Marijuana has been legally available to adults in The Netherlands since 1976 and there have been no negative consequences.Yeah more fucked up people making shitty life decisions. Just what we need.
Dutch to ban foreigners from pot shops - CNN
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Marijuana has been legally available to adults in The Netherlands since 1976 and there have been no negative consequences.Yeah more fucked up people making shitty life decisions. Just what we need.
Do you think marijuana is anything like heroin or similar narcotics? If so you should educate yourself because you have a very mistaken impression.
502 will get punked in Nov
been around - born Sept 1953
As I said, there have been no negative consequences from the use of marijuana by citizens of The Netherlands. The only problem has been low-level smuggling activity across its borders by foreign visitors, which accounts for this ban. But Dutch citizens continue to have access to marijuana -- because it is harmless!Marijuana has been legally available to adults in The Netherlands since 1976 and there have been no negative consequences.Yeah more fucked up people making shitty life decisions. Just what we need.
Dutch to ban foreigners from pot shops - CNN
As the election closes, the media will be filled with fear-mongering commercials terrifying voters to vote against legalizing weed, cause then they'll all die in car wrecks.
If he state still manages to legalize weed, yes, the feds won't stand for it. They barely tolerate medical pot.
So does chocolate! But if you believe marijuana affects those receptors to anywhere near the same degree as does one bottle of beer, you've allowed yourself to be badly misinformed.Do you think marijuana is anything like heroin or similar narcotics? If so you should educate yourself because you have a very mistaken impression.
Yes it effects the same Mu receptors as Opiates.
Neuropsychopharmacology - Opioid Antagonism of Cannabinoid Effects: Differences between Marijuana Smokers and Nonmarijuana Smokers
Rick Steves is a healthy, intelligent, sociable, highly successful man. Give some thought to why you choose to call him a "Lib drug-head." I don't wish to insult or offend you but it does seem rather malicious and utterly pointless, which boils down to just plain stupid.Lib drug -heads like Rick Steves
So does chocolate! But if you believe marijuana affects those receptors to anywhere near the same degree as does one bottle of beer, you've allowed yourself to be badly misinformed.Do you think marijuana is anything like heroin or similar narcotics? If so you should educate yourself because you have a very mistaken impression.
Yes it effects the same Mu receptors as Opiates.
Neuropsychopharmacology - Opioid Antagonism of Cannabinoid Effects: Differences between Marijuana Smokers and Nonmarijuana Smokers
You are in desperate need of education on this topic. The first thing you need to learn is all this Reefer Madness rhetoric and pseudo-science is propaganda funded by several major industries (pharmaceutical, liquor, petrochemical, drug-testing, etc.)
If you'd like to learn the truth I highly recommend this book; Marijuana, The Forbidden Medicine, by Dr. Lester Grinspoon, MD, Ph.D., Professor of Psychiatric Medicine, Harvard Medical School. (Available from Amazon.)
Join with the enlightened. You'll feel better about yourself.
Quite right. The reason behind marijuana prohibition is deeply insidious. The following excerpt is a brief but educational intro to the topic:Sad thing is, the whole reason pot was outlawed had nothing to do with the drug anyway. It had to do with hemp and ropes.. they outlawed it to get rid of hemp ropes and stop competition for a stupid corporation....
Okay. Now I understand the reason behind your persistence.You should sit in the rooms of NA and hear what kicked off a life of drug use for most with their first try of an highjacked limbic system.
[...]
But when we consider how many millions of Americans enjoy the occasional effect of a few beers or some marijuana and never experience a compulsive craving, the percentage of those who become addicted to alcohol or pot is extremely small. So small that to consider banning either substance because of the tiny percentage of addictions is analogous to banning ice cream and candy because some people get fat from eating it.
But when we consider how many millions of Americans enjoy the occasional effect of a few beers or some marijuana and never experience a compulsive craving, the percentage of those who become addicted to alcohol or pot is extremely small. So small that to consider banning either substance because of the tiny percentage of addictions is analogous to banning ice cream and candy because some people get fat from eating it.
There are 17.6 million Americans adults who abuse alcohol or are alcohol dependent*.
* 2001-2002 National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions conducted by the U.S. National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. Generally more men than women are alcoholic, and alcohol problems are most prevalent among young adults aged 18-29
But government isn't the answer. I don't want police telling me what I can eat, drink, or smoke - or, in general, how to live.
But government isn't the answer. I don't want police telling me what I can eat, drink, or smoke - or, in general, how to live.
I am certainly a less government guy but also recognize to have any sort of functioning society certain substances such as, but not limited to: Bath Salts, Phencyclidine, Meth Amphetamine, etc., should be restricted in their availability.
We are not talking about protecting an enumerated Constitutional right to get completely fucked up out of your own cognizance.
If you want to claim to be a 'less government' guy, you need to understand the Constitution a bit better. It doesn't 'enumerate' our rights - they are limitless. It enumerates the powers of government. And those don't include the power to tell us how 'fucked up' we can get.,
If you want to claim to be a 'less government' guy, you need to understand the Constitution a bit better. It doesn't 'enumerate' our rights - they are limitless. It enumerates the powers of government. And those don't include the power to tell us how 'fucked up' we can get.,
It enumerates the protections from the United States.
Is there a particular legal precedent you have in mind ?