or generalizing but all you need to do is LOOK at guys like Allen Iverson, Jason Williams (the white one), Latrine Sprewell, Damon Stoudamire, Rasheed Wallace etc. etc. etc. and you can be pretty sure they're weed freaks. These dipsh!ts are the "stars" of the NBA when they should be on a long list of the WORST possible role models in America. Yet these guys are the ones selling the shoes and the drinks and the clothes etc. You think there's at the very least a "subliminal" message there about marijuana? Not to mention that I truly believe (and science does back this up somewhat) that pot lowers your "give a sh!t" levels. Just watch a game some night with some of the knuckleheads listed above and tell me they really give a crap whether they win or lose, as long as they make a few highlight reel plays.

Now, let's take a look at Kevin Garnett, Tim Duncan, David Robinson, Reggie Miller, Steve Nash and a few other NBA "Good Guys" and ask yourself which group gets the most ink: The "Good Guys" or the "weed guys".

My point? I'd rather the NFL get TRULY tough on ALL illegal activities before they end up declining to the level of the NBA. Remember the NBA of the 70's? If you don't, it was the biggest drug ring in America, on display nightly in arenas across America and it was a DISGRACE. If D. Stern doesn't focus some of his attention on drugs soon, he's going to see his league fade right back to that era.

So essentially you assume that everybody you don't like is on weed, and everyone you like isn't? I guess that's an easy way to rationalize a position, but it's a little short on substance.

So yes, you are generalizing and stereotyping just a little bit.

Do you know what David R. was doing in Lewistown at the WIT tourney at a party when I was in high school? You'll never guess....

They virtually all do it, EG (and I'm sure that includes nearly every one of the "good guys" that you list and more). It's just that simple. It doesn't have a negative impact on nearly any of them in the slightest. In fact, it's a lot easier on their bodies and minds than boozing it up after games.

You might also be surprised how many very successful and renowned college basketball players at UM and MSU did it on occasion, and it never caused any problems for them, either. In fact, the only time it seems to cause a problem for any athlete is when they get busted for it, which is only a problem because it is illegal and not because it caused any harm to anyone.

Victimless crime. Nanny state. Bad for freedom, bad for America. It's almost as if we should be invading some country to get oppressive laws like these OFF of the books.

[El_Gato]

OK, Brad, so it boils down to this:

You are going to have NO problem when you find your kids smoking pot?

I am.

Simple as that.

OH, and I'd like to see some evidence of David Robinson smoking pot in Lewistown Montana. That's a pretty big reach, even for you.

And, for the record, I dislike Reggie Miller, and have no like nor dislike of KG or Nash. Does that change anything?

[SonomaCat]

OK, Brad, so it boils down to this:

You are going to have NO problem when you find your kids smoking pot?

I am.

Simple as that.

Of course, if I caught my kids smoking pot (depending on their age -- if they're in their 20s, they can make their own decisions), I wouldn't be happy. I will (in theory) be their parent and make sure they aren't making decisions that they shouldn't be making.

That is a COMPLETELY different issue from whether pot should be legal or illegal. I won't let my kids drink or smoke when they are too young, either, both of which are legal for adults. I won't let them drive when they are too young, yet driving is legal for adults. I won't let them bet on the ponies (unless they cut me in on their insider information) until they are old enough, even though it is legal for adults.

If we want to frame this as nothing more than Mrs. Lovejoy screeching "What about the children? Won't somebody think about the children?!", then we need ask only one question: Whose job is it to raise our kids? The Federal government of the United States of America, or Mom and Dad?

I would assume only a real commie freedom hating pinko liberal would answer the former , but I can only assume as much.

Is it the role of government to legislate to the lowest common denominator so as to tell us what we can and can not do, assuming that each of us is only as capable of making those decisions for ourselves as the least competent among us?

[SonomaCat]

OH, and I'd like to see some evidence of David Robinson smoking pot in Lewistown Montana. That's a pretty big reach, even for you.

You know, I had him pee in a cup for me when I saw him at the Fergus gym the next day, and I saved it in our freezer for years waiting for moment to thaw it and ship it to you ... but then my mom cleaned out the freezer and threw away the frozen pee sample, dashing my hopes of convincing you of this simple point forever and ever.

