Thread: Drug testing

Daisymae - 9/29/2005 at 10:33 PM

Hi Everyone-

I know this topic has been covered before so sorry I am bringing it up again...

What do you know about drug testing? I am going for a new job that in order to be hired I need to pass a urine drug test. I am a daily pot smoker. How long does it stay in the system? How long do I need to stop before the test? Also what about pain pills? I like to dabble in those now and then too...are there things I can take to over ride the test???

Yikes...I am already jonesing not smoking today and I don't even know when the test will be...I guess that is a whole other story...Funny how its much easier to stop smoking for a day when I feel like it...not when I have to...

Thanks for any info...and think of me when next time you pull a tube...

Ally


HaagenDazs - 9/29/2005 at 10:52 PM

Well, my first reaction was probably yours... Stop doing anything and everything now! Drink plenty of water and I've heard shots of vinegar are good for system cleansing - if you can swallow it! There are plenty of things that claim they can help you pass, but I think the best remedy is to start sucking on that water bottle! We're not talking about 8 glasses of 8 oz per day, I'm thinking more along the lines of, at the VERY least, 3+ liters daily. That's 6 bottles of your average size water bottle.

[Edited on 9/29/2005 by HaagenDazs]


TanDan - 9/29/2005 at 11:00 PM

Ally....if your job requires a urine test then you will not get the job.

The companies that do the tests are very well versed in the ways the folks use to 'trick them'. You will hear of 'virgin urine' and additives that you can you, etc. etc. Everyone will have a story about how 'It works 100%, Dude!!'. Don't believe it.

When you decide to grow up and join the adult world and apply for a job that requires a clean piss; then do it. Otherwise this may not be the correct forum for you to turn to.

Can I come to your house and perform ACLS on your loved one, being stoned? Should the surgeon operating on your father be high as he cuts into your fathers chest? Can I drive the school bus with 46 innocents as I think I can make that sharp curve? How about giving morphine to you? Is it 2mg or 10mg? Wow! Such Colors!!

You have already crossed one benchmark---the fact you even asked the question.

Don't ask or require one part of society to be 100% clean while you allow another to be stoned and drive my child to daycare.

Your call. Don't ask us!

Ask it of your babysitter next time.



[Edited on 9/29/2005 by TanDan]


BodineFan - 9/29/2005 at 11:12 PM

Drugs suck.


Daisymae - 9/29/2005 at 11:46 PM

TD-

Sorry you felt the need to go off as you did. I am applying for a creative position at an advertisng agency. I will not be performing surgery, operating heavy vehicles or even talking to small children. I don't smoke at work and I don't steal colored pencils either. Like many people I like to unwind after a long day at the office. I am not a drinker but I do enjoy a few puffs off a joint.

This thread has nothing to do with legal or moral issues. Just checking to see how long pot stays in the system.

Thanks again

Ally


Sammie - 9/29/2005 at 11:47 PM

All I know is that they sell those pills that are supposed to help in like Mystics and Starships. Don't know if they work... thought'd I'd share though! Good luck!


john4520 - 9/29/2005 at 11:54 PM

Or you could just quit smoking weed!


Peachstatedawg - 9/29/2005 at 11:54 PM

Daiseymae I was comtemplating your post and thought perhaps this might be a good time to quit entirely; since you're going to have to abstain for several days anyway.

Dabbling with the pain killers is full of pitfalls and pot is still illegal. You impress me that you're relatively young. Dragging around the baggage of a drug abuse problem or a drug arrest record for the rest of your life could be problematic in your future endeavors.

Just something to consider.

Nonetheless I wish you the best.


WharfRat - 9/30/2005 at 12:07 AM



Drugs are baaaad... MMmmmmmK?????????


WharfRat - 9/30/2005 at 12:08 AM

quote:
Drugs suck.


Agreed.


BodineFan - 9/30/2005 at 12:35 AM

quote:
TD-

Sorry you felt the need to go off as you did. I am applying for a creative position at an advertisng agency. I will not be performing surgery, operating heavy vehicles or even talking to small children. I don't smoke at work and I don't steal colored pencils either. Like many people I like to unwind after a long day at the office. I am not a drinker but I do enjoy a few puffs off a joint.

This thread has nothing to do with legal or moral issues. Just checking to see how long pot stays in the system.

Thanks again

Ally



I know you are getting beat up here, but I just had to respond to your response.

Why on Earth would you put something into your body that you have no idea as to how long it stays in there? It just doesn't make sense. Do your homework then make your choices, not the other way around.


TanDan - 9/30/2005 at 12:36 AM

TanDan I don't remember appointing you to speak for me, so please try not to use the word "us" next time you want to go off on some pretentious rant like that, because I wouldn't dare to speak to anyone that way, especially a complete stranger. You don't know her, you don't know what kind of job she is applying for, and you don't know that she is going to use while on that job.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------

Wannabe, I would love to go off on some 'Prententious Rant' about something that I knew nothing about. I could then think that I knew everything and had answers and could call myself God. I would love to think that I knew something about canoe building or candy making or tile floor making.

What I do know is drugs.

My 'Rant' is for the future. You missed that part and I forgive you.

The poster is asking us how to get around the fact that she should be expected to be clean. Since this is an ABB forum perhaps she could ask Gregg. He may say 'STOP!' Should you listen? Nope. If Derek tells you to stop, or Warren, or SusanT, or Jaimoe, or Butch...should you stop?

No. Not even if Tandan tells you.


Bhawk - 9/30/2005 at 12:46 AM

Daisymae, check your pm's.


Sherrick - 9/30/2005 at 12:56 AM

quote:
I am not a drinker but I do enjoy a few puffs off a joint.

This thread has nothing to do with legal or moral issues. Just checking to see how long pot stays in the system.

Thanks again

Ally



30 days or so for the average sized person. For a daily puffer, even if its only "a few puffs"...Id imagine longer, but while the detox stuff does work, the only real solution, especially if a hair test may be in order after/instead of the urinalisys, is to stop...but if you're a girl with really long hair, you're screwed...cause they dont test for where in the hair it is, just that its there.


scp2569 - 9/30/2005 at 01:13 AM

I agree with quitting. I smoked The God given weed for 12 years. EVERYDAY. Kept my job during that time. Effects were BAD memory. Its getting better and I stopped cold turkey. Hard? Very.

quote:
Funny how its much easier to stop smoking for a day when I feel like it...not when I have to...

Agreed If I couldn't find any I was hell. But if I had something to do where I couldn't or for some strange reason didn't want to I was fine. Mary Jane Is One Hell of a Drug!


So I'm not preaching and if there is some at the Concert in Charlotte I'm prob gonna toke it up However, it is best to quit. WE ALL KNOW THIS.


yurtle - 9/30/2005 at 01:15 AM

I am not going to argue a persons personal choices, there have been several opinions voiced, but all are opinions.

There is no simple solution other than quitting smoking NOW greatly increases your chances of passing.

Golden-seals don't work, Yellow root don't work, 28 days seems to be the magic #.....but varies from person to person.

THC is stored in the fat cells of your body, so even though you haven't smoked in weeks, you can still fail. If you are fat, you have it stored up in your body, and it may take 6-8 weeks.

Drinking pickle juice (taste better than plain vinegar) will help flush your kidneys, as well as cranberry juice. Drinking all the water you can will help, the more the better.But remember as you burn fat, the THC in those cells is released into your bloodstream, and cleansed out by your kidneys.

There are several beverages that work, but you have to follow the directions exactly, and require lots of water as well & only allow a window of purity, and you can't always be in control of the time frame.

There are additives that you can put into the sample that work(best bet for a random test), You never know how well you will be watched. They sell urine with heater packs, and if you can get by, work 100% of the time.

Never take a test 1st thing in the morning, if you do have an early test get up hours earlier and eat foods high in carbs so your body burns the simple sugars and not fat cells that contain THC. Always void as many times as possible, and flush as much as possible.

The longer urine hangs out in your body, the more chances of being polluted.

Never give the 1st spurt, let it go into the toilet, then fill the specimen cup with the middle portion of the void.

As far as non-organic substances, they are out of your system much quicker. LSD is out of your system in hours, coke or meth 3-5 days. The least harmful of all last the longest.

I feel that drug testing is an invasion of a persons personal freedom. Alcohol is far a more dangerous drug. Tobacco is far more addictive. I have voiced my opinion, but like a$$holes everyone knows one.

For more info try Google.


Angelemerald - 9/30/2005 at 01:20 AM

Ally, go to the Philzone.
http://www.philzone.org/index-org.html (Other Stuff section)

The guys there know all the ins and outs of getting things out as quickly as possible.

On the Philzone (or the TooBoard, for that matter) you generally do not get the sweeping condemnation angle.

Sherrick is right about the hair test and Wannabee is right that there is some stuff you can get in a health food store to help you cleanse your liver and kidneys. And Yertle knows more than I ever want to know.

I must say I feel for you girl. A few puffs a day keeps the stress away. Oh yeah . . . .





[Edited on 9/30/2005 by Angelemerald]


cortezthekiller - 9/30/2005 at 01:41 AM

LOTS of water

Start drinking 1-2 cups of cranberry or pomegranate juice per day

You can buy a detox kit at a drugstore too....Just makes u sweat and pee all the bad stuff out.

And of course just stop for a little while--Im sure you'll be able to handle it. It's just pot we're talkin about.....


curry - 9/30/2005 at 01:42 AM

nicely put, angelemerald. philzone has plenty of kindly, non-judgemental advice...

re testing: don't overdilute the urine by drinking too much water - it sends up a red flag.

good luck


TheOtherOne - 9/30/2005 at 01:50 AM

quote:
quote:
Drugs suck.


Agreed.


weed aint a drug


WharfRat - 9/30/2005 at 01:52 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Drugs suck.


Agreed.


weed aint a drug


Sorry, but yes it is.


jim - 9/30/2005 at 01:53 AM

quote:
What do you know about drug testing?


Test as many as possible of course. Just kidding folks, just kidding.


scp2569 - 9/30/2005 at 01:55 AM

quote:
Test as many as possible of course


Nice. Why didn't I think of that one.....Wait what were we talking about?


Sherrick - 9/30/2005 at 01:57 AM

quote:
Ally, go to the Philzone.
http://www.philzone.org/index-org.html (Other Stuff section)

The guys there know all the ins and outs of getting things out as quickly as possible.

On the Philzone (or the TooBoard, for that matter) you generally do not get the sweeping condemnation angle.

[Edited on 9/30/2005 by Angelemerald]



yeah...seems like there's a testing thread once a week on the PhilZone...it gets old.

People definately WILL go through the sweeping condemnation on the zone, its just that its always there, so its easier to ignore...there will always be folks who say "Don't Smoke" to someone looking to pass a urine test...and truth be told, its the only way you're guaranteed a pass...all the other methods may work, but not 100%.

and the fact that there are folks out there getting away with it for years isn't all that comforting...because that means their either changing jobs a lot, or their management has a reason to suspect their performance is suffering.


yurtle - 9/30/2005 at 02:17 AM

quote:
all the other methods may work, but not 100%


Store bought clean urine will pass urinalysis 100% of the time


RobJohnson - 9/30/2005 at 02:18 AM

"Since this is an ABB forum perhaps she could ask Gregg. He may say 'STOP!' "

Or he could say what he said in a recent interview, which is that he enjoys an occasional smoke to wind down after a show, but it has to be the "one-hit wonder weed."

"If Derek tells you to stop"

...then he probably wouldn't have done that High Times interview where he said "All my heroes have been smokers, from Louis Armstrong on down."

At the risk of pointing out the blatantly obvious, just because somebody uses drugs in their spare time doesn't mean they will be using them when they're on the clock, TanDan. If Daisymae is working as a creative person in advertising, the worst thing that could happen if she's still got some weed in her system is that she writes a crappy jingle. I don't think the world will fall off its axis.

As for whether herb is a drug, I always defer to my man Carlos Santana: "Man makes drugs, God makes medicine."

JAH RASTARARI!


yurtle - 9/30/2005 at 02:21 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Drugs suck.


Agreed.


weed ain't a drug


Sorry, but yes it is.


Caffeine, Nicotine, THC all are drugs. Weed is a schedule 1 controlled substance. Just cause the "man" says it's wrong, don't mean it ain't right.


johnwott - 9/30/2005 at 04:05 AM

If you smoke regularly it can take 30 to 40 days for you system to get clean.
Marijuana is fat soluable and metabolites are stored in your fatty tissue.

If you only smoke once in a while, 4-5 days is enough time to clear your system

I posted a whole chart about all drug cleansing times if ya wanna search for it.


Those that say "drugs are bad," How many of you don't do
caffiene, nicotine, alcohol, chocolate or sugar?

All legal drugs. All have heath risks

If you don't smoke herb (vaporize or ingest) the health risks are very low.

moderation in all things


BodineFan - 9/30/2005 at 10:49 AM

quote:


As for whether herb is a drug, I always defer to my man Carlos Santana: "Man makes drugs, God makes medicine."

JAH RASTARARI!


That's just the drugs talking.

Aparently marijuana use causes paranoia, especially if you have a drug test coming up.


dutchoneill - 9/30/2005 at 11:19 AM

quote:
Ally....if your job requires a urine test then you will not get the job.

The companies that do the tests are very well versed in the ways the folks use to 'trick them'. You will hear of 'virgin urine' and additives that you can you, etc. etc. Everyone will have a story about how 'It works 100%, Dude!!'. Don't believe it.

When you decide to grow up and join the adult world and apply for a job that requires a clean piss; then do it. Otherwise this may not be the correct forum for you to turn to.

Can I come to your house and perform ACLS on your loved one, being stoned? Should the surgeon operating on your father be high as he cuts into your fathers chest? Can I drive the school bus with 46 innocents as I think I can make that sharp curve? How about giving morphine to you? Is it 2mg or 10mg? Wow! Such Colors!!

You have already crossed one benchmark---the fact you even asked the question.

Don't ask or require one part of society to be 100% clean while you allow another to be stoned and drive my child to daycare.

Your call. Don't ask us!

Ask it of your babysitter next time.



[Edited on 9/29/2005 by TanDan]


Well said TD


rollingcrowe - 9/30/2005 at 11:25 AM

I use to smoke pot everyday but I had to quit 13 years ago for the job I have now. I miss it. I think it's a shame a man can't go home after work sit down and smoke a J to relax. Instead people have a few drinks and are a time bomb behind the wheel of a car. I would rather be stoned than drunk anyday. If a person can drink responsible they should be able to smoke that way also.


ozzypie - 9/30/2005 at 11:25 AM

I'm wondering do they even look for weed when they're doing the test? Aren't some of these tests just for 'harder' drugs? Since your job would be as an artist of sorts, would they even care if the tests showed you smoked some weed? Some pot smokers feel it 'stimulates creativity' maybe ad execs do to? Also would they even check for pain killers? Can't they be explained away by the person as having a possible legit reason for taking them? Even if they discover the weed they could just ask you about it, see if you'll be honest about doing it, and hire you because they like you for the job anyway. I'm more anti-drug than most, but for an advertising position, I see this as more of an invasion of privacy as far as the weed goes. I can understand testing for cocaine or heroin for any job, but in your position should weed even be an issue?


Binnsjim - 9/30/2005 at 11:33 AM

What's more dangerous pot or alcohol? Drinking is legal? The laws don't make sense.


Sherrick - 9/30/2005 at 11:51 AM

quote:
quote:
all the other methods may work, but not 100%


Store bought clean urine will pass urinalysis 100% of the time



unless you get caught with it.


Sherrick - 9/30/2005 at 11:53 AM

quote:
I'm wondering do they even look for weed when they're doing the test? Aren't some of these tests just for 'harder' drugs? Since your job would be as an artist of sorts, would they even care if the tests showed you smoked some weed? Some pot smokers feel it 'stimulates creativity' maybe ad execs do to? Also would they even check for pain killers? Can't they be explained away by the person as having a possible legit reason for taking them? Even if they discover the weed they could just ask you about it, see if you'll be honest about doing it, and hire you because they like you for the job anyway. I'm more anti-drug than most, but for an advertising position, I see this as more of an invasion of privacy as far as the weed goes. I can understand testing for cocaine or heroin for any job, but in your position should weed even be an issue?


cocaine and heroin are harder to test for since they leave the system faster. Most pills or things like that can be explained, but elevated levels of marijuana are hard to explain...the old "secondhand smoke from a concert" doesnt work.


DougMacKenzie - 9/30/2005 at 12:01 PM

Hey, it's their company, and if you want to work for them it's best to play by their rules. If you don't like their rules, go work for somebody else. Which do you want more, the job or the weed?


dutchoneill - 9/30/2005 at 12:44 PM

quote:
What's more dangerous pot or alcohol? Drinking is legal? The laws don't make sense.


No but the achohol industry is hugh and thery pay taxes.


rosshmusic - 9/30/2005 at 01:25 PM

quote:
quote:
What's more dangerous pot or alcohol? Drinking is legal? The laws don't make sense.


No but the achohol industry is hugh and thery pay taxes.
I don't understand the "but"...

if marijuana were legal, I'm sure it would be taxed just like cigarettes and booze...


DTBSETLISTS - 9/30/2005 at 03:05 PM

quote:
"Since this is an ABB forum perhaps she could ask Gregg. He would say what he said in a recent interview, which is that he enjoys an occasional smoke to wind down after a show, but it has to be the "one-hit wonder weed."

"If Derek tells you to stop"

...then he probably wouldn't have done that High Times interview where he said "All my heroes have been smokers, from Louis Armstrong on down."



In support of Rob's post, which in view of Dan's post and his supporters has become the real topic here.....

All of the musicians you idolize burn the weed! Name 1 that does not? I know 100's of professional musicians personally, do you? How can anyone possibly come on a music forum and use a collective "we" when referring to fans of those same musicians? Seems moronic to me. If your distaste for Ally or anyone else that enjoys the benefits of weed are so strong, then you may want to stop posting here and start posting on the Christian Rock Forum, oh that's right, God does not say not to smoke weed so they probably do as well. Weed is legal in Holland, Denmark and now all of Canada. Amazing how Dan and his followers are so well informed and base thier opinions on reality?

Stop being idiots and telling others how to live.

Good luck Ally


johnwott - 9/30/2005 at 03:30 PM

quote:
quote:
What's more dangerous pot or alcohol? Drinking is legal? The laws don't make sense.


No but the achohol industry is hugh and thery pay taxes.


And use their profits to fund anti-drug misinformation and anti-drug politicians

They don't want the competition.


lutherwv - 9/30/2005 at 03:41 PM

worked for me

http://gonumber1.com/him.htm


Binnsjim - 9/30/2005 at 03:43 PM

If my company started drug testing I would have to give up my job. Half the company would quit. I feel for you Ally. Tough choice to make. People shouldn't tell you what to do. In the end it's your decision.


ljramsey - 9/30/2005 at 07:43 PM

After fighting it for more than a year, my company announced random drug screening effective January 1. We are part of a larger DJIA company that has had drug screening in place for many years. Our industry is part of the enterainment industry and many of our clients like to enjoy the herb. My sales force is pretty uneasy today. I think we are all going to have to invest in pee-in-a-bottle!


TopDroog - 9/30/2005 at 08:05 PM

quote:
If my company started drug testing I would have to give up my job. Half the company would quit. I feel for you Ally. Tough choice to make. People shouldn't tell you what to do. In the end it's your decision.


Heh. There'd no longer be such a thing as a pizza delivery guy.


TanDan - 9/30/2005 at 09:02 PM

Amazing how Dan and his followers are so well informed and base thier opinions on reality?

Stop being idiots and telling others how to live.

Good luck Ally

______________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________

So that is the best you have for Ally? 'Good Luck'?

It is a sad world that we live in...

Chet Baker

For the record, I have no 'followers'. Each opinion voiced here is hopefully from the heart, even yours. Not everyone who tells you what you want to know is 'A Friend' and not everyone that tells you what you do not want to know is 'An Enemy'. Sometimes experience will open the curtain between you and I and I will peek in and say something. Who am I? No one in particular. Who are you? Someone asking a question.

Rob and I are friends and I understand his post. He knows that I have hundreds of Google.com posts that have every member of the ABB in interviews that are againist drug usage. Otiel could write a book.

I just heard a cry in the dark and decided to answer it. Am I a straight-party-pooper-square-anti-drug-pig? Nope.

The first time I met Warren and Matt after a Mule show I stuck out my hand and said only one thing. And it wasn't for an autograph...I said "I'm sorry you lost your friend". I could see on both of their faces surprise and I felt the extra squeeze of my hand. I truly miss Woody everyday and I know that the Mule does also. Mule songs are full of anti-drug messages.

'opinions on reality'....yes I do have that. I took the spoon out of a new mothers hand that was intent on taking out her newborn's eyeballs. She told me that the eyes were fake and that 'Satan was behind them'. The heat was on in the house and all windows had been covered in plastic. It was August. The sweating baby was staring.sweating, in pain, and wanting help. I gave it.

That's what I thought I was doing when I posted...giving help. I care little about your twisting of words.

Why did I mention Chet Baker? Look him up on the PC. Woody and Chet Baker....Doing drugs....robs the world of nothing...mind your own business....Idiots.....Good Luck...

Game Face
(Warren Haynes)
Buzzard Rock Music (BMI)
Sail on savior
I can't take no more of your insanity wisdom
Satisfy your angels
With your cocaine and your guns
As for me I don't need them

When my shadow comes alive
And wrestles with my soul
Oh, do you really want to know

Savior, you can be what you want to be
Oh yeah, and only see what you want to see
Sail on, can't let you get next to me

To be at one with your weakness
Is your greatest strength
Guess you should be proud of your game face

Guess it always was your hallelujah
Guess it was your saving grace

Savior, you can be what you want to be
Oh yeah, and only see what you want to see
Sail on, can't let you get next to me

You can say what you want now
My eyes are open wide
How was I ever on your side

Savior, you can be what you want to be
Oh yeah, and only see what you want to see
Sail on, can't let you get next to me



[Edited on 9/30/2005 by TanDan]

[Edited on 9/30/2005 by TanDan]


RobJohnson - 9/30/2005 at 09:21 PM

TanDan, I would respectfully submit the reason you have all those quotes from the Allman Brothers against "drug usage" is that they consider it patently obvious that smoking weed isn't the same thing as cocaine, heroin, or crystal meth. The quote I mentioned from Gregg was in an interview about a month ago, and it clearly indicates that he still smokes occasionally, right now in the present tense.

Nobody in the history of the world has died from a pot overdose.

