U.S. Anti-Marijuana Ads Focus on Reduced Gaming Skills

Above The Influence, the youth-oriented, anti-drug media campaign run by the Office of National Drug Control Policy, has a new, avatar-based ad campaign which warns gamers that their skills will be negatively impacted by smoking pot.

From the Huffington Post:

To dramatize how bad a stoner can be at video games, the site interviews a computer-generated character who laments the demise of a gamer friend of hers. "I used to have a good time with Lyle. We made a good team. He had skill. He had swiftness," she says. "Well, he used to, anyway. Then our last fight, Lyle decided to get high. And it was simply: sayonara skill, sayonara swiftness."

The Above the Influence campaign points out that perception, memory and eye-hand coordination are all reduced by marijuana use.

Via: Kotaku

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditEmail this to someone

155 comments

  1. 0
    lulz says:

    after reading state’s comments i lol’d so hard i almost wet myself. with that being said…

    though i am not a user myself what he is saying is the same fear-mongering that has been happening since the early part of the 19th century. as people have stated before marijuana has been linked TO ZERO LONG-TERM NEGITIVE EFFECTS (look to studies done by the FDA as well as other U.S. deptments and those done over seas), and yes it is many times safer the Alcohol or tobbaco. it does not increase the chances of lung cancer and does not effect memory loss (execpt while you are under the influence). it is proven that drinking leads to liver and memory problems as well as increased aggresion, while tobbaco has been proven to lead to lung cancer and birth defects (see the side of ANY pack of cig’s). though chemical tests did reveal higher amounts of chemicals the tests done should be viewed as null-and-void do to the fact that test sample where accuired through seized property and control tobbaco samples. meaning that the tobbaco samples where grown under govermental supervision following regulations, while the marijuana samples where grown outside of these regualtions. meaning that chemical fertilizer, chemical pesticides, and other growth stimulants where most likely used. (as stated by DEA representatives about grow farms and other drug manufacturing plants.)


     

    as far as the whole it leading to schizophrenia thing, that is nothing but lies. i have seen the studies that they did they found it didnt increase the chances, though some did suffer from schizophrenia the numbers were the same as the control group (meaning prior schizopheric behavior was present). and though THC is a minor form of acid it didnt lead to any trigger events NO MATTER THE DOESAGE.

    all-in-all i am completely for legilization of marjuana, so think for your own people dont beileve every thing big brother tells you. with that i leave you with a comment made by the partnership for a drug free america.

     


    "We felt the effects of marijuana were so dangerous that it was better to lie to the American public to save them rather than tell them the truth." — Partnership for a Drug Free America

     

  2. 0
    Bumr055 says:

    I can’t believe the people that just relay bullshit seemingly without even thinking about it.  "marijuana isn’t safer to smoke then cigarettes… same old propaganda about lots of chemicals, carcinogens"  Yet know one gets cancer from it. It doesn’t have an unusually large amount of chemicals as a plant.  It may seem dangerous on paper but in the real world it’s virtually harmless.

    The only people that have real lung problems that "just smoke weed" are the ones that are ‘just smoking weed’ in a tobacco(or sometimes mostly chemical bondent crap)wrap.

    Marijuana is FAR FAR FAR safer then alcohol, period.  No matter how you using it.  Marijuana can’t kill you, alcohol CAN.  Marijuana doesn’t make responsible people drive impaired, alcohol DOES. Marijuana doesn’t make people violent, alcohol does.  You can get as high as you want and your only going to feel kind of shitty, groggy, burnt out in a couple hours.  Get a small fraction of how drunk you really can be and you can still feel REALLY shitty in a few hours.(good thing theirs pot to help with the hangovers.)

    Marijuana gets you high, it impairs you.  Thats why people smoke it/vape it/eat it.  Theres no point in using that against it.  Due to laws it’s became its primary purpose to get you high, unlike what I imagine it used to be, before all this nonsense.

    The only time your ever going to be so high that you could somehow consider driving a good idea is when your far to high to actually accomplish getting the car started(never mind finding the keys and getting off the couch to go to the car.  Good luck remembering why you were going to drive if make it that far.)     My point it you would have to be retardedly stoned.(unusually stoned)

    A responsible person would let a sober friend hold on to their keys or do something if they REALLY thought they were going to not have control over them selfs while high.

    Lets face it.  The only argument against weed is that it makes impaired and does a ridiculously small amount of damage to your lungs compared to pretty much ANYTHING else you could smoke.

    Marijuana has chemicals that are GOOD for you.  Most of the things that you would attribute to negative effects(say on the lungs) are counteracted by the good chemicals.  There may be things that could potentially cause cancer(When smoked) but there also things in it that are shown to do the opposite.  You would think it would be a bad idea for someone with asthma to smoke yet in most cases it would actually help.

    Seems like marijuana has changed the meaning of some words, like ‘dangerous’, ‘drug’, ‘addictive’.  I guess not so much change as much as bend the meaning or find a loophole in it.

    Marijuana doesn’t make people stupid, stupid people blame marijuana for all their problems.

    Lets pretend pot is this devil plant that propaganda publishers would like you to think… Why is it a "controlled substance."  Thats doublespeak, theres nothing controlled about it.  Anything on that list they have absolutely zero control over becasue they put it into the hands of criminals.  It makes no sense.

    I’m for the legalization of recreational heroin(and other drug) use before marijuana becasue it’s DANGEROUS!(heroin)  It should be regulated not put on a list and throw taxpayers money at the problem they created.  What a joke!  Somethings supposedly dangerous so let’s let criminals distribute it to anyone instead of real regulation like alcohol.  Where it is harder for kids to get it.  Making things illegal makes them more readily available.  It’s much easier for a kid to get pot then beer.  Theres more people selling drugs then companies selling alcohol.

    I guess some areas a kid might have an easier time acquiring some alcohol, but thats what state laws are for, am I right? 
    Theres no one to step in when drugs are sold(illegally) to kids.

    Speaking of kids and drugs… Hello, sugar, aspartame, caffeine.  Candy seems to be more harmful then marijuana and it contains physically addicting chemicals.  The only difference is theres no lost profits and false stigmas attached to candy.  The only thing people think about with candy is teeth problems(and I hear now teeth and gum problems more related to other physically health problems then before thought.)  I’d really like to see the affects of aspartame on a kids brain compared to marijuana.

    My favorite thing I’d have to say I read in this thread is "Guns do not change chemicals in people’s brains."  That made me laugh.  I’m sure if used correctly a gun can seriously alter someones brain chemistry. LOL

    It’s only a plant, it’s never hurt anyone.

  3. 0
    Christ0pher says:

     This is a joke! One who you testing this argument on? Everyday smokers who also happen to be everyday gamers?? I bet if you cloned me, the "high" me would kick the "sober" me’s ass! Frigging government! Like some fat lil’ 14 year old kid is sitting around playing WoW while hitting a bong! What a gay argument! You think someone is going to stop smoking cuz someone else said there gaming is going to take a hit! Plus I play PC games and I use aimbotz anyway so I can just sit back and laugh while im high, plus pwn every lil sober fag!
     

  4. 0
    shady8x says:

    Wow looks like they properly identified the only dangers of the drug…

    Other dangers include curing cancer, preventing memory loss, preventing brain damage as well as the treatment of dozens if not hundreds of medical conditions without the usual thousands of deaths associated with legal alternatives… that is because to die from pot, you would need to use 1,500 pounds of it in 15 minutes…(this is a theoretical number provided by researchers which were unable to kill animals with it no matter how much they tried…)

    Here is a DEA judge’s perspective…

    The short version:

    http://www.ccguide.org.uk/young88.php

    the full but too long to read version:

    http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/studies/YOUNG/young1.html

  5. 0
    RandomPerson says:

    Wow, just wow…. a lot of comments of questionable and many just plain wrong. To start with a good book to read about this subject is called Buzzed (http://www.amazon.com/Buzzed-Third-Straight-Alcohol-Ecstasy/dp/product-description/0393329852) Its a researched book about what drugs really do to you, not what was mentioned in ‘the pretty ad’.

    Marijuana is typically demonized for many reasons, and it not being legal have many issues ranging from it’s a weed that grows easily (unlike fermenting alcohol) so it’d be hard to control to the other end of smoking too much will make you a danger behind the weed (‘Sir/Madam, your eyes are really red, have you been smoking marijuana or did you accidently rub your eyes too much/had something on them, tired, ect…") Unlike alcohol there isn’t a quick and easy test to find out your current levels of THC.

    As for the whole ‘marijuana causes brain damage’ arguement is only half true, being that it’s always being used when compaired to a 15 year old child who’s brain is still developing and has what is called brain plasticity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain_plasticity) which is when the brain is still forming (ie not fully grown like an adult) any and all mind altering substances (marijuana, alcohol, pain medication, ect…) can easily cause your brain to be re-wired which is a favorite concept of these anti-drug ads. It also doesn’t work on a adult brain since it isn’t effected by brain plasticity, with tests showing that marijuana use by adults only cause up to (not always) 48 hours of forming new memories (alcohol does this too but only during excessive use, and is typically refered to as ‘blacking out’), this is way a stoner might have a hard time answering what happened 2 hours ago since it’s a newer memory but can tell you all about there childhood since they didn’t smoke weed then. THe only major effect marijuana has is that it lowers testosterone, which when reduced also removes aggressive behavior and that is why people claim to feel so calm when smoking weed. It can also play a few issues with your body, where is has been known for really heavy male smokers do begin to develope breasts since there is a lot of estrogen present in the body and not enough testosterone to combat it (starts around the age of 50, and you have to be smoking like 5 joints a day).

    Now because these issues only crop up with minors and wouldn’t help if the ads had to mention that part they leave it out. One of the major issues never mentioned about alcohol which is mentioned in the Buzzed book is that being drunk is your brain’s way of saying that it is suffering perminate damage (if you don’t drink much you can gain around 80% of the damage back) since there are no nerves in the brain to tell you otherwise (it’s why during brain surgery they will only apply a local painkiller instead of gas/IV/local injection. What is happening is the outer parts of the brain start to die but it takes a lot of alcohol abuse to cause massive damage that would be noticable (like you see with a major alcoholic).

    And before someone mentions it (or I missed it) marijuana is not addictive like crack and alcohol. It is although psychology addictive being that if you use it a lot in the same settings you will crave it (ie if you smoke only late at night when you are alone you can find yourself wanting to smoke weed when your alone late at night) but it’s not a true addiction like cigg’s since you won’t care about smoking weed during the day at work but you will want that cigg no matter what or where when it hits

    Someone mentioned that many illegal drugs have medical usage, which is true. A very large hospital will possess (under lock and key) pure cocain for surgery on people with heart problems (http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/concern/cocaine.html#2). All painkillers cause your heart to slow down, but it the person has heart issues it can cause the heart to just stop and not start again so the doctor will rub the area with pure cocain to cause the numbness but with the method it does not enter the brain so the heart does not speed up.  Marijuana has historically been used to help control nausa, menstral cramps, lose of appitite and is currently and illegally used to help cope with the effects of chemotherapy.

