Police Groups Furiously Protest Eric Holder's Marijuana Policy Announcement

[vesper]

The negative effects of opiates is well documented, and I support them being banned. The negative effects of marijuana are still uncertain.




THC hangs around in the system for weeks, until you can provide actual causation, I'm going to have to doubt your claim that marijuana chemically causes criminal behaviour. Furthermore, 30,000 people in the US die from alcohol caused illness each year, and over 40,000 die from alcohol related accidents and mishaps. That's over 70,000 deaths each year linked directly to alcohol. 40% of all violent crimes involve alcohol.

Alcohol is far more dangerous to society than marijuana.



Great, so you would have no objections to banning alcohol and tobacco. Every single argument you've presented can be applied equally well to those two substances.

The National Counsel on Alcoholism and Drug Dependence. Makes a distinct separation between drug dependence and alcoholism but both are linked to criminal behavior.

Drug addiction can lead to criminal behavior. The use of illegal drugs is often associated with murder, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny/theft, serious motor vehicle offenses with dangerous consequences, arson and hate crimes. Without question, drug use and criminality are closely linked.

Most inmates are in prison, at least in large part, because of substance abuse.
•80% of offenders abuse drugs or alcohol.
•Nearly 50% of jail and prison inmates are clinically addicted.
•Approximately 60% of individuals arrested for most types of crimes test positive for illegal drugs at arrest.

Drugs and Crime

Since marijuana is the most popular of all illegal drugs then it surely is included as part of the illegal drugs testing positive in criminals.
With these stats why would I want to legalize something that according to these experts is directly linked to crime? Why would I want to increase my chances of becoming a victim of crime by legalizing a drug?

From another source

WASHINGTON – While drug use continues to drop nationally, 72 percent of men arrested in Portland in 2011 used one or more illegal drugs, with nearly a quarter testing positive for methamphetamine, a federal study released Thursday concludes.

Only Sacramento with 43 percent of men arrested scored higher than Portland for the presence of meth, according to the study by the Office of National Drug Control Policy.

Overall, Portland placed in the upper half of the 10 major cities surveyed for the annual project. The study is based on samples taken within the first 48 hours of detention for crimes ranging from misdemeanors to felonies.

In all, tests were run on 1,050 men within 48 hours of their arrest by metro Portland law enforcement. Half tested positive for marijuana while 32.9 percent tested positive for "multiple drugs." The presence of meth was next at 23.2 percent, which was the nation's second-highest rate. Other drugs found in the systems of those arrested included, in order, opiates, cocaine and oxycodone.
Among the study's findings:

•Drug use among men who are arrested "is much higher than in the general U.S. population." At least 60 percent of those arrested in all 10 cities used drugs with five cities reporting more than 70 percent;
•The presence of cocaine continues to drop since 2007, which New York and Chicago dropping from 50 percent in 2000 to 25 percent in 2011;
•Marijuana was the most commonly detected drug (36 percent in Atlanta to 56 percent in Sacrament) while cocaine was the second-most common.
•The percent of those testing positive for multiple drugs ranged from 13 percent in Charlotte to 38 percent in Sacramento

Illegal drugs found in 72% of men arrested in Portland in 2011, federal study finds | OregonLive.com

Like you stated alcoholism can be directly linked to all sorts of violence/crime. And because it is a legal substance society pays the burden for it. So why would anyone want to further add to that burden by including something that obviously has a link to criminal behavior?

 

[Dittohead not!]

The National Counsel on Alcoholism and Drug Dependence. Makes a distinct separation between drug dependence and alcoholism but both are linked to criminal behavior.

The government says all sorts of crazy things about drugs, as well as about other subjects.

The fact of the matter is that alcohol is a drug, and so is nicotine. The latter is, in fact, the worst of all of the drugs in terms of the death and human misery it causes.

But that said, if drugs are linked to criminal activity, what is the best course of action? Is it (1) outlaw all drugs, as they're trying to do with pot, or is it (3) public education, as they're trying to do with tobacco?

Hint: Pot use is increasing exponentially, while tobacco use is about half of what it was back when the statement, "smoking causes lung cancer" was still controversial and cigarettes were being touted as "healthy" and "approved by more doctors."

 

[winston53660]

The National Counsel on Alcoholism and Drug Dependence. Makes a distinct separation between drug dependence and alcoholism but both are linked to criminal behavior.