Nobody has ever tried to scoop their baby's eyeballs out after smoking weed.

I think you know this perfectly well, and it is intellectually dishonest to mention those kinds of things in a discussion about marijuana usage. Woody didn't die from smoking pot.

You have obviously seen, firsthand I should add, some of the worst possible results from the usage of man-made chemicals. However, it is inaccurate to conflate that with smoking something that is demonstrably less harmful than tobacco, which is perfectly legal. For that matter, as Sir Paul McCartney once said in a radio interview, "I've smoked pot and I've drank whiskey, and I know which one is worse for you."


Daisymae - 9/30/2005 at 09:21 PM

Thanks everyone for all the comments, opinions and advise...continue to talk amongst yourselves...I need to go pee now...

Enjoy the day!!


Bhawk - 9/30/2005 at 09:29 PM

TanDan, I certainly respect your opinons as well as the opinions of others here.

Personally, I think there is a clear difference in pot as compared to cocaine or heroin. Same as hydrocodone is quite different than morphine, aspirin is different from ibuprofen, and a triple espresso is different than an iced tea.

Alcohol kills more people and causes more damage than all of the "street drugs" combined.

You directed folks to Google Chet Baker. I did. It appears that he was done in by years of heroin abuse. Not quite the same as smoking a joint to unwind every once in a while.

I too have personally know people who have lost their fight to both drugs and alcohol. I still, however, refrain from judging those who make their own choices about the things they do in their lives. Your life is framed by the choices you make, and those choices are ultimately your responsibility, and yours alone.

As far as the ABB being "anti-drug," well, wow. I haven't listed to the ABB for 25 years and attended 29 shows for moral guidance from the band. I don't expect that from anyone, least of all musicians. Especially ones that have a mushroom for a logo.


TopDroog - 9/30/2005 at 09:46 PM

I wish they'd just legalize, regulate, and tax marijuana and be done with it.


BodineFan - 9/30/2005 at 09:49 PM

quote:
TanDan, I would respectfully submit the reason you have all those quotes from the Allman Brothers against "drug usage" is that they consider it patently obvious that smoking weed isn't the same thing as cocaine, heroin, or crystal meth. The quote I mentioned from Gregg was in an interview about a month ago, and it clearly indicates that he still smokes occasionally, right now in the present tense.

Nobody in the history of the world has died from a pot overdose.

Nobody has ever tried to scoop their baby's eyeballs out after smoking weed.





While I do not drink alcohol or use marijuana or any drugs, to be perfectly honest if I had to choose to be around a person that was stoned or drunk, I would choose the stoner. That however does not change the fact that smoking weed while on the clock or operating machinery is a bad idea and dangerous. I have been disapointed many times by pot smokers, but unlike drunks, I never had to kick their ass.

I just wish everyone could enjoy life straight instead of needing to have a buzz in their head all the time. What is that you are all suffering from that you need to check out like that, I don't get it.


TanDan - 9/30/2005 at 10:08 PM

Oh Rob...I can see the Kurosawa talks now...about how the prisim of ones self colors the view...please don't make me the bad for your good.

I have seen many, many deaths that were pot-related. No overdoses though. Body bags have a certain smell when you open them. Almost like Christmas when you open a new gift.

I have seen the things that people say I have no knowledge of... Strange statement.

Chet started out smoking pot. ( Oh no! Not another one of those gateway drug supporters!)

You all need to talk to Bird72. He knows the deal; he got the T-shirt.

Don't listen to me at all...I only know body bags....almost 30 years of them. I don't exist. I never tried to help anybody...I never dedicated my life...

[Edited on 9/30/2005 by TanDan]


robslob - 9/30/2005 at 10:30 PM

TanDan seems from his posts to be a medical professional..........so am I, and I must chime in here. There seems to be a professional opinion on the effects of marijuana vs. alcohol and other drugs in the medical community, and I have formed this opinion from personal experience. First, I worked at Kaiser Permanente as a Respiratory Therapist for 7-1/2 years. Probably because all employees belong to a Union, they did not drug test. However, I had a conflict at work and my Manager referred me to the Employee Assistance Program, a sort of confidential psychological counseling and help service, free to employees. I really didn't think I needed to go, but that's another story. The counselor asked me questions about my substance use. I told her I didn't drink or use any other drugs, but smoked marijuana. She seemed very accepting of this, never tried to caution me or refer me to an abuse program. The only disclaimer she offered was, "I want you to understand that it stays active in your system for quite some time after smoking, and in your urine for long after that." End of subject.

I recently quit that job and went to work for another hospital which DID drug test. Since I worked there some years past, I wasn't too worried about passing it. My "health screen" was scheduled for 10:00 AM; when she asked me to pee in a cup for her, the nurse added, "we're looking for narcotics in the bloodstream." Now what does that tell you? Easy interpretation: We're not looking for pot. I passed the test. And interestingly enough, I noticed on the receipt she gave me that the test included alcohol as well as narcotics. Seeing as how the test was given at 10:00 AM, this seemed very appropriate to me.

Now look at my two experiences, and they should tell you that professionals in the medical field are of the opinion that many of their employees smoke marijuana and it's OK. Now let me add a disclaimer here: Anyone who comes to work stoned in a caregiver capacity ought to be immediately relieved of their duties, and put into counseling and probation. I'll go with the position of Medical management, rather than that of any of the naysayers here who would deem to put pot on the same level as narcotics.


robslob - 9/30/2005 at 10:40 PM

Let me add one more specifically for Daisymae: I took another drug test this summer for a Respiratory Therapy contract agency. They told me they would test me; I had no idea if the test would include pot. I bought a bottle of "STRIP" for $40.00 at a local headshop. It said stay clean for 48 hours before the test, then drink the entire bottle two hours before the test and pee at least three times before the test. I doubled the clean time to 96 hours just to be safe. I still don't know if the test included pot or not, but I'm working for them, so I passed. You might try the stuff. The guy at the head shop said that from his experience, those who didn't pass mostly did not follow the instructions, tried to sneak in a little puff a night or two before (if you do that, you know you need help!!) Good luck, babe.


TanDan - 9/30/2005 at 10:57 PM

robslob. that is great....until your next unscheduled drug test.

Companies don't tell about those 'surprise' tests. I wouldn't want to have a child and a wife and 'one on the way' based on some test I took long ago to get the job.

Your house of cards could all come crashing down about you and you will become a greeter at WalMart.

Oops.....I forgot. I know nothing of what I'm talking about. Ignore me totally. My bad....


robslob - 9/30/2005 at 11:12 PM

I guess you have worked for my employer..........wait, you don't even know who it is, and I have two of them. Neither give random tests.........tests are given pre-employment only. And BTW, if I tested positive, I would not end up a greeter at Walmart, I would not even get probation with the State of Calif for first offense. Which means I could simply go to work somewhere else. And sorry about your paranoia.


Bhawk - 9/30/2005 at 11:20 PM

TanDan, if I may ask, what is your profession?


BodineFan - 9/30/2005 at 11:20 PM

I'm guessing the intrigue and sneaking around is half the fun?


TanDan - 9/30/2005 at 11:20 PM

I wasn't talking about you at WalMart...My double bad...You are a RT. Salute! (serious)

There is this little thing know as "Homeland Security"; seems they want to re-evaluate people's lifestyle. Nothing is safe anymore.


robslob - 10/1/2005 at 12:22 AM

"I'm guessing the intrigue and sneaking around is half the fun?"

Get back in your rocking chair, Grandpa, and pop open your pack of Marlboros and six pack of Bud. Hell, you didn't need any intrigue or sneaking around to get those, now did you? The Feds say it's OK to get 'em at your corner liquor store.


BodineFan - 10/1/2005 at 12:31 AM

quote:
"I'm guessing the intrigue and sneaking around is half the fun?"

Get back in your rocking chair, Grandpa, and pop open your pack of Marlboros and six pack of Bud. Hell, you didn't need any intrigue or sneaking around to get those, now did you? The Feds say it's OK to get 'em at your corner liquor store.


Hey douchebag, I don't smoke or drink.


ABBstillrockin04 - 10/1/2005 at 12:33 AM

This topic is always pretty funny when folks take it the wrong way.


OldSchool - 10/1/2005 at 12:33 AM

Just tell your parents you lost track of her because you were stoned-they'll understand


drkstr40 - 10/1/2005 at 12:51 AM

Hey Allyson, good luck figuring out which choice is best. I faced the same sort of thing about a year ago. I decided not to go after the job and went after another one. I'm not sure what I will do if the situation arises again. I do know someone who I work with at a restaurant I work at who says she will be using someone else's usrine to pass. Seems a bit risky.

Since Allyson is my friend, I took special offense from you, Mr. TanDan, because you came across like a complete holier-than-thou horses ass!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I won't speak for anyone but myself. She didn't ask you, or anyone, for your opinion on the subject. She simply asked for advice/info. No need to attack her. Go vent your anger somewhere else.


Denza - 10/1/2005 at 01:00 AM

I'll just take responsibility for my own actions. It's my life.

[Edited on 10/1/2005 by Denza]


johnwott - 10/1/2005 at 01:07 AM

quote:
Mule songs are full of anti-drug messages.



and some go the other way.

Slow Happy Boys
Don't step on the Grass Sam.

peace
John


ABBstillrockin04 - 10/1/2005 at 01:17 AM

quote:
Hey Allyson, good luck figuring out which choice is best. I faced the same sort of thing about a year ago. I decided not to go after the job and went after another one. I'm not sure what I will do if the situation arises again. I do know someone who I work with at a restaurant I work at who says she will be using someone else's usrine to pass. Seems a bit risky.

Since Allyson is my friend, I took special offense from you, Mr. TanDan, because you came across like a complete holier-than-thou horses ass!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I won't speak for anyone but myself. She didn't ask you, or anyone, for your opinion on the subject. She simply asked for advice/info. No need to attack her. Go vent your anger somewhere else.




So if she's asking for advice, which is technically in a nutshell, someones opinion about it... than why is Dan excluded from doing that?

She's a big girl. I think she can take care of her own responsibilities.


OldSchool - 10/1/2005 at 01:18 AM

Allyson,I got some stuff from the GNC store a couple of years ago that I used to pass a reefer test,I can't remember the name of it,it came in I believe a 16 ounce plastic bottle,about 2 hours before the test you drink the contents then fill the bottle twice with water & consume.Worked for me \

quote:
I do know someone who I work with at a restaurant I work at who says she will be using someone else's usrine to pass. Seems a bit risky.


Doean't the urine have to be the right temperature?Piss warm & all that.....


OldSchool - 10/1/2005 at 01:23 AM

quote:
quote:
Hey Allyson, good luck figuring out which choice is best. I faced the same sort of thing about a year ago. I decided not to go after the job and went after another one. I'm not sure what I will do if the situation arises again. I do know someone who I work with at a restaurant I work at who says she will be using someone else's usrine to pass. Seems a bit risky.

Since Allyson is my friend, I took special offense from you, Mr. TanDan, because you came across like a complete holier-than-thou horses ass!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I won't speak for anyone but myself. She didn't ask you, or anyone, for your opinion on the subject. She simply asked for advice/info. No need to attack her. Go vent your anger somewhere else.




So if she's asking for advice, which is technically in a nutshell, someones opinion about it... than why is Dan excluded from doing that?

She's a big girl. I think she can take care of her own responsibilities.


I think she was just asking for info about drug testing & how to pass the test though Mike,not about the morality or legality of getting high....


BodineFan - 10/1/2005 at 01:36 AM

quote:


I think she was just asking for info about drug testing & how to pass the test though Mike,not about the morality or legality of getting high....


Oh, ok then to answer that question, the best way to be sure you can pass a drug test on any given day, is to not do drugs. I hope that was clear and non-judgemental.

[Edited on 10/1/2005 by BodineFan]


johnwott - 10/1/2005 at 01:38 AM

quote:
quote:


I think she was just asking for info about drug testing & how to pass the test though Mike,not about the morality or legality of getting high....


Oh, ok then to answer that question, the best way to be sure you can pass a drug test on any given day, is to not do drugs. I hope that was clear and non-judgemental.

[Edited on 10/1/2005 by BodineFan]


better than calling folks names like "douchebag "


drkstr40 - 10/1/2005 at 01:39 AM

quote:
quote:


I think she was just asking for info about drug testing & how to pass the test though Mike,not about the morality or legality of getting high....


Oh, ok then to answer that question, the best way to be sure you can pass a drug test on any given day, is to not do drugs. I hope that was clear and non-judgemental.

[Edited on 10/1/2005 by BodineFan]


Completely clear and non-judgemental.


drkstr40 - 10/1/2005 at 01:41 AM

OldSchool - I asked the same question, about temp. She said it would be taped to her thigh (yum) and would stay warm enough - I would tend to agree. I think if I were taped to her thigh, I'd be nice and happy also.


peachjam - 10/1/2005 at 02:31 AM

note to self......no more pot smokin' around Dan...YIKES!!!!


fanfrom-71 - 10/1/2005 at 02:58 AM


quote:
Hey douchebag, I don't smoke or drink.
First of all! REAL nice way to speak to someone (CAN't YOU JUST FEEL THE LOVE?!!! ) Second. I wonder how many of the chest/bible thumping anti cannabis sativa non "drug" users can HONESTLY make this statement. HONESTLY!!!!


TanDan - 10/1/2005 at 03:22 AM

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----
Hey douchebag, I don't smoke or drink.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----

First of all! REAL nice way to speak to someone (CAN't YOU JUST FEEL THE LOVE?!!! ) Second. I wonder how many of the chest/bible thumping anti cannabis sativa non "drug" users can HONESTLY make this statement. HONESTLY!!!!

_-------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------------

How am I supposed to feel? I'm suddenly a ' moralizing, legalistic, hollier-than-thou, dirtbag' who nobody wants to party with. I'm going to go into the backyard and eat worms.




TanDan - 10/1/2005 at 03:35 AM

Wannabe...I was just posting about something I saw in my rearview mirror. It is known as wreckage along the way.

I'm moving on down the road and its all getting kind of fuzzy to me. Just thought I'd pass it along to the thread poster. No judgement, no morals, and no hollier than thou stance. You got pissed about that and I'm glad. Means you ain't dead yet. I'm further down the road than you and you just haven't seen what I've seen.

Yes, I mean you Wannabe. No one else here; just you.

I'm not going to pass up a chance to help someone asking for help. Period.


robslob - 10/1/2005 at 04:27 AM

"Hey, Douchebag, I don't smoke or drink"

I think my cohorts here have already answered appropriately, but..........
A little toke can likely help with that anger........


rollingcrowe - 10/1/2005 at 04:48 AM

It takes all kinds. A person has the right to do what they want, legal or not it's up to you.


Binnsjim - 10/1/2005 at 10:51 AM

quote:
Thanks everyone for all the comments, opinions and advise...continue to talk amongst yourselves...I need to go pee now...

Enjoy the day!!


Have a nice pee.

Jim


BodineFan - 10/1/2005 at 11:34 AM

quote:
"Hey, Douchebag, I don't smoke or drink"

I think my cohorts here have already answered appropriately, but..........
A little toke can likely help with that anger........


You attacked me with aspersions and assumptions. Why don't you address that. Pretty ignorant on your part to paint me as a beer chugging cigarette smoker. That would make me a hypocrite, wouldn't it? That's not me. And for the other fool, I don't read the bible either.

Smoke your weed, I don't care, but you are supporting organized crime and the human tool is far more reaching than may be obvious. Maybe no one ever died from smoking it , but the business end of it has killed many people.


ABBstillrockin04 - 10/1/2005 at 12:17 PM


Peachstatedawg - 10/1/2005 at 12:33 PM

quote:
It takes all kinds. A person has the right to do what they want, legal or not it's up to you.



Say what ? !!!???!!


aeyeq - 10/1/2005 at 12:45 PM

drug laws suck.

if i wanted to hear personal testimonies about evil drugs, i'd go to a 12 step meeting.

really funny on the Allman Brothers board...


peachjam - 10/1/2005 at 12:46 PM

[quote
Smoke your weed, I don't care, but you are supporting organized crime and the human tool is far more reaching than may be obvious. Maybe no one ever died from smoking it , but the business end of it has killed many people.




one too many anti-drug commercials here


Binnsjim - 10/1/2005 at 12:52 PM

Boy, Way too much Anti-drug B.S. I don't think this is what Ally was looking for.


rollingcrowe - 10/1/2005 at 01:00 PM

quote:
Say what ? !!!???!!


You got you drug users and anti-drug users. Everyone has a choice to do them or not. I know some people that do them that are responsilbe people. I know some people that don't who or jerks and could probably use a toke to chill out. Some people can handle drugs and some can't. The same with drinking.


crazyjoe - 10/1/2005 at 02:27 PM

quote:
[quote
Smoke your weed, I don't care, but you are supporting organized crime and the human tool is far more reaching than may be obvious. Maybe no one ever died from smoking it , but the business end of it has killed many people.


One Reason why I've been thinkin' that The Weed should be legalized, regulated and taxed much like alcohol. Here in my rural part of America the Meth problem is an epidemic and seemingly little is being done about it. There is virtually a whole generation of children I am seeing basically raising themselves and being neglected by parents whacked out on Meth, Coke and Booze. I have a friend who's wife and he take in and temporarily raise children who have been removed by the court because of abuse and neglect, it is heartbreaking to say the least, these kids respond so quickly to Love and attention and then usually all too quickly are rushed back to the parents who generally will neglect and abuse them again. 9 of 10 of these kids if old enough to express themselves , do not want to go back. Legalized weed would be one way to get the funding needed for better education, prevention and intervention. I consider myself fairly liberal, but I sometimes feel somethin' shady is goin' on when I see such a tremendous increase immigrants from south of the border in my town, many of the younger gentlemen riding around in brand new Cadillac Escalades or brand new V-8 Ford Mustangs, I by the way after 20 yrs. at the same factory still ride to work in a '94 Chevy Celebrity Station wagon. Since '97 I have had to be very carefull what I do thanx to Random Testing in my factory, I personally have not seen accidents decrease at all, nor has attendance improved much, seems folks are either responsible and safe employees, or they are not.I have seen a lot of folks hooked on Opiate based painkillers "Legally" obtained from Dr's or over the internet. Anyway, don't know if anyone will read this LOOOONG and Rambling Rant, I know I probably wouldn't, however I felt I had the right.....PEACE ALWAYS TO ALL....Joe


johnwott - 10/1/2005 at 02:36 PM

quote:



Smoke your weed, I don't care, but you are supporting organized crime and the human tool is far more reaching than may be obvious. Maybe no one ever died from smoking it , but the business end of it has killed many people.


That is caused by the prohibition. Same thing that alcohol prohibition caused.

Doesn't seem we learned any lessons on that one.


Denza - 10/1/2005 at 02:49 PM

quote:
Smoke your weed, I don't care, but you are supporting organized crime and the human tool is far more reaching than may be obvious. Maybe no one ever died from smoking it , but the business end of it has killed many people.



One of the best cases for legalization. The perfect example of why it should be legal to grow a few plants for your own personal consumption. Of course the civil disobedients that already do that have removed the money/crime equation whether it done by the cops or the robbers.

I never really imagined that in 2005 that it would still be Nancy Reagan vs. NORML debate.



Just another side of the coin...the devil ain't all bad...



http://cis.nci.nih.gov/fact/8_4.htm

Marijuana Use in Supportive Care for Cancer Patients

There has been much interest in the use of marijuana to treat a number of medical problems, including chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in cancer patients. Two forms of marijuana have been used: compounds related to the active chemical constituent of marijuana taken by mouth and marijuana cigarettes. Dronabinol (Marinol®), a synthetic form of the active marijuana constituent delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), is available by prescription for use as an antiemetic. In 1985, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved its use for the treatment of nausea and vomiting associated with cancer chemotherapy in patients who had not responded to the standard antiemetic drugs.

Marijuana cigarettes have been used to treat chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, and research has shown that THC is more quickly absorbed from marijuana smoke than from an oral preparation. However, any antiemetic effects of smoking marijuana may not be consistent because of varying potency, depending on the source of the marijuana contained in the cigarette.

The Institute of Medicine (IOM), part of the National Academy of Sciences, has published a report assessing the scientific knowledge of health effects and possible medical uses of marijuana. The IOM project was funded by the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy. The IOM released its report on March 17, 1999.

Copies of the report, Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base, are available from National Academy Press, Lockbox 285, 2101 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20055; (202) 334–3313 or 1–888–624–8373.

**********************************************

By Miranda Hitti
WebMD Medical News Reviewed By Brunilda Nazario, MD
on Tuesday, September 14, 2004

Sept. 14, 2004 -- Marijuana's active ingredient may form the basis for new antiviral drugs that fight cancer-causing herpes viruses.

Professor Peter Medveczky, MD, of the University of South Florida's medical microbiology and immunology department, and H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute in Tampa, and colleagues worked on the study.

Their report appears in the Sept. 15 issue of the journal BMC Medicine.

Key Ingredient

The researchers focused on marijuana's active ingredient, delta-9-tetrahydrocannibol (THC).

In tissue culture tests, THC blocked the reactivation of various types of herpes viruses. Infection with herpes virus is recurrent and lifelong. The virus lies dormant in nerve tissue in infected people after symptoms have gone away. Later the virus can reactivate itself leading to an increasing number of viruses and causing another symptomatic infection.

In the study, researchers tested THC against various herpes viruses including Kaposi's sarcoma-associated herpes virus (KSHV) and Epstein-Barr virus.

Kaposi's sarcoma, prevalent among people with AIDS and a common form of cancer in Africa, stems from KSHV.

Cancers of cells from the immune system such as Burkitt's lymphoma and Hodgkin's disease are associated with Epstein-Barr virus, a member of the herpes virus family.

In the presence of THC, cells infected with the viruses couldn't reactivate.

THC may interfere with a gene called ORF50, which is found in these herpes viruses, say the researchers. This gene helps turn on the virus's machinery that is involved with reactivating the virus; it also helps start viral replication.

***************************************************

from Scientific American.com

Marijuana Extract Fights Brain Cancer in Mice

The current debate over medical marijuana hinges on its use as pain medication. But an extract of the plant could one day form the basis of cancer treatments. New findings indicate that Cannabis extracts can shrink brain tumors by blocking the growth of blood vessels that nourish them.
Manuel Guzman of Complutense University in Spain and his colleagues tested extracts of marijuana known as delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinols in 30 mice that had brain tumors. The researchers analyzed the animals' DNA and identified 267 genes associated with blood vessel growth, or angiogenesis. The cannabinoids inhibited the expression of several genes critical to angiogenesis known as the VEGF (vascular endothelial growth factor) pathway. “Blockade of the VEGF pathway constitutes one of the most promising antitumoral approaches currently available,” Guzman says. The cannabinoids work by increasing the potency of a fat molecule known as ceramide, the team posits. Increased ceramide activity, in turn, inhibits cells that would normally produce VEGF and encourage blood vessel growth.