    Due to minors having brain plasticity I am highly against minors from smoking marijuana due to the fact that it is a very harmful substance for them to be using, but for the same reasons, I wouldn’t give a minor any drugs or alcohol just to get high/drunk. THe usage of a drug on a minor must be weighted by things like the amount of the drug and the medical usage and figuring out which has the least side effects (killing pain or possible brain damage.

    Always best to read up a subject instead of believing what one person or in this case ad has to say.

  6. 0
    questionmark1987 says:

    Wrong. Parents who have bad health habits are more then likely to pass those habits onto their children, and when mom and dad start eating at the fast food joint everynight guess where little timmy and suzy are getting their grub?

    Also if you think obesity doesn’t detract from your ability to do things like drive a car you’re also fooling yourself, there’s a reason why fat and sluggish are similar descriptions. People who are medically obese have more difficulty moving and reacting to suddent changes, additionally they are more at risk for sudden heart problems and strokeds, remind me what happens when someone driving a car has one of those in mid-day traffic. By your opinion any behavior that could POSSIBLY lead to danger for others needs to be banned, so everybody say bye bye BK.

  7. 0
    Michael Chandra says:

    I’d prefer some more evidence regarding your claims, especially after someone posted the content of an article and you did not respond to that, nor to my question how addictive cocaine was.

    The article quoted starts with "Cannabis is a safer drug than aspirin and can be used long-term", you can look for it in the comments with that term.

  8. 0
    Afirejar says:

    Safe? We’re at a point where it’s not only safe, but extremely healthy and a treatment for both AIDS and cancer. It’ll probably bring us world peace, the meaning of live and the actual ultimate question about life, the universe and everything too, if we would just let it.

    Perhaps I’m a bit too cynical, but when a lot of people desperately want something legalized, for years, and then suddenly, completely out of the blue, that very thing turns out to to have uses in treating both AIDS and cancer, I’m more than sceptical.

  9. 0
    Afirejar says:

    In the US, of 100000 people, 680 are in jail. Pot is illegal.
    In Germany, of 100000 people, 100 are in jail. Pot is illegal.

    I think, by blaming your ridiculous incarceration rates on pot being illegal you’re oversimplifying things a bit.

  10. 0
    Afirejar says:

    People have died because they consumed too much water. Sorry, I don’t buy it. You can overdose on anything. Alcohol, water, vitamins – why should pot of all things be different, other than because you desperately wished it?

  11. 0
    DPhish says:

     I play rockband almost exclusively drunk or high with friends at partys, and depending on various things( how drunk/high, difficulty of song) i can usualy play with about the same ability, unless i am very drunk(barely able to stand drunk).

  12. 0
    questionmark1987 says:

    On the topic of the article alone… who friggin cares? It’s a game. If the group cared THAT much that I was inhibited I would definitley be changing to a new group. My guild finds it funny as hell when I play drunk.

  13. 0
    MrKlorox says:

    Wow… not even gonna try to read through all those half-on-topic the comments about legality or alleged physiological side effects.

    From personal experience, gaming when one isn’t used to being high can make the player worse at accomplishing the goals of the game. But when one has trained themselves to play said games high, playing again sober makes it that much easier.

    Analogize it to physical training waist deep in water versus on land.

  14. 0
    State says:

    What happened was someone said: Cannabis = Safe, Alcohol = Dangerous and stating that alcohol is much more dangerous than cannabis, which is wrong. It doesn’t even have anything to do with its legal status , people believe that as soon as health problems are brought up it means that its justification for its illegal status.

    Quite frankly the jury is out on cannabis causing mental illness, and especially as the stronger GM stuff comes about there is still much to learn (with many currently concerned over its links to schizophrenia), so to category deny that cannabis causes health problems is wrong. Alcohol due to about 99% of adults consuming it, we know just about all there is to know about it.

    I don’t think people see the role of personal responsibility. Just because you do something doesn’t mean that you have to justify its "safeness" (which really seems to be about morality). People take part in extreme sports for instance, knowing for well the risks involved (they don’t justify their actions by calling it safe). With smoking the health facts are laid out and it is up to the individual whether they want to take it up or not, I just don’t know why people need to justify their cannabis use by claiming its safe, instead of just saying "I know there are a lot of health concerns over it, but I’ve decided that I still want to do it regardless, it’s my body at the end of the day".

  15. 0
    Geoff says:

    Well the debate *kind* of started on track.

    Then anti-pot guys here pointed out all the negative effects (both real and imagined) about pot.

    Pro-pot guys counter with the "It’s my body and I do what I want"

    And from there is kind of spiraled out of control in a blaze of flame-war glory.

     

    Tea and cake or death! Tea and cake or death! Little Red Cook-book! Little Red Cook-book!

  16. 0
    ZippyDSMlee says:

    Mmmmm I do not have a problem with this, can we tact on fines and confascations for those that abuse thier weapons?


    Gore,Violence,Sexauilty,Fear,Emotion these are but modes of transportation of story and thought, to take them from society you create a society of children and nannys, since adults are not required.


    http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com

  17. 0
    Praetorian says:

    Hence the loosening of gun and self defense laws.

    It’s called "culling the herd".

    More deaths = less people. Less people = more job openings (if they are working and less strain on government help programs if they aren’t).

    The unemployment rate drops when people start to work…then people have money to spend on things…then, the economy is fixed.

    Man, that’s so crazy you’d think I work for the government!

    http://micahmcmillan.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/government-demotivator.jpg

    Praetorian

    "I’ve been told I’m the resident skeptic, but I wouldn’t believe that."

    http://www.myspace.com/pree_tawr_ee_uhn

  18. 0
    ZippyDSMlee says:

    I don’t mind stepping up death pentilties for those that kill or rape, its jsut soemthing that has to give becuse we can not afford to do otherwise.

     

    But with that said that alone is not going to allow us enough room to handle minor crimnails.

     


    Gore,Violence,Sexauilty,Fear,Emotion these are but modes of transportation of story and thought, to take them from society you create a society of children and nannys, since adults are not required.


    http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com

  19. 0
    Nekowolf says:

    Yeah, I knew that there was some point where you could. I heard it was like…so many times your body weight. Basically, it was impossible to humanly do.

  20. 0
    Nekowolf says:

    And maybe that there are secret conspiracies in the media to force kids into smoking pot, headed by secret groups of the tobacco industry *also trying to take a whack at Truth*

  21. 0
    Kitchen says:

    You guys are all missing the point, you damn potheads. The whole issue of legalization has nothing to do with health issues. Studies have tried for decades to prove with conviction that pot is dangerous and damaging to oneself but they have failed. Don’t you think after decades and decades of scientific research that if pot was dangerous it would have been proven by now? The fact is that pot does so little damage that it is immeasurable. Why do people focus on the health issues associated with smoking pot? Ciggarettes are legal and they kill tens of millions of people every year. Kind of hypocritical no? Alcohol kills millions every year yet that is legal. Why? Because people have a right to do whatever they want to themselves. Why does the government have to step in and say "Hey now, you might get short-term memory problems while you’re using pot, and possibly have lung problems years from now so we’re gonna make the decision for you and become your mother and say no. You’re not allowed to smoke pot, now go to your room (prison for 10 years)."

    The government does NOT have that right. Yet Americans everywhere have been fooled into thinking that their leaders have some say. So after 70 years of prohibition, you’ve all been tricked into thinking this is normal. But it is not. The government has no more right to tell you what you can eat/smoke/inject than I do.

    If the government passed a law that outlawed eating beef, people would be outraged. After 70 years however, anyone old enough to remember a time before beef prohibition would be dead. And then the government would say "They died so young because they ate beef. JUST SAY NO TO BEEF!"

    It sounds rediculous, but this is EXACTLY what happened to pot.

  22. 0
    Praetorian says:

    Yeah, I have seen someone on pot, infact, I was dating her. Had I known before we got involved I wouldn’t have.

    Yeah, some states do have this rule on "self defense", but not nearly enough.

    True, they are like a three year old — but there is nothing more cruel and unforgiving than a child.

    Yes I was a kid once, yes I had good parents, and no I don’t hate my mother. 😛

    Praetorian

    "I’ve been told I’m the resident skeptic, but I wouldn’t believe that."

    http://www.myspace.com/pree_tawr_ee_uhn

  23. 0
    charlieton says:

    Cannabis is a safer drug than aspirin and can be used long-term
    without serious side effects, says a book by a leading Oxford scientist.
    The Science of Marijuana, by Dr Leslie Iversen of Oxford
    University’s department of pharmacology, found many "myths" surrounding
    marijuana use, such as extreme addictiveness, or links with mental
    illness or infertility are not supported by science.
    He also found cannabis is an inherently "safe drug" which does not
    lead to cancer, infertility, brain damage or mental illness.
    Legalisation of the drug for medical conditions should be considered,
    he says.
    Dr Iversen’s findings will increase pressure on the Government to reopen the debate about the decriminalisation of marijuana.
    The author, a fellow of the prestigious Royal Society, found
    cannabis was far less toxic than other drugs and had "an impressive
    record" compared with heroin, cocaine or tobacco and alcohol.
    His study showed that the active element of cannabis,
    tetrahydrocannabinol ( THC ), which made users high, had a lot of
    potential as a safe drug to treat Aids patients and people suffering
    severe pain.
    He also found "stoned" drivers were less dangerous and able to
    co-ordinate than people who were drunk. "By any standards, THC must be
    considered a very safe drug both acutely and on long-term exposure," he
    writes. "The available animal data are more than adequate to justify
    its approval as a human medicine, and indeed it has been approved by
    the FDA [American drug authority] for certain limited therapeutic
    indications."
    The book says "alarming claims about the harmful effects of
    long-term exposure to cannabis" should be "put to rest", and there "is
    no evidence the drug causes any impairment in fertility or sexual
    function in men or women". He says people who stop using cannabis do
    not suffer long-term side-effects."Cannabis does not cause structural damage to the brains of animals
    as some reports had claimed, nor is there evidence of long-term damage
    to the human brain or other than slight residual impairments in
    cognitive function after drug use is stopped." The author says many
    adverse effects of cannabis are related to smoking the drug.
    But cannabis itself did not appear to cause cancer. Compared with
    alcohol and cigarettes, which led to more than 100,000 deaths a year,
    cannabis had a far better record.
    "Tetrahydrocannabinol is a very safe drug," he said. "Despite the
    widespread illicit use of cannabis here are very few if any instances
    of people dying from an overdose. Even such apparently innocuous
    medicines as aspirin and related steroidal anti-inflammatory compounds
    are not safe.
    "Thousands of people die every year because of the tendency of these drugs to cause catastrophic gastric bleeding."
    Read on: onmarijuana.com, saferchoice.org
    original post @ http://wiseperception.com/node/188

    Leslie L. Iversen
    Chairman of the Board/Director
    ACADIA Pharmaceuticals, Incorporated
    San Diego ,  CA
    Sector: HEALTHCARE  /  Biotechnology
     
    70 Years Old
    Leslie L. Iversen, Ph.D. has been the Chairman of our Board of Directors since December 2000. He has served as a director since 1998. He also was a founding member of our Scientific Advisory Board. Dr. Iversen is currently a Professor of Pharmacology at University of Oxford, England, where he has taught since 1995. He was previously a Professor of Pharmacology at King"s College, London where he was Director of the Wolfson Centre for Age Related Diseases from 1999 until 2004. Dr. Iversen is internationally recognized for his fundamental contributions to the understanding of neurotransmission. Dr. Iversen served as Vice President of Neuroscience Research, Merck Research Laboratories and Director of the Neuroscience Research Center of Merck Research Laboratories in the UK. He was formerly Director of the Medical Research Council Neurochemical Pharmacology Unit in Cambridge. More recently, Dr. Iversen founded and serves as a director of Panos Therapeutics Ltd. Dr. Iversen is the recipient of numerous awards, including Fellow of the Royal Society of London and Foreign Associate Member of the National Academy of Sciences in the United States. Dr. Iversen received a Ph.D. and B.A. from the University of Cambridge.

