OT

Question:

From: "Michael" <muirh…@island.net>> I believe the only long-term solution to the marijuana problem will be to > eventually legalize it (10 -20 years from now?).

That was the belief and recommendation of the LeDain Commission over 30 years ago, Larry. :-( I am old enough to remember that –prohibition of alcohol did not work — I have nothing against using marijuana as long as people remain liable for actions they may undertake while impaired by it - IE: impaired driving which may mean different tests being required but sufficient legislation is already on the books once impairment is proved. There are two reasons why I currently do not use it. The primary reason is that I was addicted to nicotine and I suspect even after more than 15 years I would want to go back to smoking. While there other ways to partake, I don’t think it has anything to offer me at this time because I am enjoying life and have no pain or other symptoms that it would benefit. > For now I am happy to see > us continue on the road to decriminalizing possession.

I have a problem with the whole concept. …… Decriminalization means – de facto – that nothing really changes in practice, but we get to suffer the slings and arrows of US-Administration political and economic terrorism for having the audacity even to *appear* to have changed things in the direction of leniency …. I agree, but I think we could get to our goal without raising much US consequences providing we go slow and easy and don’t rub their face in it. Ideally we should not have to make policy and law based on concern over their reaction, but realistically and economically it must be considered. > Because of the > dinosaurs in our opposition parties I think we have to go one step at a > time. Once we see the results of decriminalizing marijuana plus see how our > approach to the heroin problem in Vancouver works out, then we can think > about legalizing marijuana. I do not see this as condoning marijuana use, > but rather as the only practical solution to all the criminal activity > associated with it.

I think it’s stupid to punish marijuana use, and equally stupid to "condone" it…. I assume that your point is it is stupid to condone it when there really isn’t anything wrong with it to start with In the interest of public safety, we ought to regulate the production and distribution of the stuff (just as we do with breakfast cereals, solely to help assure that it’s unadulterated by negligent or unscrupulous growers/distributors,) but otherwise, we should ignore its use as far as possible ……. Perhaps tax it? Of course it is being illegal to make moonshine since before prohibition. While it may have been partially for health concerns I suspect it was mostly about avoiding revenue! > Being the eternal optimist I believe we will go-ahead in the Canadian way

of one step at a time, compromise and willingness to consider new ideas. I’d like to be optomistic, but as we share a border thousands of miles long with a nation so dead-set against the use of marijuana that they’re not against demonizing the voters of several heir own self-determining States over the use of cannabis for medicinal purposes, I fear we’ll either cave in to the same pressures, or we’ll be crushed by "we mean business" tactics employed by US agencies. Exactly why I think we cannot legalize marijuana tomorrow, but I do think it may happen in the not too distant future I am also concerned about the hundreds of people who died in Vancouver from heroin overdoses and the many more affected with AIDS and HIV as well as hepatitis C. The main evil with heroin is again the cost of acquiring it and the criminal activity that goes with it. I do not believe in legalizing heroin, but there are some people for whom it may be appropriate when everything else fails, to prescribe heroin or provide it. The four pillar approach to drug addiction seems to our best shot (including an opportunity to document and research relative successes and failures). I really resent United States not been open-minded to solve a problem and to interfering with the internal affairs of other nations who think their (American) war on drugs has not succeeded. I may be naive, but I do not believe our government has been involved in trafficing narcotics to support questionable regimes for devious purposes. How dare they preach! We are very different Michael, but we are also very similar in many ways. Perhaps most importantly, based on our postings to this group, I think we both are capable of learning from each other, respecting each other’s opinions on issues and being able to consider new ideas or information and to think independently. You have opened my eyes to numerous things and I certainly appreciate your input and sharing with others here. Thanks Larry

Response:

I do not use marijuana …. well except for a couple of times in college 30+ years ago (but I didn’t inhale) so I don’t know how it effects MS. But a study was done about 3 years ago by the DOJ Department of Justice and the FDA and it compared Marijuana to Alcohol as to which was the more serious, accidents, fights, crime etc., and alcohol came out the worst offender by 80% … so what does this tell us? Booze companies have a really good lobby program! oh yea it did say people with Glaucoma and MS and a few other illnesses claimed major relief….. but they think it might have been purely psychological ….. hmmm lets see, MS=Brain+POT in Brain=Psychological …. OK I guess they are right! "white.lynx" <white.l…@telus.net> wrote in message