The scientists also tested the therapy on tumors taken from two patients who had not responded to conventional therapy for their glioblastoma, a deadly form of brain cancer. After the cannabinoid injections, both tumors exhibited decreased VEGF levels. Writing in the current issue of the journal Cancer Research, the team notes, however, that a combination of therapies will most likely be required to obtain significant clinical results. --Sarah Graham

*************************

Some currently accepted uses for Medical Marijuana Program...(this left out anorexia in cancer patients)...

Debilitating medical conditions that qualify for MMP are:

(a) Cancer, glaucoma, positive status for immunodeficiency virus or acquired
immune deficiency syndrome, or treatment for these conditions;
(b) A medical condition or treatment for a medical condition that produces,
for a specific patient, one or more of the following:
(i) Cachexia;
(ii) Severe pain;
(iii) Severe nausea;
(iv) Seizures, including but not limited to seizures caused by epilepsy; or
(v) Persistent muscle spasms, including, but not limited to, spasms caused by multiple sclerosis.








[Edited on 10/1/2005 by Denza]


Binnsjim - 10/1/2005 at 02:53 PM

quote:
quote:
Smoke your weed, I don't care, but you are supporting organized crime and the human tool is far more reaching than may be obvious. Maybe no one ever died from smoking it , but the business end of it has killed many people.



One of the best cases for legalization. The perfect example of why it should be legal to grow a few plants for your own personal consumption. Of course the civil disobedients that already do that have removed the money/crime equation whether it done by the cops or the robbers.




I'm with you all the way brother. Good Reading

I never really imagined that in 2005 that it would still be Nancy Reagan vs. NORML debate.


Just another side of the coin...the devil ain't all bad...

http://cis.nci.nih.gov/fact/8_4.htm

Marijuana Use in Supportive Care for Cancer Patients

There has been much interest in the use of marijuana to treat a number of medical problems, including chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in cancer patients. Two forms of marijuana have been used: compounds related to the active chemical constituent of marijuana taken by mouth and marijuana cigarettes. Dronabinol (Marinol®), a synthetic form of the active marijuana constituent delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), is available by prescription for use as an antiemetic. In 1985, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved its use for the treatment of nausea and vomiting associated with cancer chemotherapy in patients who had not responded to the standard antiemetic drugs.

Marijuana cigarettes have been used to treat chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, and research has shown that THC is more quickly absorbed from marijuana smoke than from an oral preparation. However, any antiemetic effects of smoking marijuana may not be consistent because of varying potency, depending on the source of the marijuana contained in the cigarette.

The Institute of Medicine (IOM), part of the National Academy of Sciences, has published a report assessing the scientific knowledge of health effects and possible medical uses of marijuana. The IOM project was funded by the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy. The IOM released its report on March 17, 1999.

Copies of the report, Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base, are available from National Academy Press, Lockbox 285, 2101 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20055; (202) 334–3313 or 1–888–624–8373.

**********************************************

By Miranda Hitti
WebMD Medical News Reviewed By Brunilda Nazario, MD
on Tuesday, September 14, 2004

Sept. 14, 2004 -- Marijuana's active ingredient may form the basis for new antiviral drugs that fight cancer-causing herpes viruses.

Professor Peter Medveczky, MD, of the University of South Florida's medical microbiology and immunology department, and H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute in Tampa, and colleagues worked on the study.

Their report appears in the Sept. 15 issue of the journal BMC Medicine.

Key Ingredient

The researchers focused on marijuana's active ingredient, delta-9-tetrahydrocannibol (THC).

In tissue culture tests, THC blocked the reactivation of various types of herpes viruses. Infection with herpes virus is recurrent and lifelong. The virus lies dormant in nerve tissue in infected people after symptoms have gone away. Later the virus can reactivate itself leading to an increasing number of viruses and causing another symptomatic infection.

In the study, researchers tested THC against various herpes viruses including Kaposi's sarcoma-associated herpes virus (KSHV) and Epstein-Barr virus.

Kaposi's sarcoma, prevalent among people with AIDS and a common form of cancer in Africa, stems from KSHV.

Cancers of cells from the immune system such as Burkitt's lymphoma and Hodgkin's disease are associated with Epstein-Barr virus, a member of the herpes virus family.

In the presence of THC, cells infected with the viruses couldn't reactivate.

THC may interfere with a gene called ORF50, which is found in these herpes viruses, say the researchers. This gene helps turn on the virus's machinery that is involved with reactivating the virus; it also helps start viral replication.

***************************************************

from Scientific American.com

Marijuana Extract Fights Brain Cancer in Mice

The current debate over medical marijuana hinges on its use as pain medication. But an extract of the plant could one day form the basis of cancer treatments. New findings indicate that Cannabis extracts can shrink brain tumors by blocking the growth of blood vessels that nourish them.
Manuel Guzman of Complutense University in Spain and his colleagues tested extracts of marijuana known as delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinols in 30 mice that had brain tumors. The researchers analyzed the animals' DNA and identified 267 genes associated with blood vessel growth, or angiogenesis. The cannabinoids inhibited the expression of several genes critical to angiogenesis known as the VEGF (vascular endothelial growth factor) pathway. “Blockade of the VEGF pathway constitutes one of the most promising antitumoral approaches currently available,” Guzman says. The cannabinoids work by increasing the potency of a fat molecule known as ceramide, the team posits. Increased ceramide activity, in turn, inhibits cells that would normally produce VEGF and encourage blood vessel growth.

The scientists also tested the therapy on tumors taken from two patients who had not responded to conventional therapy for their glioblastoma, a deadly form of brain cancer. After the cannabinoid injections, both tumors exhibited decreased VEGF levels. Writing in the current issue of the journal Cancer Research, the team notes, however, that a combination of therapies will most likely be required to obtain significant clinical results. --Sarah Graham

*************************

Some currently accepted uses for Medical Marijuana Program...(this left out anorexia in cancer patients)...

Debilitating medical conditions that qualify for MMP are:

(a) Cancer, glaucoma, positive status for immunodeficiency virus or acquired
immune deficiency syndrome, or treatment for these conditions;
(b) A medical condition or treatment for a medical condition that produces,
for a specific patient, one or more of the following:
(i) Cachexia;
(ii) Severe pain;
(iii) Severe nausea;
(iv) Seizures, including but not limited to seizures caused by epilepsy; or
(v) Persistent muscle spasms, including, but not limited to, spasms caused by multiple sclerosis.






[Edited on 10/1/2005 by Denza]


Daisymae - 10/1/2005 at 02:59 PM

still at it huh???

I'll give you something even better to consider...I am off to visit my Grandmother for a few days. She is 95 yrs old and her body has been overtaken with cancer. The Dr's have started her on Chemotherapy. Why I don't know...She is in a ton of pain. I know there have been posts about the use of medicinal marijuana on this site...that's what needs to be legalized. If smoking a joint could help her feel better then she should be able to use it. She is in a ton of pain and it breaks my heart. Last month I got married and all grandma cared about was being there for me. It was touch and go if should would even make the two hr trip. She showed up in a wheelchair escorted by her nurse. The look on her face to see me happy with my "young man", that's what she calls my husband, was priceless.
The job that I am applying for is in Phoenix. We currently live in Rhode Island. This could potentially be the last few days that I spend with a woman that I wholeheartedly admire and love. This coming week is the Jewish New Year and I pray that grandma finds peace in her final days and that the little things in life bring her joy.

So forget about the stupid drug test. I am all for the legalization, regulation and taxation of marijuana...especially if it can help people like my grandmother feel more comfortable in their final days!!!

Thanks for listening...

Allyson


Peachstatedawg - 10/1/2005 at 04:09 PM

quote:
It takes all kinds. A person has the right to do what they want, legal or not it's up to you.




No one has the "right" to do everything they choose to do. Rights conform with justice, law, or morality. You have the freedom to make choices. But you don't have the "right" to steal another's property, or the "right" to drive an automobile at any speed, and you don't have the "right" to smoke or possess pot.


dutchoneill - 10/1/2005 at 04:14 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
What's more dangerous pot or alcohol? Drinking is legal? The laws don't make sense.


No but the achohol industry is hugh and thery pay taxes.
I don't understand the "but"...

if marijuana were legal, I'm sure it would be taxed just like cigarettes and booze...


No but this time

Alcohol is controlled (for the most part) by the government, thus the taxes. There would be no way for the government to control weed. Sure they could try and corner the market, package it, tax it etc...but they could never control the underground flow. If they can't control it and make money off of it, make it illegal.


peachjam - 10/1/2005 at 04:22 PM

Sure they could control it and make money off of it. Exactly the same way they do alcohol and cigarettes, you can grow it and you can sell it as long as you conform to the standards set by the government and pay the taxes just like everything else on the market. If you were caught doing it otherwise then you would just face the same ungodly harsh penalties as are already in place.


Peachstatedawg - 10/1/2005 at 04:25 PM

quote:
quote:
Say what ? !!!???!!


You got you drug users and anti-drug users. Everyone has a choice to do them or not. I know some people that do them that are responsilbe people.........



Dictionary.com definition of responsible: Based on or characterized by good judgment or sound thinking.

Don't see how an illegal drug user fits that definition.


peachjam - 10/1/2005 at 04:33 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Say what ? !!!???!!


You got you drug users and anti-drug users. Everyone has a choice to do them or not. I know some people that do them that are responsilbe people.........



Dictionary.com definition of responsible: Based on or characterized by good judgment or sound thinking.

Don't see how an illegal drug user fits that definition.


what about a legal drug user?????


Peachstatedawg - 10/1/2005 at 04:41 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Say what ? !!!???!!


You got you drug users and anti-drug users. Everyone has a choice to do them or not. I know some people that do them that are responsilbe people.........



Dictionary.com definition of responsible: Based on or characterized by good judgment or sound thinking.

Don't see how an illegal drug user fits that definition.


what about a legal drug user?????



You're right. Or a legal drug abuser


peachjam - 10/1/2005 at 04:43 PM

ok, so have switched from user to abuser. that's a step in the right direction.


Peachstatedawg - 10/1/2005 at 04:46 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Say what ? !!!???!!


You got you drug users and anti-drug users. Everyone has a choice to do them or not. I know some people that do them that are responsilbe people.........



Dictionary.com definition of responsible: Based on or characterized by good judgment or sound thinking.

Don't see how an illegal drug user, or a legal drug abuser fits that definition.



Slammer - 10/1/2005 at 04:47 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
What's more dangerous pot or alcohol? Drinking is legal? The laws don't make sense.


No but the achohol industry is hugh and thery pay taxes.
I don't understand the "but"...

if marijuana were legal, I'm sure it would be taxed just like cigarettes and booze...


No but this time

Alcohol is controlled (for the most part) by the government, thus the taxes. There would be no way for the government to control weed. Sure they could try and corner the market, package it, tax it etc...but they could never control the underground flow. If they can't control it and make money off of it, make it illegal.


If weed was legalized, regulated and taxed, there probably wouldn't be the underground market. If it was legalized, the price would come down drastically, to the point that it is not worth the time and effort for the mexican mafia to sell it. The same analogy could apply to alchohol, are we allowed to distill our own booze? Yes. Are we allowed to grow our own tobacco? Sure. Using the tobacco scenario, would you grow the crop, harvest it, cure it, chop it, roll it, stick little filters on the end and wrap them up into packages, would you sell it for a few bucks? No. There isn't enough money for the time and labor involved. Same thing with weed. The street value would drop if it were legal, taking away the incentive for the criminal element.

To rephrase: we have the right to do as we please, legal or not, but only if does not infringe on the rights of others.

Ally, God bless your granny, and she should be able to take whatever helps the pain, legal or not.


Slammer - 10/1/2005 at 04:50 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Say what ? !!!???!!


You got you drug users and anti-drug users. Everyone has a choice to do them or not. I know some people that do them that are responsilbe people.........



Dictionary.com definition of responsible: Based on or characterized by good judgment or sound thinking.

Don't see how an illegal drug user, or a legal drug abuser fits that definition.





Can you really judge a person because of one character trait?


peachjam - 10/1/2005 at 04:55 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Say what ? !!!???!!


You got you drug users and anti-drug users. Everyone has a choice to do them or not. I know some people that do them that are responsilbe people.........



Dictionary.com definition of responsible: Based on or characterized by good judgment or sound thinking.

Don't see how an illegal drug user, or a legal drug abuser fits that definition.





just to make sure I'm staying on board with what you're saying here after the rephrasing....if you even use anything that the government has deemed illegal then there is no way you can be a responsible person. Is this correct???


Slammer - 10/1/2005 at 04:58 PM

Hey Dawg, you ever been called for jury duty?

Have you ever been given too much change at a fast food joint?

Do you vote the popular party line, or do you vote your heart?

Would you tell a lie to protect someones' feelings?


ZigZagMan - 10/1/2005 at 05:00 PM

I took a drug test once. I got an A


Roll another one just like the other one


Slammer - 10/1/2005 at 05:02 PM

quote:
I took a drug test once. I got an A


Roll another one just like the other one


This one's burned to the end, so c'mon, be a real friend.


fsducati - 10/1/2005 at 05:18 PM

DaisyMae start looking for a new job. TheTHC will stay in your body for at least 30 to 45 days depending hos much you smoke and your weight. All of the water drinking will not fluch it out. Everyone who tells you that are wrong. If it is a piss test you will fail, if it is a blood draw you will fail and if it is a hair sample you will fail. You should have listen to Nancy R. and just said no.
I am not sure what kind of job you were looking at put I would not want to work with a pill poping weed head especially if I had to rely on you for my life or the lives of others. There is a reason it is called dope. But it sounds like with your personal issuses and work background you should have no trouble getting a good job in the fast food or janitorial industries.


Slammer - 10/1/2005 at 05:25 PM

quote:
DaisyMae start looking for a new job. TheTHC will stay in your body for at least 30 to 45 days depending hos much you smoke and your weight. All of the water drinking will not fluch it out. Everyone who tells you that are wrong. If it is a piss test you will fail, if it is a blood draw you will fail and if it is a hair sample you will fail. You should have listen to Nancy R. and just said no.
I am not sure what kind of job you were looking at put I would not want to work with a pill poping weed head especially if I had to rely on you for my life or the lives of others. There is a reason it is called dope. But it sounds like with your personal issuses and work background you should have no trouble getting a good job in the fast food or janitorial industries.


Pill popping weed head?

C'mon, dude, lighten up. Seems you're the one with issues.


Peachstatedawg - 10/1/2005 at 05:27 PM

quote:
Hey Dawg, you ever been called for jury duty?

Have you ever been given too much change at a fast food joint?

Do you vote the popular party line, or do you vote your heart?

Would you tell a lie to protect someones' feelings?






Not sure what you mean.

My point was that using drugs doesn't characterize good judgment or sound thinking. Wouldn't you agree?


fsducati - 10/1/2005 at 05:32 PM

DaisyMae, Ally I was doing a little goofing on you in y last post. But the THC wll stay in your fat cells for up to 45 days depanding on your weight. You are facing one of those things in your life that is being dictated by past actions. Hope all goes well for you. I don't want to see anyone suffer to much for bad past chocies, hell it is just alittle weed, you now see the 'living with consequeses of your actions' thing first hand.


Slammer - 10/1/2005 at 05:41 PM

quote:
quote:
Hey Dawg, you ever been called for jury duty?

Have you ever been given too much change at a fast food joint?

Do you vote the popular party line, or do you vote your heart?

Would you tell a lie to protect someones' feelings?






Not sure what you mean.

My point was that using drugs doesn't characterize good judgment or sound thinking. Wouldn't you agree?


And my point is that one character trait doesn't define the person.

I am a registered independent and vote in all elections
I am self employed and pay my fair share in taxes
I report for jury duty when called upon
I volunteer time at my local non profit organization
I donate a tidy sum to the SPCA
and I smoke weed

Using your logic, I am an irresponsible person, unable to use good judgement and sound thinking, isn't that correct?


Peachstatedawg - 10/1/2005 at 05:54 PM







And my point is that one character trait doesn't define the person.

I am a registered independent and vote in all elections
I am self employed and pay my fair share in taxes
I report for jury duty when called upon
I volunteer time at my local non profit organization
I donate a tidy sum to the SPCA
and I smoke weed

Using your logic, I am an irresponsible person, unable to use good judgement and sound thinking, isn't that correct?






[Edited on 10/1/2005 by Peachstatedawg]


Peachstatedawg - 10/1/2005 at 05:54 PM

[






And my point is that one character trait doesn't define the person.

I am a registered independent and vote in all elections
I am self employed and pay my fair share in taxes
I report for jury duty when called upon
I volunteer time at my local non profit organization
I donate a tidy sum to the SPCA
and I smoke weed

Using your logic, I am an irresponsible person, unable to use good judgement and sound thinking, isn't that correct?





All I said was, "Using drugs doesn't characterize good judgment or sound thinking. Wouldn't you agree ? "


Denza - 10/1/2005 at 06:58 PM

Marijuana is taken by
".....musicians. And I'm not speaking about good musicians, but the jazz type..."

HARRY J ANSLINGER
Commissioner of the US Bureau of Narcotics 1930-1962




A little history about the criminalization of cannabis and marijuana law seems in order for educated discussion...if you read nothing else, read what I call Anslinger-isms...I put them in italics...they are absolutley priceless...



The social history of cannabis dates back millennia. Throughout recorded history, humanity has used it in a variety of forms: Chinese herbalists noted the medical potential of cannabis thousands of years ago. This relationship changed dramatically when the U.S. government began a campaign of prohibition against hemp in 1937, which has continued (and intensified) to the present day.

For most of human history, marijuana has been completely legal. It's not a recently discovered plant, nor is it a long-standing law. Marijuana has been illegal for less than 1% of the time that it's been in use. Its known uses go back further than 7,000 B.C. and it was legal as recently as when Ronald Reagan was a boy.

America's first marijuana law was enacted at Jamestown Colony, Virginia in 1619. It was a law "ordering" all farmers to grow Indian hempseed. There were several other "must grow" laws over the next 200 years (you could be jailed for not growing hemp during times of shortage in Virginia between 1763 and 1767), and during most of that time, hemp was legal tender (you could even pay your taxes with hemp -- try that today!) Hemp was such a critical crop for a number of purposes (including essential war requirements - rope, etc.) that the government went out of its way to encourage
growth.

The United States Census of 1850 counted 8,327 hemp "plantations" (minimum 2,000-acre farm) growing cannabis hemp for cloth, canvas and even the cordage used for baling
cotton. Native Americans grew it as well.


Many people assume that marijuana was made illegal through some kind of process involving scientific, medical, and government hearings; that it was to protect the citizens from what was determined to be a dangerous drug.

The actual story shows a much different picture. Those who voted on the legal fate of this plant never had the facts, but were dependent on information supplied by those who had a specific agenda to deceive lawmakers. The House Hearing on The Marijuana Tax Act of 1937 featured the wisdom of Harry J. Anslinger who was essentially the first Drug Czar.

Anslinger was an extremely ambitious man, and he recognized the Bureau of Narcotics as an amazing career opportunity -- a new government agency with the opportunity to define both the problem and the solution. He immediately realized that opiates and cocaine wouldn't be enough to help build his agency, so he latched on to marijuana and
started to work on making it illegal at the federal level.

Anslinger immediately drew upon the themes of racism and violence to draw national attention to the problem he wanted to create. Some of his quotes regarding marijuana...


"There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the US, and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos, and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz, and swing, result from marijuana use. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers, and any others."

"...the primary reason to outlaw marijuana is its effect on the degenerate races."

"Marijuana is an addictive drug which produces in its users insanity, criminality, and death."

"Reefer makes darkies think they're as good as white men."

"Marihuana leads to pacifism and communist brainwashing"

"You smoke a joint and you're likely to kill your brother."

"Marijuana is the most violence-causing drug in the history of mankind."

And he loved to pull out his own version of the "assassin" definition:
"In the year 1090, there was founded in Persia the religious and military order of the Assassins, whose history is one of cruelty, barbarity, and murder, and for good reason: the members were confirmed users of hashish, or marihuana, and it is from the 'Arabs' 'hashashin' that we have the English word 'assassin.'"


Harry Anslinger got some additional help from William Randolf Hearst, owner of a huge chain of newspapers. Hearst had lots of reasons to help. First, he hated Mexicans. Second, he had invested heavily in the timber industry to support his newspaper chain and didn't want to see the development of hemp paper in competition. Third, he had lost 800,000 acres of timberland to Pancho Villa, so he hated Mexicans. Fourth, telling lurid lies about Mexicans (and the devil marijuana weed causing violence) sold newspapers, making him rich.

Some samples from the San Francisco Examiner:

"Marihuana makes fiends of boys in thirty days -- Hashish goads users to bloodlust."

"By the tons it is coming into this country -- the deadly, dreadful poison that racks and tears not only the body, but the very heart and soul of every human being who once becomes a slave to it in any of its cruel and devastating forms.... Marihuana is a short cut to the insane asylum. Smoke marihuana cigarettes for a month and what was once your brain will be nothing but a storehouse of horrid specters. Hasheesh makes a murderer who kills for the love of killing out of the mildest mannered man who ever laughed at the idea that any habit could ever get him...."

And other nationwide columns...

"Users of marijuana become STIMULATED as they inhale the drug and are LIKELY TO DO
ANYTHING. Most crimes of violence in this section, especially in country districts are laid to users of that drug."

"Was it marijuana, the new Mexican drug, that nerved the murderous arm of Clara Phillips when she hammered out her victim's life in Los Angeles?... THREE-FOURTHS OF THE CRIMES of violence in this country today are committed by DOPE SLAVES -- that is a matter of cold record."

Hearst and Anslinger were then supported by Dupont chemical company and various pharmaceutical companies in the effort to outlaw cannabis. Dupont had patented nylon, and wanted hemp removed as competition. The pharmaceutical companies could neither identify nor standardize cannabis dosages, and besides, with cannabis, folks could grow their own medicine and not have to purchase it from large companies.

This all set the stage for...

The Marijuana Tax Act of 1937.

After two years of secret planning, Anslinger brought his plan to Congress -- complete with a scrapbook full of sensational Hearst editorials, stories of ax murderers who had supposedly smoked marijuana, and racial slurs.