  24. 0
    Geoff says:

    It’s be theorized that you can OD on pot…if you smoke something like 3.2 KILOS of it.  Which no one could ever do.  You’d just pass out into sweet, sweet stoner sleep before you get up to half an ounce.

    So yeah, impossible.

     

    Tea and cake or death! Tea and cake or death! Little Red Cook-book! Little Red Cook-book!

  25. 0
    ZippyDSMlee says:


    The trouble is we have so many minor criminals we can not house them all we as a society do not have the money to manage them, you have 3 choices here let them go when the jail is full, kill off hard violent offenders within a year of inprsionment(to reduce hard crime in part but also relive jail numbers)  or refocus the the quagmire of the drug war not to fighting the gangs/cartels on the streets directly but to healthcare and filling vice via legalized drugs and programs to take care of addicts as so they wont have to steal.

    If you legalize drugs and run a fair/flat tax based off whats sold you will do so much damage to the black market cartels they could not afford to supply the nation and be reduced to mere localized gangs not nation wide mobsters.

     


    Gore,Violence,Sexauilty,Fear,Emotion these are but modes of transportation of story and thought, to take them from society you create a society of children and nannys, since adults are not required.


    http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com

  26. 0
    questionmark1987 says:

    I can believe crank would cause this, but pot? Have you ever SEEN someone on pot? It’s like watching a 3 year old in a new playhouse. Also depending on your state the laws already fit what you mentioned, texas you are allowed to shoot anyone who enters your home for the purpose of hurting you your family or stealing. I think you can do the same for your yard after a certain time of day as well.

  27. 0
    ZippyDSMlee says:

    EZK
    Lets lobotomize the public and turn them into drones so that those with the intelligence to lead and reproduce are allowed to do so in absolution, its no different than trying to remove humans and vice in fact those lobotomized would be much happier being less intelligent and not having to deal with human drivers and needs….

     


    Gore,Violence,Sexauilty,Fear,Emotion these are but modes of transportation of story and thought, to take them from society you create a society of children and nannys, since adults are not required.


    http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com

  28. 0
    Praetorian says:

    Honestly, nothing would thrill me more than to see a bunch of people actually get a real punishment for drug use instead of a slap on the wrists.

    They should just legalize the drugs and tax the income — then they should loosen up the "self defense" and gun laws. That way when people do drugs and act irresponsible by breaking into homes because they can’t afford to buy their daily fix, those of us who are still in their right mind can "defend" themselves legally.

    It may not make the place safer, but people would sure think twice before they tried to do anything.

    I normally wouldn’t care about the drug debate, but I lost 10K woth of electronics and music because of a crank and pot junkie while I was away on business. There is nothing worse than getting a call from police while setting up a large system in another state and not knowing _exactly_ what was stolen.

    Praetorian

    "I’ve been told I’m the resident skeptic, but I wouldn’t believe that."

    http://www.myspace.com/pree_tawr_ee_uhn

  29. 0
    questionmark1987 says:

    This is why we have laws banning drunk driving but not drinking (anymore). We recognize as a society of free individuals that people have the right to fuck up their own bodies but when they endanger others it’s not ok.

    What’s next, outlaw BK and McD’s because they’re making everyone who’s too stupid to eat elsewhere obese?

  30. 0
    questionmark1987 says:

    Aside from the obvious health risks of intaking smoke into the body (which can be easily negated by using a vaporizor or by using cannibis in cooking as has been mentioned) there are no stodies that have proven any negative health or memory effects from cannibis long term. Short term memory and motor skills are effected alone. You could say it contributes to obesity but really that’s a stretch of an arguement against it.

    And unlike most of these arguments which seem to be taken from mass media and the anti-drug compaigns my facts come from medical practitioners and professionals (IE my doctors, nurses and friends who are) I don’t partake but I have a LOT of friends that do and wanted to know if I should be concerned, the basic response besides details is "If they’re eating it or using a vaporizor it’s 100% safe."

  31. 0
    Nekowolf says:

    Yeah. I know. For fuck sakes, I actually have to explain this?

    Cocaine = possible overdose (I can’t say how frequent, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s not too uncommon).

    Marijuana = impossible to overdose.

    Pot wins the case of overdose. If I have to break it down any more, then you’re just a fucking idiot.

  32. 0
    Geoff says:

    Tobacco isn’t safe…but if you do it in moderation you greatly reduce the chance of health risks.

    Driving isn’t safe…but if you’re attentive and follow the driving laws you greatly reduce the chance of getting into an accident.

    As for the last comment, laws have been changed over time to reflect both changes in public attitude and in light of new information about the subject.  In the case of pot, some health risks aside, most of the reasons to not legalize it has either been proven false such as labeling it a narcotic.

    Really, we can do this all day and the only thing that will come from it is raising the number of comments for this article.

     

    Tea and cake or death! Tea and cake or death! Little Red Cook-book! Little Red Cook-book!

  33. 0
    Mr. Peacock says:

    The problem is that prohibition doesn’t work, history has already proven that.  Humans, in general, like to get fucked up and for that matter so does much of the animal kingdom.  All that a heavy handed prohibative approach does is allow the more unsavory characters in our society to take control of that business.  Last time we outlawed alcohol we managed to make a criminal out of what would normally be a regular law abiding American and give rise to modern organized crime which, because of the amount of money involved in bootlegging began to employ a level of violence that hadn’t been seen before.  

    Modern marijuanna laws are no different.  If you remove the criminality you, to an extent, remove the criminal.  People aren’t going to go to some shady guy on a corner when they can walk into a store and make their purchase legally.  Given, I’m sure those already involved in the drug trade will probably go off and find another raeson to shoot at each other but we can at least give them one less excuse.  All prohibition does is create criminals, and often times violent ones.  To think otherwise is to grossly misunderstand human nature.

  34. 0
    E. Zachary Knight says:

    Hey, I respect your opinion on the matter as well. While my call for prohibition does nto agree with you, it still stands.

    I understand the problems with organized crime due to prohibition of alcohol and current illegal drugs as well. But organized crime can be dealt with. It is possible. But only if we as a nation are willing to deal with it. It does not help when we have people in a position of power to stop these criminals take bribes and other such cut backs to turn their heads. You cannot deny that that happens.

    We have cops who steal drugs from evidence lockers for the sole purpose to sell it back out on the street. We have cops and city officials who regularly accept bribes and or give into extortion from those criminals.

    It does take money and resources to fight these criminals, but legalizing these substances only gets rid of the headline grabbing problems.

    You may not mind dealing with the occasional "asshole wandering around drunk" or high, but how would you feal if that same asshole got behind the wheel of his car and ended up killing someone you love?

    E. Zachary Knight
    Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
    http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma


    E. Zachary Knight
    Divine Knight Gaming
    Oklahoma Game Development
    Rusty Outlook
    Random Tower
    My Patreon

  35. 0
    State says:

    Smoking tobacco in the UK is legal, doesn’t mean it’s safe though. Driving is legal, doesn’t mean it’s safe though. But illegal drugs weren’t made illegal for the hell of it.

  36. 0
    black manta says:

    What?  Are you kidding?  Zach, you’re my friend, and I’ve stayed out of this discussion largely because I really don’t have firsthand experience with the issue at hand and don’t want to be talking out of my ass.  But really, when you make a statement like this, I have to facepalm.  Prohibition may have been a great idea on paper, but it ended up doing more harm than good.  Not the least of which was the rise of organized crime who, once they saw a profit could be made from smuggling and dsitributing alcohol, took advantage of it and subesequently saw a rise in crime as rival crime lords duked it out for territory and innocent bystanders got caught in the crossfire (i.e. the war between Al Capone and Bugs Morane).  The same can be said right now of marijuana; as long as it’s illegal, the criminals will continue to traffic in it as long as it remains profitable for them.  Decriminalize or legalize it and that source of revenue will dry up for them, and you’ll see a drop in drug-related violence.  And personally, I’d rather have assholes wander around drunk in the street and have alcohol legal than have it be made illegal and see a rise in crime because of it.

    Yes, alcohol can be bad if anyone abuses it.  I don’t drink myself, but it’s not because of any kind of adherance to any set of moral or religous priciples, I just never liked the taste of beer or liqour and never went to parties or anyplace where people drank in my youth.  That and I had a bad experience with a roommate who got violent when he drank, threatened me and my friends and stole my stuff by the time I got fed up and moved out.  By contrast I had another set of roommates who smoked weed, and while I may not have necessarily approved of it and were irritable when they were coming down, on the whole they were a lot more pleasant to deal with than the guy who drank.  That and one of my friends whom I love very much smoked weed, and she got into Cornell and is writing for their newspaper and as far as I know is doing very well (though granted, she hasn’t smoked in over a year and I don’t know if she is still doing it).  So between that and everything else I have read about pot, I’m inclined to look more favorably on pot than on alcohol.  And it should be at the very least decriminalized.  If for no other reason than stop wasting taxplayer dollars on what is a failed policy.

    I respect your lifestyle and the principles you live by, and I hope you do with me, and I think we have to respectfully agree to disagree on this one.

  37. 0
    DarkSaber says:

    A significant amount of anti-hemp/marijuana funding comes from the paper barons.

    ————————————————-

    I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

  38. 0
    axiomatic says:

    Man there is a lot of kool-aid drinking going on in here. There is no speculation. Alcohol is in fact far worse for your body and mind than marijuana is. Other than lung problems, marijuana has actually recently been found to stop cancer cells from forming and/or getting worse. http://www.youtube.com/watch

    One fact I am positive about though is that no one who is "stoned" comes home and beats their wife and children. Stoners are generally happy people. Alcoholics…. not so much.

    I don’t really do much of either anymore but the bullshit in here was getting too strong.

    Marijuana needs to be decriminalized. It should be a monetary fine at best.

  39. 0
    Evil Toothpick says:

    I would like to point out a documentary about cannabis i found on youtube. Just look it up and watch it, its titled "Marijuana documentary". You will be suprised about the things you will found out in the movie. Like cannibis’s ability to replace trees as a source of paper. Just so you know, i am all for cannabis

     

  40. 0
    Geoff says:

    "all drugs that are illegal aren’t safe"

    So when I smoke pot in a country where it’s legal, like the Netherlands, it’s safe but once I go back to the US it isn’t safe? 

