|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
the eye
Joined: 29 Jan 2004
|
 Posted: Tue Mar 07, 2006 2:09 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| SPINOZA wrote: |
[
Personally speaking, I don't disagree with that point at all. But an argument I have heard is that there's less justification to de-criminalize crack or indeed its parent drug cocaine because they aren't physically addictive. Unlike alcohol, tobacco and heroin, coke and crack addicts could just quit today and suffer no physical withdrawal symptoms. Of course, that's superficial. Crack and coke are addictive - psychologically addictive - and this is real addiction. Addiction clearly doesn't have to be physical.
|
huh?
cocain is extremely addictive physically.
http://www.cocaine-addiction.ca/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
SPINOZA
Joined: 10 Jun 2005
Location: $eoul
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 07, 2006 2:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| the eye wrote: |
| SPINOZA wrote: |
[
Personally speaking, I don't disagree with that point at all. But an argument I have heard is that there's less justification to de-criminalize crack or indeed its parent drug cocaine because they aren't physically addictive. Unlike alcohol, tobacco and heroin, coke and crack addicts could just quit today and suffer no physical withdrawal symptoms. Of course, that's superficial. Crack and coke are addictive - psychologically addictive - and this is real addiction. Addiction clearly doesn't have to be physical.
|
huh?
cocain is extremely addictive physically.
http://www.cocaine-addiction.ca/ |
Be careful. In my opinion - unless I missed something - that site doesn't explicitly confirm what you claimed. Whether coke is physically addictive or not is still debated - see other sources. Compare that to heroin or alcohol, whereby their physical addictiveness IS NOT debated at all because there's no doubt.
However, the distinction between physical addiction and psychological addiction only is very unclear, because Cocaine and crack addiction are psycho-physiological. It affects the brain physically.
It's clearly highly psychologicaly addictive; after a night's coke, you're depressed in the morning and want a rebound. Experiments with animals suggest that cocaine is perhaps the most powerful drug of all in producing dependence, be it physical or whatever. Rats and monkeys will forgo food and sleep for cocaine. But - whilst a coke addict craves coke, a heroin addict may not crave heroin mentally (he may never wish to see the stuff ever again) BUT his body needs it in order to be normal. Clear physical withdrawal symptoms occur - aches, pains, flu-like symptoms - and these are unpleasant. I've yet to come across literature that says coke does these things. But as coke is wildly addictive anyway, it doesn't seem to matter. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
the eye
Joined: 29 Jan 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 07, 2006 3:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
agreed there is a lack of consensus as to what 'physical addiction' is defined as.
however, if you define physical addiction being apparent when one experiences physical withdrawal symptoms such as....
| Quote: |
Increased tolerance
Nausea
Vomiting
Anxiety
Insomnia
Loss of appetite leading to malnutrition and weight loss
Cold sweats
Restlessness
|
and those physical symptoms are relieved from exposure to more of the drug... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vox
Joined: 13 Feb 2005
Location: Jeollabukdo
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| the eye wrote: |
Also, you reiterate the age old question of, 'why does alcohol remain legal and pot does not?'. Perhaps someone here can offer some opinion on that? Vox? |
In my humble opinion, alcohol remains legal by dumb luck - because it was a staple of many of the Western cultures that came to settle in the New World and it was just too big for prohibitionists to get their hands around it (red wine through the church for Sunday, and through that, a whole list of secular attachments with the French, Irish, English, Spanish, and others). Not that the West didn't try. We all know about what happened in early 20th century America when the prohibition movement started and ended.
If the people who introduced us to tobacco had their way, cigarettes would never have been made and we could all be either enjoying tobacco leaves for making Cubans, or just for using in ceremonial blessings for earth-friendly religious rites. Again it's just dumb luck (good or bad) of history's timing.
