Tobacco versus marijuana

[TNHarley]

What substances are better than pot?

Heroin, cocaine, LSD ..... of course it's a matter of personal preference and just how much of a high one is capable of handling.

I didnt mean like that! Lol good to see you stranger

 

[Moonglow]

I always did like people who have never used marijuana elling me a forty year user what it does to a person and society...What a joke...Sex has more social impact that pot ever will...

 

[TNHarley]

Really bad what the FDA, ruin right of what good is going on..I promise you

We need to fight the FDA and big pharma folks..they are finding it fights pain and cancer without their crooked greedy hands in there...

Don't listen to the lies , don't let them ruin a good thing.

They are probably already trying to secretly patent strains. I know monsanto is
They know it will be a thriving business and they know pot is a better, healthier choice than their opioid bullshit.

 

[Moonglow]

What substances are better than pot?

Heroin, cocaine, LSD ..... of course it's a matter of personal preference and just how much of a high one is capable of handling.

You know where I can get some LSD?

 

[Moonglow]

As far as tobacco I know people that love to use it and wouldn't stop if they knew it was killing them....Yet I never wanted to end tobacco production..Pot laws are dumb we ot users know and we also know that govt. waste lives and money trying to enforce a progressives law of morality..Stupid shit..

 

[martybegan]

I am really confused how the same liberals who want marijuana to become legalized also want tobacco to be regulated, taxed, and sued into oblivion. What's up with that?

Weed has medicinal properties. All tobacco does is kill.

Nicotine has medicinal qualities as well. It is a stimulant. The issue is when combusted you get more downsides when used as opposed to caffeine, but vaping eliminates that.

"The CDC says 50 to 60 milligrams of nicotine is a deadly dose for an adult who weighs about 150 pounds. But some research suggests a lethal amount may be a lot higher."
Nicotine Poisoning: Can You Overdose?

I am really confused how the same liberals who want marijuana to become legalized also want tobacco to be regulated, taxed, and sued into oblivion. What's up with that?

Weed has medicinal properties. All tobacco does is kill.

Nicotine has medicinal qualities as well. It is a stimulant. The issue is when combusted you get more downsides when used as opposed to caffeine, but vaping eliminates that.

"The CDC says 50 to 60 milligrams of nicotine is a deadly dose for an adult who weighs about 150 pounds. But some research suggests a lethal amount may be a lot higher."
Nicotine Poisoning: Can You Overdose?

That is the older LD-50 based on a lethal dose of 0.5-1.0 mg/kg, which they are not sure about. Some studies show a higher LD-50 of 6.5-13 mg/kg orally.

We should see more studies on this now that vaping is prevalent and liquid nicotine suspensions are more common.

As a reference the LD-50 of caffinne is 150-200 mg/kg, so nicotine is more dangerous, but only by 1 order of magnitude.

 

[martybegan]

I am really confused how the same liberals who want marijuana to become legalized also want tobacco to be regulated, taxed, and sued into oblivion. What's up with that?

Weed has medicinal properties. All tobacco does is kill.

Nicotine has medicinal qualities as well. It is a stimulant. The issue is when combusted you get more downsides when used as opposed to caffeine, but vaping eliminates that.

The addiction and negative health influences of nicotine outweigh any possible medical benefit.

No, the negative aspects of the combustion products is the issue, not nicotine. and a better delivery system was invented, vaping.

Which ironically came from the pot industry.

If you do it right, it is safer. Buy the non flavored liquids. Dont smoke at a high heat as that release some crazy chemical.. cant remember what its called..

Doing it right is a usual component of doing things safely.

 

[Stormy Daniels]

Well, sorry. I assumed you were implying heroine. Not a flower with edible seeds that is grown in gardens across the world.

Heroin is basically just a concentrated form of morphine, morphine being a natural component of opium. Licking "poppy tears" can get you high. People have been using opium tea for intoxication (and dying from withdrawal) going back to the middle ages.

heroin is full of harmful chemicals. Pot is all natural.
Maybe we should apply your logic to ALL things and ban them when you dont think its necessary. Like fast cars. Too many shoes. Too much wasted food. Cokes. Pastries. Porn.
What about those things? They all have bad side effects on society. Do you have outrage over those too?
Why cant people just let people make their own bad decisions? I just sit here and wonder, "who do you think you are?"

You don't seem to be understanding my position. The fact is, drugs are illegal. Whether you think that was far when it happened is irrelevant. Unless you can make an argument that banning drugs was such an egregious offense against society that it warrants making the issue a huge priority, then it's a first world problem at best. But I don't see any such argument that can hold water. If we were talking about something that infringes on religious freedom or something like that, then I can see putting the issue at the top of the priority list. And when people support marijuana legalization while also supporting anti-tobacco policies, the contradiction makes it impossible to make an argument about freedom.