     

    Tea and cake or death! Tea and cake or death! Little Red Cook-book! Little Red Cook-book!

  41. 0
    Nekowolf says:

    Oh for christ sakes, YOU did. "There is the possibility of an OD"

    Yeah, well that is utterly impossible with smoking pot. The sheer amount you’d have to inhale is unhuman.

  42. 0
    State says:

    Who said anything about overdosing on cannabis?

    Currently in the UK there are health campaigns about the dangers of cocaine (not crack cocaine, but just cocaine), because most people don’t know of them because it is seen as being one of the safer illegal drugs (all drugs that are illegal aren’t safe), such health problems include heart disease. But the effects on the brain are minor when compared to cannabis.

  43. 0
    Nekowolf says:

    What!? Ahahahahaha! Wtf?

    If you honestly believe that, wow…that’s hysterical. You fail again. Just ignore the fact that cocaine is much more lethal. And more addcitive. Also, it is impossible to overdose on pot.

  44. 0
    Nekowolf says:

    Fuck Above the Influence. Nothing but complete bullshit, just like Truth. They lie out the ASS just to get their points across, which usually even aren’t that great to begin with, sounding like a bunch of scared little pussies of the big bad world. Yeah, people smoke cigarettes, and yeah, they smoke pot.

    Well guess what. War on Drugs = complete failure. So shut up already.

    Also, my friend Jeremy is a big pot smoker, and I play games with him quite frequently. I noticed very little affect on his gameplay.

  45. 0
    State says:

    Actually cocaine isn’t as bad as cannabis. There is the possibility of an OD, but it doesn’t seem to how the seem permanent negative effects on the brain that cannabis does.

  46. 0
    Bennett Beeny says:

    It should be my decision and my responsibility – just like any other activity is.  But right now I have to break the law if I want to use marijuana – and that’s even if I use it responsibly.  That’s ridiculous and it’s a double standard when alcohol and tobacco – drugs that are similarly prone to abuse – are perfectly legal.

    They should either legalize marijuana use or criminalize alcohol and tobacco use.  Since I don’t often partake of any intoxicating drugs (I have a beer about once a week, I smoke a cigar maybe once a year and I’ve smoked marijuana once – and that was over 20 years ago in Austria) I don’t really care too much which, although I think any law that treats adults as kids is probably a stupid law.  But I think the law should at least be consistent.

  47. 0
    Erasmus Darwin says:

    On the other hand, I’ve heard anecdotal stories of competitive gamers abusing cocaine in order to get an edge during major tournaments.  It’d be tragically funny if this ad inadvertently pushed some gamers toward harder and more dangerous drugs.

  48. 0
    Mechadon says:

    I find this campaign to be highly stereotypical of gamers.

    To make an analogy, this is equivelent to saying "Weed will f* up your jump-shot" if they were trying to target African-Americans.

  49. 0
    Bennett Beeny says:

    Heck, only a loser cares about playing to one’s best ability in a game.  It’s not about winning – it’s about the fun to be had while playing, and a whole lot of fun can be had when you’re playing while drunk or high.

    On the cannabis vs. legal drugs issue, I really don’t care which is more dangerous for me.  I just want the government to get out of the business of telling me what chemicals I should or should not be putting in my own body.  That stuff is for my doctor to advise me on and for me to make the decision about.  No one else should be involved.

  50. 0
    Meddle says:

    Day by day, Above the Influence resorts more and more to 1930’s tactics. Soon they’ll be accusing pot of causing rape, dementia, and murder.

  51. 0
    Geoff says:

    And I had a friend who took part in a 30+ man Guilty Gear X2 tournament while stoned.  He won the tournament with Sol Badguy.  Didn’t lose a match. 

    It affects different people in different ways just like pretty much any other drug.  Some people can’t play stoned while others can play just fine.  It’s all about knowing how it affects you and doing it in moderation.

     

    Tea and cake or death! Tea and cake or death! Little Red Cook-book! Little Red Cook-book!

  52. 0
    Geoff says:

    Strange, I’ve never found my gameing skills to be affected by smoking weed, unless I’m so shit-faced stone that I can’t get off the couch.  Seeing as that rarely happens now, from a combination of being more moderate with my intake and due to my high tolerance, I’m going to have to decry BS on this assumption.  Being drunk on the other hand makes me totally useless at most games.

    Weed affects each person in a different way.  I’ve known stoners who fit the stereotype of being incredibly lazy and idiotic.  I’ve also known stoners who totally break this stereotype by being some of the most intelligent individuals I’ve ever met.  Hell there was a dude I knew in college who was a marine bio major that use to get stoned all the time.  When he had to write a major report he’d spend an entire day in his room smoking pot and blasting Rage Against the Machine while busting out the paper.  Guy never got anything besides A’s.

    These ads by and large are ineffective.  Those that have decided not to smoke aren’t going to care about them because it’s not targeting them to begin with.  Those that do smoke are just going to point and laugh at the second-grade scare tactics depicted within.  As for those that the ads are really targeting, teens that haven’t made that kind of decision yet, regardless what their reasonings to smoke or not to smoke I’d bet they don’t include these ads.  I have yet to meet a non-smoker who cites information give to him from an ad as his primary reason to not spark up.

     

    Tea and cake or death! Tea and cake or death! Little Red Cook-book! Little Red Cook-book!

  53. 0
    Michael Chandra says:

    I know a guy who, in an obscure game you guys probably never heard of, did most of the fort fights stoned and always, despite having a skill, strength and gear advantage, would always nearly or fully lose due to it. Influencing behaviour negatively? Yeah, I’m buying that.

  54. 0
    shady8x says:

    To quote FRANCIS L. YOUNG, DEA Administrative Law Judge

    "Marijuana, in its natural form, is one of the safest therapeutically active substances known to man. By any measure of rational analysis marijuana can be safely used"

  55. 0
    shady8x says:


    I agree there are safe levels of alcohol. Still it kills more than all illegal drugs, car accidents, and violent crimes combined every year…

    There is a safe level of cannabis use. It is known as ANY LEVEL OF CANNABIS USE. The LD-50 rating for pot is theoretical because researchers couldn’t kill test animals despite repeated attempts… Aspirin ‘s LD-50 is 1:20 so you take 20 aspirins’s in a row and a trip to the grave is entirely possible… Pot’s LD-50 is 1:40,000. It is not humanly possible to inhale or consume that much…

    Pot has been proven TO PROTECT THE BRAIN FROM BOTH CANCER AND OTHER BRAIN DAMAGE. Google it and if you avoid drug policy websites and go to medical journals you will find the specifics…

    Smoking is bad and is a result of drug laws which keep costs artificially high… this prevents eating of pot which would require more pot for the same effect. Vaporizers are not sufficiently known to the public but if pot was legal then they would be advertised often…

    There is no evidence linking pot use to schizophrenia… The ‘evidence’ is derived from the use of pure THC rather than the whole plant which includes dozens of different chemicals. Some of the other chemicals have ANTI-psychotic effects… so the studies apply to drugs like marinol but NOT to the marijuana itself…

    If one out of 50 people is a murderer and 10 are doctors that save lives everyday. Does that mean all 50 people are murderers? No, that would be a stupid conclusion, and yet you state it as fact… though I guess you have been confused by propaganda that states this conclusion as well…

  56. 0
    shady8x says:

    Actually Marijuana has been found to help treat Alzheimers and Cancer… even fox news started reporting on this recently… last I checked they are not pro pot…

  57. 0
    shady8x says:

    """""Alcohol can be an entirely safe "drug", in moderation it cases no harm, the same can’t be said for cannabis."""""""- wowwwwwwwwwwwwww

    120,000 die from alcohol within the USA alone EVERY year… that is more than the deathsfrom all illegal drugs, car crashes, gun crimes per year and all the losses we took in Iraq and Afghanistan combined!!!!!!

    Cleaning a loaded weapon pointed at you is safer!!!

    In comparison there has not been a verified death caused by pot in the 10,000 years that it has been used by the entire world… This includes experiments with animals, aimed to find the LD-50 ratio(how much you can take of a substance before it becomes lethal) for pot… This is why LD-50 for pot is a theoretical 1:40,000.(aspirin LD-50 is 1:20) That is you need to take 40,000 times the normal dose in order to kill yourself with pot, this is about 1,500 pounds of weed and is not physically possible to accomplish…

    http://www.ccguide.org.uk/young88.php

  58. 0
    vanchuck says:

    Yes, Isopropyl Alcohol is a pretty good disinfectant and antiseptic. However, it is not commonly used for cleaning wounds (any more at least).

    The reason is that it not only kills bacteria but also kills the exposed healthy cells in the wound, supposedly adding to the healing time and causing more scarring (ie, it is slightly toxic/poisonous). It also evaporates readily, meaning its effects are very short lasting, and won’t protect against further infection in the wound after application.

    Current medical practice is to cleanse an open wound by irrigation with simple tap water or saline solution. Antiseptics can be used in cases where extensive infection is suspected (like if left untreated for a couple days)– although the effect of the antiseptic in that case is relatively minor to that of the antibiotics that would no doubt also be prescribed.

    So, yeah, pretty much no form of alcohol is good for anything. Other than being a side effect of delicious beer.

  59. 0
    casieispretty says:

    You, my friend, seem to be the product of the misinformation that is spread by the fear mongering anti drug campaigns.  The only person who has had their brain damaged is you, who seems to suffer from a tad bit of the ole reefer madness.  There is no properly conducted scientiffic evidence to suggest that marijuana is linked to mental illness.  Actually, there is contrary evidence to your ridiculous claim conducted by Oxford scientists.  Here is a link to an article which highlights some of the findings by Oxford University’s lead scientist of pharmacology about how safe marijuana actually is:

    http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-wellbeing/health-news/cannabis-less-harmful-than-aspirin-says-scientist-634183.html

    If you feel inclined, you can buy a copy of Dr. Iversen’s book which goes more in-depth in dubunking these commonly held stereotypes about the safety of marijuana.  Please, stop spreading these lies and educate yourself on the subject matter before flying off the handle and making bold statements based on nothing but myths and fear inspired lies. Also, even though there is no recorded case of marijuana linked to cancer, marijuana can be even more safely smoked using a vaporizer, or ingested.

  60. 0
    LujanD says:

    Nekowolf said, "GP really needs to make a seperation between them >.>"

    Lol, agreed. Sometimes commentators seem completely batty to me as I read their last line, only to realize it’s a sig.

    Like Geoff’s for example. >_>

  61. 0
    LujanD says:

    Honestly, I wasn’t expecting the joke to open the door for insults so perhaps I should point out that I have never even touched illegal drugs, nevermind allowed the stuff into my system, which turns the "irony" (or “justice” as you say for some reason) into a simple statement.