If legality of such substances is supposed to be scaled on a level of toxicity (it is not) alcohol's legality is unfair. However to argue this is to be ignorant of history and culture. Obviously arguing alcohol's legality as comparatively unfair to pot's illegality would be so narrow as to be almost two-dimensional. It really is unfair but it does not follow that on the basis of that unfairness our society should then give up the ghost on all attempts to control all such substances. Then again Chris Rock suggested legalizing everything. It makes for an entertaining contemplation but it is much harder to implement in real life. But we have gotten some benefits from having these unchecked vices in our society. Red wine has an acid (absent in white wine) which helps break down the plaque on the walls of the heart, that build-up that occurs over years from fatty foods. Yet Baha'is will discourage the consumption of red wine and to that end they point out that the same acid is present in red grapes and in grape juice(although in lesser amounts). Well red wine had to be around enough for them to give a d*mn to find out what's the big deal and propose alternatives for getting its benefits. A glass of beer is supposed to be an aid to preventing Alzheimer's. It would be great if someone would step up and show us how that benefit can be reproduced without drinking beer? But while we know these things are bad for us, there's enough of it being consumed openly that a critical mass develops and the whole observation machine picks up speed. But because there is so much denial around the problems with pot the movement toward wider acceptance is driven underground and the whole process of dealing with it in a responsible manner and dissecting its good and bad points takes just that much longer. It would be nice if libertarians weren't running around trying to tell us nothing's happening and we could have the normal conditions we see with alcohol and tobacco consumption, that some group could eventually come along and show us in our would-be widerspread cannabis-using society how its beneficial properties can be found elsewhere.
I could have made that clearer and shorter but basically I feel that the greater socialization of pot suffers from a stunted growth imposed by a bad habit of its greatest proponents.
While we're on history and substances, lots of people in the anti-white-sugar camp mention to me periodically that if refined granulated white sugar were introduced on the market today it would be labelled a narcotic. I find that interesting. I agree with the point, don't know if I believe the suggestion, but having given up white sugar for unrefined sugar (and white flour for whole-grain foods) I have found a big improvement in my health. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
endo
Joined: 14 Mar 2004
Location: Seoul...my home
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 7:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| But because there is so much denial around the problems with pot the movement toward wider acceptance is driven underground and the whole process of dealing with it in a responsible manner and dissecting its good and bad points takes just that much longer. |
I don't think it's so much of a denial around the problems associated with pot, but more of a hyper counter-reaction to a lot of bull$h!t produced over the years by the American government and others about marijuana.
I absolutely agree that the pro-marijuana groups are failing to tell the whole story, which as a result clouds their argument. In addition, many of the pro-pot members who are arguing the medicinal purposes of ganga are in reality disingenious. They just want pot to be legal for them.
| Quote: |
| ..........that some group could eventually come along and show us in our would-be widerspread cannabis-using society how its beneficial properties can be found elsewhere. |
Who says that legalization or decriminalization would result in a "widespread cannabis-using society"? What evidence do you have of this? I've actually heard that drug use per-population is lower in Western Europe as opposed to the U.S., which has much stronger drug laws.
If you legalize or decriminalize cannabis in either Canada or the U.S., you may initially see a slight increase in users out of curiosity. However, that doesn't necessarily mean that North America will go to pot.
Lastly, in regards to your idea that the "benificial properties can be found elsewhere."
So who controls these "benificial properties"? The pharmaceutical companies? In many respects the government is a gang and the pharmaceutical companies are their pushers.
I don't want them making any money off me when I can grow it myself. Plus I can always use a Vaporizor to inhale pot and thus eliminate the harmful carbons cause by smoking.
In regards to the question from "the eye" about where i'm from. Well....not sure if I want to disclose personal information to a guy called "the eye" on a message board dealing with marijuana in Korea.