Drugs and Crime

Since marijuana is the most popular of all illegal drugs then it surely is included as part of the illegal drugs testing positive in criminals.
With these stats why would I want to legalize something that according to these experts is directly linked to crime? Why would I want to increase my chances of becoming a victim of crime by legalizing a drug?

From another source

Illegal drugs found in 72% of men arrested in Portland in 2011, federal study finds | OregonLive.com

Like you stated alcoholism can be directly linked to all sorts of violence/crime. And because it is a legal substance society pays the burden for it. So why would anyone want to further add to that burden by including something that obviously has a link to criminal behavior?

Well when alcohol was illegal violent criminal gangs were and great wealth went into the black market

 

[vesper]

Well when alcohol was illegal violent criminal gangs were and great wealth went into the black market

That sure was an interesting time in history. Prohibition of alcohol had support on both sides of the aisle much like those today wanting to legalize marijuana and other drugs. I didn't know until recently William F Buckley, Mr. Conservative supported legalization of drugs while Charles Rangel, Democrat is against it. When it comes to comparing alcohol to weed, one of the biggest differences is out of all who consume alcoholic beverages, only 15% get intoxicated. When it comes to drug use getting high is 100% the goal.

 

[Dittohead not!]

That sure was an interesting time in history. Prohibition of alcohol had support on both sides of the aisle much like those today wanting to legalize marijuana and other drugs. I didn't know until recently William F Buckley, Mr. Conservative supported legalization of drugs while Charles Rangel, Democrat is against it. When it comes to comparing alcohol to weed, one of the biggest differences is out of all who consume alcoholic beverages, only 15% get intoxicated. When it comes to drug use getting high is 100% the goal.

It was an interesting time in history. Violent gangs weren't quite as widespread as they are now, but they did spice up the evening news to be sure.

 

[tech30528]

Yes so was the use of opiates. It wasn't uncommon in NY in the mid 1800's to see opium dens. Many used the drugs to control pain associated with deadly illnesses there were no cures. We live in a time where many of those diseases can be cured or managed. Much to do with their adverse affects on society led to them being banned. You mentioned earlier that you see alcohol more dangerous than marijuana. According to the stats I've been reading in major cities all over this country, 60-80%+ arrested (regardless of type of crime...rape, burglary, theft, assault) have an illegal substance in their system. Most often that substance is marijuana. Like it or not there is a connection between the two. The reason a free people agree to laws is for their personal protection and of their property. Another concern is the number of drug treatment centers popping up all over dealing with marijuana addiction. And this is occurring while the substance is illegal almost everywhere. And finally, the science proving the adverse affects on teens who get in the habit of smoking weed regularly is a real concern as well. So I find it hard to make the argument that legalizing the substance would be beneficial to society.

I'm not seeing the direct correlation between pot and breaking laws. You've stated a couple of times that people arrested test positive for pot, unless you can show a significant difference between criminals using it and other citizens using it there is simply no metric. I would much rather the police spend their time trying to solve murders such as those in Chicago than chasing pot smokers. I agree I think the war on drums is a self propagating war and rives a wedge between the people and law enforcement.

 

[spud_meister]

The National Counsel on Alcoholism and Drug Dependence. Makes a distinct separation between drug dependence and alcoholism but both are linked to criminal behavior.


Drugs and Crime

Since marijuana is the most popular of all illegal drugs then it surely is included as part of the illegal drugs testing positive in criminals.
With these stats why would I want to legalize something that according to these experts is directly linked to crime? Why would I want to increase my chances of becoming a victim of crime by legalizing a drug?

From another source

Illegal drugs found in 72% of men arrested in Portland in 2011, federal study finds | OregonLive.com

Like you stated alcoholism can be directly linked to all sorts of violence/crime. And because it is a legal substance society pays the burden for it. So why would anyone want to further add to that burden by including something that obviously has a link to criminal behavior?

All you've shown is that criminals engage in illegal behaviour. You show correlation, but not causation. I showed causation, where alcohol played a direct, chemical part in deaths and criminal behaviour.

Marijuana is less addictive than tobacco, and less harmful than alcohol, and these are the yardsticks by which to measure legal drugs. If you believe marijuana should be illegal because it is harmful, then the only consistent position is that alcohol and tobacco should be illegal too, as they cause far more harm.