  62. 0
    questionmark1987 says:

    Alcohol is sometimes given intreveniously (spl?) to alcoholics to lessen side effects from withdrawl. This is done with all addictive drugs though. It is slowly slowly lowered in it’s amount to minimize withdrawl symptoms. Interestingly I’ve never heard of a case of physical addiction to pot. Mental (IE addicted to the way it makes you feel) yes but as far as I’ve heard the chemicals themselves are not addictive. People who are regular users do not suffer side effects from stopping use.

  63. 0
    questionmark1987 says:

    Now if the rest of america could be this logical we would have a much better country. ‘I don’t want to do it but as long as you don’t hurt anyone else go ahead.’ This is what our whole country was founded on.

  64. 0
    d20sapphire says:

    Also, correlation does not imply causation.  Just because schizophrenia is linked to pot smoking doesn’t mean one causes the other. 

    This is getting absurd.  Any substances that messes with your state of mind as it’s implied intention is good in small doses and horrible in high doses.  There is always a safe dosage.  Sometimes it’s a ridiculously small dose but still, one exists.

    http://www.20sidedwoman.blogspot.com

  65. 0
    thelobbyist.net says:

    There are other pros but alas… I forget. -LujanD

     

    Did anyone else find this ironic? lol

     

    thelobbyist.net – live it, love it, debate

  66. 0
    Davvolun says:

    I agree and you make a good point, but typically not the kind of alcohol that you drink. (Yes I know, in a pinch, any alcohol works, and you’re probably more likely to have the drinking variety in a pinch).

  67. 0
    Geoff says:

    Well according to the section about mental illness, it states that young pot smokers who developed psychotic illness probably had a pre-disposed condition.

    From there it says that for the population as a whole pot has had a "modest role" in the increase of psychotic illness.  How they went from the comment above to this second one I can’t figure out.  They’re saying "most likely young smokers who become crazy after smoking pot were already predisposed to be crazy…so on the population as a whole pot has had a modest role in increasing psychotic illness."  They went from talking about just young smokers to all smokers, they don’t define what a "modest role" is, no statistics or percentages or anything of the like, and in general they appear to be jumping to conclusions without backing it up.  I would have to check out the Lancet article some other time but if this is the best you can provide I’m sticking with my bullshit conclusion.

     

    Tea and cake or death! Tea and cake or death! Little Red Cook-book! Little Red Cook-book!

  68. 0
    Arell says:

    I agree on one point for certain.  If you’re going to talk about "responsible" cannibis use, then you have to compare it to "responsible" alcohol.  It’s unfair to compare someone that lights up a joint once a week, to someone that drinks a case of beer every night for 10 years.  Just as it is unfair to compare someone that has a few beers every other weekend at the bar, to someone that is stoned from the minute they walk in the front door every night.

    I have no moral objection to either drinking or smoking weed.  I honestly think that the latter should be legalized.  It would stop the crime and gangs involved in it’s distribution, you could regulate it just like the alcohol industry, and of course, taxes.  And cannibis is certainly not as dangerous as other, harder drugs.  As long as you keep it away from children, and don’t hurt the people around you, then it’s cool.  Both have potential, but minor risks, so I don’t see why marijuana should be treated differently than alcohol.

    That said, one shouldn’t deny that there are potential health problems with both alcohol and cannibis (some proponents of marijuana act like it’s a magical substance that has only good qualities).  And both can be addictive to the right people.  The studies are currently inconclusive, but there is a strong suggestion that weed can lead to certain mental imparments over the long term (even with casual use).  But then, studies about video games are inconclusive, but highly suggest that really young children have a higher chance of imulating violence they see in a violent game (with does seem to be true, so probably shouldn’t let your 7 year old play Madworld or GTA).

    Me personally?  I don’t drink or smoke.  I’m not prissy or preachy about it, and I don’t tell others not to.  It’s just my personal choice.

  69. 0
    Nekowolf says:

    …I have never heard of that. Then, if that’s true, I concede my point of alcohol not having medical uses. I stand correct. Though the rest applies.

  70. 0
    LujanD says:

    State said, “Actually there are safe levels of alcohol, there are no safe levels of cannabis (whether it be minor damage to the brain or to the lungs). Again the talk about liver disease is related to prolonged, above average alcohol consumption.”

    And the talk of anything to do with cannabis is also related to prolonged exposure when taken excessively, with the only difference being that it’s a lot longer than alcohol… Yeah, even I can’t back that up but I figured, you said it, so why can’t I?

    This is becoming silly… I can actually tell you’re ignoring most of what I say quite handily. And you’re making stuff up as you go along, pointing out how alcohol has "safe levels" and cannabis "does not" while making vague remarks about how these effects have something to do with "brains". I can also pretty much say, "alcohol does stuff to your brain… OOoooooOOOooOOO!"

    I hear peanut butter also does "something" to the brain… more OOoooooOOOOoooOOOoo!

    Lol, sorry, couldn’t help myself.

    State said, “And considering the fact that there is growing evidence linking cannabis use to schizophrenia, well…”

    I hope that’s not your proof if you’re actually trying to “defend” alcohol… Because, well…

    I’d hate to whip out the “how alcohol is four times worse in causing psychotic symptoms as opposed to cannabis” charts.

  71. 0
    State says:

    This article goes on unbiased about it, it clearly shows that the jury is still out, you simply cannot say smoking cannabis does not cause mental illness. So quite frankly it is debatable, but as said the evidence is there linking it to mental illness (however minor). I find it amusing that people have to justify their use of it by its safeness, and justify its legal position over the same effects too, particularly when driving is legal but dangerous.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4583648.stm

    To another comment, why should I compare to heavy alcohol consumption to light cannabis consumption? That is the same as comparing heavy cannabis consumption to light alcohol consumption.

    Also alcohol has plenty of medical uses, just as cannabis, heroin (opium) and cocaine do.

  72. 0
    Geoff says:

    More and more studies are proving that pot leads to mental illness?  Oh now that’s a new one.

    Until you can cite a source, I’m considering that pure bullshit.

     

    Tea and cake or death! Tea and cake or death! Little Red Cook-book! Little Red Cook-book!

  73. 0
    Nekowolf says:

    Yes. But is there any medical benefit to alcohol, which is what YOU brought up.

    The fact is, you are completely full of it. You basically said you cannot properly compare alcohol abuse to smoking pot. My fucking ass you can’t.

    Alcohol is not only heavily abused, and very often at that, but furthermore, sure, you can have a glass of wine. But, you are narrowing it down far to heavily. If you are at a part, chances are, you are going to have a few. Not only that, but alcohol affects people differently as well.

    I can not drink anywhere NEAR my friends. So to some, just a few COULD quite possibly hinder them, instead of drinking a whole bottle of, say, whiskey.

    Well I call bullshit on you. I say that having one joint, it does not bring out this worst-case scenario you are trying to present. Pot can be fine as long as you don’t do too much. Sure, it’s affects may be more immediate, but you cannot honestly say it is worse.

    Take driving. I do not know of any proper, balanced, study to show which is worse, driving stoned, or driving drunk.

    There is not enough research done to compare the affects of these two drugs. But I’d rather trust a pot smoker, than a fucking alcoholic.

    Furthermore, you MUST compare alcohol abuse, to as you said, smoking pot casually. And drinking a glass of wine is NOT abuse. Fucking alcholol abuse, I think, is far more dangerous than smoking pot casually. Maybe not on a physical level, but on a mental level to yourself, but also physical/mental to those AROUND you. How many have been killed from alcholol, both the drinker and victims of any acts that were influenced by alcholol (such as drunk driving)? And how many from pot? 

    I imagine alcohol has far greater numbers.

  74. 0
    State says:

    Actually there are safe levels of alcohol, there are no safe levels of cannabis (whether it be minor damage to the brain or to the lungs). Again the talk about liver disease is related to prolonged, above average alcohol consumption.

    And considering the fact that there is growing evidence linking cannabis use to schizophrenia, well…

  75. 0
    LujanD says:

    The unfortunate fact of the matter is that I’m talking in the line of cannabis "abuse" and the differences. And again, the "marijuana causes memory loss" scare is a myth. If you have any solid facts however, I’m quite ready to reevaluate my opinion.

     

    So, if I were to knock my argument down to your level of "minimum usage" I could also claim the effects are exceptionally diminished; likely more so than alcohol (Hu hu hu… lol, okay, that was mean, I’m just playing with you here).

     

    And I’ve already commented on the whole “smoking” bit but if you guys want to push this angle, I could point out the whole “liver” damage bit. Again, there are safer ways of taking cannabis rather than smoking it.

     

  76. 0
    State says:

    Why do people compare casual cannabis use with alcohol abuse?

    Drinking a glass of wine, pint of beer does not do any damage on the body, and it shouldn’t even change your attitude (unless you get drunk very easily). People in France and Italy drink a glass of wine with every meal, but they stay incredibly healthy and live to an old age. Alcohol abuse on the other hand does a lot of damage. Drinking alcohol does not mean abusing it.

    Smoking cannabis, whether casually or heavily does damage to your body and your head. There are now more and more studies into it being the cause of mental illness, and as has been said previously causes great amounts of lung damage. If people want to smoke the stuff that’s up to them, they are allowed to harm their bodies in any way they want (as long as it doesn’t infringe on any else). Don’t try to justify your use of it by its "safeness", everyone does stuff that is bad for them, hell chocolate is bad for you but I eat it. But to argue that alcohol is not safe but cannabis is is just plain wrong.

    At the end of the day one glass of alcohol doesn’t do any harm whereas one spliff does (however small).

  77. 0
    LujanD says:


    Arell  said, “That’s sort of irrelevant, since we’re talking about which is "safer."”

     

    Considering the number of fights, domestic abuses, DEATHS, etc, jump-started due to alcohol, I feel this is far from irrelevant in regards to safety. And while cannabis might make people a little silly it is proven to be relaxing, relieving stress rather than bottling [pun unintended] it all up and allowing it to explode.

     

    Plus, I hardly think you’ll find too many people OD’ing on marijuana any time soon. Alcohol, on the other hand, has quite effectively bitch-slapped people into an early grave due to poisoning.

     

    Arell  said, “On the casual end of it, occasional use of alcohol does less memory damage than occasional use of weed.”

     

    Hardly true. There is no evidence that cannabis does anything more than impair memory for the brief moments under the influence, while there is solid evidence of alcohol’s unfortunate effects.

     

    Arell  said, “Fine, and when that becomes the normal method of delivery, I’ll accept that arguement.  As it is, smoking is by far, much more common.”

     

    Brushing aside an argument based on the fact that most of the population is unaware of the proper means of intake is a little unfair. The only reason many likely even smoke it is because that’s how it’s advertised to them, through your usual anti-drug claptrap. I’d be surprised if any knew of alternate methods of ingestion due to movies, shows, etc. Even you were going on about how “smoking” it is bad, right off the bat, effectively perpetuating the cycle of ignorance; unintentionally, I’m sure, but it makes for a solid example.

     

    P.S.

    I’m sorry to hear about your grandfather. It’s happening with my grandmother at this very moment.

  78. 0
    HurricaneJesus says:

    On the casual end of it, occasional use of alcohol does less memory damage than occasional use of weed

     

    I would love to see your source for this. I am calling complete bullshit on that one.