Of course, I can't prove it outside of testimony of the guys I know who were smoking with him. But if you can claim to have knowledge of scores and scores of kids in Kalispell that burned out on the stuff, and make wild assumptions about which players in the NBA do and don't smoke weed based on (as far as I can tell) their hairstyles, then I'm not going to get too concerned about proving an assertion that I at least had some second-hand information about. When he runs for President in ten years or so, and the question is inevitably posed to him, then I guess you will finally know for sure. Since Bush is on record as admitting that he did in the past, I assume that it is now a badge of honor among politicians to admit (directly or indirectly) such things, as opposed to Bill's silly response to the question.

So I guess as soon as you provide evidence that all of the "good guys" in the NBA DON'T smoke pot while all of the guys whose attitudes you don't care for DO smoke pot, then I'll start combing the landfill in Winifred for that urine sample.

The funny thing is that you actually care whether he did or not. I don't, and it doesn't diminish him in my eyes at all. I just accept that fact that most people in this country have or do smoke it occasionally, especially athletes who can't afford (athletically) to drink a lot because it's so bad for their bodies. They need to unwind just like all those drinkers out there, so pot tends to be their drug of choice.

[El_Gato]

I'm not arguing whether or not it should/shouldn't be legal; that's too much of an issue for now. You are saying, however, that if your kids choose to break the law when they are "adults" (in their 20's, you said), that's OK with you? You honestly mean the only reason you'd be upset with them if they were smoking pot in high school is because it's currently illegal? Are you CERTAIN that's the ONLY reason? You'd have no problem with it if it was legal? So when they're 18, are you going to be OK with them smoking cigarettes?

As to the kids at Flathead I'm referring to, they were either kids (& families) that I KNEW or they were kids kicked off various sports teams FOR SMOKING POT. So stuff your condascending remarks in that area. As to the NBA players I referred to, some of them have been BUSTED for marijuana possession/use in their lifetimes and it is public knowledge. A couple of the others are so "reknowned" for their use, that it's pretty much common knowledge that they partake. So I am not judging them on hairstyles but ON THEIR OWN ACTIONS.

As to David Robinson, I was not asking because I was concerned about his image, I was asking because of your willingness to occasionally "embellish" to make a point. So, you are stating that you never actually witnessed DR smoking pot but you are willing to take the word of some pot-smokers from small-town America who just maybe wanted to make up an incredible story?

Great position, BAC. You are taking disagreeing with me to unbelievable heights.

[SonomaCat]

I'm not arguing whether or not it should/shouldn't be legal; that's too much of an issue for now. You are saying, however, that if your kids choose to break the law when they are "adults" (in their 20's, you said), that's OK with you? You honestly mean the only reason you'd be upset with them if they were smoking pot in high school is because it's currently illegal? Are you CERTAIN that's the ONLY reason? You'd have no problem with it if it was legal? So when they're 18, are you going to be OK with them smoking cigarettes?

I'm not following what you're trying to say, so rather than responding to your attempt to restate the point I was making, I'll just make my own point:

I wouldn't want my kids making decisions to do things that are riskier behaviors (including drinking, smoking, driving, gambling, pot, etc.) until they were old enough to do so responsibly and with all of the information they need to make a good decision.

I was going through that logic assuming that if legalized for adults, pot would still be illegal for minors, along with all of the other things I listed. They are illegal for minors because they require more responsiblity than minors possess.

Therefore, when you ask me if I would care if my kids smoked pot during a conversation about adults smoking pot, I answered accordingly, framing the kids conversation in terms of what is right and wrong for kids, and noting that we do treat adults differently.

I would certainly discourage things that I thought were bad for them (smoking cigs, excessive drinking, drinking and driving, drug abuse, etc.) even when they are adults (I'm confused as to where you were going with that), but at that point they make their own decisions.

[SonomaCat]

As to the kids at Flathead I'm referring to, they were either kids (& families) that I KNEW or they were kids kicked off various sports teams FOR SMOKING POT. So stuff your condascending remarks in that area.

Kettle ... you're black.

[SonomaCat]

Great position, BAC. You are taking disagreeing with me to unbelievable heights.

I'm not sure why you are disagreeing with ME anywhere on this thread, actually. Once again, didn't you call yourself a Libertarian not so long ago? I would have assumed that you would be in favor of personal freedoms and self-accountability. Being in favor of the current drug laws runs counter to everything a Libertarian believes in.