 

[vesper]

I'm not seeing the direct correlation between pot and breaking laws. You've stated a couple of times that people arrested test positive for pot, unless you can show a significant difference between criminals using it and other citizens using it there is simply no metric. I would much rather the police spend their time trying to solve murders such as those in Chicago than chasing pot smokers. I agree I think the war on drums is a self propagating war and rives a wedge between the people and law enforcement.

I've given several sources where experts in law enforcement and drug treatment disagree with you. They do see a correlation a link between drug use and crime.
One of the problems we are facing today is most of the pot being sold illegally is being grown right here in the U.S, Just a little over 30% of Mexican, compressed block weed is showing up in their busts. Some of the homegrown stuff comes from California, Oregon and Washington but the biggest suppliers at the moment seem to be Colorado. Another thing I've learned from reading first hand accounts from police enforcement is the marijuana that older folks experimented with in their youth is not the same stuff as "medical grade". They claim it is much more potent. While you wish police would focus on more serious crimes like in Chicago, today the police force in California after 16 years of legalizing so called marijuana for medical use, the cops now spend their time pulling out illegal plants in their state parks and public lands that are being cultivated to traffic toward the East. Legalizing it isn't going to free up more for cops because in other ways their time is used up still fighting against another illegality involved with the substance.

 

[Dittohead not!]

I've given several sources where experts in law enforcement and drug treatment disagree with you. They do see a correlation a link between drug use and crime.
One of the problems we are facing today is most of the pot being sold illegally is being grown right here in the U.S, Just a little over 30% of Mexican, compressed block weed is showing up in their busts. Some of the homegrown stuff comes from California, Oregon and Washington but the biggest suppliers at the moment seem to be Colorado. Another thing I've learned from reading first hand accounts from police enforcement is the marijuana that older folks experimented with in their youth is not the same stuff as "medical grade". They claim it is much more potent. While you wish police would focus on more serious crimes like in Chicago, today the police force in California after 16 years of legalizing so called marijuana for medical use, the cops now spend their time pulling out illegal plants in their state parks and public lands that are being cultivated to traffic toward the East. Legalizing it isn't going to free up more for cops because in other ways their time is used up still fighting against another illegality involved with the substance.

Which shows that states that have more relaxed pot laws export the stuff to states where law enforcement is more inclined to prosecute potheads.

Conclusion: We need one uniform law in order to keep this illegal trade from being profitable.

Therefore, the federal government needs to legalize pot so that it can fulfill its obligation to regulate interstate trade.

 

[Painter]

Funny as in Ha Ha? Conservatives have a right to be upset for they expect the Commander and Chief to uphold the laws of the land. And currently marijuana is classified equivalent to heroin. Either declassify it or uphold the laws. It is no secret that these new found medical dispensaries are selling weed way below street price and people are buying it and trafficking it to where it will get top dollar in states that don't want the sh*t . Where the f'k are their protections under the law?

Marijuana is less addictive than caffeine, less harmful than cigarettes, and far less potent than alcohol.
It will be declassified. It is just a shame that so many have to suffer until it is.
As for medical dispensaries selling for less than street dealers, just like most of your misconceptions, this is false. Dispensaries sell marijuana for more than the street price. Considerably more. They just happen to sell FAR BETTER pot than street dealers.

 

[vesper]

Marijuana is less addictive than caffeine, less harmful than cigarettes, and far less potent than alcohol.
It will be declassified. It is just a shame that so many have to suffer until it is.
As for medical dispensaries selling for less than street dealers, just like most of your misconceptions, this is false. Dispensaries sell marijuana for more than the street price. Considerably more. They just happen to sell FAR BETTER pot than street dealers.

There are many experts that disagree with you and believe pot is addictive. Many who use it regularly don't even realize they are addicted. But even at that, have you noticed how many help centers are popping up all over the country to deal with marijuana addiction? If it wasn't addictive, why would there be a need for drug rehabilitation centers specializing in it?

 

[radcen]

There are many experts that disagree with you and believe pot is addictive. Many who use it regularly don't even realize they are addicted. But even at that, have you noticed how many help centers are popping up all over the country to deal with marijuana addiction? If it wasn't addictive, why would there be a need for drug rehabilitation centers specializing in it?