It was a remarkably short set of hearings.

The one fly in Anslinger's ointment was the appearance by Dr. William C. Woodward, Legislative Council of the American Medical Association.

Woodward started by slamming Harry Anslinger and the Bureau of Narcotics for distorting earlier AMA statements that had nothing to do with marijuana and making them appear to be AMA endorsement for Anslinger's view.

He also reproached the legislature and the Bureau for using the term marijuana in the legislation and not publicizing it as a bill about cannabis or hemp. At this point, marijuana (or marihuana) was a sensationalist word used to refer to Mexicans smoking a drug and had not been connected in most people's minds to the existing cannabis/hemp plant. Thus, many who had legitimate reasons to oppose the bill weren't even aware of it.

Woodward went on to state that the AMA was opposed to the legislation and further questioned the approach of the hearings, coming close to outright accusation of misconduct by Anslinger and the committee:


"That there is a certain amount of narcotic addiction of an objectionable character no one will deny. The newspapers have called attention to it so prominently that there must be some grounds for [their] statements [even Woodward was partially taken in by Hearst's propaganda]. It has surprised me, however, that the facts on which these statements have been based have not been brought before this committee by competent primary evidence. We are referred to newspaper publications concerning the prevalence of marihuana addiction. We are told that the use of marihuana causes crime. But yet no one has been produced from the Bureau of Prisons to show the number of prisoners who have been found addicted to the marihuana habit. An informed inquiry shows that the Bureau of Prisons has no evidence on that point.

You have been told that school children are great users of marihuana cigarettes. No one has been summoned from the Children's Bureau to show the nature and extent of the habit, among children. Inquiry of the Children's Bureau shows that they have had no occasion to investigate it and know nothing particularly of it. Inquiry of the Office of Education--- and they certainly should know something of the prevalence of the habit among the school children of the country, if there is a prevalent habit--- indicates that they have had no occasion to investigate and know nothing of it.

Moreover, there is in the Treasury Department itself, the Public Health Service, with its Division of Mental Hygiene. The Division of Mental Hygiene was, in the first place, the Division of Narcotics. It was converted into the Division of Mental Hygiene, I think, about 1930. That particular Bureau has control at the present time of the narcotics farms that were created about 1929 or 1930 and came into operation a few years later. No one has been summoned from that Bureau to give evidence on that point.

Informal inquiry by me indicates that they have had no record of any marihuana of Cannabis addicts who have ever been committed to those farms. The bureau of Public Health Service has also a division of pharmacology. If you desire evidence as to the pharmacology of Cannabis, that obviously is the place where you can get direct and primary evidence, rather than the indirect hearsay evidence."

Committee members then proceeded to attack Dr. Woodward, questioning his motives in
opposing the legislation. Even the Chairman joined in:

The Chairman: If you want to advise us on legislation, you ought to come here with some constructive proposals, rather than criticism, rather than trying to throw obstacles in the way of something that the Federal Government is trying to do. It has not only an unselfish motive in this, but they have a serious responsibility.

Dr. Woodward: We cannot understand yet, Mr. Chairman, why this bill should have been prepared in secret for 2 years without any intimation, even, to the profession, that it was being prepared.

After some further bantering...

The Chairman: I would like to read a quotation from a recent editorial in the Washington Times:

The marihuana cigarette is one of the most insidious of all forms of dope, largely because of the failure of the public to understand its fatal qualities.

The Nation is almost defenseless against it, having no Federal laws to cope with it and virtually no organized campaign for combating it.

The result is tragic.

School children are the prey of peddlers who infest school neighborhoods.

High school boys and girls buy the destructive weed without knowledge of its capacity
of harm, and conscienceless dealers sell it with impunity.

This is a national problem, and it must have national attention.

The fatal marihuana cigarette must be recognized as a deadly drug, and American
children must be protected against it. That is a pretty severe indictment. They say it is a national question and that it requires effective legislation. Of course, in a general way, you have responded to all of these statements; but that indicates very clearly that it is an evil of such magnitude that it is recognized by the press of the country as such. And that was basically it. Yellow journalism won over medical science.

The committee passed the legislation on. And on the floor of the house, the entire discussion was:

Member from upstate New York: "Mr. Speaker, what is this bill about?"

Speaker Rayburn: "I don't know. It has something to do with a thing called marihuana. I think it's a narcotic of some kind."

"Mr. Speaker, does the American Medical Association support this bill?"

Member on the committee jumps up and says: "Their Doctor Wentworth[sic] came down
here. They support this bill 100 percent."

And on the basis of that lie, on August 2, 1937, marijuana became illegal at the federal level.





ZigZagMan - 10/1/2005 at 07:05 PM

NEWS FLASH


The movie Reefer Madness is not a documentary


BodineFan - 10/1/2005 at 07:10 PM

quote:
NEWS FLASH


The movie Reefer Madness is not a documentary


What about "Up in Smoke"?


Denza - 10/1/2005 at 07:13 PM

quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----
NEWS FLASH


The movie Reefer Madness is not a documentary
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----



What about "Up in Smoke"?


I think that is a biography.


BodineFan - 10/1/2005 at 08:01 PM

quote:

You got you drug users and anti-drug users. Everyone has a choice to do them or not. I know some people that do them that are responsilbe people. I know some people that don't who or jerks and could probably use a toke to chill out. Some people can handle drugs and some can't. The same with drinking.


The phrase "handle drugs" or alcohol also, always makes me laugh, because if you can handle life, you don't need either.

[Edited on 10/1/2005 by BodineFan]


cortezthekiller - 10/1/2005 at 08:01 PM

quote:
NEWS FLASH


The movie Reefer Madness is not a documentary



It's turning all your children into Hooligans and Whores!!


BodineFan - 10/1/2005 at 08:06 PM

quote:



It's turning all your children into Hooligans and Whores!!


Hmmm, I may have to reconsider my position.


ABBstillrockin04 - 10/1/2005 at 09:27 PM

quote:
quote:

The phrase "handle drugs" or alcohol also, always makes me laugh, because if you can handle life, you don't need either.

[Edited on 10/1/2005 by BodineFan]

That's because you are better than everyone else.


Dude go away. You're the one being Negative throughout this whole thread.


BodineFan - 10/1/2005 at 10:07 PM

quote:


Dude go away. You're the one being Negative throughout this whole thread.

Better read the thread again then, sir.


I couldn't figure out if he was talking to me or you.


yurtle - 10/1/2005 at 10:37 PM

I'll be glad when this thread dies or hits 10 K post and gets closed like all good threads must


rollingcrowe - 10/1/2005 at 11:50 PM

quote:
No one has the "right" to do everything they choose to do. Rights conform with justice, law, or morality. You have the freedom to make choices. But you don't have the "right" to steal another's property, or the "right" to drive an automobile at any speed, and you don't have the "right" to smoke or possess pot.


You must be a republican.


Slammer - 10/2/2005 at 02:38 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Hey Dawg, you ever been called for jury duty?

Have you ever been given too much change at a fast food joint?

Do you vote the popular party line, or do you vote your heart?

Would you tell a lie to protect someones' feelings?






Not sure what you mean.

My point was that using drugs doesn't characterize good judgment or sound thinking. Wouldn't you agree?


And my point is that one character trait doesn't define the person.

I am a registered independent and vote in all elections
I am self employed and pay my fair share in taxes
I report for jury duty when called upon
I volunteer time at my local non profit organization
I donate a tidy sum to the SPCA
and I smoke weed

Using your logic, I am an irresponsible person, unable to use good judgement and sound thinking, isn't that correct?


All I said was, "Using drugs doesn't characterize good judgment or sound thinking. Wouldn't you agree ? "


I don't agree, because that would be judgemental


WharfRat - 10/2/2005 at 02:42 AM


johnwott - 10/2/2005 at 02:56 AM

quote:
quote:
It takes all kinds. A person has the right to do what they want, legal or not it's up to you.




No one has the "right" to do everything they choose to do. Rights conform with justice, law, or morality. You have the freedom to make choices. But you don't have the "right" to steal another's property, or the "right" to drive an automobile at any speed, and you don't have the "right" to smoke or possess pot.


Where is the morality in arresting people for growing flowers to treat disease and intractable pain?

And giving sick folks long prison sentences.

pot laws are not about morality. It's about money and market share for legal drugs and
fibers other than hemp.

if many religious and health organization support marijuana for sick folks regardless of the law,
then who really has the moral high ground?

I have intractable nerve pain from an autoimmune disease that only marijuana relieves.
But I have to suffer when I can't find it because of stupid laws.

Someone show me the morality of that.

Peace
John




fanfrom-71 - 10/2/2005 at 02:56 AM

Just another proud american,for a work free drug place.


robslob - 10/2/2005 at 11:42 AM

I've had a LOT of posts on this thread.........but the Right Wing mentality of that last one, and many of the others, tells me it's time to opt out. Very hard for me to believe this is a Forum on the website of a band which has a mushroom as it's official logo.


ozzypie - 10/2/2005 at 02:11 PM

quote:
still at it huh???

I'll give you something even better to consider...I am off to visit my Grandmother for a few days. She is 95 yrs old and her body has been overtaken with cancer. The Dr's have started her on Chemotherapy. Why I don't know...She is in a ton of pain. I know there have been posts about the use of medicinal marijuana on this site...that's what needs to be legalized. If smoking a joint could help her feel better then she should be able to use it. She is in a ton of pain and it breaks my heart. Last month I got married and all grandma cared about was being there for me. It was touch and go if should would even make the two hr trip. She showed up in a wheelchair escorted by her nurse. The look on her face to see me happy with my "young man", that's what she calls my husband, was priceless.
The job that I am applying for is in Phoenix. We currently live in Rhode Island. This could potentially be the last few days that I spend with a woman that I wholeheartedly admire and love. This coming week is the Jewish New Year and I pray that grandma finds peace in her final days and that the little things in life bring her joy.

So forget about the stupid drug test. I am all for the legalization, regulation and taxation of marijuana...especially if it can help people like my grandmother feel more comfortable in their final days!!!

Thanks for listening...

Allyson


I'm sorry to hear about your grandmother Daisymae, my sister is in the same situation and they give her the chemotherapy not to treat the cancer, because at this point it can't, but rather they give it to her because it's supposed to help ease her pain and suffering.


robslob - 10/2/2005 at 02:59 PM

Gotta add one last post: DENZA, thank you so much for the most interesting post on Harry Anslinger and the history of marijuana legality in the U.S.


stillrockin05 - 10/2/2005 at 06:03 PM







And my point is that one character trait doesn't define the person.

I am a registered independent and vote in all elections
I am self employed and pay my fair share in taxes
I report for jury duty when called upon
I volunteer time at my local non profit organization
I donate a tidy sum to the SPCA
and I smoke weed

Using your logic, I am an irresponsible person, unable to use good judgement and sound thinking, isn't that correct?






I think that's an example of a process of the mind called self-justification.
That's when a person knows he is wrong in his attitude or actions and tries to shift the attention to other aspects of his behavior that he thinks cancels the wrong doing.

I'm middle school teacher and I deal with it everday.


fast43 - 10/2/2005 at 06:09 PM

quote:






And my point is that one character trait doesn't define the person.

I am a registered independent and vote in all elections
I am self employed and pay my fair share in taxes
I report for jury duty when called upon
I volunteer time at my local non profit organization
I donate a tidy sum to the SPCA
and I smoke weed

Using your logic, I am an irresponsible person, unable to use good judgement and sound thinking, isn't that correct?




I think that's an example of a process of the mind called self-justification.
That's when a person knows he is wrong in his attitude or actions and tries to shift the attention to other aspects of his behavior that he thinks cancels the wrong doing.

I'm middle school teacher and I deal with it everday.




When did Dr. Phil sign up here?


stillrockin05 - 10/2/2005 at 06:15 PM

No Dr. Phil LOL,

Just an old teacher that is sick and damned tired of dealing with the aftermath of drugs.

I keep thinking that the next generation will be the one that learns the lesson.

[Edited on 10/2/2005 by stillrockin05]


Slammer - 10/2/2005 at 07:16 PM

quote:
quote:

And my point is that one character trait doesn't define the person.

I am a registered independent and vote in all elections
I am self employed and pay my fair share in taxes
I report for jury duty when called upon
I volunteer time at my local non profit organization
I donate a tidy sum to the SPCA
and I smoke weed

Using your logic, I am an irresponsible person, unable to use good judgement and sound thinking, isn't that correct?




I think that's an example of a process of the mind called self-justification.
That's when a person knows he is wrong in his attitude or actions and tries to shift the attention to other aspects of his behavior that he thinks cancels the wrong doing.

I'm middle school teacher and I deal with it everday.



I really don't have to justify anything to myself. That would mean that I have some regrets, which I truely don't. The choice is mine and I am capable of making decisions about how I live my life. I don't mind listening to other peoples' opinions regarding things around me, but I don't think you or anyone else can tell me I am wrong for toking the herb.

Let me ask you, am I a bad person because I partake? Does one character trait that you don't agree with cancel out all my other redeeming qualities?


stillrockin05 - 10/2/2005 at 07:24 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:

And my point is that one character trait doesn't define the person.

I am a registered independent and vote in all elections
I am self employed and pay my fair share in taxes
I report for jury duty when called upon
I volunteer time at my local non profit organization
I donate a tidy sum to the SPCA
and I smoke weed

Using your logic, I am an irresponsible person, unable to use good judgement and sound thinking, isn't that correct?




I think that's an example of a process of the mind called self-justification.
That's when a person knows he is wrong in his attitude or actions and tries to shift the attention to other aspects of his behavior that he thinks cancels the wrong doing.

I'm middle school teacher and I deal with it everday.



I really don't have to justify anything to myself. That would mean that I have some regrets, which I truely don't. The choice is mine and I am capable of making decisions about how I live my life. I don't mind listening to other peoples' opinions regarding things around me, but I don't think you or anyone else can tell me I am wrong for toking the herb.
Let me ask you, am I a bad person because I partake? Does one character trait that you don't agree with cancel out all my other redeeming qualities?




Oh yes they can, I just did.


Denza - 10/2/2005 at 07:26 PM

This thread is making me want to go on a vision quest.



[Edited on 10/2/2005 by Denza]


fast43 - 10/2/2005 at 07:28 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:

And my point is that one character trait doesn't define the person.

I am a registered independent and vote in all elections
I am self employed and pay my fair share in taxes
I report for jury duty when called upon
I volunteer time at my local non profit organization
I donate a tidy sum to the SPCA
and I smoke weed

Using your logic, I am an irresponsible person, unable to use good judgement and sound thinking, isn't that correct?




I think that's an example of a process of the mind called self-justification.
That's when a person knows he is wrong in his attitude or actions and tries to shift the attention to other aspects of his behavior that he thinks cancels the wrong doing.

I'm middle school teacher and I deal with it everday.



I really don't have to justify anything to myself. That would mean that I have some regrets, which I truely don't. The choice is mine and I am capable of making decisions about how I live my life. I don't mind listening to other peoples' opinions regarding things around me, but I don't think you or anyone else can tell me I am wrong for toking the herb.
Let me ask you, am I a bad person because I partake? Does one character trait that you don't agree with cancel out all my other redeeming qualities?




Oh yes they can, I just did.


Aren't you judgemental.

Or are you a regular with a new screen name just havin some fun?


cortezthekiller - 10/2/2005 at 07:30 PM

quote:

Oh yes they can, I just did.



oh snap!

You just got bitchslapped!


But seriously, stillrockin05. That's not cool. 10 bucks says that when you have run late to school, you have gone over the speed limit, which would be no better. A person who smokes pot isn't throwing their life away. I know too many potheads to count...some very good and consciencious people, and others are dicks. But the point is, that a person is the same person whether they smoke herb or not. That just happens to be something part of his life. If he enjoys it in a responsible manner (i.e. in the safety of his home or whatnot), and he can manage to keep up his life very well, then what's the problem?

[Edited on 08/04/2069 by cortezthekiller]


Slammer - 10/2/2005 at 07:32 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:

And my point is that one character trait doesn't define the person.

I am a registered independent and vote in all elections
I am self employed and pay my fair share in taxes
I report for jury duty when called upon
I volunteer time at my local non profit organization
I donate a tidy sum to the SPCA
and I smoke weed

Using your logic, I am an irresponsible person, unable to use good judgement and sound thinking, isn't that correct?




I think that's an example of a process of the mind called self-justification.
That's when a person knows he is wrong in his attitude or actions and tries to shift the attention to other aspects of his behavior that he thinks cancels the wrong doing.

I'm middle school teacher and I deal with it everday.



I really don't have to justify anything to myself. That would mean that I have some regrets, which I truely don't. The choice is mine and I am capable of making decisions about how I live my life. I don't mind listening to other peoples' opinions regarding things around me, but I don't think you or anyone else can tell me I am wrong for toking the herb.
Let me ask you, am I a bad person because I partake? Does one character trait that you don't agree with cancel out all my other redeeming qualities?




Oh yes they can, I just did.


Let me ask you again, do you think I am a bad person because I partake? Does one character trait that you don't agree with cancel out all my other redeeming qualities?


stillrockin05 - 10/2/2005 at 07:38 PM



Aren't you judgemental.

Or are you a regular with a new screen name just havin some fun?





I'm a newbie to posting but usually just check in to see the ABB setlists.
The thread on evading drug testing piqued my interests. On my job I see the consequences of drug use with regularity.


And of course I'm judgmental. You are too, we make judgments everyday.


[Edited on 10/2/2005 by stillrockin05]


cortezthekiller - 10/2/2005 at 07:43 PM

yea, but considering you dont know the guy, then you are casting a pre-judgment

I.E. Prejudice!


Slammer - 10/2/2005 at 07:48 PM

quote:
quote:
Aren't you judgemental.

Or are you a regular with a new screen name just havin some fun?


I'm a newbie to posting but usually just check in to see the ABB setlists.
The thread on evading drug testing piqued my interests. On my job I see the consequences of drug use with regularity.


And of course I'm judgmental. You are too, we makes judgments everyday.


Well, let me welcome you to the forum, SR05, and I am glad to say that I am enjoying our discussion.

You are correct about being judgemental, we just disagree on the herb thing. I know some educated folks who don't partake and are just flat useless human beings.

As far as consequences, that would indicate that there is no chance of anything positive coming from those actions, and clearly, I am not an example of that.


yurtle - 10/2/2005 at 07:52 PM

It's like the proverbial train wreck, you don't want to see it, but you can't look away



Slammer - 10/2/2005 at 07:53 PM

Hey, I'll be right back

Gotta go twist one up


Slammer - 10/2/2005 at 07:54 PM

Hey Yurts,

How's that abstinence thing progressing?


stillrockin05 - 10/2/2005 at 08:00 PM

quote:
yea, but considering you dont know the guy, then you are casting a pre-judgment

I.E. Prejudice!


I was just concurring with the post that said:


Dictionary.com definition of responsible: Based on or characterized by good judgment or sound thinking.

Don't see how an illegal drug user, or a legal drug abuser fits that definition.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----






Slammer - 10/2/2005 at 08:11 PM

quote:
quote:
yea, but considering you dont know the guy, then you are casting a pre-judgment

I.E. Prejudice!


I was just concurring with the post that said:

Dictionary.com definition of responsible: Based on or characterized by good judgment or sound thinking.

Don't see how an illegal drug user, or a legal drug abuser fits that definition.


Let me ask you one more time, do you think I am a bad person because I partake? Does one character trait that you don't agree with cancel out all my other redeeming qualities? I'm a big boy, I can take it, go ahead and say it.





yurtle - 10/2/2005 at 08:14 PM

quote:
Hey Yurts,

How's that abstinence thing progressing?


I miss it, but it ain't the end of the world. I can't wait till I have a 6 pack outback


Slammer - 10/2/2005 at 08:18 PM

quote:
quote:
Hey Yurts,

How's that abstinence thing progressing?


I miss it, but it ain't the end of the world. I can't wait till I have a 6 pack outback


How much longer?


stillrockin05 - 10/2/2005 at 08:19 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
yea, but considering you dont know the guy, then you are casting a pre-judgment

I.E. Prejudice!


I was just concurring with the post that said:

Dictionary.com definition of responsible: Based on or characterized by good judgment or sound thinking.

Don't see how an illegal drug user, or a legal drug abuser fits that definition.


Let me ask you one more time, do you think I am a bad person because I partake? Does one character trait that you don't agree with cancel out all my other redeeming qualities? I'm a big boy, I can take it, go ahead and say it.








The answers to your questions are:
No and No

But if you are in possession of an illegal drug I think you are not using good judgment.

I bet those people that got busted at the ATL concert last night and woke up in that vile Atlanta City Jail would agree.


yurtle - 10/2/2005 at 08:35 PM

quote:
But if you are in possession of an illegal drug I think you are not using good judgment.

I bet those people that got busted at the ATL concert last night and woke up in that vile Atlanta City Jail would agree




I'll bet everything I own ($65,000 in bills)that more drunks went to jail than simple possessions in Atlanta.

In the years past in Atlanta, confiscation was the only penalty, unless you showed your A$$.

I've never seen a person under the influence of only Marijuana show his a$$, the way a person will after drinking. They don't call it liquid courage for nothing.


Slammer - 10/2/2005 at 08:35 PM

quote:
The answers to your questions are:
No and No

But if you are in possession of an illegal drug I think you are not using good judgment.

I bet those people that got busted at the ATL concert last night and woke up in that vile Atlanta City Jail would agree.


Heh heh heh, I happen to not agree, but it might be because I don't equate the herb with heroin or crack. Maybe that is the crux of the disagreement.

As for the folks unlucky enough to get arrested at the Atlanta show, how much do you want to bet that the first thing on their mind this morning wasn't "Gee what lousy judgement"? It was probably, "Dang, I shouldn't have taken my whole stash"

And just how would you know that the jail in Atlanta is vile?


Angelemerald - 10/2/2005 at 08:41 PM

By criminalizing drug using behavior this country has done nothing but destroy people's lives: By enforcing the US drug laws, more children have lost their parents than through drug use itself.

The basic debate is this: How should drug use be handled? Either we educate people about drug use and how to minimize harm from it or we lock them up. Our country has chosen to lock people up for some drugs but not others. That is inherent hypocrisy of the drug laws in the United States. Then there is further hypocrisy with what I think is even more criminal, the unequal enforcement of the drug laws.

