i'd be bitchy if it actually affected me, like if i was mugged for crack money, but if you want to have a joint on the weekends to relax, it's ok.
yeh loads of my friends dont smoke and loads do. the way i grew up a lot of people did smoke weed and if you didnt it was sooo not a big deal nobody gives a ****. i never had ANY peer pressure or anything and i really dont get how people can 'give into' it so i didnt smoke weed for the longest time i think i was 20 or 21 when i started to and when i am and im with my friends ill ask if they want some, if they do then yeh, if they dont then ok... theres never been a PFFFFFT he doesnt smoke, or GOO ON GIVE IT A TRY muwhahaha soon you will be sucking cocks in alleys lol at the end of the day people that try to push themselves onto others are just trying to fill a void within themselves and they need to reflect rather than try to change others to be like them. however i dont get pissed off at people that tell you the dangers of smoking etc etc. they arent lying, people that say smoking weed isnt bad are lying/in denial/unaware/stupid. and at the end of the day if my mate does tell me that stuff i can justify why i like to smoke weed and how i feel at currently the benefits outweigh anything else about it. btw what is sXe? (are you calling him sexy?!? ) oh and another funny thing... at the end of the night take a look how many people fighting and hurt etc outside the pubs... and then last summer there was j-day the canabis march and festival bloody THOUSANDS of people smoking weed freely there and not one thing went wrong
lol now that would be funny. and thats hardly 'urban talk' now is it... how would you say it SE? or what? or straight-edgers lol i never even heard of theres rioting nerds before its funny how everything has a label now, when i was growing up, we just used to call people like that 'dickheads' how everything is so specific... and how comes they are 'christian' morals lol people had those morals before christianity was about... and similar people so those things in middle eastern countries about the same exact things but they are 'muslim extremists' but hey i just made a discovery... cleaning guitar pots with some super10 and wiped of the excess with a tissue, then forgot, and blew my nose with the tissue... tripppaaay...
That's a poor and unfair definition, tbh. It would be a seriously rare occurrance when a group of edgers would resort to violence when views are conflicted. Yes there are people who follow the movement because it's the cool thing to do. There are also those who choose not to poison their bodies/engage in pre-marital sex/etc. Some people like to get wasted, others like to stay sober. Why some people don't understand that, I really don't know.
I look at cigs no different then cigs or booz...yes they all do harm but as an adult that's up to each person. Weed should not be illegal, 21+ yes but not illegal. Cigs and booz kill more people each year then weed has in the last 50 yrs. Weed has its down sides like memory loss and stupid ness. Also lazy ness but I think that those lazy people would be lazy anyway. I smoke weed and I still run 2 different businesses and take care of my ****. Marijuana does not get the credit it deserves though. Marijuana has the potential of being a great benefit to society. If it were legal it would be the largest cash crop on the market and I dont mean the streets I mean the trading markets. It would bring in $500 billion+ a year in tax's alone...some say a trillion dollars. Almost every area of commerce would benefit from it, clothes, fuel, food, medicine, materials, building...1000's of different industries would benefit. Plus the jail system could be used to house real criminals instead of pot smokers. Some reports have said in the past that pot users and dealers take up to 30% of jail occupants. Not sure if that's low or high now but that's just BS. One day soon it will be legal again.
hate to burst your bubble but weed aint gonna be legal again we are part of the eu. they cracked down on amsterdam last year about the cafe's... and its part of the eu **** to fight all drugs including weed. so no country in the eu (or ec or eec or whatever the hell they call themselves) is gonna legalise weed sad i kno cos i think weed should be legal too but just reality and no i dont think it would be the fantastic thing uve envisioned either. lots of people would lose jobs and stuff over it. lots of kids would get expelled cos of it. millions of pounds would be lost from people being high at work instead of working... lots more people would go skitzo and try to walk out of windows and so on...
is it worth losing those businesses? do you trust someone enough to run your business while you are in jail? (apparently gov't think burning a plant and killing someone deserve the smae punishment) i honestly wouldn't risk 2 businesses for pot.
