Sarren wrote:
Not true in the slightest. There's absolutely no established pattern which pegs marijuana as even a probable factor in violent behavior. The link you provided is essentially meaningless. It's the same type of "evidence" used against violent video games which I think most can agree is severely lacking. Such a simple one sided use of statistics is largely worthless.
I hate to burst your bubble, but that's the same sort of evidence used to connect *anything* to violent activity. What exact evidence should I use if not studies showing that kids who smoke marijuana frequently are more likely to be violent in direct proportion to the amount of marijuana they smoked? You can always look at any such study and argue that some other factor could have accounted for the results.
I freely admit (and stated in my earlier post) that there's no real way to definitively state whether this statistic is because kids who smoke pot become more violent or if kids who are violent tend to smoke more pot. But the point is that the statement that "smokers do not become violent" is false. They most clearly do, over time, and in direct proportion to the amount of pot they smoke.
Why long time heavy marijuana smokers tend to be violent is a wonderful question, but that's not what I was specifically talking about. The only point I was making was that statistically, they do.
Quote:
Quote:
Point being that it's utterly false to make this broad claim. Lots of people drink alcohol and don't become violent either, but that does not change the fact that there's a strong link between alcohol use and violence, just as there is with marijuana.
Not the case at all. The two aren't equivalent. I can go into why alcohol makes violence much easier to insight and why the same does not apply to marijuana on a body chemistry level, but that information is widely available online.
Again. Wonderful theory. Crappy practice.
You're also missing what I was talking about. Alcohol increases the likelihood of violence while the user is under the influence. Marijuana reduces it. However, over a long period of time, marijuana users become more violent all the time (whether they are currently under the influence or not). Alcohol has some other nasty effects, but barring sufficient use for poisoning, there are no specific mental effects while not under the influence. You take an alcoholic and detox him completely, and his mental state will be normal. Long time marijuana users tend to suffer mental problems, violent behavior, and psychosis for the rest of their lives, no matter how long it's been since they used the drug.
In that context, it's vastly incorrect to argue that Marijuana is safer for casual recreational use than alcohol. Unless you actually drink enough continuously to suffer physical (most often liver) damage, all effects of alcohol disappear when the alcohol flushes out. Not so with marijuana. As I said earlier, and as hundreds of medical studies show, marijuana alters the brain chemistry in ways that are still not completely understood. The effects are though. Typically, it causes depression, anxiety, and violence in long term users.
Tell you what? I'll have a couple vodka drinks every day for the next 30 years and you take a few hits off a bong every day for the same period of time and we'll compare notes. I'll likely be in exactly the same health condition I'd have been in without drinking anything at all. You'll likely have some noticeable mental impairment.
Look. I'm all for legalizing marijuana. But let's not sugarcoat the issue. If someone were to ask me if they should smoke a joint every day, or drink a few beers every day when unwinding after a hard days work, I'd recommend the beer every single time. I've known a lot of people who drink alcohol every single day and suffer no ill effects (in fact, I'd wager we all do). Every single person I've ever met who smoked pot regularly for even 5 or 10 years was "off". Not just when smoking (although it was hard to ever find them *not* high), but all the time. Slurred speech, bad balance, not too bright, and just plain "weird" is the best way to describe them.
The idea that pot is harmless is absurd. Less harmful in the short term than a lot of other substances? Absolutely. But as I stated, so is LSD. Virtually *zero* physiological effects from that drug. Virtually guaranteed to make you a mental basket case if you use it long enough though...
Quote:
Quote:
It's not as strongly physically additive as other drugs, but it has some profound effects on brain chemistry that in some ways make it harder to kick as a habit.
Once again, incorrect. The mechanisms of addiction are well understood for drugs like cocaine, meth, ect... and marijuana does not invoke the profound change in neurochemistry that the vast majority of addictive drugs create. "Habit forming" is the phrase generally applied to the substance. And, it's true. Use of the drug can lead to a psychological addiction, but then again so can anything else you enjoy.