  79. 0
    Geoff says:

    Bwahahahahahahaha!  If you actually believe that statement you’re a fool.

     

    Tea and cake or death! Tea and cake or death! Little Red Cook-book! Little Red Cook-book!

  80. 0
    Arell says:

    "Alcohol can cause aggressive behaviour while cannabis has the complete opposite effect."

    That’s sort of irrelevant, since we’re talking about which is "safer."  Getting surly isn’t a health issue, unless you’re implying that it makes you do stupid stuff (which can be applied to cannibis just as easily).

    "alcohol can cause a lot more severe (plus permanent) memory problems (similar to Alzheimers)"

    Oh, no doubt.  My grandfather had "Alcoholic Demintia" in his last years.  But that’s long-term, heavy abuse of alcohol.  On the casual end of it, occasional use of alcohol does less memory damage than occasional use of weed.

     

    ‘Also, it’s normally suggested that you ingest it instead of smoke it"

    Fine, and when that becomes the normal method of delivery, I’ll accept that arguement.  As it is, smoking is by far, much more common.

  81. 0
    LujanD says:

    Alcohol can cause aggressive behaviour while cannabis has the complete opposite effect. And oddly enough alcohol can cause a lot more severe (plus permanent) memory problems (similar to Alzheimers).

    Also, it’s normally suggested that you ingest it instead of smoke it which negates any lung cancer arguments.

    There are other pros but alas… I forget.

  82. 0
    Arell says:

    No. Smoking weed is… well, bad for your body.  People act like it’s safer to inhale than cigarette smoke, but it really isn’t.  You get all sorts of high doses of chems, some higher than tobacco, like hydrogen cyanide.  And like all types of smoke inhalation (cigs, wood smoke, etc), it tends to stick to your lungs.  Additionally, even occasional use can start to effect your memory capabilities over the long term.  On the other hand, occasional use of alcohol can be easily worked out of your system by your liver.  Technically, drinking is "safer" than smoking.

    But that’s casual, occasional use, and we’e not talking about major, life-changing effects here.  And if you take it to th other extreme, heavy long-term abuse of either alcohol or weed, then both can really screw you up.

  83. 0
    rdeegvainl says:

    "It has been proven that smoking marijuana or drinking messes with your reasoning ability."

    Playing video games has been proven to mess with your brain as well, albeit temporarily, like the effects of smoking pot.

    "Just because you don’t plan on doing any driving after drinking or smoking does not mean that it will never happen."

    Hold the individual responsible for their actions, not an object.

    "This is not confined to idiots. I have met many intelligent people who made a poor choice while drunk and ended up costing someone their life."

    Im going to say, that if they did not control themselves, while on pot or alcohol, they are responsible, and passing the buck off to a substance, is irresponsible. I don’t care who the person is, or what their background is. It’s called taking precautions.

    So many other activities are dangerous, and can be dangerous to others, but it is not illegal, and with the proper preparation, that danger is mitigated, and people can responsibly partake in this. Why the over reaction to marijuana?

    You said earlier "It may be your body but when you damage your body, it has an affect on everyone. Your increased issurance costs reflect on other people’s plans."

    TWhat about making a ban on irresponsible eating habits, or lack of excercise, or lack of safety courses on seemingly mundane but dangerous daily activities. All of these things would greatly affect insurance.

    "Mind altering substances even taken in moderation can have a dramatic effect on your reasoning skills and reflexes."

    Just like endorphins that are released when partaking in pleasurable activities. Such as gaming, or a new fling. Should these activities also be regulated? if no, why not?

    "It is far easier and better for society as a whole to remove dangerous substances than try to educate people on their proper use."

    It is easier to remove things, than to educate people on their use. But that does not make it right. My counter example being, It is easier to also live off welfare, than getting a job.

    "

    I am far from the ideal of banning something just because there is a potential for misuse/abuse. hence I do not agree with banning of Modchips and games.But I do advocate banning of substances that have little to no redeeming qualities. Social applications of drugs are far from a redeeming quality."

    What are modchips and games but a social application? These are people trying to get there games out on popular formats. What a redeeming quality is, is completely subjective. What is the redeeming quality of video games?

    "You smoking marijuana in the confines of your own home may not harm me. But the moment you set foot behind the wheel of a car or handle a fire arm, you become a risk to myself and my family."

    Same can be said about video games. When you have endorphins released from this pleasurable activity, which has adverse, short term, affects on you.

    "So why should I take that risk just so you can get stoned?"

    So why should I take that risk just so you can gplay games?

  84. 0
    Afirejar says:

    Drinking too much can exagerate this a bit more sometimes but the level of consupmtion has to be well above and beyond what would be considered resonable and you still do know better and are perfectly capable of stopping yourself from doing something so stupid.  

    So your argument hinges on the fact, that noone ever does anything stupid while drunk? Are you being sarcastic?

  85. 0
    Mr. Peacock says:

    Your problem here is that you’re grossly overestimating the intoxicating effects.  If I went and smoked a whole bag to my head, i’m still very much aware of how high I am and that trying to drive a car at the moment is a very bad idea.  Being stoned does not suddenly deprive you of all common sense and to think that it does is just silly.  Drinking too much can exagerate this a bit more sometimes but the level of consupmtion has to be well above and beyond what would be considered resonable and you still do know better and are perfectly capable of stopping yourself from doing something so stupid.   

  86. 0
    E. Zachary Knight says:

    Quite frankly if this is all you got there really isn’t any reason to debate you on this topic anymore.  Might as well go argue with a brick wall.

    My thoughts exactly.

    Just because you don’t plan on doing any driving after drinking or smoking does not mean that it will never happen. It has been proven that smoking marijuana or drinking messes with your reasoning ability. The more you do it the harder it is to reason clearly. If you get stoned enough you increase the risk that you will make a bad decision that can harm yourself or other people. This is not confined to idiots. I have met many intelligent people who made a poor choice while drunk and ended up costing someone their life. These people are not idiots but under the influence they quickly become one.

    E. Zachary Knight
    Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
    http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma


    E. Zachary Knight
    Divine Knight Gaming
    Oklahoma Game Development
    Rusty Outlook
    Random Tower
    My Patreon

  87. 0
    Geoff says:

    Whose to say I would get behind the wheel or handle a gun when I’m high?  Maybe, and apparently this might be a stretch of logic for you, but maybe I have enough forethought and responsibility to not do either of those two things when I’m high or had a couple of drinks. 

    What about people that are stone-cold sober when they hit a person with a car or shoot a gun at people?  Stupidity isn’t something exclusive to substance abusers.

    Why should substances be banned just so you can have the illusion of safety for your family?  Because that’s all it is, an illusion.

    You’re making this assumption that everyone that smokes pot or drinks alcohol become irresponsible idiots with no control over what they do.  You’re selectively picking out the idiots in the demographic and using it as an excuse to ban it from those of us that drink or smoke in a responsible manner.  It’s pretty much the same thing as bad-mouthing all Christians because a few nut-jobs got "drunk" on the ideology and blew up an abortion clinic.

    Quite frankly if this is all you got there really isn’t any reason to debate you on this topic anymore.  Might as well go argue with a brick wall. 

     

    Tea and cake or death! Tea and cake or death! Little Red Cook-book! Little Red Cook-book!

  88. 0
    JustChris says:

    Oh well, that means that the current laws are perfectly logical!

    According to the publicly available media that pushes for/advertises or is against a product:

    Marijuana "inhibits" the user; therefore it is illegal
    Nicotine "improves" the user; therefore it is legal
    Alcohol "inhibits" the user; therefore it is legal
    Adderall "improves" the user; therefore it is illegal (recreationally speaking)

    WHAT

    Instead of leading you on with "proteckt them from WUT LOLZ," I’m going to go ahead and assume that you’re talking about crimes like assault or robbery that people commit when they’re high. Unfortunately, they’re really not relevant to the argument unless someone can establish that all or most marijuana users will commit crimes (aside from the obvious possession and consumption of marijuana). Such activity is already illegal, and legalizing a drug won’t make them any more or less legal. Or, you could try to prove that they pose some kind of threat independently of violent intent (similar to the "drunk driving" argument).

    GameSnooper

  89. 0
    Mr. Peacock says:

    Most people would agree that driving or handling a firearm while under the influence is a bad idea and endangers everyone involved.  As a result the only ones that would do so are the dumb shits that tend to be danger to themselves and others even without imbibing any substance.  Being stoned does not make you suddenly have no regard for the law or personal safety. 

    Of course it’s also true that anyone on the road or handling a gun can be a danger even if they are dead sober. 

  90. 0
    E. Zachary Knight says:

    You smoking marijuana in the confines of your own home may not harm me. But the moment you set foot behind the wheel of a car or handle a fire arm, you become a risk to myself and my family.

    So why should I take that risk just so you can get stoned?

    E. Zachary Knight
    Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
    http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma


    E. Zachary Knight
    Divine Knight Gaming
    Oklahoma Game Development
    Rusty Outlook
    Random Tower
    My Patreon

  91. 0
    Geoff says:

    How is me smoking risking your family’s safety?  Let’s start with that and maybe I can give you answer you’ll be satisfied with, though I doubt it with this topic.

     

    Tea and cake or death! Tea and cake or death! Little Red Cook-book! Little Red Cook-book!

  92. 0
    ZippyDSMlee says:

    EZK

    Way to gloss it over there Stalin, Some forms of murder are legal it dose not mean they are not double checked by the law and legal system to varifiy self defense or crimes of passion which do get no to little punishment, you can not paint anything in black and white and expect humans to perfectly conform to it. No you have to have rules that bend with flaws of humanity if not what you create is a fascist system of strife and social/science/media entropy.

     


    Gore,Violence,Sexauilty,Fear,Emotion these are but modes of transportation of story and thought, to take them from society you create a society of children and nannys, since adults are not required.


    http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com

  93. 0
    ZippyDSMlee says:

    Wow why not take away guns and all rights I mean people with the right to think and live their life in their own individual way is a affront to peace and order….

    If you take guns away from the people only criminals will have them the same line of thought works with drugs if you take them away only the criminals will have them, and not only that you just made a large proration of your normal non violent/criminals populace criminals, Good way to go there Stalin…. Good way to go…

     


    Gore,Violence,Sexauilty,Fear,Emotion these are but modes of transportation of story and thought, to take them from society you create a society of children and nannys, since adults are not required.


    http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com

  94. 0
    Mr. Peacock says:

    The problem is that you’re including using a substance to get high a misuse, it’s not.  If you’re screwing up your health or endagering others by doing something bat shit like hopping behind the wheel then that’s the misuse.  If I come home from work, take a couple of pulls of the old vaporizer, eat a pizza and watch Ernest Goes To Camp the danger to myself and others is that I be involved in a criminal transaction for that dime.  Without the prohibition the biggest danger to myself and others is that I just watched Ernest Goes To Camp.

  95. 0
    E. Zachary Knight says:

    I am far from the ideal of banning something just because there is a potential for misuse/abuse. hence I do not agree with banning of Modchips and games.