Lets just look at this: Marijuana comes from a plant, it is natural (apart from resin which is usually cut and smells like burning tires - wonder why....) and freely occuring in nature. Magic Mushrooms are hallucinogens, also freely occuring in nature. Drugs such as these have been used by cultures for THOUSANDS of years, cultures such as the American Indians who developed complex spiritual beliefs and a harmony with nature that did not unbalance the eco-system. The outcry over the use of marijuana was an economic and political occurance which began in the US. Hemp threatened the established cotton industry in as it is softer and stronger than cotton as a natural fibre (but it is harder to collect). The banning of Marijuana occured for three reasons: - Widespread use led to a reactionary government backlash - The lobbying of the cotton industry against the import of better quality asian hemp products. - A cultural backlash against what was deemed, in the post 1950s era, an 'irrisponsible lifestyle' Bill Hicks - "These drugs grow naturally on earth...God created the Earth...so saying drugs are wrong is like saying god made a mistake"
And another thought..... [RANT] The US and EU's blatent protectionism of their agricultural markets as well as the practice of offloading market surplus on third world countries (thus driving prices down and putting local growers out of business, a practice which the US uses regually in South America though little is ever written about it and it is called 'food aid' when really the effects are devastating to the local agricultural economies of these countries) has led to third world farmers seeking cash crops from which they can make a profit. This has directly affected the drugs trade and has been a contributing factor since protectionism has been in place. The EU is beginning to phase out CAP (their agricultural subsidy) but this will take place over a long period of time ~50-60 years. The US does not engage in a program of direct subsidisation, they find other ways round such as selling water to farmers at cheaper rates, which farmers then buy up in larger quantities than they need for irrigation and sell the excess back to the cities (a practice common in California). Despite the variation in tactics the result is the same. Just for an illustration, the value of food has dropped radically over the last 50 years, food used to be 1/4 of our income, now it is roughly 1/12. Though wages appear to have risen when you adjust for inflation there is only a small rise in comparative value so it is safe to assume the 'value/cost' of food has fallen. This is an unreal cost and can only be maintained by damaging practices such as battery farming chickens which have been crossbred and over-fed to produce unnaturally large birds. These conditions encourage the spread of diseases such as salmonella and e. coli. Chicken Meat is further adulterated by the adding of beef protiens so as to increase the water retention and thus increase the weight (maximising the profits of the supermarkets which sell it at a £/Kg $/Kg ratio). This is just one example, selective growing has also produced a hardy strawberry which is large and has a long shelf life, but it has little flavour and has all but wiped out the more flavourful but rare varieties which Britain used to grow. The drugs war cannot be 'won' without direct involvement of the developed world with third world agriculture and the restructuring of our agricultural policies. This will only occur if consumers are willing to accept the 'real' price of agriculture. The current trends in eating and methods of food production are dangerous and increasing the spread of disease amongst our food sources, we are playing russian roulette with our health as well a increasing the supply of dangerous, refined drugs such as cocaine and heroine.[/RANT]
thats not true, weed is still grown in the US even though our gov't is fighting to stop it. the only thing (i beleive) that will stop people from getting high is not wanting to. americans are a very "f-you" kinda people a lot of the time, when the gov't instilled prohibition, we said F-you and started sneaking alcohol into the country. most people wouldn't want a hotwheels car inserted into our anus, so we don't do it for fun (well... to ourselves, but there is always that one guy who passes out early... ). i'm sure this does not just apply to americans, judging from the amount of stoners (which probably explains everyone spraypainting their modded case in their garage with the door closed) in this thread, most brits are like this too. if we really want it we'll get it. F-you for trying to stop us. PS the hotwheels thing is why i'll never drink or do drugs
Oh yeah, instead of telling him while I'm drunk, I'll do it while I'm high instead. Yeah, that makes sense (!) I don't want to escape with the aid of drugs. It shows that I am weak willed - which I am not.
To be honest some of you are just proving M3G4's original opinion of 'stoners' correctly by being arsey little know it alls. Fair dinkum, he hasn't tried weed so he isn't expert and probably shouldn't comment on it, but just cos you have tried it why does that make you an expert or completely immune to any possible effects it could have? It works both ways - you get people that don't do it being judgemental & preachy yet you also get people that *do* do it judgemental and preachy. I'm sick to death of some people I know who have a go at me for being 'uptight' and refusing to try any drug minus alcohol. I don't friggin' need to so whats the big deal? At the end of the day it's your opinion and your choice/responsibility. But it's wise to be aware of what *could* happen (as it is with any drug / activiy tbh), to understand other peoples reasons for hate/concerns and not insist you're immune from it just cos you're not addicted (in your opinion).
no, i was just giving my experience of weed in that its not "wasters" or whatever that smoke weed. being subjective myself to form an overall objective opinion for me, and possibly shared by others? obivously hasnt got through to everyone here Yes, it is. I am also aware of whats happening and like ive said, i dont shove it in peoples faces and make them smoke. They choose to do it, and could stop at any time much in the way that i could like is didnt smoke 3 weeks eitherside of christmas and ive smoked the last few days/week but havent before that since the 1st & 2nd weeks of term. Its much in the way that i dont particularly like the smell of most cigarettes (theres one make that strangely smell nice.....) and when people are smoking i dont mind as they can do as they please, but i take offence when its on buses where there's clear non-smoking signs and they show great disregard for others (on the bus for example)
To be honest its not something I worry about, I dont go out with it and 1/4 can last me a month or longer. I'm not worth the cops time and with a half descent lawyer I wouldn't get jail time either. Im not the type of person to live in fear of that. In Chicago even mayor Daley talked about decriminalize it here. Not that it would happen but word here is that cops dont care unless your selling big time. Weed isnt for everyone and no one should be pressured into even thinking of trying it but thats peer pressure for ya. I enjoy the smell, taste and effects of weed but mostly only use it when Im done with my day while playing a game and no it doesnt effect my gaming skills either.