I can give you many statistics but it would be boring. The one statistic that gets my goat however, is that in many communities around the country fifty percent of young black men are in jail. At least half of that is due to drug use or the possession laws that make having small amounts of certain drugs a class one (or two) felony. While I mention the race of these young men, it is only to highlight the fact our drug laws are unequally enforced based on racial and class determinates. Study after study has shown this about this country. It is so easy for us to blame the victims and talk all this shiitt about how drugs destroy the fabric of our communities. No, racism, poverty and discriminatory drug laws are destroying the fabric of our communities!

Drug use has been with us since the beginning of time and all the laws in the world won't eradicate it.

So now the question becomes how does a compassionate society reduce the harm from drug use? Legalizing and controlling drugs makes more sense than our current enforcement approach. Our society would benefit by taxing drug use and infusing funds into successful addiction prevention and treatment programs. We could shift the funds we use for incarcerating young people into educating them about the physical and psychological dangers of drug use and addiction. We could tax gambling more to understand and prevent addiction in the first place because even gambling is an addiction that can cause significant personal, financial and community harm. We could tax the food companies that insist on using trans fats and other harmful ingredients to fund nutrition, physical education and weight reduction programs. And we can tax people who insist on eating, for example hamburgers at McDonald's instead of food that is healthier. Think about it: Why is it cheaper in this country to eat a meal at McDonald's than to buy fresh fruits, vegetables and lean meats or other proteins?

The answers are much more complex, but you get the drift.

I can't stand the moralistic posturing that passes for compassion in this country.

[Edited on 10/2/2005 by Angelemerald]


fast43 - 10/2/2005 at 08:54 PM

quote:
quote:


And just how would you know that the jail in Atlanta is vile?


The voice of experience?

The $64,000 Question


yurtle - 10/2/2005 at 08:59 PM


Slammer - 10/2/2005 at 09:07 PM

Can our Angel get an AMEN!!!!!!!!!

Of course, you know that you are preaching to the chior, don't you?

The folks who are against it want stiffer penalties, and will agree that children brought up in drug infested households should be taken from their parents. I don't have children, so I can't say with conviction, that parents on pot aren't any worse than a parent on booze or a parent on prescription meds. But those same pothead parents have just as good a chance on raising some well rounded, socially adjusted offspring as a straight family.

It's not the drug itself that creates a bad person. It's the other things that make that carbon based life form a person. The effects of the drug have an equal chance of enhancing their lives or it could hinder it. What I am against is the shotgun approach to the whole "drugs are bad" way of thinking. I would even give more credence to someone who used to smoke the herb and gave it up, not because of a job interview, but because they simpley decided it wasn't their thing any longer. I listen to other folks opinions, but how can someone who has never tried it say it is bad?




Amberley - 10/2/2005 at 09:55 PM

Denza rocks!

Society has been brainwashed by politicos and their money, bottom line. Had hemp been allowed to be processed for anything from clothing to text books we would have more trees, cleaner air, less density in asthetic housing, better and longer lasting products, etc...

I smoke pot in moderation. I'm 22, I work everyday, I passed a drug test and I am a good employee. I'm the daughter of a mother who instilled values, morals and character in my brother and me, not that I have always heeded her teachings.

Back to Harry Anslinger, Denza's post on Anslinger's tactics were dead on. Money, greed and politics caused this bill to be passed. Just look at those names, Hearst Corp, Dupont; powerful names who used their influence to get this bill passed to prevent productivity of hemp.

Another point completely out of the context of this thread is oil. Have you ever stopped to think about the inventions of the 20's that were killed by money, greed and politics? It's amazing. It's also the reason we are still dependent on crude oil today. It's sure made a lot of rich people richer also.

On the legalization of marijuana in the US, I'd be all for it if it were allowed to be grown organically or hydroponically for personal or medicinal use without government sanction, inteference, taxation, etc. How many posts will we read telling me that is impossible?

www.hempnation.com




BigDaveOnBass - 10/2/2005 at 10:42 PM

I'd just like to ad to this thread.....

The comradery we feel as ABB fans gets lost in threads like this. Here I am HIGH on last nights show, and I come in here and read all the blasting and name calling over a topic such as this. It makes me sad.


TanDan - 10/2/2005 at 11:04 PM

Here are some words from someone we can ignore also:

"I just wish I would have said no the first time anyone offered me drugs and alcohol," he says. "Alcohol is the one that almost got me. I can't tour as much any more because I have, not a cirrhosis, but let's just say my liver is pretty (mad) at me."

Gregg Allman
05/05/2005
The San Diego Union-Tribute


fast43 - 10/2/2005 at 11:51 PM

Wow a visit from Amberley.

Haven't seen you around in a while


Libby - 10/2/2005 at 11:59 PM

All this from one question!

Gregg Allman can be a poster child for overindulgence and addiction, we can't ignore that, no.

Before the forum patrol hangs me by my toes on that statement, I meant no disrespect toward Gregg Allman. His life has been an open book. He has publicly acknowledged his problems.


johnwott - 10/3/2005 at 12:13 AM

TanDan just posts the negative, there are two sides to the coin.

Louis Armstrong - the father of modern jazz smoked weed every day. Got the Presidents medal of freedom
for his contributions to Jazz and american culture.

Sigmund Freud- father of modern psychoanalysis- regularly used cocaine

Willie Nelson - daily pot smoker. probably the prolific song writer of all time.

Many productive folks can have a drink or smoke to relax without problems.

many use stimulants like caffiene or nicotine to increase alertness and productivity.

Not all drug users are abusers. Some folks can handle drugs some can't.

drugs in the natural form are less addictive than those highly refined.

It's about personal responsibility and moderation.

Peace
John


fanfrom-71 - 10/3/2005 at 12:17 AM

quote:
TanDan just posts the negative, there are two sides to the coin.

Louis Armstrong - the father of modern jazz smoked weed every day. Got the Presidents medal of freedom
for his contributions to Jazz and american culture.

Sigmund Freud- father of modern psychoanalysis- regularly used cocaine

Willie Nelson - daily pot smoker. probably the prolific song writer of all time.

Many productive folks can have a drink or smoke to relax without problems.

many use stimulants like caffiene or nicotine to increase alertness and productivity.

Not all drug users are abusers. Some folks can handle drugs some can't.

drugs in the natural form are less addictive than those highly refined.

It's about personal responsibility and moderation.

Peace
John


Libby - 10/3/2005 at 12:18 AM

Yes John, I absolutely agree, it's all about responsibility and moderation.


TanDan - 10/3/2005 at 12:43 AM

Argumentum ad Populum


BodineFan - 10/3/2005 at 01:03 AM

"At or around this time, Spud, Sick Boy, and I made a healthy, informed, democratic decision to get back on heroin as soon as possible."


crowboy - 10/3/2005 at 01:17 AM

Didn't Gregg recently state that he likes to smoke pot every once in awhile, to unwind after a show or whatever? I'm thinking of a newspaper interview from somewhere in the midwest this summer. Seems to me theres a big gap between weed and narcotics- just my opinion...


StratDal - 10/3/2005 at 01:24 AM

I'd rather deal with a stoned person than a drunk person. So would the police.

Now it's time for another hit...and a martini...and another ABB CD!


cortezthekiller - 10/3/2005 at 01:56 AM

quote:

I bet those people that got busted at the ATL concert last night and woke up in that vile Atlanta City Jail would agree


Most of the people arrested were kids, and most of them just got confiscated and kicked out. They were escorted by police, which scared the crap out of everyone around them, but they just got kicked out. They don't have enough police cars for the allman brothers fans.


Peachstatedawg - 10/3/2005 at 02:21 AM

quote:
quote:

I bet those people that got busted at the ATL concert last night and woke up in that vile Atlanta City Jail would agree


Most of the people arrested were kids, and most of them just got confiscated and kicked out. They were escorted by police, which scared the crap out of everyone around them, but they just got kicked out. They don't have enough police cars for the allman brothers fans.




I hope that isn't true Cortez ( the part about the number of smokers). In my little circle of 6 ABB fans, the 5 of us in our 40's (in my case still just barely lol) have smoked to some degree or another but no longer do. The one in hid 30's says he never has.


curry - 10/3/2005 at 10:48 AM

quote:
"At or around this time, Spud, Sick Boy, and I made a healthy, informed, democratic decision to get back on heroin as soon as possible."


great movie...


lutherwv - 10/3/2005 at 12:23 PM

quote:
worked for me

http://gonumber1.com/him.htm


this is the ticket.


musicalbeds - 10/3/2005 at 12:51 PM

Interesting thread.

Nice to see the mention of sugar and caffiene, both are legal but bad for the body.


This whole thread exists because marijuana is illegal.

If it were legal, pompous windbags wouldn't be attacking potusers any more than they run around attacking people who drink alcohol.

Marijuana is ONLY illegal because big business..ie the pulp and paper industry...got scared of hemp, {that wonderful renewable product that would put them out of business if it got out how versatile it was}, and lobbyed the government to make pot illegal. Reefer madness was started, and the rest is history.

It's always been about money, so don't throw pot's legal status into the arguement...that's just a decades-old embarrassment that does more damage than good to your anti-drug arguement.


Anyone who is actively spending time trying to demonize marijuana better be standing in front of the beer/liquor stores spouting the evils of alcohol as well, or they're just a corporate lackey working as a lapdog instead of a defender of humanity.




curry - 10/3/2005 at 01:52 PM

'Up in Smoke'...

Pedro: Man, what is in this s h i t, man?

Stoner: Mostly Maui Waui man, but it's got some Labrador in it.

Pedro: What's Labrador?

Stoner: It's dog s h i t

Pedro: What!?

Stoner: Yeah, my dog ate my stash man. I had it on the table and the little mf ate it, man. Then I had to follow him around with a little baggie for three days man, before I got it back. Really blew the dogs mind, ya know

Pedro: You mean we're smoking dog's s h i t, man?

Stoner: Get's ya high, don't it? I think its even better than before.

Pedro: Uhhhh, I wonder what Great Dane tastes like, man?


robslob - 10/3/2005 at 02:04 PM

A most EXCELLENT post by musicalbeds. I opted out of this thread because I got tired of the severe right-wingers; I hope all of them just read your post!! And let me add that as a health care pro I've seen plenty die from alcohol abuse in ICU, not one yet from toking.

[Edited on 10/3/2005 by robslob]


Peachstatedawg - 10/3/2005 at 02:28 PM

quote:


.


This whole thread exists because marijuana is illegal.

If it were legal, pompous windbags wouldn't be attacking potusers any more than they run around attacking people who drink alcohol.............




Yes but you can't take the illegality aspect out of it. Personally, I wouldn't go near the stuff because I have a wife and children depending on me. Professoinally, were I to get busted for drug possesiion I would kiss a 28 year career down the toilet the day I was convicted. Regardless if I was straight while on the job or not.

My point is unless you are in a place in life where drug convictions bear no consequences, it doesn't seem like a wise thing to be messing around with.

We live in a representative republic we have the authority and power to change laws.


stillrockin05 - 10/3/2005 at 02:48 PM

[

[Edited on 10/3/2005 by stillrockin05]


Libby - 10/3/2005 at 03:05 PM

quote:
Argumentum ad Populum




There is no argument for me here, Dan. I'm not jumping in the boat with anyone here. I simply stated my personal opinion and I still absolutely agree with John, not saying it's right or it's wrong. I don't give a **** about the popular consensus on this issue. I'm quite capable of standing on my opinions and beliefs, furthurmore, I don't give a **** what you think about MY opinions. My opinions on this issue are passionate for personal reasons.

My life and the lives of my children were devastated by alcohol , a legal intoxicant which comes with a warning that it should be consumed responsibly. If that 21 year old young man had been responsible, he would have never gotten behind the wheel of his Bronco and rear ended and crossed out something very precious to my children and me. Me, my children, our friends, my Dad, we lost alot because of someone's irresponsibility with alcohol and drugs. Do I drink? Yes, on occasion, I have a bourbon...responsibly, at home. 1 neat Maker's Mark. Do I smoke? Yes, on occasion, responsibly, at home. It's my choice and my personal responsibility not to partake in a way that could endanger myself and others.

My point? It's called substance abuse for a reason. It's substance abuse when overindulged and used irresponsibly.

I cringe at the amount of alcohol and other substances comsumed at an event such as a concert. I cringe because those people get behind the wheel of their vehicles and drive. Sometimes it's people I know and care about and I wonder if they're going to make it home. I don't worry about them getting arrested, I worry about them living.

I support responsibility and moderation.......... as much as I miss Chuck, I don't fight to ban alcohol. I fight to teach people that irresponsibility is what destroys their life and the lives of others in the end.


johnwott - 10/3/2005 at 03:09 PM

quote:


We live in a representative republic we have the authority and power to change laws.




Then why are the Feds locking up medical marijuana users in states where it is legal under state law
but not under federal laws when 70% of americans support medical use of marijuana.?

It's because the big money from spirit companies, fiber companies and pharmecutical industry
have the federal politicans in their pockets.

The Feds even tried to block hemp products (with no THC) from import from Canada.
Canada had to go to court to get the free trade agreements enforced.
They are now trying to stop the Lakota tribe from growing industrial hemp for fiber.

It's not the will of the people. It's the big money that gets their way.


stillrockin05 - 10/3/2005 at 03:13 PM

quote:





.

If



........Anyone who is actively spending time trying to demonize marijuana better be standing in front of the beer/liquor stores spouting the evils of alcohol as well, or they're just a corporate lackey working as a lapdog instead of a defender of humanity.






Would it change your opinion about marijuana if the warning came from an alcoholic? Would an alcoholic have the street cred required by you to get your ear?


ozzypie - 10/3/2005 at 03:20 PM

BABY, SOME-TIMES...I...FEEEEEEEELL

SOME-TIMES...I...FEEEEEEEL

LIKE I'VE BEEN TIED TO THE WHIPPING POST

TIED TO THE WHIPPING POST....


IdlewildRickT - 10/3/2005 at 03:25 PM

I am going to support Dan on this one.

Witout too much debate on the issue of MJ as a legal drug, the fact is, today at least, you place drug use ahead of employment in the priority of things. Most responsible adults cannot fathom that choice. No responsible adult in healthcare can fathom that choice because of the risks involved.

As far as the test passing goes, yep, about 30 days is it for most. But its a crap shoot. My advice would be to stop altogether, and, check yourself via urine tests...you can buy them at the local drugstore like CVS...once a week until you are clean.

I am most concerned however with your statement re pain killers and you dabble with them. You obviously are headed down an addictive road and perhaps you should be concerned and take a look at your habits.

I see the point Dan was making; some jobs simply cannot tolerate ANY form of altering behavior; drugs or alcohol, legal or illegal. His is one, mine is another. Advertising? I cannot speak on that line of work. But I do feel most employers understand the risks associated with their employees dabbling in illegal drugs or showing up for work drunk/high, even if their job does not require them to be "sharp". Hell, even Dickey was fired for showing up at work drunk, so I guess no job is immune.

Stay sharp..be sharp!

RT


goldtop - 10/3/2005 at 03:38 PM

quote:
I wish they'd just legalize, regulate, and tax marijuana and be done with it.


Droog.......Ya got to stop using logic......It confuses a lot of people


johnwott - 10/3/2005 at 03:46 PM

quote:


I am most concerned however with your statement re pain killers and you dabble with them. You obviously are headed down an addictive road and perhaps you should be concerned and take a look at your habits.




You have no clue.

I have the support of my physicians on the use of MJ as pain medicine.

The nerve damage in not reversible, so why should one worry about addiction?
I will need pain medicine until this disease kills me. MJ is much safer than
prescription narcotics.


Peachstatedawg - 10/3/2005 at 03:50 PM

quote:
quote:


We live in a representative republic we have the authority and power to change laws.






.........It's not the will of the people. It's the big money that gets their way.




I'm not quite that cynical (not yet anyway LOL). I do agree there are enormous obstacles to overcome at times. The process can take a very, very, long time. But in the end I do believe the American people get what they want. Sometimes to our own detriment.

Incidently, I am not advocating relaxing the drug laws. I was just making the point that if the day comes when a sizeable majority of Americans desire it, it will happen.


curry - 10/3/2005 at 04:04 PM

'Daddy made whisky and he made it well, cost two dollars and burned like hell,
I cut hickory just to fire the still,
Drink down a bottle and you're ready to kill...'


Denza - 10/3/2005 at 05:10 PM

quote:
My life and the lives of my children were devastated by alcohol, a legal intoxicant which comes with a warning that it should be consumed responsibly.


Mine too by an alcoholic wife. I have seen multitudes of families absolutely wrecked by the legal drug ALCOHOL, but know of none that have suffered that kind of damage from toking a joint occasionally. Maybe they exist, but of all the people I have known over the years, I know of none.

So alcohol is a drug, albeit legal, that can prove most detrimental. Do all of the posters here who knock people who choose the use of marijuana also abstain from alcohol? Have any of you ever had those "couple" beers at a concert or club and then driven home? (Yeah, I know, you were fine to drive). Maybe even someone who attended the ABB show this past weekend? Be honest now.


TanDan - 10/3/2005 at 05:45 PM

I don't give a **** what you think about MY opinions. My opinions on this issue are passionate for personal reasons.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------
Libby, my quoting one of Plato's fallacies wasn't directed at you. I do care about your opinions and we've talked at many a concert; the latest being Saturday in Atlanta.

RORY ON!

(Now there is someone who was done in by legal, doctor prescriped medications, Rory Gallagher.)


CowboyNeil - 10/3/2005 at 06:01 PM

Daisymae, I hope you got the job.

Those without sin cast the first stone.....

I'll bet more days of work are missed due a hangover from alcohol than a couple hits of the green.


Peachstatedawg - 10/3/2005 at 06:54 PM

quote:
Daisymae, I hope you got the job.

Those without sin cast the first stone.....

I'll bet more days of work are missed due a hangover from alcohol than a couple hits of the green.





Personally, I know I sin. It's not other sinner's jugment that concerns me, It's God's.


OldSchool - 10/3/2005 at 08:24 PM

Anyone who knocks reefer and not alcohol either because weed is illegal & booze isn't or for any other reason either doesn't have a clue what they are talking about or I simply have no respect for their opinion & it has no validity.Growing up with an alcoholic parent(and the other an enabler in denial) & being one myself I can attest firsthand to the seeping soul sickness this stuff can infest a person & a family with.My folks are in their 70s now and I would honestly give my left pinky if my mother would quit the Gin every night & smoke a joint instead.What's the worst that could happen,she gets goofy & maybe occasionally burns dinner a little?Alot better then the fear,anger,resentment, & soul sickness that alcoholism causes...


CowboyNeil - 10/3/2005 at 08:41 PM

My point was just that

but if you read through this thread there are judgements of others going on and alot of unnecessary name calling to folks we should be calling brother and sister, not pill popping weed heads.

The marijuana laws in this country are by origin racist as they come and one of the biggest waste of law enforcement money and energy I can think of. The laws need to be changed so police officers don't have to waste their time enforcing the law and focus their energys and resources on the violent criminal.Thats my stand on it and I'm sticking to it!


musichick3 - 10/3/2005 at 08:55 PM

quote:
A most EXCELLENT post by musicalbeds. I opted out of this thread because I got tired of the severe right-wingers; I hope all of them just read your post!! And let me add that as a health care pro I've seen plenty die from alcohol abuse in ICU, not one yet from toking.

[Edited on 10/3/2005 by robslob]


Me too. Alcohol is much more damaging to people overall.


KirkKoster - 10/3/2005 at 09:57 PM

Hey Daisy, Best bet to make sure you get through. Quit while doing your job search. You get the benefit of being totally clear headed during the process and clean when you take your pee. A month of abstinence should do the trick. As far as the judgemental crap goes.... I would much rather be under the knife of a surgeon who had a toke the previous night than that of the one who buried himself in the bottle the previous night. There is no way anyone can tell you that the person you may trust your life to has not partaken in illegal or risky behavior 5 minutes prior to that event. As an employee representative for almost 20 years, I can tell you that after a pre-employment screen, most employers, in most states, need probable cause (unusual behavior, erratic behavior, physical signs of use, etc.) for further testing. Random tests can be used for certain safety sensitive jobs and your job area isn't under that umbrella, I'm sure. Good luck with your search and your test.


musicalbeds - 10/3/2005 at 10:13 PM

quote:
The marijuana laws in this country are by origin racist as they come


I agree the laws are wrong and harsh....but racist? I'm not understanding that...



BodineFan - 10/3/2005 at 10:19 PM

quote:
I would much rather be under the knife of a surgeon who had a toke the previous night than that of the one who buried himself in the bottle the previous night. .


I seriously don't understand why this comparrison keeps coming up, ideally I think most people want to deal with clear headed sober professionals, I know I do.

The original question in this thread dealt wth a person trying to get around a drug test for a new job. This is dishonest behaviour. The company even though it is "creative" in nature wants people with clear heads working for them, to try and get the job through deceit say a lot about the applicant.


Denza - 10/3/2005 at 10:25 PM

quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----
The marijuana laws in this country are by origin racist as they come
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----


I agree the laws are wrong and harsh....but racist? I'm not understanding that...





You need to go back and read my post on page 4. Also take a look at Harry Anslinger, the man who spearheaded the criminalization of weed.


From my previous post (and there are many more if you look him up)...

quote:
Many people assume that marijuana was made illegal through some kind of process involving scientific, medical, and government hearings; that it was to protect the citizens from what was determined to be a dangerous drug.

The actual story shows a much different picture. Those who voted on the legal fate of this plant never had the facts, but were dependent on information supplied by those who had a specific agenda to deceive lawmakers. The House Hearing on The Marijuana Tax Act of 1937 featured the wisdom of Harry J. Anslinger who was essentially the first Drug Czar.

Anslinger was an extremely ambitious man, and he recognized the Bureau of Narcotics as an amazing career opportunity -- a new government agency with the opportunity to define both the problem and the solution. He immediately realized that opiates and cocaine wouldn't be enough to help build his agency, so he latched on to marijuana and
started to work on making it illegal at the federal level.

Anslinger immediately drew upon the themes of racism and violence to draw national attention to the problem he wanted to create. Some of his quotes regarding marijuana...

"There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the US, and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos, and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz, and swing, result from marijuana use. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers, and any others."

"...the primary reason to outlaw marijuana is its effect on the degenerate races."





and a couple more...

"Reefer makes darkies think they're as good as white men."

"Gentlemen, it will make your wives want to have sex with a Black man!"

"I wish I could show you what a small marihuana cigarette can do to one of our degenerate Spanish-speaking residents. That's why our problem is so great; the greatest percentage of our population is composed of Spanish-speaking persons, most of who are low mentally, because of social and racial conditions."