Some people have an addiction to making money.

 

[vesper]

It was an interesting time in history. Violent gangs weren't quite as widespread as they are now, but they did spice up the evening news to be sure.

Lucky Luciano, Capone, Bonnie and Clyde, Baby Face Nelson, Dillinger, Pretty Boy Floyd. I heard stories from my grandparents about the infamous bootleggers and bank robbers. There was a pretty famous one in the early thirties named Dutch. Anyway he robbed the bank in the town my grandparents lived. The robbery went bad and Dutch got filled with lead in the alley. My grandfather watched it happen. When they took the body to the coroner, grandpa asked for his shirt. He got my aunt to patch all the bullet holes and he wore it into town on those days he met the ole timers for breakfast at the diner.

 

[Painter]

There are many experts that disagree with you and believe pot is addictive. Many who use it regularly don't even realize they are addicted. But even at that, have you noticed how many help centers are popping up all over the country to deal with marijuana addiction? If it wasn't addictive, why would there be a need for drug rehabilitation centers specializing in it?

Pot can be addictive. But constipation, irritability, and sleeplessness that lasts as long as a full week does not qualify as a serious problem.
The main thing is that pot has no physical addiction. It is socially addictive for certain. If your wanting to stop and everyone around you is smoking, it becomes very difficult.
The important thing to remember is that the addiction rate is less than caffeine. Caffeine is quite addictive though and actually has some physical addiction qualities even though it is not deemed as such.
I have no idea what your talking about as far as these "help centers". But I would imagine it is a for profit scenario and has something to do with the for profit court system or with teenagers. If you had any significant experience with pot, you'd understand how silly this notion is.

 

[iacardsfan]

I don't know how to put this more elementary but damn I'll try..... The left has been using the judiciary to get laws passed that did'nt have the support in Congress or at the ballot box. That's a friggin fact. The whole campaign against Prop 8 in California can be considered lawfare. Neither the U.S. Constitution nor the California Constitution say anything about a right to define marriage to be between members of the same sex. But by using lawsuits and finding friendly judges who feel the Constitution is a "living" document, gays have managed to throw out the votes of 7 million Californians, a disproportionate fraction of whom are Black.

If the people of California really wanted so-called same-sex marriage, gays and their supporters could have gone through the same process that the supporters of Prop 8 went through and gotten Prop 8 repealed. Instead gays and their supporters used lawsuits, LAWFARE, to essentially disenfranchise the majority of California voters. The same lefties who are perfectly comfortable with the disenfranchisement of Californian voters..... object vociferously to laws that require voters to prove that they are eligible to vote. I don't know how to explain it more simple than that. The left is using lawfare to further their cause in legalizing marijuana. First they have a vote in a state to legalize it under the guise of medical use using sick people. Then the abuses begin in allowing the drug to be trafficked even though states like Colorado passed legislation that voters believed would be impossible to do . Think about it, two states have now legalized the use of marijuana as a recreational substance while the federal government classifies it equivalent to heroin. What's next New York legalizing heroin even though it is a felony under federal law? Lawfare, abusing the system to get what you want regardless the cost to others.

The vote in the Supreme Court about Prop 8 yielded no specific bearing on the law. The Supreme Court ruled they did not have the jurisdiction to make a decision on Prop 8 itslef, and sent it back down to the California Supreme Court where Prop 8 was abolished. That has nothing to do with the Supreme Court. Be upset if you will, but be upset at the California Supreme Court. The voters played a role in getting these people into office, so I really don't see any disfranchising.

 

[Hard Truth]

my guess is that most of them experimented with pot at some point in their lives. Busting some other person for it would be like raiding somebody's house because they're suspected of having beer.

Remember those few weird kids who would never smoke pot? Now they are politicians and cops. We should stop electing people who never inhaled.

Also, the police should enforce the laws that the people pass, and should not be allowed to make decisions, or even have any influence, on which laws should be passed and enforced. They have a conflict of interest.

 

[vesper]

The vote in the Supreme Court about Prop 8 yielded no specific bearing on the law. The Supreme Court ruled they did not have the jurisdiction to make a decision on Prop 8 itslef, and sent it back down to the California Supreme Court where Prop 8 was abolished. That has nothing to do with the Supreme Court. Be upset if you will, but be upset at the California Supreme Court. The voters played a role in getting these people into office, so I really don't see any disfranchising.