if u had a quarter at home they would just confescate it and give u off with a warning or a formal 'caution'. theres no way youd go to jail, unless you live in the basement of a primary school and were luring kids down to buy it and awoken man i kinda get pissed off when people start with that 'natural' crap. heroin and **** are all natural too do you think thats fine as well? what about smoking opium. theres a million other 'natural' things that can kill us instantly. arguing that weed is safe because its natural is like saying its safe because its green... and then people go on about yo people used to do it 1000's of years ago and look at how holy and magical they were wtf man i dunno if im a 'stoner being arsey' but if so im only doing it against other stoners that try to justify weed with faff about 'indians thought it was magical therefore its ok' every time somebody brings those points up its gonna make non smokers thing lol what a bunch of arse and that we're all idiots. but if you talk about the real benefits AND bad points about it then a lot more people are gonna think hey its not as bad the media makes out... good things... you will feel more relaxed your senses will be enhanced (music sounds really good) its a counterstrike enhancing drug lol smoking it with friends is a v social thing to do unlike being drunk, you will never lose control of yourself its a nice chilled way to spend an evening you can concentrate on things for longer you will not worry about pointless **** sex feels better u can often make better music, get more creative theres no 'bad trips' etc theres no immediate risks of overdosing or whatever see the humour in everything you will think getting a kebab but buying the chips at a fish shop is the smartest idea for the best takeaway in the world stuff like that bad things- youll sleep a lot longer that night (or next day hehe) some people like that tho bad weed or bad hash will be crap it has been shown that it can trigger a chemical imbalance you might have under control (if you are already a screw loose weed can make you go nuts) its just as bad as smoking (but you smoke less of it) untrustworthy dealers it costs like 20quid for an 8th of skunk if you dont know what youre doing you can have a 'whitey' (easily avoided tho if you arent on an empty stomach and overtired, and just have a chocolate bar before you light up and youll never pull another whitey) can get u a criminal record smoking by yourself can make you antisocial some people will smoke to get away from harsh reality and then use it as escapism to deal with the world making them worse off could lead to depression etc some people will use it to gain appetite and only eat proper if they got munchies so can lead to eating disorders bad weed can give u a headache for some people it will be the start of worse things as they are introduced into a bad life (stealing, drugs, crime etc) so at the end of the day think of it like alcohol and cigarettes rolled into one. kind of like a booze that you smoke that doesnt get you so messed up and violent. only smoke good skunk, never smoke soapbar (made from boot polish and windex) that **** will kill u and its not proper hash. try not to be a dickhead if you smoke it to others that dont. and if you dont then same but vice versa
I should have made myself clear, the only thing I object to about drugs is the fact that criminals control the supply and use it to fund other things (such as the illegal sex trade that runs girls from eastern europe through Europe, usually ending in the UK). In my opinion when the supply is removed from criminal hands then the drugs war has been 'won'. Bill Hicks - "Have you heard this 'War on drugs' bull? It seems our government are fighting a war on drugs and guess what....they're losing...that means the people on drugs must be winning!...lets think about that, there must be some pretty creative people on drugs." This is a state of affairs that the government stubbornly refuses to deal with. I am well aware of prohibition attitudes, don't think its true just of America, the exact same attitudes exist around the world. I did try and keep my post shortish and I avoided stating my opinions, just making another side of the argument visible. I don't smoke anymore and I wouldn't criticise anyone who wanted to but I do think that people should be aware of the consequences and choose for themselves, an informed choice is always better than a ignorant one Also, you buy your drugs from criminals, only a fraction will be 'home grown' by enthusiasts where do you think the money goes? Maybe you should think about the far reaching consequences and switch your supplier. Its just like companies (such as GAP) they have products at a cheap price but theres always a cost. Think before you buy, every purchase is a vote in favour of that product and the way it is produced. Few interesting facts for you: "The United States is already alarmed that 95% of the marijuana grown in British Columbia is sent south of the border. The growers are largely Vietnamese organized crime groups who have moved into Ontario and Quebec to supply the U.S. market with high-potency and high-quality marijuana." In 1937 Popular Science magazine called hemp "The New Billion Dollar Crop." Then the big money people struck out to protect their interests. Newspaper publisher William Randolph Hearst led the crusade to ban hemp. Hearst owned millions of acres of prime timber land and a machine that simplified the process of making paper from hemp had just been invented. Hearst used his power as a publisher to create public panic about the evils of hemp and marijuana. Another big money player Pierre DuPont held patent rights to the sulfuric acid wood pulp paper process. In 1937 DuPont patented nylon rope made from synthetic petrochemicals. Along with Duponts backer Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon the big money people prevailed and near the end of 1937 Congress passed the Marijuana Tax Act. By placing a prohibitively high tax on hemp production it destroyed the industry. This was done to protect these big money interests of the timber, petrochemical, and cotton industries. Industrial hemp can replace cotton. Cotton is typically grown with large amounts of chemicals that are harmful to people, wildlife and the entire environment. Close to 50% of all the world's pesticides are sprayed on cotton. Hemp grows well in a wide variety of climates and soils. It requires far less fertilizer and pesticides than most commercial crops.