There so many, many more, and his helper the publisher Mr. Hearst was about as nuts. I prefer the words of these Presidents:


"Make the most of the Indian hemp seed, and sow it everywhere!"

George Washington
Note to the gardener at Mount Vernon, 1794
"The Writings of George Washington"
Volume 33, page 270 (Library of Congress)

(George Washington, first president of the United States of America, grew cannabis on Mount Vernon, his plantation, for about 30 years. He may have used the Indian hemp to treat his chronic tooth aches.)



"Government exists to protect us from each other. Where government has gone beyond its limits is in deciding to protect us from ourselves."

Ronald Reagan
U.S. President










[Edited on 10/3/2005 by Denza]


musicalbeds - 10/3/2005 at 10:27 PM

quote:
The original question in this thread dealt wth a person trying to get around a drug test for a new job. This is dishonest behaviour. The company even though it is "creative" in nature wants people with clear heads working for them, to try and get the job through deceit say a lot about the applicant.



Does the same company test to see if it's workers drink alcohol? Probably not...even though it keeps people from having a clear head.

It's a marijuana witchhunt, plain and simple, propped up by people who don't know any better, insurance companies in the pocket of big business and hypocritcal moron's who rave about drug abuse with one hand, while consuming martini's with the other one.


BodineFan - 10/3/2005 at 10:35 PM

quote:


Does the same company test to see if it's workers drink alcohol? Probably not...even though it keeps people from having a clear head.

It's a marijuana witchhunt, plain and simple, propped up by people who don't know any better, insurance companies in the pocket of big business and hypocritcal moron's who rave about drug abuse with one hand, while consuming martini's with the other one.


I don't know, I'm just saying that's the way it is. Maybe they don't care about weed, maybe they are looking for harder things, who knows. I just know if it were me, I would have said "hey, about the drug test, I want to let you know upfront I like to burn one every now and then and if that's what you are looking for, I'm not your man" Also the person who made the post is a daily smoker and part time dabbler in other things, I'm not sure that's a liability I would want on my payroll.

I agree with you about the alcohol and the insurance companies, but you know it's not the only place in our society where hypocrisy exists. I think if the majority of people smoked weed it would be legal by now, but obviously you guys are not voting hard enough.

[Edited on 10/3/2005 by BodineFan]


musicalbeds - 10/3/2005 at 10:46 PM

quote:
I think if the majority of people smoked weed it would be legal by now,


Wrong. It will never be legalized in the U.S because of big business.

Canada has started looking into the "marijuana debate" and maybe some day it will be legal here, but never in the U.S.


TanDan - 10/3/2005 at 10:51 PM

The original question in this thread dealt wth a person trying to get around a drug test for a new job. This is dishonest behaviour. The company even though it is "creative" in nature wants people with clear heads working for them, to try and get the job through deceit say a lot about the applicant.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------

Thank you Bodinefan!

Think about this:

(OK, don't think about it)

The ABB tourbus is involved in a tragic accident while going from city to city. It hits a family of four ( or six, or seven, who cares ).

No one in car with the family of four is drug impared. No one on the tourbus is impared. And yet everybody dies. No more concerts. No 16th birthday for the children in the other car.

Question: Who gets tested for drug usage here?

Answer: The person who gets tested is the ABB bus driver! He is THE MOST TESTED PERSON ON THE ROAD TODAY. DOT rules. Period. Why can't he get high while the band plays. Come on, its just a lude. You're being a bummer.

Result: The band all dies. The innocents in the car all die. We all go to the funneral and wonder why.

My origonal question still stands: "Why ask a certain part of society to go by rules that you refuse to go by?" You want the bus driver to be straight, right?

Oh, did I mention that the driver of the other car was vacationing, going to Florida. To Walt Disney World...Did I mention that the driver worked for an 'advertising agency'. Does it matter? Who cares?

Body bags smell like plastic no matter WHO is in them.


musicalbeds - 10/3/2005 at 10:55 PM

quote:
Why ask a certain part of society to go by rules that you refuse to go by?" You want the bus driver to be straight, right?



The thing is...that bus driver might be drinking nightly, and still get the job. The dope smoker who smokes nightly, won't.
How is that right?

You are defending testing for one, but not condemning the lack of a test for the other.

We want him straight, right? Not hungover...


BodineFan - 10/3/2005 at 10:57 PM

I saw someone a few pages ago mention the genius of Willie Nelson and his preference for the herb. Interestingly, Willie's edict to his crew is "if you are wired you are fired". No if's and's or but's. Willie only needs to be on the ball 3-4 hours a day, his crew needs to be professional all day long.


BodineFan - 10/3/2005 at 11:03 PM

quote:
quote:
Why ask a certain part of society to go by rules that you refuse to go by?" You want the bus driver to be straight, right?



The thing is...that bus driver might be drinking nightly, and still get the job. The dope smoker who smokes nightly, won't.
How is that right?

You are defending testing for one, but not condemning the lack of a test for the other.

We want him straight, right? Not hungover...


The way they are lowering the standard for DWI, it wont be long before people will be scared to drink if they plan on getting in a car anytime during the week.

I do think one of the things that confuses people with the weed is that it is evident in your system for so long. unfortunately for the smokers, many non-smokers believe this means it is actively effective for that long, which obviously is ludicris.

We only have one guy at work that smokes and he was out of sick time, personal days and vacation time by april and now has one foot out the door, he's 30 years old and can not get it together on a daily basis, plus no one likes the fac tthat he smells like burning burlap when he does show up.


yurtle - 10/3/2005 at 11:25 PM

quote:
I saw someone a few pages ago mention the genius of Willie Nelson and his preference for the herb. Interestingly, Willie's edict to his crew is "if you are wired you are fired". No if's and's or but's. Willie only needs to be on the ball 3-4 hours a day, his crew needs to be professional all day long.


Wired is generally not the term for partaking of MJ. It is resereved for stimulants, like coke, crank, etc.


yurtle - 10/3/2005 at 11:28 PM


TanDan - 10/3/2005 at 11:41 PM

I've stood there talking to Bert as the ABB bus driver gets on the bus... It is like a pilot getting on an airplane...he has a job to do and is an unsung hero of this site. It is his professionalism that brings this band to us every night. they trust him. They trust Bert to know when to say "no".

Everyone else asleep....he drives through the night... You also sleeping in your home waiting for the concert....all is well.


Fuse - 10/3/2005 at 11:51 PM

quote:
Ally....if your job requires a urine test then you will not get the job.

The companies that do the tests are very well versed in the ways the folks use to 'trick them'. You will hear of 'virgin urine' and additives that you can you, etc. etc. Everyone will have a story about how 'It works 100%, Dude!!'. Don't believe it.

When you decide to grow up and join the adult world and apply for a job that requires a clean piss; then do it. Otherwise this may not be the correct forum for you to turn to.

Can I come to your house and perform ACLS on your loved one, being stoned? Should the surgeon operating on your father be high as he cuts into your fathers chest? Can I drive the school bus with 46 innocents as I think I can make that sharp curve? How about giving morphine to you? Is it 2mg or 10mg? Wow! Such Colors!!

You have already crossed one benchmark---the fact you even asked the question.

Don't ask or require one part of society to be 100% clean while you allow another to be stoned and drive my child to daycare.

Your call. Don't ask us!

Ask it of your babysitter next time.



[Edited on 9/29/2005 by TanDan]


Aw, hope it's a couple of months, cross fingers. If you have a good history, with a supervisor. or somebody, impressed enough to turn in a reference, sometimes your positive reefer test will be ignored.

Unless you are a jet mechanic. Or pilot.


BodineFan - 10/4/2005 at 12:22 AM

quote:
quote:
I saw someone a few pages ago mention the genius of Willie Nelson and his preference for the herb. Interestingly, Willie's edict to his crew is "if you are wired you are fired". No if's and's or but's. Willie only needs to be on the ball 3-4 hours a day, his crew needs to be professional all day long.


Wired is generally not the term for partaking of MJ. It is resereved for stimulants, like coke, crank, etc.


Let's not get into symantics here, the details of the interview revealed that no drugs were allowed on tour, 'ceptin' of course Willie I suppose. The point was he doesn't want guys who are stoned riggin lights 30 feet over his head if they are stoned or getting busted on the road and stuff like that. He wants a professional show so people get their money's worth.


johnwott - 10/4/2005 at 12:24 AM

quote:
quote:
The marijuana laws in this country are by origin racist as they come


I agree the laws are wrong and harsh....but racist? I'm not understanding that...





The first marijuana laws were aimed at mexican immigrants.


Peachstatedawg - 10/4/2005 at 12:29 AM

quote:
quote:
Ally....if your job requires a urine test then you will not get the job.

The companies that do the tests are very well versed in the ways the folks use to 'trick them'. You will hear of 'virgin urine' and additives that you can you, etc. etc. Everyone will have a story about how 'It works 100%, Dude!!'. Don't believe it.

When you decide to grow up and join the adult world and apply for a job that requires a clean piss; then do it. Otherwise this may not be the correct forum for you to turn to.

Can I come to your house and perform ACLS on your loved one, being stoned? Should the surgeon operating on your father be high as he cuts into your fathers chest? Can I drive the school bus with 46 innocents as I think I can make that sharp curve? How about giving morphine to you? Is it 2mg or 10mg? Wow! Such Colors!!

You have already crossed one benchmark---the fact you even asked the question.

Don't ask or require one part of society to be 100% clean while you allow another to be stoned and drive my child to daycare.

Your call. Don't ask us!

Ask it of your babysitter next time.



[Edited on 9/29/2005 by TanDan]


Aw, hope it's a couple of months, cross fingers. If you have a good history, with a supervisor. or somebody, impressed enough to turn in a reference, sometimes your positive reefer test will be ignored.

Unless you are a jet mechanic. Or pilot.




Or school bus driver, or health care provider, or school teacher, or waste water treatment operator, or power company lineman, or disaster preparadness planner, etc, etc, etc,


BigDaveOnBass - 10/4/2005 at 12:31 AM

Drug testing? I volunteer! What are we testing them for??


johnwott - 10/4/2005 at 12:31 AM

Willie Generally Justs smokes before bedtime to relax.

He was the subject of a recent High Times interview.

Responsible user ...

Too much smoke wrecks the voice.





[Edited on 10/4/2005 by johnwott]


Denza - 10/4/2005 at 12:43 AM

Just some food for thought...

What if rock & roll bands were run as companies? If there was drug testing in rock & roll do you think we might be missing any music? If record companies drug tested would we have had an Allman Brothers Band?

I think we would have more people and less music...weird.


BTW, Anybody know of any bands that drug test?


johnwott - 10/4/2005 at 12:46 AM

SnoopDog likes to test the reefer.

I read he requires an ounce of top grade in his concert rider.


BodineFan - 10/4/2005 at 12:47 AM

quote:



BTW, Anybody know of any bands that drug test?




Aerosmith did for a while and they were on "Antabuse" (Disulfiram) for the booze. I think they are past that now.

Being in a band or an artist is not really a mainstream occupation where you actione impact others, it's kind of like being self-employed and you get out what you put in. Care to list all the bands that have lost everything due to drugs and alcohol abuse?

[Edited on 10/4/2005 by BodineFan]


OldSchool - 10/4/2005 at 12:48 AM

quote:
The ABB tourbus is involved in a tragic accident while going from city to city. It hits a family of four ( or six, or seven, who cares ).

No one in car with the family of four is drug impared. No one on the tourbus is impared. And yet everybody dies. No more concerts. No 16th birthday for the children in the other car.

Question: Who gets tested for drug usage here?

Answer: The person who gets tested is the ABB bus driver! He is THE MOST TESTED PERSON ON THE ROAD TODAY. DOT rules. Period. Why can't he get high while the band plays. Come on, its just a lude. You're being a bummer.

Result: The band all dies. The innocents in the car all die. We all go to the funneral and wonder why.

My origonal question still stands: "Why ask a certain part of society to go by rules that you refuse to go by?" You want the bus driver to be straight, right?

I've stood there talking to Bert as the ABB bus driver gets on the bus... It is like a pilot getting on an airplane...he has a job to do and is an unsung hero of this site. It is his professionalism that brings this band to us every night. they trust him. They trust Bert to know when to say "no".

Everyone else asleep....he drives through the night... You also sleeping in your home waiting for the concert....all is well.


Let me make sure I'm dialing into your point correctly Dan;you're saying that we want Bert to be tested to ensure he can't be using when he's driving the bus,especially with the boys in it,& if we're going to impose these rules on him then we should impose them on everyonein society,regardless of there occupation,& we should also live by these rules ourselves-right?

Well,I have no problem with Bert or anyone else with a job that has that kind of responsability & the potential to endanger the lives of others being drug tested,but I don't agree that we should hold all members of society to that standard.Should the person who wants a creative job at-say, oh,an advertising agency for arguments sake-have to be able to drive a bus?Should we make sure that before a guy gets hired to stock shelves at the local Prancing Pony he possesses the physical requirements needed to be a firefighter?Do you have to pass the Bar to be a Roadie?People in different occupations should not be held to the same standards...
Having said that,I'd much rather Bert be driving high on trees then drunk....






[Edited on 10/4/2005 by OldSchool]


BodineFan - 10/4/2005 at 12:52 AM

quote:

The ABB tourbus is involved in a tragic accident while going from city to city. It hits a family of four ( or six, or seven, who cares ).

No one in car with the family of four is drug impared. No one on the tourbus is impared. And yet everybody dies. No more concerts. No 16th birthday for the children in the other car.

Question: Who gets tested for drug usage here?

Answer: The person who gets tested is the ABB bus driver! He is THE MOST TESTED PERSON ON THE ROAD TODAY. DOT rules. Period. Why can't he get high while the band plays. Come on, its just a lude. You're being a bummer.

Result: The band all dies. The innocents in the car all die. We all go to the funneral and wonder why.

My origonal question still stands: "Why ask a certain part of society to go by rules that you refuse to go by?" You want the bus driver to be straight, right?

I've stood there talking to Bert as the ABB bus driver gets on the bus... It is like a pilot getting on an airplane...he has a job to do and is an unsung hero of this site. It is his professionalism that brings this band to us every night. they trust him. They trust Bert to know when to say "no".

Everyone else asleep....he drives through the night... You also sleeping in your home waiting for the concert....all is well.
quote:


Let me make sure I'm dialing into your point correctly Dan;you're saying that we want Bert to be tested to ensure he can't be using when he's driving the bus,especially with the boys in it,& if we're going to impose these rules on him then we should impose them on everyonein society,regardless of there occupation,& we should also live by these rules ourselves-right?

Well,I have no problem with Bert or anyone else with a job that has that kind of responsability & the potential to endanger the lives of others being drug tested,but I don't agree that we should hold all members of society to that standard.Should the person who wants a creative job at-say, oh,an advertising agency for arguments sake-have to be able to drive a bus?Should we make sure that before a guy gets hired to stock shelves at the local Prancing Pony he possesses the physical requirements needed to be a firefighter?Do you have to pass the Bar to be a Roadie?People in different occupations should not be held to the same standards...
Having said that,I'd much rather Bert be driving high on trees then drunk....







The employer sets those standards though, not the employees. It's their playing field and you wont find much symapthy in court should you file a suit for creating a hostile working environment because they don't want you coming to work with a buzz on. Maybe pot smokers should just start their own businesses and set their own standards.

[Edited on 10/4/2005 by BodineFan]


Denza - 10/4/2005 at 12:57 AM

I was really just posing it as a question, but since you asked...


quote:
Being in a band or an artist is not really a mainstream occupation where you actione impact others, it's kind of like being self-employed and you get out what you put in.


I don't necessarily think that is the case unless you are a self financed and an independent band. If someone (or a record company) is investing in your talent with production and promotion, they might just have a vested interest in you outputting to your maximum potential.


quote:
Care to list all the bands that have lost everything due to drugs and alcohol abuse?


Nope, way too numerous to list. I've read those books and it's not a pretty sight.


None to list from marijuana though that I know of.


BodineFan - 10/4/2005 at 01:00 AM

Has anyone had their mind changed from this debate?


I didn't think so....


Quinn - 10/4/2005 at 01:02 AM

lets start testing goverment officals
and start at the top


johnwott - 10/4/2005 at 01:07 AM

Let's not test anyone

but hold everyone accountable for their actions.


BodineFan - 10/4/2005 at 01:18 AM

quote:
Let's not test anyone

but hold everyone accountable for their actions.


Let's say "toe-mah-toe" instead of "toe-may-toe"


OldSchool - 10/4/2005 at 01:27 AM

quote:
The employer sets those standards though, not the employees. It's their playing field and you wont find much symapthy in court should you file a suit for creating a hostile working environment because they don't want you coming to work with a buzz on. Maybe pot smokers should just start their own businesses and set their own standards.


Many do(no,I'm not just talking about selling weed )Earlier BodineFan you said

quote:
The original question in this thread dealt wth a person trying to get around a drug test for a new job. This is dishonest behaviour. The company even though it is "creative" in nature wants people with clear heads working for them, to try and get the job through deceit say a lot about the applicant


Myself and others have been saying that alcohol is much worse than pot.If the person is right for the job in the creative field,why should the fact that they may like to unwind with a couple of tokes at the end of the day change that when if their way of unwinding is a couple of Martinis,that doesn't?OK,it's the employers playing field,& they set the standards.It's still wrong .So if someone has to resort to the "dishonest behavior" of trying to get around a drug test to get the job they need to make it,& that decision isn't gonna hurt anyone,I say go for it.It's real easy to sit on a high horse on an internet forum & pass judgement on someone else's life & the choices they make.Are you so perfect?



BodineFan - 10/4/2005 at 01:41 AM

quote:


Myself and others have been saying that alcohol is much worse than pot.If the person is right for the job in the creative field,why should the fact that they may like to unwind with a couple of tokes at the end of the day change that when if their way of unwinding is a couple of Martinis,that doesn't?OK,it's the employers playing field,& they set the standards.It's still wrong .So if someone has to resort to the "dishonest behavior" of trying to get around a drug test to get the job they need to make it,& that decision isn't gonna hurt anyone,I say go for it.It's real easy to sit on a high horse on an internet forum & pass judgement on someone else's life & the choices they make.Are you so perfect?





I'm not passing jusdgement on anyone, well that's not true, there was one guy about 4 pages back . As I have said, i don't use any drugs unless we are in fact including caffeine, but I'm not sure about that one. Does that make me "perfect" of course not, does it make me very employable and not have to worry about this stuff, you bet. Sorry, but I really don't have any vices, I tried pot about 3 times before the age of 17 and haven't tried in since. Had a few drinks in my later teens and didn't like that either. Never smoke butts. You have to understand that when people don't do these things, it's very hard to understand the attraction and the effort that others put into it. I'm sure for people who have more than dabbled and learned hard lessons, it's even harder to understand.

Do I think pot smokers and recreational drug users and drinkers are beneath me? No, do I want to spend time with them when they are in an "altered state" no, not unless they need a safe ride home. The defensive posture of the smokers really puzzles me because I figured they would be like "yeah, whatever, I'm still going to smoke", but many of the more biting comments and hostile acusations have come from the pro-weed group.

Also, what the heck is everyone "unwinding" from? Life aint that hard.

[Edited on 10/4/2005 by BodineFan]


Fuse - 10/4/2005 at 02:11 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
The marijuana laws in this country are by origin racist as they come


I agree the laws are wrong and harsh....but racist? I'm not understanding that...





The first marijuana laws were aimed at mexican immigrants.


Disinformation got you. Reefer laws got started back in the '20s when Harry Anslinger wanted to get the New Orleans darkies in jail. Those rascals.


Angelemerald - 10/4/2005 at 02:26 AM

quote:
I've stood there talking to Bert as the ABB bus driver gets on the bus... It is like a pilot getting on an airplane...he has a job to do and is an unsung hero of this site. It is his professionalism that brings this band to us every night. they trust him. They trust Bert to know when to say "no".

Everyone else asleep....he drives through the night... You also sleeping in your home waiting for the concert....all is well.



DanTan, You're right. Drug use can be a problem in the work place. Most people shouldn't even try to get away with smoking during the work day. Same for drinking. Even though it may be a lot different for a musician to smoke than for a bus driver or someone who operates machinery, I would say in general, it isn't cool to smoke during work.

And you are right, there is something called addiction. Addiction is a negative thing. Even if you are a musician, if you need to get high every single solitary day, just to make it through the day, you might want to consider that something in your life needs attention.

The problem with the just say no anti-drug movement is that their proponents forget that people need to learn how to identify when drug use becomes an addiction. Now one may argue that pot isn't addictive. Maybe not. But it is a drug and it changes perception and it can be abused. Another problem that arises because of society's enforcement approach to drug use is that people don't learn about how to experiment responsibly. This results in people dying from an overdose or visiting emergency rooms to safely come down from a high.

There is a better way. We can teach people that excessive use of psychoactive drugs (of which pot is one) may be an indicator for serious depression, obsessive compulsive disorder or other psychological disorders that need attention. We can teach people to recognize when drug use is becoming problematic. We can teach people how to help friends, family members and significant others get help and we can teach people who use drugs excessively to know that recovery is possible.

There are no easy answers. To make believe it can all be synthesized down to "just say no," well that is unrealistic and in my opinion, the real crime.


PS - Dan Tan, Congrats on that geetar. Cool. :-)

[Edited on 10/4/2005 by Angelemerald]


Sherrick - 10/4/2005 at 02:30 AM

quote:
SnoopDog likes to test the reefer.

I read he requires an ounce of top grade in his concert rider.


if only that were possible...or legal...or even true, for that matter. I've seen his rider...his is pretty simple, really.


musichick3 - 10/4/2005 at 02:32 AM

quote:


The employer sets those standards though, not the employees. It's their playing field and you wont find much symapthy in court should you file a suit for creating a hostile working environment because they don't want you coming to work with a buzz on. Maybe pot smokers should just start their own businesses and set their own standards.

[Edited on 10/4/2005 by BodineFan]


Ben And Jerry's? lolol


BodineFan - 10/4/2005 at 02:45 AM

quote:

Ben And Jerry's? lolol


Goddamn the pusherman.


TanDan - 10/4/2005 at 02:53 AM

Let me make sure I'm dialing into your point correctly Dan;you're saying that we want Bert to be tested to ensure he can't be using when he's driving the bus,especially with the boys in it,& if we're going to impose these rules on him then we should impose them on everyonein society,regardless of there occupation,& we should also live by these rules ourselves-right?