Well we will have to agree to disagree for you see just like the Supreme Justices the California SC are all politically appointed justices and when Lawfare is the tactic used to push an agenda, then whatever the political leaning of the justices involved is the way the cookie crumbles and I find that to such an abuse of power.

 

[vesper]

Pot can be addictive. But constipation, irritability, and sleeplessness that lasts as long as a full week does not qualify as a serious problem.
The main thing is that pot has no physical addiction. It is socially addictive for certain. If your wanting to stop and everyone around you is smoking, it becomes very difficult.
The important thing to remember is that the addiction rate is less than caffeine. Caffeine is quite addictive though and actually has some physical addiction qualities even though it is not deemed as such.
I have no idea what your talking about as far as these "help centers". But I would imagine it is a for profit scenario and has something to do with the for profit court system or with teenagers. If you had any significant experience with pot, you'd understand how silly this notion is.

Let's see if I have this right, because I don't use pot then my points are silly.
First you say pot isn't addictive then you say it is in a "social" type of way.
And because I point out that there are a number of "help centers" to aid in addiction to Marijuana somehow that is BS too and must have something to do to profit court systems or for teenagers?

Brahahahahahahahahahah

Did a search on Bing for "Help for Marijuana Addiction in Portland Oregon"
Help for Marijuana addiction in Portland Oregon - Bing

Gee.....awful lot of help centers listed for people who don't have a problem! :2razz:

 

[Painter]

Let's see if I have this right, because I don't use pot then my points are silly.
First you say pot isn't addictive then you say it is in a "social" type of way.
And because I point out that there are a number of "help centers" to aid in addiction to Marijuana somehow that is BS too and must have something to do to profit court systems or for teenagers?

Brahahahahahahahahahah

Did a search on Bing for "Help for Marijuana Addiction in Portland Oregon"
Help for Marijuana addiction in Portland Oregon - Bing

Gee.....awful lot of help centers listed for people who don't have a problem! :2razz:

I never said pot is not addictive.
I said pot is less addictive than caffeine, a well known fact.

Google "Addiction rate of caffeine vs marijuana".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis_dependence
Take note that this is not a pro marijuana site.

Here is one statement from a random search, "Dr. Jack E. Henningfield of NIDA ranked the relative addictiveness of 6 substances (cannabis, caffeine, cocaine, alcohol, heroin and nicotine). Cannabis ranked least addictive, with caffeine the second least addictive and nicotine the most."

I also said that Marijuana is less harmful than nicotine with a less effect than alcohol. Two more statements of proven fact.

As for your treatment centers, here is a quote that is interesting, "Only a minority of cannabis users seek medical help with addiction, though in the United States 57% of those seeking treatment were forced to do so by the criminal justice system as of 2007"
Note that I never read anything or heard anything pointing to the "for profit court" system as the cause of this. I merely made an assumption based on what I know.
Turned out I was pretty close eh? Of the 43% that do not go as a result of "for profit court" systems, how many do you think are teenagers sent by their parents?
What percentage does that leave?
Of that last tiny little percentage... what percentage of those are such weak and mentally disturbed individuals that they would need help for addiction to pretty much anything?

 

[vesper]

I never said pot is not addictive.
I said pot is less addictive than caffeine, a well known fact.

Google "Addiction rate of caffeine vs marijuana".
Cannabis dependence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Take note that this is not a pro marijuana site.

Here is one statement from a random search, "Dr. Jack E. Henningfield of NIDA ranked the relative addictiveness of 6 substances (cannabis, caffeine, cocaine, alcohol, heroin and nicotine). Cannabis ranked least addictive, with caffeine the second least addictive and nicotine the most."

I also said that Marijuana is less harmful then nicotine with a less effect than alcohol. Two more statements of proven fact.

As for your treatment centers, here is a quote that is interesting, "Only a minority of cannabis users seek medical help with addiction, though in the United States 57% of those seeking treatment were forced to do so by the criminal justice system as of 2007"
Note that I never read anything or heard anything pointing to the for profit court system as the cause of this. I merely made an assumption based on what I know.
Turned out I was pretty close eh? Of the 43% that do not go as a result of for profit court systems, how many do you think are teenagers sent by their parents?
What percentage does that leave?