Yes. But this is the definition I was using.
[b]1. A physical or psychological need for a habit-forming substance, such as a drug or alcohol.[/quote]
As I pointed out (and you ignored), when people say it's not addictive, they're using a more clinical sociological definition of addiction, which is specific to taking actions that are directly harmful. We call someone an "addict" if they have a compulsion to do something that causes them harm. So someone who has sex isn't a sex addict unless they're unable to not have sex even when it causes them to lose their family, their home, their job, etc... Same with drugs. Same with anything in fact.
But that's not the definition I was using. The whole point I was making is that the list of "things that aren't bad" about marijuana misses the most important "bad thing" about it. It is addictive (habit forming if you will). And it has some serious detrimental long term effects. So you don't notice that your brain is getting fried over time. It just happens. At no single point are you in any direct physical or mental harm from taking the drug, but over time you are gradually losing your own mental and emotional capacities.
Listing that it's not addictive because the physical withdrawal is minimal is misleading. It's exactly because it appears to have no direct physical side effects that makes it pretty darn dangerous. While it's certainly completely safe when used occasionally, regular use has been overwhelmingly shown to be a really really bad idea. But it's exactly the sort of "there's no downside" arguments that lead people to smoke it every day and think they're perfectly safe.
I've known a lot of potheads in my time. The contrast between them and otherwise identical people over time is staggering. I could point to two friends of mine, who are the same age, went to the same school, had the same interests, approximately the same grades, similar home backgrounds, etc. One of them started smoking pot regularly about 16 years ago (late in high school). The other didn't. While anectdotal, and you can all choose not to believe me, but the difference in not just their lives, but in themselves is dramatic. The given is that the pot smoker never got a good job and pretty much lives in a crappy apartment doing entry level work, even while in his late 30s, while the other guy has a decent career, wife, kids, etc. The more startling difference is their personalities and their overall mental capacity. The pot smoker is just plain "dumb". All the time. Whether smoking or not. It's like his brain has just become more and more numb over time.
He's given to rambling conversations talking about all sorts of random things he's heard, most of which makes no sense at all. He watches the news but doesn't really seem to understand it. His entire worldview seems to have changed to be that of a pot smoker, and even when sober, he still can't shake it. It's one of the saddest things to watch, made worse by the fact that he seems utterly oblivious to it.
Sorry. I think it's just a huge mistake to tell people that marijuana isn't addictive or harmful. It only needs to be addictive enough to cause harm. And guess what? It is. Very few people actually just smoke pot occasionally. Most either smoke it regularly, or not at all. Honestly, my biggest reason for thinking it should be legalized is exactly because more people might just use it casually, but not regularly. So perhaps something you'd buy for a party, but you wouldn't do every single night.
Dunno. Lots of different approaches to this, but I just totally disagree with those who try to argue that it's a harmless drug. IMO, it's much much worse in a long run then almost all other drugs out there. They have obvious negatives associated with them that tend to limit long term heavy use. Pot seems so much safer that people use it far far more often than they should. IMO, that's what makes it really dangerous. Course, I'm very much about personal freedom coupled with personal responsibility, so if someone chooses to make such a stupid decision as to smoke pot regularly for a long time, that's their own fault. But I'll definitely speak up when someone tries to say that it's safe to use...
Quote:
Quote:
Doing otherwise confuses the issue IMO and gives a false impression that people who use marijuana don't have a hard time quitting.
It's not a false impression. It's as easy to quit marijuana as is to quit eating sweets. "REM rebound" is the only unique symptom of marijuana withdrawal that doesn't apply to every other psychological addiction.
Sure. And people have to work hard to avoid eating sweets. That's the point. The difference being that if you eat sweets every day for the rest of your life, you might get fat and some tooth decay. If you smoke pot for that length of time, you'll likely end up a basket case.
"Habit forming" is relevant if the result of a long time habit is really bad for you, right?