    But I do advocate banning of substances that have little to no redeeming qualities. Social applications of drugs are far from a redeeming quality. It is far outweighed by the fact that they not only damage the body and mind of the user, but also place others in danger due to the user’s inhibited reflexes.

    But again I must ask as I have not been given a valid answer, "Why should I risk my and my family’s safety and money just so you can get stoned?"

    E. Zachary Knight
    Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
    http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma


    E. Zachary Knight
    Divine Knight Gaming
    Oklahoma Game Development
    Rusty Outlook
    Random Tower
    My Patreon

  96. 0
    Geoff says:

    It took some of the wind out of the criminal organizations, for one thing.  Did it get rid of them?  Of course not.  Once an organized criminal element appears, it sticks around.  When the gangsters couldn’t make money from alcohol anymore they moved their priorites to gambling, prostitution, and drugs. The hardcore criminals didn’t turn into legitimate business men, legitimate business men who were shut down by the screed of a bunch of old ladies were finally able to go back to the public.

    Plenty of legal products get abused or end up killing people.  Take a look at any pharmacy.  Any one of those medications can kill or be abused.  Fine, they have legit purposes but say tommorow all illegal drugs, alcohol, and tobacco disappear from the Earth.  Poof, gone.  Guess what?  There will just be a black market that sells the legit drugs to people for recreational use.  (It actually already exists, but it will explode in this regard)

    You want to know why?  A simple cold, hard fact about reality: People like to get buzzed or even a little fucked up from time to time.  People have always liked to get fucked up.  People will always find a way to get fucked up.  No amount of wishing is going to change that and no amount of banning substances is going to change that either.  If it’s not drunk drivers killing people, it’ll be people fucked up on oxy-cot.  It’s a constant aspect of human civilization.

    Just to point it our real quick, some substances that are/were banned are part of religious rituals for some religions.  Banning them violates First Amendment rights. 

    So you can either legalize the substance, monitor it, and therefore get some control as well as some cash out of it.  Or you can ban everything that’s "bad", which you will be doing until the day you die because every time you ban one thing people will find another way to get high or drunk or alter their mind.

    You don’t like them?  Fine, don’t do it.  Hell you can even state your case as to why you think it’s bad.  But banning a substance produces zero results and thinking otherwise is niave.

     

    Tea and cake or death! Tea and cake or death! Little Red Cook-book! Little Red Cook-book!

  97. 0
    DarkSaber says:

    You passed the point of facetiousness really early in this discussion you know.

    ————————————————–

    I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

  98. 0
    E. Zachary Knight says:

    You know, murder is illegal right? Yet people still murder. So why don’t we just legalize it already. All it does is make people criminals when they don’t have to be. Same with armed robbery and grand theft auto. All making these things illegal do is clog up our legal system with frivolous charges and lengthy expensive court battles and cause over crowding in our prisons.

    E. Zachary Knight
    Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
    http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma


    E. Zachary Knight
    Divine Knight Gaming
    Oklahoma Game Development
    Rusty Outlook
    Random Tower
    My Patreon

  99. 0
    E. Zachary Knight says:

    And making alcohol legal magically improved society? That is a big joke right there. The only thing repealing prohibition did was turn those criminals into legitamite businessmen who get rich doing the exact same thing they did before only now it is in the open and taxed. Their products still kill. Their products are still abused. Their products still result in damge and pain for millions of people each year. But hey its all good, its taxed now.

    I am not so niave that I think society will magically be improved, but it can be with a little work. Along ith prohibition we would need to reorganize our criminal system and come up with more alternatives to prison time. More fines and community service would work just as well as jail time.

    It is not an easy solution but I think it is better than legalizing yet another mind altering drug.

    E. Zachary Knight
    Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
    http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma


    E. Zachary Knight
    Divine Knight Gaming
    Oklahoma Game Development
    Rusty Outlook
    Random Tower
    My Patreon

  100. 0
    KingTonberry says:

     "Sure the individual should be blaimed but when access to dangerous substances is so easy you could easily improve public safety by removing those substances. It is far easier and better for society as a whole to remove dangerous substances than try to educate people on their proper use."

    Sure, now how do we get rid of them? Prohibition sure did a good job of removing alcohol, nobody consumed it when it was illegal because that would make them criminals. 

    /sarcasm

  101. 0
    Geoff says:

    And I can counter with the point: "Why should responsible drinkers/smokers such as myself be punished or denied our habit because some people can’t control themselves?" 

    You’re living in a fantasy world if you think banning substances will improve anything.  They won’t go away, just go underground.  As prohibition has shown crime sky-rockets when they become the only source for a substance.  Organized crime profits from it.  People still get fucked up, only now it’s illegal so now the cops are even more stressed to handle the issue.  Prisons become overcrowded with nickle-and-dime dealers or by people that simply want to get high.  And you said many people don’t care about personal responsibility so why do you think these same people would follow the law if they banned alcohol?

    Dude I’ve read what you’ve posted on this site and I know you’re an intelligent individual.  This is why I’m having such a hard time understanding how you can believe this myth that banning something will somehow magically improve society especially when history has shown that prohibition did nothing to stop the ingestion of the substance.

     

    Tea and cake or death! Tea and cake or death! Little Red Cook-book! Little Red Cook-book!

  102. 0
    Davvolun says:

    Why should I risk my and my family’s safety and money just so you can use a cell phone?

    Why should I risk my and my family’s safety and money just so you (a responsible adult) can play a video game (when a video game could turn an otherwise normal child into a sex-crazed killer)?

    Who decides?

    The truth is, if alcohol is illegal, only criminals will drink (and drive…don’t forget that).

    I think all of the above is another case where legislation is probably not the best answer.

  103. 0
    E. Zachary Knight says:

    How much my insurance payments are is a direct result of how much money the insurance company pays out. So if my insurance company pays out a lot of money due to other people’s poor choices with dangerous and/or illegal drugs, I am being punished for it.

    That was my point. My insurance rates go up when there are high cost pay outs caused by other people.

    You also talk about road conditions etc, if you are under the influence of alcohol or other drugs, you become less likely ro properly respond to those road conditions and thus more likely to be a danger to others on the road. As for sleep, it has been shown in studies that lack of sleep can have similar effects to intoxination. I believe it is around 21 hours without sleep and you react on the same level as someone with .08 blood alcohol level.

    Sure the individual should be blaimed but when access to dangerous substances is so easy you could easily improve public safety by removing those substances. It is far easier and better for society as a whole to remove dangerous substances than try to educate people on their proper use. Most people won’t care about personal responsibility as we very well know.

    In the end, my main point comes down to this, "Why should I risk my and my family’s safety and money just so you can get stoned?"

    E. Zachary Knight
    Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
    http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma


    E. Zachary Knight
    Divine Knight Gaming
    Oklahoma Game Development
    Rusty Outlook
    Random Tower
    My Patreon

  104. 0
    Geoff says:

    Sorry but not impressed by any of your examples for the "hidden victims".

    I’m not sure what you’re saying about the insurance cost.  Are you talking about all plans being provided by an insurance company or affecting the cost of your own personal plan that you may have others on, like a spouse or child?  Either way that is the call of the insurance company and they raise the costs of their plans for far more than just smoking or drinking.  They could do it for obesity, for conditions totally unrelated to substance use such as genetic heart conditions.  Really this is an issure of how insurance companies do business (maximum profit at the expense of the patient) and personal responsibility (if I smoke two packs a day I best be prepared to face the consequence).  

    Sure some car accidents are caused by people fucked up.  Car accidents are also caused by poor road conditions, poor driving, lack of sleep by the driver, etc. etc.  Again this is personal responsibility.  It can lead to a horrible tragedy for an innocent bystander but the individual should be the one to blame. 

    As for organ transplants, there are waiting lists for those because they are in such demand and we’d have to get into the specifics of how a hospital chooses who gets the liver and who doesn’t.  Do they give it to the alcholic or the kid with liver cancer?  To make a sweeping generalization that all of these substance abusers are getting new organs is asinine.  BTW can you replace lungs?  I honestly don’t know. 

     

    Tea and cake or death! Tea and cake or death! Little Red Cook-book! Little Red Cook-book!

  105. 0
    Bennett Beeny says:

    "Now sure there are plenty of people who can show signs of "moderation" and do so quite naturally, but it does change your thinking even in moderation. That has been proven."

    EVERYTHING we do changes our thinking.  That’s called living.  If our thinking didn’t change we’d be zombies.  The real question is this: does the moderate use of illegal drugs usually make us a danger to society.  If not, then those drugs should be legal because it’s not the drug that’s causing the danger – it’s the person who chose to do the dangerous thing.  It’s an issue of personal responsibility, not whether or not a person alters his brain chemistry.  Heck, I alter my brain chemistry when I eat chocolate, but that shouldn’t make carrying an ounce of chocolate a criminal offense.

  106. 0
    E. Zachary Knight says:

    Sorry, but the guns marijuana comparison does not work. You are comparing apples to zebras here. Guns are not a mind altering substance. Guns do not change chemicals in people’s brains.

    Now sure there are plenty of people who can show signs of "moderation" and do so quite naturally, but it does change your thinking even in moderation. That has been proven.

    Personally, I don’t think prohibition on alcohol or any other drug is a morality issue. It may be your body but when you damage your body, it has an affect on everyone. Your increased issurance costs reflect on other people’s plans. When people get in wrecks and insurance companies have to pay multimillion dollar settlements to the families of victims, that reflects on the insurance costs of the unseen victims, those of us who do not use the substances. When you have to have those hundreds of thousands or millions of dollar organ transplants to replace your damaged liveror other organs, those cost get reflected on those of us who don’t use these substances.

    The point is, just because you can’t see the victim, that does not mean they don’t exist. Drugs of any kind are not a morality issue. They are a public safety issue. Mind altering substances even taken in moderation can have a dramatic effect on your reasoning skills and reflexes.

    While I agree we need stricter punishments for abusers but you would think more could be done.

    E. Zachary Knight
    Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
    http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma


    E. Zachary Knight
    Divine Knight Gaming
    Oklahoma Game Development
    Rusty Outlook
    Random Tower
    My Patreon

  107. 0
    Geoff says:

    And while we’re at it, let’s take away everyone’s guns.  You know, for "public safety".

    This is something I’m on the total opposite side of, EZK.  Prohibition doesn’t solve any of the problems and there are plenty of people who drink alcohol or smoke pot that don’t abuse it despite what others may want you to believe.  On average on a work day I’ll have one beer and smoke one bowl (after work, obviously).  If it’s the weekend I may have a couple of more drinks and I may smoke a second bowl (I stay up later on weekends). 

    Does everyone show such moderation?  Of course not.  But rather than take them away from those of us that can punish those that do abuse it who do stupid things. 

    To put it frankly, you don’t have to like it but you don’t have a right to regulate morality.  What I want to put in my body is none of your concern.  If, theoretically, I were to get drunk and do something stupid like beat a guy up I should be punished…for beating the guy up. 