Just messing with you, i'm from beautiful Winnipeg. Been 17 months since I smoked my last joint there. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vox
Joined: 13 Feb 2005
Location: Jeollabukdo
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 10:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| endo wrote: |
| Quote: |
| ..........that some group could eventually come along and show us in our would-be widerspread cannabis-using society how its beneficial properties can be found elsewhere. |
Who says that legalization or decriminalization would result in a "widespread cannabis-using society"? What evidence do you have of this? I've actually heard that drug use per-population is lower in Western Europe as opposed to the U.S., which has much stronger drug laws. |
Well I'm just entertaining somebody else's notion of a wider-spread cannabis-using utopia under decriminalization. It's already widespread in use, but what I said 'wider-spread' only meant to say it would increase, and I think it would if legalized. If I had to guess why, I would look at the wider consumption of alcohol and the fact that it's legal.
| Quote: |
| If you legalize or decriminalize cannabis in either Canada or the U.S., you may initially see a slight increase in users out of curiosity. However, that doesn't necessarily mean that North America will go to pot. |
I agree. But I still think a society needs so much exposure before there is enough critical mass to develop interest in analyzing pot. What we have now (at least in North America) is a critical mass of suspicion, and given the propositions by addicts, it is well-founded suspicion. And it's a shame.
and I totally know that 99% of the counter-arguing on this thread are addicts being disingenuous. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jacl
Joined: 31 Oct 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 10:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
I can't read yours's posts. They are too philosphical for me. Fighting about what? Please stop before somebody thinks you might be important. Smoke pot or not. Who cares. I didn't put a question mark after the last sentence. I also said "yours's" because I felt like it.
If you're a non-pot smoker then go away. Smoke some pot. Just not here. I don't think it's good here. I may be mistaken 'cause it's been a while, but, nonetheless, whatever.\
Smoking pot, from my 3-years teaching experience, would be beneficial to the teaching industry. Why? Because it's a wind down tool. It puts ya to sleep and you wake up quite calmly and happy and look forward to your time offf to do whatever and smoke yet another at midnight.
Near the end of the day, you can get quite edgy. The pot avoids this OR it can provoke some sort of edginess. That's aleviated by... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vox
Joined: 13 Feb 2005
Location: Jeollabukdo
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 12:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jacl wrote: |
I can't read yours's posts. They are too philosphical for me. Fighting about what? Please stop before somebody thinks you might be important. Smoke pot or not. Who cares. I didn't put a question mark after the last sentence. I also said "yours's" because I felt like it.
If you're a non-pot smoker then go away. Smoke some pot. Just not here. I don't think it's good here. I may be mistaken 'cause it's been a while, but, nonetheless, whatever.\
Smoking pot, from my 3-years teaching experience, would be beneficial to the teaching industry. Why? Because it's a wind down tool. It puts ya to sleep and you wake up quite calmly and happy and look forward to your time offf to do whatever and smoke yet another at midnight.
Near the end of the day, you can get quite edgy. The pot avoids this OR it can provoke some sort of edginess. That's aleviated by... |
LMAO!!!  Are you the old hippie on 'That 70's show' ?
I don't get edgy at the end of the day. I am exhausted but satisfied at the end of most days of teaching. You think you're edgy now? Just give that habit a few years, muchacho. You'll be stealing your mother's silverware for a gram and blaming your loved ones for stuff they didn't do. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
igotthisguitar
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2006 12:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| vox wrote: |
| LMAO!!! Are you the old hippie on 'That 70's show' ? |
Uhhhh ... that's none other than the one & only: TOMMY CHONG ... dude ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Chong
Hollyweed - the Tommy Chong interview
with David Malmo-Levine
Running Time: 22 min
Date Entered: 07 Jan 2003
Description
Tommy talks to DML about his transformation from jazz musician to hippy
to comedian on the streets of Vancouver.
Included are clips from his favorite movie: Up In Smoke.
http://www.pot-tv.net/ram/pottvshowse1712.ram
( FYI - Chong's the guy on the right ) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
khyber
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Compunction Junction
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 10, 2006 8:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
You know, this whole "open the flood gates" attitude seems to have very little grounding most data I have seen.
Drug commissions have pointed out that MJ use in NL's youth is lower than that of the US yet the legal situation CANNOT even be compared. And in comparing numbers of adults, the trend continues.