news:ACVua.150953$dh1.5268044@news0.telusplanet.net… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> From: "Michael" <muirh…@island.net>> I believe the only long-term solution > to the marijuana problem will be to > > eventually legalize it (10 -20 years from now?). > That was the belief and recommendation of the LeDain Commission over 30 > years ago, Larry. :-( > I am old enough to remember that –prohibition of alcohol did not work — I > have nothing against using marijuana as long as people remain liable for > actions they may undertake while impaired by it - IE: impaired driving > which may mean different tests being required but sufficient legislation is > already on the books once impairment is proved. There are two reasons why I > currently do not use it. The primary reason is that I was addicted to > nicotine and I suspect even after more than 15 years I would want to go back > to smoking. While there other ways to partake, I don’t think it has > anything to offer me at this time because I am enjoying life and have no > pain or other symptoms that it would benefit. > > For now I am happy to see > > us continue on the road to decriminalizing possession. > I have a problem with the whole concept. > …… Decriminalization means – de facto – that nothing really changes in > practice, but we get to suffer the slings and arrows of US-Administration > political and economic terrorism for having the audacity even to *appear* to > have changed things in the direction of leniency > …. I agree, but I think we could get to our goal without raising much US > consequences providing we go slow and easy and don’t rub their face in it. > Ideally we should not have to make policy and law based on concern over > their reaction, but realistically and economically it must be considered. > > Because of the > > dinosaurs in our opposition parties I think we have to go one step at a > > time. Once we see the results of decriminalizing marijuana plus see how > our > > approach to the heroin problem in Vancouver works out, then we can think > > about legalizing marijuana. I do not see this as condoning marijuana use, > > but rather as the only practical solution to all the criminal activity > > associated with it. > I think it’s stupid to punish marijuana use, and equally stupid to "condone" > it…. I assume that your point is it is stupid to condone it when there > really isn’t anything wrong with it to start with > In the interest of public safety, we ought to regulate the production > and distribution of the stuff (just as we do with breakfast cereals, solely > to help assure that it’s unadulterated by negligent or unscrupulous > growers/distributors,) but otherwise, we should ignore its use as far as > possible ……. > Perhaps tax it? Of course it is being illegal to make moonshine since > before prohibition. While it may have been partially for health concerns I > suspect it was mostly about avoiding revenue! > > Being the eternal optimist I believe we will go-ahead in the Canadian way > of one step at a time, compromise and willingness to consider new ideas. > I’d like to be optomistic, but as we share a border thousands of miles long > with a nation so dead-set against the use of marijuana that they’re not > against demonizing the voters of several heir own self-determining States > over the use of cannabis for medicinal purposes, I fear we’ll either cave in > to the same pressures, or we’ll be crushed by "we mean business" tactics > employed by US agencies. > Exactly why I think we cannot legalize marijuana tomorrow, but I do think it > may happen in the not too distant future > I am also concerned about the hundreds of people who died in Vancouver from > heroin overdoses and the many more affected with AIDS and HIV as well as > hepatitis C. The main evil with heroin is again the cost of acquiring it > and the criminal activity that goes with it. I do not believe in legalizing > heroin, but there are some people for whom it may be appropriate when > everything else fails, to prescribe heroin or provide it. The four pillar > approach to drug addiction seems to our best shot (including an opportunity > to document and research relative successes and failures). I really resent > United States not been open-minded to solve a problem and to interfering > with the internal affairs of other nations who think their (American) war on > drugs has not succeeded. I may be naive, but I do not believe our > government has been involved in trafficing narcotics to support questionable > regimes for devious purposes. How dare they preach! > We are very different Michael, but we are also very similar in many ways. > Perhaps most importantly, based on our postings to this group, I think we > both are capable of learning from each other, respecting each other’s > opinions on issues and being able to consider new ideas or information and > to think independently. You have opened my eyes to numerous things and I > certainly appreciate your input and sharing with others here. > Thanks > Larry

Response:

"Albert Schloegel" <GlobeRan…@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message

news:V_Vua.77143$cO3.5025339@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net… > I do not use marijuana …. well except for a couple of times in college 30+ > years ago (but I didn’t inhale) so I don’t know how it effects MS. But a > study was done about 3 years ago by the DOJ Department of Justice and the > FDA and it compared Marijuana to Alcohol as to which was the more serious, > accidents, fights, crime etc., and alcohol came out the worst offender by > 80% … so what does this tell us? Booze companies have a really good

lobby Don’t think one needs a degree to figure that one out. I mean how many people to you know of that have died as a DIRECT result of smoking pot??? Now how many people do you know of that have died as a DIRECT result of drinking??? Nope don’t take a rocket scientist to figure that one out > program! oh yea it did say people with Glaucoma and MS and a few other > illnesses claimed major relief….. but they think it might have been purely > psychological ….. hmmm lets see, MS=Brain+POT in Brain=Psychological …. > OK I guess they are right!

