5 ms·

Well, I wouldn't have been strongly anti recreational use if I didn't go through what I did. Extremely high THC products coupled with professional marketing ag

Well, I wouldn't have been strongly anti recreational use if I didn't go through what I did. Extremely high THC products coupled with professional marketing agencies? Yikes. We're going to have a weed epidemic soon. Maybe it's a silent epidemic now.

WarOnPrivacy 3y ago
> We're going to have a weed epidemic soon. Maybe it's a silent epidemic now. Whatever it is, it's been underway for long enough for the pot-parade of horribles to manifest itself. Heavy weed smokers are all over - but we aren't surrounded by ruin that is clearly attributable to pot. If you have extra concern to invest, may I suggest one of our most pressing psychological catastrophe? The criminalization of childhood growth (adult-free time) and the erasure of critical free range land. We've brought complete ruin to childhood and parenting in just two generations. Whatever you think pot is doing, this is actually far, far worse.
danenania 3y ago
If we have a weed epidemic then we certainly have an alcohol epidemic too, as well as an obesity epidemic, as well as a traffic accident epidemic, and so on. Making everything that can be harmful to some subset of the population illegal is not the way to deal with these issues. It's reductio ad absurdum into a totalitarian nanny state that literally controls your diet and makes you drive 25 mph on the highway. It's not the government's job to make everything that could possibly hurt you if you overdo it unavailable to you. I agree with you that cannabis can be very harmful to some people, and that the risks are often understated. But if you want to help people who are susceptible in this way, the solution is to help them realize they have a problem, develop self-discipline, and understand that while cannabis may be harmless to many people, for them it is not, and what works for many others (occasional moderate use) won't work for them. In short, people with this issue should take responsibility, join a 12 step program, and fix the problem in themselves rather than expecting all of society to adapt itself to not trigger their addiction. That you can't use it in moderation doesn't mean no one can, just like there are probably many things you can do in moderation that other people aren't able to.
- aurareturn 3y ago
  There are a few issues with what you're saying. 1. Weed has a mostly benign image right now. It has good PR. 2. It's much harder to realize that you're addicted to weed - unlike alcohol. Alcohol addiction is obvious to people around you as well. Not weed. Many weed addicts do not have the self awareness. 3. Weed can be significantly cheaper than alcohol per session - thus consuming more is economical for many. A few drinks at a bar could cost you $100 vs eat a weed gummy for $2 and then go out. 4. Weed addiction takes place over a long period of time. It could take years before you realize the negative effects. It's obvious for alcohol immediately.
  - danenania 3y ago
    None of those are issues with what I'm saying. Many millions of people are able to use cannabis moderately and responsibly. If for whatever reason you can't, that's up to you to deal with--there are many resources available that can help. Taking it away from everyone because you have a problem is not a reasonable solution.
    - aurareturn 3y ago
      If you legalize cocaine and meth, some people will use it responsibly too. ;)
      - danenania 3y ago
        I'm against drug prohibition in general. I think it has been an abject failure. Strong regulation makes sense for the most dangerous drugs (cannabis certainly isn't one of them), but I don't think any drug should be illegal. I don't believe it's the government's job to save you from yourself. Making a habit of driving 100mph on a motorcycle will probably kill you about as quickly on average as either of those drugs, and is more dangerous to other people to boot. Should motorcycles therefore also be illegal? If not, why not? If the goal is to stop people from hurting themselves, why are you only focused on one particular way that people can hurt themselves?

WarOnPrivacy 3y ago

> We're going to have a weed epidemic soon. Maybe it's a silent epidemic now. Whatever it is, it's been underway for long enough for the pot-parade of horribles to manifest itself. Heavy weed smokers are all over - but we aren't surrounded by ruin that is clearly attributable to pot. If you have extra concern to invest, may I suggest one of our most pressing psychological catastrophe? The criminalization of childhood growth (adult-free time) and the erasure of critical free range land. We've brought complete ruin to childhood and parenting in just two generations. Whatever you think pot is doing, this is actually far, far worse.

danenania 3y ago

If we have a weed epidemic then we certainly have an alcohol epidemic too, as well as an obesity epidemic, as well as a traffic accident epidemic, and so on. Making everything that can be harmful to some subset of the population illegal is not the way to deal with these issues. It's reductio ad absurdum into a totalitarian nanny state that literally controls your diet and makes you drive 25 mph on the highway. It's not the government's job to make everything that could possibly hurt you if you overdo it unavailable to you. I agree with you that cannabis can be very harmful to some people, and that the risks are often understated. But if you want to help people who are susceptible in this way, the solution is to help them realize they have a problem, develop self-discipline, and understand that while cannabis may be harmless to many people, for them it is not, and what works for many others (occasional moderate use) won't work for them. In short, people with this issue should take responsibility, join a 12 step program, and fix the problem in themselves rather than expecting all of society to adapt itself to not trigger their addiction. That you can't use it in moderation doesn't mean no one can, just like there are probably many things you can do in moderation that other people aren't able to.

aurareturn 3y ago
There are a few issues with what you're saying. 1. Weed has a mostly benign image right now. It has good PR. 2. It's much harder to realize that you're addicted to weed - unlike alcohol. Alcohol addiction is obvious to people around you as well. Not weed. Many weed addicts do not have the self awareness. 3. Weed can be significantly cheaper than alcohol per session - thus consuming more is economical for many. A few drinks at a bar could cost you $100 vs eat a weed gummy for $2 and then go out. 4. Weed addiction takes place over a long period of time. It could take years before you realize the negative effects. It's obvious for alcohol immediately.
- danenania 3y ago
  None of those are issues with what I'm saying. Many millions of people are able to use cannabis moderately and responsibly. If for whatever reason you can't, that's up to you to deal with--there are many resources available that can help. Taking it away from everyone because you have a problem is not a reasonable solution.
  - aurareturn 3y ago
    If you legalize cocaine and meth, some people will use it responsibly too. ;)
    - danenania 3y ago
      I'm against drug prohibition in general. I think it has been an abject failure. Strong regulation makes sense for the most dangerous drugs (cannabis certainly isn't one of them), but I don't think any drug should be illegal. I don't believe it's the government's job to save you from yourself. Making a habit of driving 100mph on a motorcycle will probably kill you about as quickly on average as either of those drugs, and is more dangerous to other people to boot. Should motorcycles therefore also be illegal? If not, why not? If the goal is to stop people from hurting themselves, why are you only focused on one particular way that people can hurt themselves?