Thanks for once again trying to run with the "BAC makes up stuff" line. I rarely drop any kind of personal rumors, even though I know a lot of them. It was just too much to pass up when you used Robinson as an example of a person who you assumed didn't smoke pot because he looks and acts nice, especially when he was the one NBA player that I had heard a story about to the contrary. But if you want to believe that it was just some "small-town pot smoker" (who's probably an attorney or doctor somewhere right now) that made up a story, then run with it. I don't care either way. Just rest assured that your generalizations and stereotypes about NBA players regarding who does and doesn't smoke pot are far from perfect.

[lifeloyalsigmsu]

I know you're going to disagree with me here, BAC (big stretch there, eh?), but I DO think pot is ruining the NBA.

I'm sure you're going to tell me I'm stereotyping and/or generalizing but all you need to do is LOOK at guys like Allen Iverson, Jason Williams (the white one), Latrine Sprewell, Damon Stoudamire, Rasheed Wallace etc. etc. etc. and you can be pretty sure they're weed freaks. These dipsh!ts are the "stars" of the NBA when they should be on a long list of the WORST possible role models in America. Yet these guys are the ones selling the shoes and the drinks and the clothes etc. You think there's at the very least a "subliminal" message there about marijuana? Not to mention that I truly believe (and science does back this up somewhat) that pot lowers your "give a sh!t" levels. Just watch a game some night with some of the knuckleheads listed above and tell me they really give a crap whether they win or lose, as long as they make a few highlight reel plays.

Now, let's take a look at Kevin Garnett, Tim Duncan, David Robinson, Reggie Miller, Steve Nash and a few other NBA "Good Guys" and ask yourself which group gets the most ink: The "Good Guys" or the "weed guys".

My point? I'd rather the NFL get TRULY tough on ALL illegal activities before they end up declining to the level of the NBA. Remember the NBA of the 70's? If you don't, it was the biggest drug ring in America, on display nightly in arenas across America and it was a DISGRACE. If D. Stern doesn't focus some of his attention on drugs soon, he's going to see his league fade right back to that era.

So essentially you assume that everybody you don't like is on weed, and everyone you like isn't? I guess that's an easy way to rationalize a position, but it's a little short on substance.

So yes, you are generalizing and stereotyping just a little bit.

Do you know what David R. was doing in Lewistown at the WIT tourney at a party when I was in high school? You'll never guess....

They virtually all do it, EG (and I'm sure that includes nearly every one of the "good guys" that you list and more). It's just that simple. It doesn't have a negative impact on nearly any of them in the slightest. In fact, it's a lot easier on their bodies and minds than boozing it up after games.

You might also be surprised how many very successful and renowned college basketball players at UM and MSU did it on occasion, and it never caused any problems for them, either. In fact, the only time it seems to cause a problem for any athlete is when they get busted for it, which is only a problem because it is illegal and not because it caused any harm to anyone.

Victimless crime. Nanny state. Bad for freedom, bad for America. It's almost as if we should be invading some country to get oppressive laws like these OFF of the books.

After I read what El Gato posted, it occurred to me after I read your return comment BAC. The "bad guys" as you put it vs the "good guys". It's not a matter of whether El Gato likes one group or not but when he brought up those names, it did occur to me that the "bad guys" have all been in trouble with the law regarding weed or some other distraction whether it be brandishing guns to get into a home or what have you. The other guys (D. Robinson, Nash, Reggie, etc) have made their names strictly on the court and in decent, civic ways.

Gato has a point in that the "bad guys" have shown themselves to have bouts with drug use or other trouble with the law while the "good guys" have never really had any trouble or they've just been smart enough to never get caught.

[Ponycat]

From reading this post I get the feeling that some believe marijuana should be legal, so I feel a strong urge to respond. I personally deal with marijuana ADDICTS on a daily basis. Yes, marijuana is addictive mentally or physically split whatever hairs you choose but it is addictive. It is considered a drug for a reason. Secondly, marijuana is a gateway drug. I know this is going to garner a lot of responses and you can be as delusional as you wish but this is a fact. Does it always lead to harder drugs...no, but is does A LOT. Far more than alcohol. And the alcohol vs. marijuana battle doesn't hold water. ALCOHOL IS LEGAL, period. Also, Marijuana flat out makes you lazy, and the more you use it the more your OK with being lazy. The give a ****** level (as was stated earlier) lowers. Along with this it also breads anti-social behavior. Again not always but very often.