So absent any other reason to put the issue on the top of the priority list, the big push for legalization seems to imply something else. Mostly from what I can see, it's a low class trashy element of society that mistakenly believes baking yourself into oblivion is high class. I get sick of seeing all this trash that is coming out of the woodwork saying "Oh yeah man! Gettin fuckin blaaaaazed! Yeah! Uh, yeah, um, what? That--uh. Fuckin blazed!" and wanting the rest of us to think that there is some kind of secret wisdom that the rest of us have missed. There is this whole pot culture that is emerging that is obsessed with getting high in 20 different ways. It's dressed up to imitate sophistication by making wines and teas labeled with tasting notes to pair it with your favorite pot brownies or even a hearty beef dish with fava beans and a savory balsamic reduction. But no matter how it's dressed up it still boils down to "Fuckin blaaazed maaan...uh hey do you know my name? Hehe, I forgot." When people make this nonsense a priority it just proves that they're low class trash.

 

[NightFox]

And when people support marijuana legalization while also supporting anti-tobacco policies, the contradiction makes it impossible to make an argument about freedom.
.

It depends on which "anti-tobacco policies" you're referring too, if you're referring to policies which are geared towards protecting individuals from second hand tobacco smoke in the commons then there is no contradiction.

Individual liberty doesn't grant the individual the freedom to cause harm to others and the argument that second hand smoke (tobacco or marijuana) exposure in the commons causes harm to others is credible.

 

[TNHarley]

Well, sorry. I assumed you were implying heroine. Not a flower with edible seeds that is grown in gardens across the world.

Heroin is basically just a concentrated form of morphine, morphine being a natural component of opium. Licking "poppy tears" can get you high. People have been using opium tea for intoxication (and dying from withdrawal) going back to the middle ages.

heroin is full of harmful chemicals. Pot is all natural.
Maybe we should apply your logic to ALL things and ban them when you dont think its necessary. Like fast cars. Too many shoes. Too much wasted food. Cokes. Pastries. Porn.
What about those things? They all have bad side effects on society. Do you have outrage over those too?
Why cant people just let people make their own bad decisions? I just sit here and wonder, "who do you think you are?"

You don't seem to be understanding my position. The fact is, drugs are illegal. Whether you think that was far when it happened is irrelevant. Unless you can make an argument that banning drugs was such an egregious offense against society that it warrants making the issue a huge priority, then it's a first world problem at best. But I don't see any such argument that can hold water. If we were talking about something that infringes on religious freedom or something like that, then I can see putting the issue at the top of the priority list. And when people support marijuana legalization while also supporting anti-tobacco policies, the contradiction makes it impossible to make an argument about freedom.

So absent any other reason to put the issue on the top of the priority list, the big push for legalization seems to imply something else. Mostly from what I can see, it's a low class trashy element of society that mistakenly believes baking yourself into oblivion is high class. I get sick of seeing all this trash that is coming out of the woodwork saying "Oh yeah man! Gettin fuckin blaaaaazed! Yeah! Uh, yeah, um, what? That--uh. Fuckin blazed!" and wanting the rest of us to think that there is some kind of secret wisdom that the rest of us have missed. There is this whole pot culture that is emerging that is obsessed with getting high in 20 different ways. It's dressed up to imitate sophistication by making wines and teas labeled with tasting notes to pair it with your favorite pot brownies or even a hearty beef dish with fava beans and a savory balsamic reduction. But no matter how it's dressed up it still boils down to "Fuckin blaaazed maaan...uh hey do you know my name? Hehe, I forgot." When people make this nonsense a priority it just proves that they're low class trash.

Well i definitely agree with the lack of consistency.
I dont really think it is a "top priority" for most. I cant help but feel like most of this is hyperbole.

 

[Papageorgio]

Corporations make big money from tobacco ergo libbies hate tobacco
When corporations make big money from weed the libbies will hate weed

The appeal of weed is that it has been illegal for so long that even now when people smoke it legally they think they are being rebels and sticking it t the man

A couple of flaws in your analysis

Corporations make big money from tobacco ergo libbies hate tobacco
When corporations make big money from weed the libbies will hate weed

The appeal of weed is that it has been illegal for so long that even now when people smoke it legally they think they are being rebels and sticking it t the man

Then in the next breathe you will condemn a libbie that runs FaceBook and is worth billions and claim he is a liberal that hates free speech...How rich of you to inform us of your one horse trick...