Well,I have no problem with Bert or anyone else with a job that has that kind of responsability & the potential to endanger the lives of others being drug tested,but I don't agree that we should hold all members of society to that standard.Should the person who wants a creative job at-say, oh,an advertising agency for arguments sake-have to be able to drive a bus?Should we make sure that before a guy gets hired to stock shelves at the local Prancing Pony he possesses the physical requirements needed to be a firefighter?Do you have to pass the Bar to be a Roadie?People in different occupations should not be held to the same standards...
Having said that,I'd much rather Bert be driving high on trees then drunk....
_____________________________________________________________________

You must be new here....sorry.

"Bert" is Bert Holman, the guy who says "Ladies and Gentleman, the best damn band in the land, The Allman Brothers Band" on most of your CD's.

His 'Other' job is not driving the bus. He is responsible for everything that goes right. I'm not sure he has ever driven a bus. What I do know is that he makes sure everything goes right. That includes spotting doped or drunk bus drivers...

How can anyone on this site not know Bert....Sheesh....!!!


bluefox - 10/4/2005 at 03:06 AM

I wouldnt call someone with over a 1000 posts a newbie....unless there is a new definition for that. Did I miss that meeting??


OldSchool - 10/4/2005 at 06:05 AM

quote:
"Bert" is Bert Holman, the guy who says "Ladies and Gentleman, the best damn band in the land, The Allman Brothers Band" on most of your CD's.

His 'Other' job is not driving the bus. He is responsible for everything that goes right. I'm not sure he has ever driven a bus. What I do know is that he makes sure everything goes right. That includes spotting doped or drunk bus drivers...

How can anyone on this site not know Bert....Sheesh....!!!


Wupps,mah bad,I don't know Bert! * OS smacks self in head(then remembers people think it's strange when he talks about self in 3rd person) *"Maybe some day I'll be cool like that tanned guy & know Bert"
But until then-way to stay on subject,Dan.I see how you are.After the pompous,arrogant,pretentious,holier than thou posts you have made on this thread,that's your response to me?The name of the bus driver is obselete,it was the point I was making that you didn't seem to like.I liked you better when you were being paranoid & self pitying:
"I don't exist.I never tried to help anybody...I never dedicated my life...I know nothing of what I talk about...ignore me totally... "
PHUCKIN WAAHHHH!!!You jumped down the poor girl who started this thread's throat on the first damn page,all she did was ask a simple question.Telling people they're gonna be greeters at Wal-Mart if they smoke weed." I just heard a cry in the dark and decided to answer it " Y'okay pal,PULL THE OTHER ONE.Was that you that called someone a douchebag?Man,are you sure you're not an addict?You certainly have all the symtoms......



rollingcrowe - 10/4/2005 at 11:12 AM

Dang, page nine! I could have smoked a V-8


KirkKoster - 10/4/2005 at 11:25 AM

New question. Or fact as the case may be. The test for pot is much more sensitive than that for alcohol. There are no tests that will show alcohol useage 30 days previous (although it still may have an impact). If there were, very few would be employed. On the other hand, there is no way anyone on this post can point to factual information that an individual is still impaired 30 days after they have smoked pot. No way you can point to scientific fact that you are impaired 30 hours after you smoke pot. Also, I hate to suggest that those of you who are diehard against drug use may be listening to artists who have composed your favorite songs under the influence or performed under the influence. Do we then get to the question of whether you're getting your moneys worth when you attend a show or buy a CD. Let's have all artists tested prior to performance or recording. That's only fair to the public buying these products. However we view this situation that Daisymae is in, we won't change it. She will still have to pee in the bottle because the law allows the potential employer to preemploy test. Daisy, hopefully you get /find the job you want and love, because I've been in the situation where you go to a job you dread being at. I find that to be the best reason to stay clean, at least for a while, because your work happiness should be a top priority.


Sherrick - 10/4/2005 at 12:12 PM

quote:
New question. Or fact as the case may be. The test for pot is much more sensitive than that for alcohol. There are no tests that will show alcohol useage 30 days previous (although it still may have an impact). If there were, very few would be employed. On the other hand, there is no way anyone on this post can point to factual information that an individual is still impaired 30 days after they have smoked pot. No way you can point to scientific fact that you are impaired 30 hours after you smoke pot. Also, I hate to suggest that those of you who are diehard against drug use may be listening to artists who have composed your favorite songs under the influence or performed under the influence. Do we then get to the question of whether you're getting your moneys worth when you attend a show or buy a CD. Let's have all artists tested prior to performance or recording. That's only fair to the public buying these products. However we view this situation that Daisymae is in, we won't change it. She will still have to pee in the bottle because the law allows the potential employer to preemploy test. Daisy, hopefully you get /find the job you want and love, because I've been in the situation where you go to a job you dread being at. I find that to be the best reason to stay clean, at least for a while, because your work happiness should be a top priority.


no, you're not impaired by it, its just still in your system, and the test just finds it, it doesnt ask it how long its been there.


KirkKoster - 10/4/2005 at 01:57 PM

no, you're not impaired by it, its just still in your system, and the test just finds it, it doesnt ask it how long its been there.





Agreed


Binnsjim - 10/4/2005 at 02:16 PM

quote:



Spark it up Monkey!!!


johnwott - 10/4/2005 at 02:38 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
The marijuana laws in this country are by origin racist as they come


I agree the laws are wrong and harsh....but racist? I'm not understanding that...





The first marijuana laws were aimed at mexican immigrants.


Disinformation got you. Reefer laws got started back in the '20s when Harry Anslinger wanted to get the New Orleans darkies in jail. Those rascals.


At the same time there was this bad ass mexican that shot some folks that pissed him off.

That was used as propaganda about mexicans with loco weed.

So the racism came on two fronts.


johnwott - 10/4/2005 at 02:48 PM

quote:


I'm not passing jusdgement on anyone, well that's not true, there was one guy about 4 pages back . As I have said, i don't use any drugs unless we are in fact including caffeine, but I'm not sure about that one. Does that make me "perfect" of course not, does it make me very employable and not have to worry about this stuff, you bet. Sorry, but I really don't have any vices, I tried pot about 3 times before the age of 17 and haven't tried in since. Had a few drinks in my later teens and didn't like that either. Never smoke butts. You have to understand that when people don't do these things, it's very hard to understand the attraction and the effort that others put into it. I'm sure for people who have more than dabbled and learned hard lessons, it's even harder to understand.




caffeine is a stimulant, in the same class of drugs as nicotine, cocaine and meth.

not an illegal drug, still a drug

you are drug user .

When coffee was first brought to europe it had a social stigma also.
until employers figured out they could get more work out of folks using it.

many employers have free coffee for workers.

Its a drug.


Bhawk - 10/4/2005 at 04:21 PM

J-j-j-j-john W-w-w-w-wott I've h-h-h-had four c-c-cups of c-c-c-coffee this m-m-m-orning and e-e-e-e-ven though my h-h-h-hands are s-s-s-shaking and I've gotten t-t-t-three d-d-days worth of w-w-w-work d-d-d-done in the l-l-l-last two hours doesn't m-m-m-ake coffee a d-d-d-d-r--u-g.


CowboyNeil - 10/4/2005 at 04:22 PM

OH god I'm a Beanhead


FarmerMaggie - 10/4/2005 at 06:00 PM

quote:
lets start testing goverment officals
and start at the top

Absolutly. Start with math and spelling.


johnwott - 10/4/2005 at 08:55 PM

quote:
quote:
lets start testing goverment officals
and start at the top

Absolutly. Start with math and spelling.


It's spelled "Gov't"


gotdrumz - 10/4/2005 at 10:03 PM

greetings:

Hey John, regardless of the classification of caffiene. The issue is that employers do not test employees for caffiene. Insurance companies do not base thier rates on whether or not companies have employees under the influence of caffiene. You cannot be arrested for being high on caffiene or having it in your possesion. I agree it is a stimulant and myself do not use it anymore. But big deal. The person who started this topic wasn't asking how to pass a drug test because they went to Starbucks that day. twice. Another perspective on this whole thing is how an individual presents themselves to a perspective employer when they indulge in some illegal activity. This puts face value integrity out the window. Factor in whether or not they are a recreational user or even what other type of "drugs" they use or abuse. legal or illegal ? In my life, a very high percentage of drug takers were also involved in other ilegal activities. Even those who smoke pot for medical purposes are feeding the same machine that slings out crack cocaine, meth, and heroin. Cause most of them are getting it from the street corner or other means besides perscription. Even then that avenue of doctor prescribed pot is very very much abused by individuals who fill a doctors pocket with cash to get a signature
so they can smoke legal. Failing to see the impact or consequences of doing so when it leads in most cases to these clinics being shut down, including places where voters have passed legislation to allow it. To sum this all up in one sentence...Even a person who takes just a hit or two on the week-end is supporting criminal activity someplace somewhere. We all justify behaviors to suit our needs


Sherrick - 10/4/2005 at 10:35 PM

you're a drug user too...did you eat food this morning? Have something to drink, even water? Did you breathe? You're addicted to food, liquid, and oxygen...all in essence a drug.

quote:
caffeine is a stimulant, in the same class of drugs as nicotine, cocaine and meth.

not an illegal drug, still a drug

you are drug user .

When coffee was first brought to europe it had a social stigma also.
until employers figured out they could get more work out of folks using it.

many employers have free coffee for workers.

Its a drug.


musicalbeds - 10/4/2005 at 10:37 PM

quote:
Even a person who takes just a hit or two on the week-end is supporting criminal activity someplace somewhere.


What a crock of sh!t...I guess you've never heard of people growing their own?

It;s illegal because of big business, not because of it's effects on humans....are you having trouble understanding that?

You;ve been sold lies, and you spew them out here like facts showing us how brain-washed you are....think for yourself.

Pot is no more hazardous to people's health than alcohol...yet one is illegal and the other isn't.

Maybe we should just accept that....but I don't see it happening. It's wrong to demonize one segment of society for smoking pot, while the same type of substance is served legally at restaurants. You won't make people quit....but you will divide people and ruin lives simply for the sake of inforcing an outdate, racist{see I learn stuff here} law.


johnwott - 10/4/2005 at 11:16 PM

quote:
greetings:

Hey John, regardless of the classification of caffiene. The issue is that employers do not test employees for caffiene. Insurance companies do not base thier rates on whether or not companies have employees under the influence of caffiene. You cannot be arrested for being high on caffiene or having it in your possesion. I agree it is a stimulant and myself do not use it anymore. But big deal. The person who started this topic wasn't asking how to pass a drug test because they went to Starbucks that day. twice. Another perspective on this whole thing is how an individual presents themselves to a perspective employer when they indulge in some illegal activity. This puts face value integrity out the window. Factor in whether or not they are a recreational user or even what other type of "drugs" they use or abuse. legal or illegal ? In my life, a very high percentage of drug takers were also involved in other ilegal activities. Even those who smoke pot for medical purposes are feeding the same machine that slings out crack cocaine, meth, and heroin. Cause most of them are getting it from the street corner or other means besides perscription. Even then that avenue of doctor prescribed pot is very very much abused by individuals who fill a doctors pocket with cash to get a signature
so they can smoke legal. Failing to see the impact or consequences of doing so when it leads in most cases to these clinics being shut down, including places where voters have passed legislation to allow it. To sum this all up in one sentence...Even a person who takes just a hit or two on the week-end is supporting criminal activity someplace somewhere. We all justify behaviors to suit our needs


If you live in Holland you can get it at the drugstore with a prescription.
No criminal problem there.
It also allows for consistant strenght which is important for medicines.

why not here ?

The crime caused by illegal drugs is a serious social problem. The War on drugs isn't helping.
Countries that treat drug abuse as a health issue rather than a legal issue have
better success. But commerical interests will not let that happen at the federal level.

The issue of caffeine is not about legality, It's about the those that
use legal drugs and look down on those using illegal drugs.
That is so hypocritical

Drugs have always been part of the human experience. both legal and illegal.

How much does refined sugar raise the cost of health care with the damage it does?

Obesity is a major health problem.

Alcohol prohibition didn't work. Neither has prohibition of other drugs.
Our tax dollars would be better spent on helping those with addictions
medically rather than throwing non-violent "criminals" in jail.

Peace
John


johnwott - 10/4/2005 at 11:19 PM

quote:
you're a drug user too...did you eat food this morning? Have something to drink, even water? Did you breathe? You're addicted to food, liquid, and oxygen...all in essence a drug.



NO

a drug changes your mental state.

air and water are not drugs.


gotdrumz - 10/4/2005 at 11:30 PM

quote:
What a crock of sh!t...I guess you've never heard of people growing their own?

It;s illegal because of big business, not because of it's effects on humans....are you having trouble understanding that?

You;ve been sold lies, and you spew them out here like facts showing us how brain-washed you are....think for yourself.

Pot is no more hazardous to people's health than alcohol...yet one is illegal and the other isn't.

Maybe we should just accept that....but I don't see it happening. It's wrong to demonize one segment of society for smoking pot, while the same type of substance is served legally at restaurants. You won't make people quit....but you will divide people and ruin lives simply for the sake of inforcing an outdate, racist{see I learn stuff here} law.



the issue is that it is illegal. I could care less as to why.
the issue isn't what effect it has on your body, though below is an actual medical effect on the body and has nothing to do with phsycology. So don't get confused.


The cannaboids found in THC stimulate opiate receptors in your brain. This triggers not only production but the amount of saratonin and dopamine by your brain. When either of these are insufficient as opposed to the other, it causes your limbic system to engage.
When your limbic system engages it effects you very very much. It isn't a physical effect but a behavioral one.

Sounds pretty brainwashed to me, don't ya think

I made a choice to grow up and quit doing something that could be detrimental to not only my freedom but the well being of my family. The benefits of the temporary feeling caused from smoking pot are pale in comparison to the consequences of getting caught with it in my possession or in my system.

Even if they legalized pot there would still be testing for it in the workplace
I wouldn't want my kids driven to school by a bus driver on pot cause it is legal.
To further my point, a few people in my own working environment smoke weed and it is easily determined by thier performance, behavior, and productivity whether they had smoked it recently or not.


yes I have heard of people growing it.
my dad grew tons of the crap while I was growing up
and I have probably dropped more weed on the floor then you have ever smoked
but who cares.

Even those who grow it themselves sometimes get in a pinch and sell (perhaps give it away ?) an 1/8 or a 1/4 here and there. Thus getting into the illegal aspect of my post you had a problem with. Even if you give it away or smoke it with another person in the privacy of your own home, the "personal use" clause of most cultivation laws doesn't apply anymore.

If you choose to smoke weed, I am cool with that.
just don't get too upset when you have to take a drug test sometime for work or the police rattle your cage due to indulgence. But since I don't think for myself, I don't have to worry bout any of that.

Laters
Brother James


gotdrumz - 10/4/2005 at 11:40 PM

Hey John, thanks for the insight and other perspective.

perhaps the perservatives in our food, which has an adverse effect on our bodies should be put in tat same catergory as sugar and caffiene ? You could debate this forever.

The bottom line is those who have problems with drug testing are drug users


musicalbeds - 10/4/2005 at 11:43 PM

quote:

the issue is that it is illegal. I could care less as to why.



Your preference for ignorance means it's a waste of time addressing you on this thread...so I didn't bother reading the rest and I won't bother addressing you again.


I agree with John; air and water aren't drugs.

[Edited on 10/4/2005 by musicalbeds]


johnwott - 10/4/2005 at 11:50 PM

quote:



The cannaboids found in THC stimulate opiate receptors in your brain. This triggers not only production but the amount of saratonin and dopamine by your brain. When either of these are insufficient as opposed to the other, it causes your limbic system to engage.
When your limbic system engages it effects you very very much. It isn't a physical effect but a behavioral one.





This is incorrect.

Cannaboids are chemically different than opiates. Nerve tissue have both cannaboid and opiate receptors.
Opiates can't excite cannaboid receptors any more than cannaboids can affect opiate receptors.

The differences account for the fewer side effects of cannaboids as opposed to opiates.

When there is nerve damage the opiate receptors shut down, while the cannaboid receptors
actually increase. (english research reported in the journal of neurology)

This makes cannaboids more appropriate for nerve pain and is the reason that
marijuana works better than narcotics for neurological pain.

Opiates don't work well for nerve pain because of the shut down of opiate receptors.

peace
John


FarmerMaggie - 10/5/2005 at 12:10 AM

quote:
the issue is that it is illegal. I could care less as to why.

Please, don't take this as a fight, but do you know the laws pertaining to sexual intercourse in your state? In the Commonwealth of Virginia there is only one legal position for consenting adults - missionary. That means paraplegics who live in Virginia, are married and sexually active are criminals. tsk tsk...
Shame on ...who?

Maybe it's time for us to care about laws are on the books and why they are there. Unless you are celibate, you could be a criminal, too.


johnwott - 10/5/2005 at 12:12 AM

quote:
quote:
the issue is that it is illegal. I could care less as to why.

Please, don't take this as a fight, but do you know the laws pertaining to sexual intercourse in your state? In the Commonwealth of Virginia there is only one legal position for consenting adults - missionary. That means paraplegics who live in Virginia, are married and sexually active are criminals. tsk tsk...
Shame on ...who?

Maybe it's time for us to care about laws are on the books and why they are there. Unless you are celibate, you could be a criminal, too.


I've proudly broken those laws in virginia!


TopDroog - 10/5/2005 at 12:45 AM

I think it's because of you that those laws were drafted in the first place. I told you to leave that State Senator's daughter alone.


peachjam - 10/5/2005 at 12:58 AM

Tonight at 9 eastern on HDNet "Debate" Allen St. Pierre, executive director of NORML deliberates with Calvina Fay, President of Drug Free America over marijuana issues. Going to watch now


curry - 10/5/2005 at 01:13 AM

'Weed With Willie' - Toby Kieth

I always heard that his herb was top shelf
Lord I just could not wait to find out for myself.
Well don't knock it till you've tried it.
And I've tried it my friend.
I'll never smoke Weed with Willie again!

Now we learned a hard less in a small Texas town
He fired up a fat boy and he passed it around
The last words I spoke before they tucked me in
I may discount Bungee jump but,
I'll never smoke Weed with Willlie again!

I'll never smoke Weed with Willie again
My party's all over before it begins
You can pour me some Old Whiskey River my friend
But I'll never smoke Weed with Willie again

We hopped on his old bus, the Honeysuckle Rose
The party was Huntsville, it was after the show
Alone in the front lounge, just me and him
I took one friendly puff and the grim reaper set in

Now we're passin' the guitar, we're tellin' good jokes
I can tell one's a comin' 'cause I'm smellin' smoke
No I do not partake, I just let it pass by
With a grin on my face and a great contact high

In a fetal position with drool on my chin
We broke down and smoked Weed with Willie again.




johnwott - 10/5/2005 at 02:12 AM

quote:
I think it's because of you that those laws were drafted in the first place. I told you to leave that State Senator's daughter alone.


Just a little night putting with the dean's daughter.....


Sherrick - 10/5/2005 at 02:19 AM

quote:
quote:
you're a drug user too...did you eat food this morning? Have something to drink, even water? Did you breathe? You're addicted to food, liquid, and oxygen...all in essence a drug.



NO

a drug changes your mental state.

air and water are not drugs.


go a couple days without eating anything or drinking anything...and see what your mental state is.


johnwott - 10/5/2005 at 03:03 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
you're a drug user too...did you eat food this morning? Have something to drink, even water? Did you breathe? You're addicted to food, liquid, and oxygen...all in essence a drug.



NO

a drug changes your mental state.

air and water are not drugs.


go a couple days without eating anything or drinking anything...and see what your mental state is.


let's see you catch a buzz from water.

you're just being absurd.


musicalbeds - 10/5/2005 at 03:35 AM

quote:
Maybe it's time for us to care about laws are on the books and why they are there.


Amen to that.

"If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice". {Name the band }

It astounds me that people here can call each other "brother" on one hand, yet endorse the jailing of the potsmoking segment of our board simply by staying silent and allowing the laws to stay unchanged.


With brothers like that.....who needs nagging little sisters?


johnwott - 10/5/2005 at 04:35 AM

quote:
quote:
Maybe it's time for us to care about laws are on the books and why they are there.


Amen to that.

"If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice". {Name the band }



I will choose free will


RUSH


Sherrick - 10/5/2005 at 11:46 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
you're a drug user too...did you eat food this morning? Have something to drink, even water? Did you breathe? You're addicted to food, liquid, and oxygen...all in essence a drug.



NO

a drug changes your mental state.

air and water are not drugs.


go a couple days without eating anything or drinking anything...and see what your mental state is.


let's see you catch a buzz from water.

you're just being absurd.




I didn't say you catch a buzz from it...but again...try not drinking any liquids for a few days and see how you feel.


Bhawk - 10/5/2005 at 01:05 PM

If one is to take the stance of "what do you need a buzz for anyway..." then one would really need to examine the nature of human beings using something or other to escape throughout history. Every culture in history has an example of this. The Egyptians brewed beer. Wine has been around for centuries. Google the history of chocolate and say that that wasn't an addiction.

Speaking of addictions, how about the difference between moderation and addiction? One can be addicted to anything. Folks with natural addictive personalities can find themselves obsessed with eveything from scrapbooking to sex.

Illegality...you could take a hard look at a lot of the laws on the books and apply some interesting moral virtue to them...say, for instance, the difference between pot and alcohol, law-wise:

You get pulled over for speeding while you're smoking, you get arrested and taken to jail for what could be a variety of charges. Some carry mandatory jail time, heavy fines, etc.

You get pulled over for speeding while you're drunk. You get a DUI, your buddy bails you out, you stop at the liquor store on the way home, you get a lawyer, pay him $1500 and you do no jail time, perhaps a class or community service, and all the while, you keep drinking and driving.


FarmerMaggie - 10/5/2005 at 02:21 PM

quote:
If one is to take the stance of "what do you need a buzz for anyway..." then one would really need to examine the nature of human beings using something or other to escape throughout history. Every culture in history has an example of this. The Egyptians brewed beer. Wine has been around for centuries. Google the history of chocolate and say that that wasn't an addiction.


Most folks know by the age of 2... just spin in circles until you fall down laughing.
It used to be that a short walk to the playground and several spins on the old merry-go-round while flat on my back looking up at the sky did the trick. But Draconian measures deemed that wonderful ride "too dangerous" and it was removed "for public safety". Now we have to pay the big bucks to ride the monster roller coaster at the corporate owned parks.
A rush is a rush is a rush...


WharfRat - 10/5/2005 at 02:26 PM

I sniff glue, is that ok?


ozzypie - 10/5/2005 at 02:46 PM

quote:
I sniff glue, is that ok?