I agree with that statement almost a hundred percent, it's a fact that it can and hopefully someday will solve alot of problems and boost alot of industrys. Most of you people don't seem to realise that we owe alot to cannabis, the first FORD was fabricated using hemp for f**ks sake. Try again mate and you just might get it right According To Mr Nice (those who smoke'll know, those who dont find out ) it was actually asian workers who worked on the railways that caused pot to become illegal cuz of all the opium (sp*) they brought over. When someone (cant remember who) said that opium should be banned cuz they were using it an Egyptian Prince (king, snenate whatever) said that if opium should be banned so should pot and it went from there. (This is all vague and of the top of my head, was seriously drunk when i watched it. Source: Mr Nice The DVD) It usually makes your game better if you have the right amount cuz ure so calm HaHaHa, seriously, i cant stop laughing after that statement and a few others in this thread. TBH one statement alone comes to mind: Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, chocolate in one hand, martini in the other, body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming "WOO HOO what a ride! In other words, live life to the full Death
Yup, seen it, read the book (my brother own a lot of stuff by him), didn't buy a word of it (something similar happened in California but the rest is bull). Sorry. Try REAL politics: In 1912, an international conference at Den Haag (the Hague) was the first to seriously discuss the "need" for the confining "to medical and legitimate purposes the manufacture, sale and use of opium, heroin, morphine and cocaine". Cannabis was not included at this stage, though the conference considered it - and though a handful of US states had banned its use prior to the 1920s, at the time of alcohol prohibition across the US, most states still permitted the use of cannabis. So why the subsequent rapid sea-change? As I've said above, the motives were far more economic and political than any concern for the "welfare" of smokers. South Africa, a prohibition pioneer, stated at the League of Nations in 1923 that cannabis should be prohibited because it affected the productivity of (black) mine-workers. Cannabis was declared a "narcotic" the next year. Also around this time, improved technology and the rise of large petrochemical corporations - DuPont being the most notable example here - encouraged these large corporate interests to start developing and marketing alternatives to hemp, such as plastics and paper prepared from wood-pulp. Though there were over 1,000 hash bars in New York City at this time, the drug was still associated mainly with black and Hispanic immigrants, and therefore seen as implicitly undesirable. Britain made cannabis illegal in September 1928, and in 1931, the US formed the Federal Bureau of Narcotics. Its head, Anslinger, immediately launched a vitriolic offensive on cannabis, calling it at one point "the most violence-causing drug known to man". Over the objections of the American Medical Association, in 1937 the US passed the infamous Marijuana Tax Act which forbade hemp farming. The Act was based on the Machine Gun Transfer Act which made it illegal to pass on machine guns without a government stamp - there being no such stamps available. By applying this strategy to marijuana, Anslinger was able to effectively ban hemp without contravening constitutional rights. "Coincidentally", immediately after the passing of this act, DuPont filed patents for nylon, plastics and a new bleaching process for paper, thus taking advantage of the gap in the market. In 1941 the drug was dropped from the US pharmacopeia (list of approved drugs), enabling pharmaceutical companies to similarly profit from alternatives. Dissenting official voices were still heard - the US Military Surgeon magazine declared that smoking cannabis is no more harmful than smoking tobacco, and in 1944 the New York Academy of Medicine reported that cannabis use does not cause violent behaviour, provoke insanity, lead to addiction or promote opiate usage. Anslinger described the authors as dangerous and strange. In the same year, the New York Mayor's La Guardia Report The Marijuana problem in the City of New York similarly concluded that smoking marijuana did not lead to addiction in the medical sense of the word, that juvenile delinquency was not associated with marijuana smoking and that the publicity concerning the catastrophic effects of marijuana smoking in New York was unfounded. With characteristic tolerance, Anslinger then threatened doctors who carry out cannabis research with imprisonment. By 1948 this pleasant person had changed his message in one way, saying that cannabis users were peaceful rather than violent, but this did not change his opinion - he now stated that cannabis could be used during a communist invasion, to weaken American will to fight. The first UK cannabis arrest occurred in 1951, and the prospects for any immediate change in the law looked bleak indeed.