There isn’t free speech on Facebook.

It was far from an analysis and more of an opinion

But I'm not that wrong either

The part that is wrong is that you believe liberals "think", they don't.

 

[Moonglow]

Well, sorry. I assumed you were implying heroine. Not a flower with edible seeds that is grown in gardens across the world.

Heroin is basically just a concentrated form of morphine, morphine being a natural component of opium. Licking "poppy tears" can get you high. People have been using opium tea for intoxication (and dying from withdrawal) going back to the middle ages.

heroin is full of harmful chemicals. Pot is all natural.
Maybe we should apply your logic to ALL things and ban them when you dont think its necessary. Like fast cars. Too many shoes. Too much wasted food. Cokes. Pastries. Porn.
What about those things? They all have bad side effects on society. Do you have outrage over those too?
Why cant people just let people make their own bad decisions? I just sit here and wonder, "who do you think you are?"

You don't seem to be understanding my position. The fact is, drugs are illegal. Whether you think that was far when it happened is irrelevant. Unless you can make an argument that banning drugs was such an egregious offense against society that it warrants making the issue a huge priority, then it's a first world problem at best. But I don't see any such argument that can hold water. If we were talking about something that infringes on religious freedom or something like that, then I can see putting the issue at the top of the priority list. And when people support marijuana legalization while also supporting anti-tobacco policies, the contradiction makes it impossible to make an argument about freedom.

So absent any other reason to put the issue on the top of the priority list, the big push for legalization seems to imply something else. Mostly from what I can see, it's a low class trashy element of society that mistakenly believes baking yourself into oblivion is high class. I get sick of seeing all this trash that is coming out of the woodwork saying "Oh yeah man! Gettin fuckin blaaaaazed! Yeah! Uh, yeah, um, what? That--uh. Fuckin blazed!" and wanting the rest of us to think that there is some kind of secret wisdom that the rest of us have missed. There is this whole pot culture that is emerging that is obsessed with getting high in 20 different ways. It's dressed up to imitate sophistication by making wines and teas labeled with tasting notes to pair it with your favorite pot brownies or even a hearty beef dish with fava beans and a savory balsamic reduction. But no matter how it's dressed up it still boils down to "Fuckin blaaazed maaan...uh hey do you know my name? Hehe, I forgot." When people make this nonsense a priority it just proves that they're low class trash.

Native American tribes use peyote for ceremonies and it is not illegal..and the rest of yer post is anti-capitalist....Just because you don't like something doesn't mean I have to dislike it also..

 

[Moonglow]

Corporations make big money from tobacco ergo libbies hate tobacco
When corporations make big money from weed the libbies will hate weed

The appeal of weed is that it has been illegal for so long that even now when people smoke it legally they think they are being rebels and sticking it t the man

A couple of flaws in your analysis

Corporations make big money from tobacco ergo libbies hate tobacco
When corporations make big money from weed the libbies will hate weed

The appeal of weed is that it has been illegal for so long that even now when people smoke it legally they think they are being rebels and sticking it t the man

Then in the next breathe you will condemn a libbie that runs FaceBook and is worth billions and claim he is a liberal that hates free speech...How rich of you to inform us of your one horse trick...

There isn’t free speech on Facebook.

No shit..

 

[NightFox]

Well i definitely agree with the lack of consistency.

There's no lack of consistency, since the pro-marijuana constituency isn't arguing to impose a prohibition on tobacco, just to remove the one on marijuana, nor are they arguing that pot shouldn't be regulated or taxed.

The OP's argument is without merit.

 

[Stormy Daniels]

What makes pot "trashy" anyways?
What substances are better than pot? What makes pot so bad?

Not saying that pot is trashy. I'm saying that this emerging pot culture that is trying to reinvent pot as some form of high society is trashy. Let's use wine as a comparison. Wine, at least higher end wine, often has a certain status that tends to imply sophistication and refined taste. But there are plenty of reason for that. Wine is complex, it can have an incredible combination of different flavors, colors, and fragrances. There is tons of nuance that goes into wine, and it all revolves around the seemingly infinite ways in which wine can please the senses and enhance meals. Notice that getting drunk has nothing to do with wine being associated with sophistication.

None of these things are true of pot. By all accounts, pot edibles taste like shit. There is nothing sophisticated about making a tea or wine out of pot. It's just an imitation. The whole purpose of this nonsense is to get high as **** in different ways that imitate something you'd find in high society. Pot culture is pretending to be wine snobs that drink $1000 wines, when they're really winos drinking Mad Dog 20/20. Nobody who has any sophistication will think that this garbage tastes good.