I know people are going to disagree with me, some probably strongly but I can say with almost 95% confidence that I deal with MORE marijuana users MORE OFTEN than anyone on this board. This includes the social, legal, and dependency aspects of the use.

Also, I know of at least 4 registered libertarians who DO NOT believe marijuana or other drugs should be legalized. It's not a pre-requisite of Libertarianism.

[El_Gato]

[SonomaCat]

I find it very hard to believe that pot causes more problems in our country than alcohol, nor do I think it would if it was legal.

Pot does make people lazy and mellow. Booze makes them aggressive and sometimes violent. Which is a worse result?

I also find it hard to swallow the "gateway drug" argument any more for pot than alcohol. What is it about pot that would lead somebody to do harder drugs that alcohol lacks? Once your inhibitions are lowered, which both drugs (pot and booze) do, you are more open to doing things you wouldn't otherwise do, which includes hard drugs. The one caveat to that argument is that, as pot is currently illegal, people who are doing pot are probably more likely the types to not be as afraid of doing drugs simply because they are illegal (as they are already breaking the law doing pot). Therefore, due to our laws (but not the drug itself), the group of people who do pot are more likely to do other hard drugs. However, if both pot and booze were perfectly legal, I am certain that there would be no difference in the likelihood of pot leading to harder drugs than booze.

Yes, pot is illegal. Should it be, considering it's relavent dangers to our society as compared to other drugs (alcohol, namely) that are legal? I don't personally think so.

I do understand that you see a lot of people who are messed up and who use pot habitually/are addicted. If pot didn't exist, would they be otherwise perfect citizens, or would they just be addicted/habitual users of something else that allows them to deal with/hide from their emotional issues? Is it the drug that is the problem, or is it underlying emotional/behavioral issues? I'm sure it's a widely mixed bag, but more often than not my understanding is that drug/alcohol abuse is often a symptom of underlying deeper issues.

And yes, it is possible to be a Libertarian and still favor the current drug laws. It just requires a bit more rationalization from that particular person to reconcile the concepts of personal freedoms with laws put in place to protect us from ourselves. I favor seatbelt laws (maybe not strict enforcement of that law, but at least the public information aspect of it), yet that conflicts with a true Libertarian mentality. I have to admit that I'm not consistent on that point. I also favor anti-smoking laws out of pure selfish motives (I don't like the smell of smoke, and I like to pour alcohol into my body without that smell lingering all around me in bars), so I have to admit hypocrisy on that point as well.

I know you spend a lot of time dealing with the worst examples of what drugs (and presumably alcohol as well) can produce in our society, so I know that you know what you are talking about when you point out the problems that arise from drug abuse, and I readily admit that those do exist. I just don't think that the state can or should babysit us all to protect us from the irresponsiblity of the minority of people who abuse drugs. Prohibition didn't work with alcohol (except for the mob), and it hasn't worked for drugs either (again, except for organized crime).

[Grizlaw]

I'm not sure where I stand on the legalization of marijuana, but I've never quite been convinced by the argument that it's a gateway drug. I've never smoked pot myself, but almost all of my friends, from all walks of life, have tried it at some point, and the vast majority of them have never done any hard drugs. If pot actually *caused* people to try harder drugs, then I think a much higher percentage of pot users *would* be using harder drugs.

The reality is, the vast majority of our population tries pot at some point -- I'm not saying that's a good thing, but it's the truth. Yes, it's probably true that most users of "harder" drugs have also tried pot at some point, but perhaps that's true only because the majority of the population has used pot. It's probably true that most serial killers have smoked pot too, but that doesn't mean pot use is a "gateway" to becoming a serial killer, does it?

[SonomaCat]

I did a quick google search for some references on this issue, and found about 10,000,000 of them. I guess it's a popular issue. This link is from a legalization advocacy group, so it obviously has a bias, but the studies that are referenced appear to be from pretty distinguished sources, so there must be at least some validity to them:

http://paranoia.lycaeum.org/marijuana/f ... ology.html

http://www.drugtext.org/sub/marmyt1.html

http://my.marijuana.com/Exposing_index_1095.html