NO!!! Sniffing glue leads to listening and eventually even enjoying bands like Motley Crue and Bon Jovi....whoops....you're screwed!


johnwott - 10/5/2005 at 02:49 PM

quote:
quote:
I sniff glue, is that ok?


NO!!! Sniffing glue leads to listening and eventually even enjoying bands like Motley Crue and Bon Jovi....whoops....you're screwed!


OR thinking water is a drug


FarmerMaggie - 10/5/2005 at 03:03 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
I sniff glue, is that ok?


NO!!! Sniffing glue leads to listening and eventually even enjoying bands like Motley Crue and Bon Jovi....whoops....you're screwed!


OR thinking water is a drug

Actually, you can get high from water if you drink enough of it. Problem is THAT WILL KILL YOU shortly after you go into the coma.


Bhawk - 10/5/2005 at 03:32 PM

Did you know that some medical researchers once actually calculated the effect of marijuana and what it would take to actually OD to the point of death? The approximation, using a medium to high-grade strain rolled into regular sized joints, one would have to smoke approximately 30 joints in fifteen minutes. Wow. Can you imagine?


CowboyNeil - 10/5/2005 at 04:16 PM

Actually THC does drop your blood glucose level by inhibiting the enzyme Glucose-6-phosphatase and thats why your blood sugar drops, it can't get out of the liver. Your brain cells will only use glucose for cellular respiration.

Not saying thats why its illegal but it does have some negative effects when done not in moderation, thus the word SPENT


johnwott - 10/5/2005 at 05:56 PM

quote:
Did you know that some medical researchers once actually calculated the effect of marijuana and what it would take to actually OD to the point of death? The approximation, using a medium to high-grade strain rolled into regular sized joints, one would have to smoke approximately 30 joints in fifteen minutes. Wow. Can you imagine?


You would fall asleep before ever getting to 30


bradfordg. - 10/5/2005 at 06:24 PM

quote:
quote:
Did you know that some medical researchers once actually calculated the effect of marijuana and what it would take to actually OD to the point of death? The approximation, using a medium to high-grade strain rolled into regular sized joints, one would have to smoke approximately 30 joints in fifteen minutes. Wow. Can you imagine?


You would fall asleep before ever getting to 30


ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ....................

Uh what???????????


TanDan - 10/5/2005 at 09:01 PM

(Member #610...I was not calling member # 22230 a 'newbie')


OriginalGoober - 10/5/2005 at 11:52 PM

go to www.marijuana.com

forums drug testing

covers hair, urine, saliva, blood testing

very informative

not advocating, but I needed to learn about hair follicle testing and found lots of info there


gotdrumz - 10/6/2005 at 02:02 AM

Greetings:

Hey Musicalbeds, just because I disagree with you about pot I am "ignorant" ?

If pot was legal, my choice would still be to not smoke it.

I spent way too many years of my life "justifying" behavior by picking and choosing which laws I wanted to follow are not. Spent 3 years in prison (non drug related charges) in account of those actions. Now I choose to follow the law as best I can, evern the ones I disagree with, like seat belts, helmets, ect. ect. ect. This is my choice to make, you can go smoke all the pot your lil heart desires. I am trying to set examples for my kids to follow
that hopefully later on they can't throw the "I saw you doin' it...why can't I ?"

I am sorry you can't have reasonable debate/conversation with an opposing view without
getting all bent out of shape. Refusing to answer me is your choice and I will not lose any sleep over it. Wonder what example that would give others ?..."someone disagrees with me so they are ignorant"


musicalbeds - 10/6/2005 at 03:01 AM

quote:
Hey Musicalbeds, just because I disagree with you about pot I am "ignorant" ?


No, you're ignorant because;

quote:
the issue is that it is illegal. I could care less as to why.



and while it's more apathetic than ignorant, my earlier point still applies;

"It astounds me that people here can call each other "brother" on one hand, yet endorse the jailing of the potsmoking segment of our board simply by staying silent and allowing the laws to stay unchanged."

I'm not asking you to smoke pot, endorse smoking it or hang out with people who do. But I, as a fellow "brother" expect you to see a wrong and add your voice to making it right. Jailing people for marijuana use is wrong but by your own words you could "care less".

You've been in jail so you know it's not for people who's only crime is marijuana. You also know it's a training ground for criminals. Yet you silently advocate jailing pot users.

I'm glad to hear you are trying to better yourself and help your children to be responsible, and I know you've done your debt to society and you don't have to give more...but maybe it's something to think about; adding your voice to the legalization of pot.

I am not trying to be harsh, but in my opinion, there's a lot of people who need to give their head a shake and get this issue dealt with NOW.

Because it won't go away....and we're wasting time, money and people's lives debating it.







Binnsjim - 10/6/2005 at 09:34 AM

quote:
quote:



Spark it up Monkey!!!


Spank th Monkey!!!!!!!!!!


gotdrumz - 10/7/2005 at 01:06 AM

greetings:

again for musicalbeds...If everyone who smoked pot grew there own you would then have an arguement for your point. The people who sell pot usually sell other drugs. So you have "the training ground for criminal activity" you mentioned. I dont' recall saying specificly that pot smokers should be jailed. You can speculate but it was actually about it being illegal and how that is in retrospect to drug testing. Which is the topic of this discussion. Most cops will not arrest, much less cite a person if they caught them merely smokiing a joint. They wiill however, scope the situation differently if that person is "loaded" and driving a car or has a reasonable amount more than for personal use in thier possesion. If you perhaps would try to understand what is being said, you wouldn't end up having the reactions you do. I respect your opinion and admire the passion you
possess for this issue.

Take Care


bradfordg. - 10/10/2005 at 06:06 AM

quote:




Good God that brings back memories of Jr.High school..........headphoes,Foghat (the Live LP) and rolling a fatty. Of course that was back in '78 &'79.........


Peachstatedawg - 10/10/2005 at 01:51 PM

quote:
quote:




Good God that brings back memories of Jr.High school..........headphoes,Foghat (the Live LP) and rolling a fatty. Of course that was back in '78 &'79.........




I heard on a news show recently that the MJ being smoked today in the US is "40 times"
more potent than what was being used in the 70's. Can anyone verify or attest to that?


Binnsjim - 10/10/2005 at 02:06 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:




Good God that brings back memories of Jr.High school..........headphoes,Foghat (the Live LP) and rolling a fatty. Of course that was back in '78 &'79.........




I heard on a news show recently that the MJ being smoked today in the US is "40 times"
more potent than what was being used in the 70's. Can anyone verify or attest to that?




Sounds Good to me


johnwott - 10/10/2005 at 03:01 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:




Good God that brings back memories of Jr.High school..........headphoes,Foghat (the Live LP) and rolling a fatty. Of course that was back in '78 &'79.........




I heard on a news show recently that the MJ being smoked today in the US is "40 times"
more potent than what was being used in the 70's. Can anyone verify or attest to that?


More Drug War Lies.


ozzypie - 10/13/2005 at 05:54 PM

Lest we let this thread just wither and die...


Drug agents can't keep up with pot growers By John Ritter, USA TODAY
Thu Oct 13, 6:34 AM ET



In the waning days of a record season, a helicopter buzzes treetops here in a remote corner of the "Emerald Triangle," redwood country notorious as the USA's premier producer of marijuana. (Photo gallery: Rooting out pot hot spots)



State narcotics officers from CAMP - Campaign Against Marijuana Planting - are searching for "gardens" to eradicate and find six on a warm, cloudless day.


They strap onto a 150-foot cable dangling from the chopper, drop into the pot patches, hack down the plants and bundle them for the chopper to haul back to a landing zone.


Perhaps $500,000 worth of America's favorite illegal drug is trucked off for burial. It's not a big day by CAMP standards: 813 plants that fill a pickup bed. In this ever-growing illicit market, agents routinely find plots of 5,000 and 10,000 plants that require dump trucks to dispose of.


In the 2005 growing season, CAMP says it so far has destroyed more plants than ever - 1.1 million worth $4.5 billion on the street, up from 621,000 plants last year. But agents still lost ground to growers. No longer is marijuana cultivation the cottage industry that flourished in the 1960s and '70s after waves of counterculture migrants bought cheap land in the northern California mountains and grew pot for their own use and extra income.


Mexican criminals using sophisticated methods have spread the marijuana industry across California, traditionally the nation's main domestic source because of a mild climate and vast stretches of isolated landscape ideal for clandestine growing, say the authorities.


As recently as 10 years ago, the Emerald Triangle counties of Humboldt, Mendocino and Trinity grew virtually all of the state's pot. Now every California county that's not desert has a problem. Because of tighter security on the southern U.S. border, Mexicans simply made a business decision to move north.


"In the last two or three years almost 100% of the gardens we've eradicated are Mexican drug cartel gardens," says James Parker, the senior narcotics agent who oversees CAMP. "It's alarming if you think about it."


Today's high potency weed is so valuable - $5,000 or more for a pound of buds on the East Coast - that big operators employ armed guards who camp in pot gardens for months, nurturing plants that grow to 15 feet and taller. A state Fish and Game officer was wounded and a suspect shot and killed in a Santa Clara County bust in June, the fourth incident in two years.


Scarring the landscape


There would be more violence if growers weren't able to flee at the sound of a helicopter looking for gardens, says Jack Nelsen, CAMP's regional operations commander here. "This time of year, they won't go far -- the plants are worth too much," he says. "If we don't come back soon enough they'll be in there harvesting until we do."


Fishermen and hikers stumble onto armed men in the woods who threaten them and demand that they leave. Pot-growing has become epidemic both on privately owned timber tracts and public lands in California, including national forests and parks.


"A lot of terrain is so rugged and dense with foliage you wouldn't think about taking your family to those areas," Parker says. "It's amazing how much work these Mexicans put in to get a crop out."


Growers scar the landscape by crudely terracing hillsides that erode under winter rain. They spill pesticides, fertilizer and diesel fuel used to power generators that run extensive drip-irrigation systems. They dam creeks for water sources, plant salsa gardens, disfigure trees and leave behind tons of garbage, human waste and litter.


"They'll pour fertilizer right into a stream, then irrigate out of it," says Alexandra Picavet, a Sequoia National Park ranger. "That creates algae blooms, hurts fish and animals and contaminates downstream." Since 2001, officers have destroyed 105 pot gardens covering 181 acres in the park but have had enough money to clean up fewer than half the sites. "We think that for every one we've been able to eradicate, there's another one out there," Picavet says.


CAMP's critics equate the program with Prohibition in the 1930s.


"Look at the amount of economic value we're destroying," says Dale Gieringer, director of California NORML, the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws. "This could be legally taxed and regulated and we could all be making money off it. We never saw this lawlessness until there were drug laws and CAMP." NORML estimates that Californians' pot consumption could yield at least $250 million a year in sales taxes.


Gieringer also says that, despite the government's assertion, there is no evidence that Mexican cartels are involved in the cultivation.

Roger Rodoni is a cattle rancher and registered Republican who has represented a conservative district in Humboldt County - conservative by local standards, anyway - on the board of supervisors since 1997. He calls CAMP "an exercise in futility."

"It's a vast expenditure of public funds that for all practical purposes does no good," Rodoni, 65, says. Demand for marijuana keeps growing, and CAMP has done little to stem the supply, he says. As evidence he points to a drop in the price of "the quality stuff'" from $6,000 a pound a few years ago to $3,000 today.

A June report for Taxpayers for Common Sense by Harvard economist Jeffrey Miron found that despite billions of dollars spent on marijuana suppression - nearly $4 billion by the federal government in 2004 alone - usage is about the same as 30 years ago.

CAMP, an arm of the state attorney general's office, was formed in 1983 to help understaffed local authorities ferret out large-scale marijuana crops grown for profit, particularly in isolated areas far from roads where helicopters were needed. Five eradication teams deployed in different regions of the state operated this year on a $1.1 million budget, about three-quarters of it supplied by the federal Drug Enforcement Administration.

CAMP agents, with help from local sheriff's deputies and loaners from the National Guard, the state forestry department, the U.S. Forest Service and the National Park Service, have arrested 42 suspects, seized 76 weapons and raided 742 gardens.

But CAMP has made little headway penetrating and prosecuting the Mexican hierarchies allegedly behind most of the busted gardens. "They're similar to al-Qaeda, they're cells," says Sgt. James "Rusty" Noe of the Mendocino County sheriff's office. "We go out and find some guy in the garden and we arrest him, he's not going to know anything."

Since last year, two CAMP investigative teams have concentrated on tracking the Mexican drug bosses, and arrests have been made in Fresno and Redding. Parker says he'll ask for three more investigative units for 2006.

CAMP teams start reconnaissance flights in early spring as growers are preparing gardens - clearing land, setting up water systems, hauling in supplies and setting up campsites. When agents see a garden from the helicopter they fix its location with GPS.

Growers adapt to surveillance

Seizures have risen dramatically because of more aggressive air surveillance and larger gardens. But growers have adapted, CAMP's Nelsen says. They used to plant uniform plots in open ground - marijuana thrives in full sunlight - but those were easily spotted, even from an airplane at 5,000 feet.

Now gardens are tucked under the forest canopy, often on steep slopes, and strung out along hillside contours so they're much harder to see. Growers expect many of their gardens to be busted, so they put as many plants in the ground in as many locations as they can.

"It's a lot like what they do on the border," Parker says. "They'll try to send 70 cars through thinking a few are going to get picked off and that it's a cost of doing business."

These days, other counties have eclipsed the Emerald Triangle in confiscated marijuana. Shasta County led the state as of last week, according to CAMP figures: 209,864 plants eradicated compared with 52,133 all of last year.

The Central Valley counties of Tulare and Fresno, two of the nation's biggest agricultural producers, now rank No. 2 and 4. Mendocino had the fifth most plants seized, and Humboldt has slipped to No. 12. CAMP doesn't operate in California's two most populous counties, Los Angeles and San Diego, because authorities there have ample resources to go after marijuana themselves, Parker says.

"The Mexicans have basically found out how easy it is to find locations and find people to work these gardens," Nelsen says. "These organizations are even moving into some of the eastern counties in snow country."

Cultivation of medical marijuana, legalized by California voters in 1996, has expanded the supply, particularly from indoor production, and complicated efforts to crack down on the illegal market.

CAMP doesn't bother with medical marijuana growers, even large ones who say they're providing pot to many sick people. "We're not here to take anyone's medicine away," Nelsen says.

But medical marijuana has made it harder to figure out who the bad guys are, Noe says. The law left it up to counties and cities to set guidelines. Some have zero tolerance for medical marijuana; others have set limits on the number of plants. Mendocino County is wide open.

"The amount of marijuana cultivated in this county almost doubled because anybody can grow it in their backyard," Noe says. "The criminal element has taken advantage of the law."

Mendocino County started going after pot growers in the early 1980s after a spate of violence. Six deputy sheriffs, a sergeant, a legal secretary and an evidence technician operated on a $500,000 budget, Noe says. Today, it's Noe, a deputy and a $300,000 budget.

But with CAMP's help, the cops are more effective, he says, more than doubling the number of plants destroyed in the county compared with early years.

And each of those plants carries a lot more kick today. No more of the baggies with stems and seeds that baby boomers remember from their college days. Growers learned to "sex" the plants - cull the males early in the season to deny the females pollination and prevent buds from going to seed.

In a futile effort to attract pollen, the female plants produce more and more THC, the active ingredient and the source of marijuana's "high." The plant's buds get fatter and fatter. By September, they're sticky with THC and ready to harvest. "Back in the '60s and '70s the stuff imported from Mexico, there wasn't much bud to it," Noe says. "If it was good quality maybe the THC was 5%."

Tests nowadays find THC content as high as 21%, he says.


robslob - 10/13/2005 at 07:55 PM

Great post, Ozziepie, after I thought this thread was long since dead. As a California resident, let me add that, like most other Government agencies, Forest Ranger staff have been cut way back. They say there are numerous huge and professionally run pot farms in Sequoia National Forest with armed guards ready to shoot on site. Irrigation systems are complex and professional. They simply do not have the staff to monitor it anymore. Therefore, you are in danger if you simply should go hiking in the wrong place.
Marijuana is not going to go way, I admit not with people like me with a 30 year usage history around. More evidence that prohibition is not working and legalization is the way to go.
Since you re-started the thread, let me refer you and others to a link posted in a recent thread ("War on Weed is working") that a lot seem to have missed:

http://illuminati-news.com/marijuana-conspiracy.htm


johnwott - 10/13/2005 at 08:02 PM

quote:
Great post, Ozziepie, after I thought this thread was long since dead. As a California resident, let me add that, like most other Government agencies, Forest Ranger staff have been cut way back. They say there are numerous huge and professionally run pot farms in Sequoia National Forest with armed guards ready to shoot on site. Irrigation systems are complex and professional. They simply do not have the staff to monitor it anymore. Therefore, you are in danger if you simply should go hiking in the wrong place.
Marijuana is not going to go way, I admit not with people like me with a 30 year usage history around. More evidence that prohibition is not working and legalization is the way to go.
Since you re-started the thread, let me refer you and others to a link posted in a recent thread ("War on Weed is working") that a lot seem to have missed:

http://illuminati-news.com/marijuana-conspiracy.htm


"In the 1930s, people were very naive; even to the point of ignorance. The masses were like sheep waiting to be led by the few in power. They did not challenge authority. If the news was in print or on the radio, they believed it had to be true. They told their children and their children grew up to be the parents of the baby-boomers."


Some things never change.

peace
John


Peachstatedawg - 10/13/2005 at 11:52 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:




Good God that brings back memories of Jr.High school..........headphoes,Foghat (the Live LP) and rolling a fatty. Of course that was back in '78 &'79.........




I heard on a news show recently that the MJ being smoked today in the US is "40 times"
more potent than what was being used in the 70's. Can anyone verify or attest to that?


More Drug War Lies.







Drug agents can't keep up with pot growers By John Ritter, USA TODAY
Thu Oct 13, 6:34 AM ET

...............................And each of those plants carries a lot more kick today. No more of the baggies with stems and seeds that baby boomers remember from their college days. Growers learned to "sex" the plants - cull the males early in the season to deny the females pollination and prevent buds from going to seed.

In a futile effort to attract pollen, the female plants produce more and more THC, the active ingredient and the source of marijuana's "high." The plant's buds get fatter and fatter. By September, they're sticky with THC and ready to harvest. "Back in the '60s and '70s the stuff imported from Mexico, there wasn't much bud to it," Noe says. "If it was good quality maybe the THC was 5%."

Tests nowadays find THC content as high as 21%, he says.






robslob - 10/14/2005 at 12:43 AM

Peachstatedawg, I hate to burst a bubble here, but weeding out the male plants to keep the female fertile is not exactly new technology. A friend of mine (and an expert marijuana cultivator I might add) taught me that 30 years ago. Good bud has been around as long as I've been smoking, and obviously that's a long, long time. It just wasn't as prevalent back then as it is now. But then, you were going on 30 year old perceptions in your opinion of marijuana smokers as well (no vindictiveness intended, just a fact from your previous post in "Stuck on Stupid" thread).


MissElf - 10/14/2005 at 12:45 AM

Daisy, Stays in the sytem at least 45 days. Drink lots of water. After the test, go back to smoking and drink lots of water every day. Also, drink cranberry juice everyday...not tons, but 6-8 ounces. Keep that system flushed! A Rastafarian friend of mine says he has never failed a urine test by just drinking water everyday (about a gallon). And, of course, he smokes pot everyday.


OldSchool - 10/14/2005 at 01:09 AM

quote:
Daisy, Stays in the sytem at least 45 days. Drink lots of water. After the test, go back to smoking and drink lots of water every day. Also, drink cranberry juice everyday...not tons, but 6-8 ounces. Keep that system flushed! A Rastafarian friend of mine says he has never failed a urine test by just drinking water everyday (about a gallon). And, of course, he smokes pot everyday.


She already got the job MissElf,wasn't even a drugtest lol...


Peachstatedawg - 10/14/2005 at 01:44 AM

quote:
Peachstatedawg, I hate to burst a bubble here, but weeding out the male plants to keep the female fertile is not exactly new technology. A friend of mine (and an expert marijuana cultivator I might add) taught me that 30 years ago. Good bud has been around as long as I've been smoking, and obviously that's a long, long time. It just wasn't as prevalent back then as it is now. But then, you were going on 30 year old perceptions in your opinion of marijuana smokers as well (no vindictiveness intended, just a fact from your previous post in "Stuck on Stupid" thread).




Aight


johnwott - 10/14/2005 at 03:59 AM

The total thc was low because the weed was crappy in the old days with males and leaves
in the lid.

the female flowers were just as strong back then.

and even if 5% to 20% was comparing apples to apples and not apples to oranges
thats only a 4 time increase not 40.

You need to read a little more carefully dawg

Peace
John



[Edited on 10/14/2005 by johnwott]


Gordie - 10/14/2005 at 05:27 PM

People seemed to go into different directions with this topic. Being a cannabis consumer, I'm not going to tell someone to stop because it is illegal. However, since the OP said she had a hard time stopping for a day in order to prepare for her drug test, isn't that a little disconcerting? If I ever get to that point, I hope that I would realize by myself that I'm smoking too much, or that a friend/loved one would try to help. There is a difference between wanting to smoke pot, and needing to. Knowing the difference is the hard part.

I will get on a soapbox about the usage of pain pills, though. Unless a physician has prescribed pain pills for you to treat an ailment/illness, I would advise against messing around with them recreationally. At the least, I hope the OP has done her homework to see the interactions these pills have with other prescription/non-prescription meds you are taking.

Thanks, and party smart!


Binnsjim - 10/14/2005 at 05:32 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:



Spark it up Monkey!!!



Peachstatedawg - 10/15/2005 at 03:18 AM

quote:
The total thc was low because the weed was crappy in the old days with males and leaves
in the lid.

the female flowers were just as strong back then.

and even if 5% to 20% was comparing apples to apples and not apples to oranges
thats only a 4 time increase not 40.

You need to read a little more carefully dawg

Peace
John



[Edited on 10/14/2005 by johnwott]




I wasn't doing any math at all, nor was I making a comment. I simply pulled the quote from the USA Today story that Ozzypie posted because it dealt with the question of potency. I have no idea if the figures the writer used are accurate or not.



[Edited on 10/15/2005 by Peachstatedawg]


This thread come from : Hittin' The Web with the Allman Brothers Band
https://www.hittintheweb.com/

Url of this website:
https://www.hittintheweb.com//modules.php?op=modload&name=XForum&file=viewthread&fid=11&tid=34427