The thing about imitating high society is that it proves how trashy you are. You can't imitate sophistication. Either you are sophisticated to a certain level, or you aren't. Maybe that level can change over time, but faking it is the key sign that someone is at the lowest rung.

I guess what I'm saying is that pot culture is kind of like being a filthy rich billionaire who decorates his penthouse with the ugliest, gaudy bullshit he can find, desperately trying to convince other people he has good taste, while pathetically failing and proving to everyone he's just a piece of trash.

 

[TNHarley]

Well i definitely agree with the lack of consistency.

There's no lack of consistency, since the pro-marijuana constituency isn't arguing to impose a prohibition on tobacco, just to remove the one on marijuana, nor are they arguing that pot shouldn't be regulated or taxed.

The OP's argument is without merit.

Some are. Someone did in this thread.
Not that idiot is an example of mainstream america....
Well, they are all idiots.. so maybe my argument doesnt have merit

 

[TNHarley]

What makes pot "trashy" anyways?
What substances are better than pot? What makes pot so bad?

Not saying that pot is trashy. I'm saying that this emerging pot culture that is trying to reinvent pot as some form of high society is trashy. Let's use wine as a comparison. Wine, at least higher end wine, often has a certain status that tends to imply sophistication and refined taste. But there are plenty of reason for that. Wine is complex, it can have an incredible combination of different flavors, colors, and fragrances. There is tons of nuance that goes into wine, and it all revolves around the seemingly infinite ways in which wine can please the senses and enhance meals. Notice that getting drunk has nothing to do with wine being associated with sophistication.

None of these things are true of pot. By all accounts, pot edibles taste like shit. There is nothing sophisticated about making a tea or wine out of pot. It's just an imitation. The whole purpose of this nonsense is to get high as **** in different ways that imitate something you'd find in high society. Pot culture is pretending to be wine snobs that drink $1000 wines, when they're really winos drinking Mad Dog 20/20. Nobody who has any sophistication will think that this garbage tastes good.

The thing about imitating high society is that it proves how trashy you are. You can't imitate sophistication. Either you are sophisticated to a certain level, or you aren't. Maybe that level can change over time, but faking it is the key sign that someone is at the lowest rung.

I guess what I'm saying is that pot culture is kind of like being a filthy rich billionaire who decorates his penthouse with the ugliest, gaudy bullshit he can find, desperately trying to convince other people he has good taste, while pathetically failing and proving to everyone he's just a piece of trash.

The entire first paragraph about wine can be said about pot.

 

[Stormy Daniels]

Well i definitely agree with the lack of consistency.

There's no lack of consistency, since the pro-marijuana constituency isn't arguing to impose a prohibition on tobacco, just to remove the one on marijuana, nor are they arguing that pot shouldn't be regulated or taxed.

The OP's argument is without merit.

Really? So you mean to tell me that the majority of liberals don't simultaneously support pro-pot and anti-tobacco policies? Are you saying that they're separate wings of liberal ideology? So Obama didn't push anti-tobacco policies while also giving a pass as a couple states began embracing pot?

 

[Stormy Daniels]

Native American tribes use peyote for ceremonies and it is not illegal.

Which proves my point. There is no serious infringement on public freedom posed by drug laws. Therefore, there is no good reason for anyone to be so passionate about trying to decriminalize drugs. Unless you're in love with drugs, in which case you're an addict.

 

[NightFox]

Well i definitely agree with the lack of consistency.

There's no lack of consistency, since the pro-marijuana constituency isn't arguing to impose a prohibition on tobacco, just to remove the one on marijuana, nor are they arguing that pot shouldn't be regulated or taxed.

The OP's argument is without merit.

Really? So you mean to tell me that the majority of liberals don't simultaneously support pro-pot and anti-tobacco policies?

I have no idea what the "majority" of "liberals" support or don't support, personally I stopped giving a **** what so called American "liberals" think decades ago. However the mainstream "pro-pot policies" are centered on the removal of legal prohibition of sale and consumption while the primary thrust of "anti-tobacco policies" revolve around protecting non-users from the harm caused by second hand smoke in the commons, it's apples and oranges.

Are you saying that they're separate wings of liberal ideology? So Obama didn't push anti-tobacco policies while also giving a pass as a couple states began embracing pot?

No, I'm saying what I said in the post you replied to, that the pro-marijuana constituency isn't arguing for the imposition of a tobacco prohibition or that pot be legalized without regulation or taxation.