I am way past my 1/4 bag every other day 20’s …… but I still have been known to take a hit if one crosses my line of vision LOL ….. It does nothing for my MS symptoms. Matter of fact I think it makes them worst. Or makes me more tried, hence the symptoms become worse. So if I burn one is strictly recreational and I know the concequences. But I too have heard it helps many with symptoms of many different diseases. If it’s psychological … so be it. The mind is a powerful thing. Billy

Response:

"Billy" <Kmtn…@carolina.rr.com> wrote in message

news:zaTwa.33135$Lm2.2327535@twister.southeast.rr.com… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> "Albert Schloegel" <GlobeRan…@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message > news:V_Vua.77143$cO3.5025339@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net… > > I do not use marijuana …. well except for a couple of times in college > 30+ > > years ago (but I didn’t inhale) so I don’t know how it effects MS. But a > > study was done about 3 years ago by the DOJ Department of Justice and the > > FDA and it compared Marijuana to Alcohol as to which was the more > serious, > > accidents, fights, crime etc., and alcohol came out the worst offender by > > 80% … so what does this tell us? Booze companies have a really good > lobby > Don’t think one needs a degree to figure that one out. I mean how many > people to you know of that have died as a DIRECT result of smoking pot??? > Now how many people do you know of that have died as a DIRECT result of > drinking??? > Nope don’t take a rocket scientist to figure that one out > > program! oh yea it did say people with Glaucoma and MS and a few other > > illnesses claimed major relief….. but they think it might have been > purely > > psychological ….. hmmm lets see, MS=Brain+POT in Brain=Psychological

Its physiological. Plus its calming effects on the immune system and emotional system. (in those not prone to paranoia I suppose) Ive never met a violent stoner. Rob – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> …. > > OK I guess they are right! > I am way past my 1/4 bag every other day 20’s …… but I still have been > known to take a hit if one crosses my line of vision LOL ….. It does > nothing for my MS symptoms. Matter of fact I think it makes them worst. Or > makes me more tried, hence the symptoms become worse. So if I burn one is > strictly recreational and I know the concequences. > But I too have heard it helps many with symptoms of many different diseases. > If it’s psychological … so be it. The mind is a powerful thing. > Billy

Response:

"white.lynx" <white.l…@telus.net> wrote in message

news:ACVua.150953$dh1.5268044@news0.telusplanet.net… > From: "Michael" <muirh…@island.net>> I believe the only long-term solution > to the marijuana problem will be to > > eventually legalize it (10 -20 years from now?). > That was the belief and recommendation of the LeDain Commission over 30 > years ago, Larry. :-( > I am old enough to remember that –prohibition of alcohol did not work — I > have nothing against using marijuana as long as people remain liable for > actions they may undertake while impaired by it - IE: impaired driving > which may mean different tests being required but sufficient legislation is > already on the books once impairment is proved.

Fine by me. I’m all for safe roads, and I’m one of the people who becomes too impaired to drive if I smoke. Of course, unlike when I’m mildly drunk, I’m acutely aware of the impairment and perfectly capable of judging that I’m not in any shape to drive a car. > There are two reasons why I > currently do not use it. The primary reason is that I was addicted to > nicotine and I suspect even after more than 15 years I would want to go back > to smoking.

I’m a repeat nicotine addict since age 10 myself, having quit (with great attendant stress) for a year or more several times. I cannot smoke one cigarette… either I smoke none or I smoke six months worth or more. I was also once briefly but seriouslty addicted to alcohol… (though at the time I was just too young to know that I *would* become addicted if I drank in that quantity, and I can drink moderately now without ill effect and without any difficulty in stopping.) By comparison, the few times I have quit smoking pot have been simple decisions without consequence of any kind. One day I’m an ounce+-per-week smoker of potent Jamaican buds, and the next day I finally decide that I don’t really like being high any more, so I "just say no" for the next 16+ years. I didn’t miss it a bit, physically or otherwise. My mom and several friends suggested a few years ago that it might help with spasm and fasciculation from MS… and for me, it does – though I still don’t like the buzz. > While there other ways to partake, I don’t think it has > anything to offer me at this time because I am enjoying life and have no > pain or other symptoms that it would benefit.

You might be right. Besides: it’s a drug, and the fewer of them taken, the better. I presume the ones you do use are tolerable and at least somewhat effective… and that’s the best one can expect. > We are very different Michael, but we are also very similar in many ways. > Perhaps most importantly, based on our postings to this group, I think we > both are capable of learning from each other, respecting each other’s > opinions on issues and being able to consider new ideas or information and > to think independently. You have opened my eyes to numerous things and I > certainly appreciate your input and sharing with others here.

Same here, Larry. Different as we may be, I’m glad to be able to see the world through your eyes a little, not the least importantly because my own are stuck on an isolated little island and I’m not the city boy I used to be. :-) ((U)) M

Glaucoma Disease

Information about Glaucoma

Glaucoma Symptoms

OT

Question:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Response:

Related Posts

Write a comment