    I will at least give you props for being consistent with your views on drugs.  It’s better than dealing with people who try to make a lame excuse for while alcohol is "magically delicious" while pot is the tool of the devil, even if it’s the total opposite stance that I take.

     

    Tea and cake or death! Tea and cake or death! Little Red Cook-book! Little Red Cook-book!

  108. 0
    lumi says:

    Hyperbole for the lose, dude.

    Look at it this way.  If one of your raid members said "I broke my hand today, so I may be slow to type through the cast", you wouldn’t consider ditching him that night for someone else who’d perform up to par?  To fall back on a silly phrase, "raids are serious business"…for real.  It’s 40 people putting in what amounts to their entire evening to try and accomplish something.  Raiders put a ridiculous amount of time and effort just into the prep for a raid.  Why wouldn’t they swap the stoned or drunk guy out if it means a much lower risk of everyone having wasted their time?

    Everyone here is so big on the "it’s fine as long as I’m not affecting anyone else" shtick, but quite frankly, I find playing while impaired and subsequently screwing up 39 other player’s evenings to be "affecting anyone else."

  109. 0
    Geoff says:

    "If we didn’t take games serious to some degree why would we be on this site?"

    -I take legal issues about gaming very seriously which is why I come to this site in the first place.

    "Who doesn’t take their favored activity with at least a smidgen of seriousness; of trying to get the most out of it for them, regardless of what "most" might mean?"

    -Well that’s a matter of perspective I guess.  Overall I figure people play video games for fun, with the exception of hardcore pro players…maybe. 

    Now apparently the original poster doesn’t find video games fun if he and I were playing and I was stoned.  Not that he would notice.  I don’t play any worse when I’m high (basing this off of my performance in TF2…average about the same regardless of whether or not I’m sober) and I don’t advertise it over online like others ("Dude, I’m so stoooonnneed…" yeah I’m not that guy).  However, for the sake of the argument, if we were on the same team and he found out I’m high he’d kick me because there’s a possibility my skills might be affected, that I’d be a liability for the team, and hence would ruin his fun.

    On the other hand I probably couldn’t stand playing with someone like the poster.  People who treat every game like it’s some clan tournament serve only to be an annoyance to me.  I’m playing TF2 because it’s fun.  Do I want to win?  Of course but it’s not the single goal that keeps me coming back nor do I have any less fun if I lose.  (Though spawn-camping kind of pisses me off.)

     

    Tea and cake or death! Tea and cake or death! Little Red Cook-book! Little Red Cook-book!

  110. 0
    Duffy says:

    If we didn’t take games serious to some degree why would we be on this site?

    Who doesn’t take their favored activity with at least a smidgen of seriousness; of trying to get the most out of it for them, regardless of what "most" might mean? 

    Why must you disrespect them because they choose to take their favored hobby serious? Do you walk around asking people "why so serious" about everything they do?

    (From what I gather, in this case they choose to not possibly waste some of their time because of another’s actions.)

    How do you expect anyone to take you seriously when you respond to people in such a way?

    And I’m not just pointing you out, this goes for all the above posts with the same basic comments.

  111. 0
    Geoff says:

    Gaming is serious business.

    Haven’t seen you around here in awhile Saber. :)

     

    Tea and cake or death! Tea and cake or death! Little Red Cook-book! Little Red Cook-book!

  112. 0
    DarkSaber says:

    Yep, DEFINITLEY take your gaming too seriously.

    ————————————————–

    I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

  113. 0
    Arell says:

    Unfair judgement based on lack of facts.  We were a lot of fun most of the time.  Bu getting a raid together was difficult enough as it is (this is back in the days when all raids were 40 man).  We didn’t want to waste it on the chance that an impared player might make a bad pull, or get left behind while he drunkenly typed out a reply.

    If you’re going to play multiplayer, then some occasional goofiness is fne.  But when it comes down to business, I don’t want to deal with someone that drunk or high, or has a bladder infection that makes them pee every 10 minutes, or is just too tired from lack of sleep to pay attenion.  That aplies to any multiplayer.  Ok, fine, during a casual match of Team Fortress II, I could put up with a high player fooling around.  But if we’re in a tournament, I dont want to get shot in the back because he suddenly thinks friendly fire is the funniest thing in the world.

  114. 0
    Nekowolf says:

    "Hey guys! I just fucked my girlfriend!"

    Oooo, sex? Yeah, we don’t want to play with you. You are too unclean.

    Joke aside, christ sakes. Talk about taking it too seriously.

  115. 0
    JustChris says:

    Most researches of marijuana usage are done by institutions that have an agenda, either for pushing the legalization or pot or against it. What we need is a report done by a 3rd party that has no strong bias. This is why the debate continues on.

    Also, pot has been legal before the 20th century. All that caused it to be made illegal is because certain unwanted racial groups were smoking it, and people wanted them out. Also, tobacco companies crying over Big Pot taking away their territory and the government helping them financially. But as the nation became more politically correct, outdated racial segregation reasoning has been replaced by a more "scientific" reasoning based on protecting your health. Deep down, though, it’s still for helping tobacco stay in business.

    And if you are banning something for bureaucratic reasons, you shouldn’t ban it at all.

    GameSnooper

  116. 0
    DarkSaber says:

    "So what I’m saying is, get drunk/high on your own time. Not while gamming.. "

    If they are gaming, then they are already on their own time. Bigot.

    ————————————————–

    I LIKE the fence. I get 2 groups to laugh at then.

  117. 0
    BANE XXIII says:

    I think It really depends on what game you’re playing and if you are playing with a friend. Single player games I can see maybe getting drunk/high. One Example being N20, I loved playing that game high with my best freind. But when I took acid… not so much.

    Multiplayer games, I would understand that if you want to do that beforehand… don’t expect to be an asset to the team. I dropped people from my teams if they were high/drunk. I don’t need to pull their wieght in matches.

    So what I’m saying is, get drunk/high on your own time. Not while gamming.. it’s bad for everyone. Just like 12 year olds playing Halo whilst breathing heavy into their mic.

     

    -There is no greater sin, than that of the man who does not think for himself.

  118. 0
    ZippyDSMlee says:

    OMG the ignorance on pot is truly bliss if you drink all the time you are going to have about the same amount of memory loss as with pot only your liver and other organs is not going to be fcking raped, your lungs might if you smoke all the time but if you eat it there is no real down side unless with extream usage that can lead to paranoid delusions which is still better than the anger and control issues associated with getting minorly drunk

    Reasonable use of both provide safe remedies for what ails you, pot is a good stress reliever,mind opener and appetizer booster, alcohol is a depressant that may work well as a stress reliever for some and it has anti oxidant(as dose canbi tea) and heart helping properties if not abused.

    The trouble here is that moralist glaze over logic and reason because the truth is they don;t want people to have power over their own lives and need to restrict the populace under guises of safety or children in order to feel special, rich man hobbies suck eh?

     


    Gore,Violence,Sexauilty,Fear,Emotion these are but modes of transportation of story and thought, to take them from society you create a society of children and nannys, since adults are not required.


    http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com

  119. 0
    ZippyDSMlee says:

    Sure but it makes bad to mediocre games games (80% of all new titles) much more enjoyable!!

    Hate to break it to you but pot is alot better than booze and cigs.

    And another thing stoner’s are in for the lulz…….

    And another thing while I am at it, the war on drugs is nothing more than wars off attrition abandoning reason, hope and logic for insipid and illusionary morals…


    Gore,Violence,Sexauilty,Fear,Emotion these are but modes of transportation of story and thought, to take them from society you create a society of children and nannys, since adults are not required.


    http://zippydsmlee.wordpress.com

  120. 0
    d20sapphire says:

    I’m in the same camp, in the sense that legalizing the drug will mean having to monitor it.  Any drug has to fit certain specifications.  Also, legalizing the drug will make the gangs/"businesses" distributing it legit and minimize the crime associated with it, which is another plus.

    http://www.20sidedwoman.blogspot.com

  121. 0
    SilverMelee says:

    I have overall mixed views on Mary Jane. Yeah, I’m willing to agree it isn’t particularly harmful as long as you don’t abuse it (especially when compared to other illegal drugs that get made in "labs"), but I still think that even if it was legalized, it would need to be moderated like tobacco and alcohol.

    Nevertheless, as Freyar said, "just keep that crap out of my home and my store."

    — I do more than just play games. I draw, too: http://www.silvermelee.deviantart.com

  122. 0
    Arell says:

    One time in WoW, a member admitted in guildchat that he had been drinking just prior o a raid.  And he was acting more goofy than usual.  We gave his slot to another guild member, since we didn’t want to deal with him.  I mean, yeah, he was a hoot to listen to drunk.  But we didn’t want to take the chance that he might slow us up or anything during the raid.

    Same arguement applies to lighting up a joint.

  123. 0
    E. Zachary Knight says:

    We are having a hard enough time keeping the streets safe from people abusing one mind altering drug, alcohol. Why should we legalize yet another mind altering drug with a high abuse tendancy of those taking it.

    We have binge parties right now. Do you think that would not happen with marijuana? Do you think people will smoke it in "moderation" just because they are supposed to? You know, opium used to be legal in several countries around the world. Now it is not because most of those countries realized how dangerous it is.

    Personally, I would love to see prohibition return, and it is a shame it will never happen. Screw public and private safety. Let’s make billions from the tax revenue.

    E. Zachary Knight
    Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
    http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma


    E. Zachary Knight
    Divine Knight Gaming
    Oklahoma Game Development
    Rusty Outlook
    Random Tower
    My Patreon

  124. 0
    gonzlamm says:

     

    "There are 100,000 total marijuana
    smokers in the US, and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos, and entertainers.
    Their Satanic music, jazz, and swing, result from marijuana.
    This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes,
    entertainers, and any others."

    quote from Harry Anslinger before a senate hearing on marijuana in the 1930’s. He was the Commissioner of US bureau of Narcotics. Clearly racism forged these pointless laws. Over 700,000 people were put in jail last year for being in possession of a plant. Non-violent offenders being jailed with rapist and killers. Its appaling. Our government should regulate it the same way we regulate alcohol. You have no idea how many scumbags are makings millions off this un taxed endevour. You cant even begin to fathom, trust me. They want illegal marijuana. They are the richest people in america for it. So why the fuck do we keeps these insane draconian laws? In any war, there is a loser and a winner. So ask you’re self this. Whos winning? It fucking certainly isnt us.

     

     

  125. 0
    King of Fiji says:

    For ships and giggles I watched the videos that go with the website and by all means having generic video game characters telling me how they got the crap beaten out of them because the person controlling them was high insulted my intelligence.

    And when you insult the intelligence of a idiot like me thats pretty bad.  :(

  126. 0
    DeusPayne says:

    Playing Street Fighter IV high, not so great. Playing an MMO high, a bunch of fun. Playing a music game high (from Rock Band to Audiosurf), heaven.

  127. 0
    Andrew Eisen says:

    I was on morphine once and I absolutely hated it.  It killed my motor skills and reaction time.  I could barely leave my room without bumping into a wall let alone play a video game with any modicum of skill.

     

    Andrew Eisen

Leave a Reply