I am fairly certain I had put up a GREAt link to these regards WAY earlier in this thread.
vox, you argue that pot is terrible because it ruined your friends. I put up a scientific study (which you haven't refuted/commented on) that indicates that pot doesn't necessarily do what you claim it does. Have you abandoned that train of thought?
re:
| Quote: |
The researchers estimated that at least 2.5 percent of the 10,748 fatal crashes studied were directly caused by the use of marijuana. |
Fatigue is considered a CONTRIBUTING factor in 10x that number of accidents.
Cell phone use, inattentive driving AND fiddling with radio/cd/dvd/tape player buttons ALL cause MORE accidents than pot.
i'm not sold on that sorry.
also
THIS:
| Quote: |
| "The bottom line is, the active ingredients in marijuana are doing something to sperm, and the numbers are in the direction toward infertility |
is INCREDIBLY noncommital and vague don't you think?
and....
| Quote: |
| Further research in the andrology laboratory showed that human sperm exposed to high levels of THC displayed abnormal changes in the sperm enzyme cap, called the acrosome. When researchers tested synthetic anandamide equivalents on human sperm, the normal vigorous swimming patterns were changed and the sperm showed reduced ability to attach to the egg before fertilization. |
What could THAT possibly mean????
| Quote: |
| The volunteers reported smoking marijuana approximately 14 times a week, and for an average of 5.1 years. |
Find a guy who does ANYTHING to their body THAT many times a week for THAT long. I'll show you a guy who would be HALF as fertile and half as pleasant to be around.
and lastly:
| Quote: |
"The sperm from marijuana smokers were moving too fast too early," said Burkman. "The timing was all wrong. These sperm will experience burnout before they reach the egg and would not be capable of fertilization."
|
You will ALSO note that he says "these sperm WILL experience burnout": Implies to ME that that is a logical conclusion but NOT something studied NOR a viable conclusion that COULD be derrived from the experiment (as it's presented in this article).
Lastly, about 3 of the 6 "what causes low sperm count" websites I've seen don't even list pot on their pages. To say nothing of the minimal attention that was paid to them compared to things like alcohol, cigarettes, stress and heat on the nutters. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jacl
Joined: 31 Oct 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 10, 2006 9:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I know some pot smokers that are quite violent. Has nothing to do with pot smoking though Pot's not a relaxer as such. Trust me, I know. The thing that can upset a pot smoker, however, is always having to pay for it and the added illegalness of it. If it was legal, totally, then there would be a totally diiferent outlook and your high would be different. The illegal and unaccepted aspect add to the wholet deal. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jacl
Joined: 31 Oct 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 10, 2006 9:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| vox wrote: |
| jacl wrote: |
I can't read yours's posts. They are too philosphical for me. Fighting about what? Please stop before somebody thinks you might be important. Smoke pot or not. Who cares. I didn't put a question mark after the last sentence. I also said "yours's" because I felt like it.
If you're a non-pot smoker then go away. Smoke some pot. Just not here. I don't think it's good here. I may be mistaken 'cause it's been a while, but, nonetheless, whatever.\
Smoking pot, from my 3-years teaching experience, would be beneficial to the teaching industry. Why? Because it's a wind down tool. It puts ya to sleep and you wake up quite calmly and happy and look forward to your time offf to do whatever and smoke yet another at midnight.
Near the end of the day, you can get quite edgy. The pot avoids this OR it can provoke some sort of edginess. That's aleviated by... |
LMAO!!! Are you the old hippie on 'That 70's show' ?
I don't get edgy at the end of the day. I am exhausted but satisfied at the end of most days of teaching. You think you're edgy now? Just give that habit a few years, muchacho. You'll be stealing your mother's silverware for a gram and blaming your loved ones for stuff they didn't do. |
I don't smoke pot now. I did before. The only thing that would make you steal and lie for pot would be if you didn't have any money whatsoever. If you have a good job and make lots of money, you dont' need to steal, cheat and lie for it. Unless you're smokin 4 inche fatties every 5 minutes. It's not a cocaine type of thing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Satori
Joined: 09 Dec 2005
Location: Above it all
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 10, 2006 3:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vox
Joined: 13 Feb 2005
Location: Jeollabukdo
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 10, 2006 6:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Satori wrote: |
|
I knew you were a pimp. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