It's a very common attempt from a cannibas lover to use things like nicotine and coffee as addiction factors of legal drugs but you all always void the point that cigarettes nor coffee cause a person loss of motor coordination. A cup of joe and a cigarette normally don't cause a person's heart rate to greatly increase, they don't distort perceptions of sights, sounds, time and touch nor do they cause someone trouble with thinking and problem-solving but smoking weed does.

And if you would have bothered to look at the payment schedules and forms of insurances these help centers take as payment, you would have discovered they accept MEDICARE. Hardly a need for MEDICARE if we were only teenagers.

Portland Marijuana Addiction Treatment Centers and Rehab Programs | OR

 

[Painter]

It's a very common attempt from a cannibas lover to use things like nicotine and coffee as addiction factors of legal drugs but you all always void the point that cigarettes nor coffee cause a person loss of motor coordination. A cup of joe and a cigarette normally don't cause a person's heart rate to greatly increase, they don't distort perceptions of sights, sounds, time and touch nor do they cause someone trouble with thinking and problem-solving but smoking weed does.

You love to play games don't you?
You talk of addiction and treatment centers and so you are given testament of experience as well as scientific data indicating that both caffeine and nicotine are more addictive. You lost that debate. It is over. You have presented nothing to counter either science or experience.
Now you want to move on to the effect of marijuana and try to pretend it is the same argument. Either you are not reading, or you are being intellectually disingenuous.
You want to compare the effects of marijuana to coffee or nicotine, but this was not the debate. For effect, we compare to alcohol.
However, your ideas of the effect of marijuana are the old school misconceptions created by people who A) never smoked marijuana and B) tested people who were casual smokers without including data from frequent smokers.

Let's address your points 1 by 1:

Loss of motor coordination - It is correct that in the casual smoker there is a SMALL loss of motor skills. Casual smokers should not drive a motor vehicle and should expect difficulty akin to having 2 to 3 beers.
False for frequent smokers. Frequent smokers experience very little loss of motor skills. Frequent smokers do not pose a risk when driving motor vehicles and would compare to having less than 1 beer.
Heart rate to greatly Increase - False due to the word "greatly". Marijuana can cause heart rate to increase. It also can cause blood pressure to decrease. Caffeine and nicotine also can cause heart rate to increase. Masterbation can also cause heart rate to increase. Your point?
Distort perceptions of sights, sounds, time, and touch - This is where it becomes clear you have never actually tried this "devil weed" you seem to care so much about. This is completely false. This better describes some wild combination of LSD and Extacy. Scientists who like you, have never smoked marijuana, have written such claims. Usually you will also read something that says, "If they smoked an ounce of hashish". I guess that means nothing to you and you just assume that people walk around smoking entire ounces of hashish.
Thinking and problem-solving - Now we're talking! You had to get one right eventually. True! Marijuana can slightly inhibit higher thinking and problem solving skills.
For example, you'd be just fine doing things you do regularly, but you would not want to go to your job as an accountant or a nuclear physicist.
On the plus side though, if your job was something where you did the same task over and over, marijuana can be a great asset to help you stay focused and on task.

There are many ways that marijuana slightly inhibits a person. Many you did not cover. The problem is that you read things, some true and some not true, and you imagine these things as being significant when in fact they are all minor effects. In addition to blowing these minor effects out of proportion, you also fail to account for the difference of the effects on the casual smoker vs the frequent smoker.
You continuously miss the point when we discuss effects. The comparison to alcohol. There is no grade of marijuana and no amount of marijuana that can cause greater effect to a human being in any single category than 4 servings of alcohol. (5 or 6 for a really large person)
And when you compare to a nasty sloppy drunk that has had 12 servings of alcohol, this entire situation becomes extremely offensive and utterly ridiculous.

And if you would have bothered to look at the payment schedules and forms of insurances these help centers take as payment, you would have discovered they accept MEDICARE. Hardly a need for MEDICARE if we were only teenagers.
Portland Marijuana Addiction Treatment Centers and Rehab Programs | OR

Oh I am sure they'd take anything that can make a buck, including ripping off senile old people.
You completely missed the point.
I wish you'd go back and read it. 2 posts back I speculated. Last post I looked it up and was proven correct. The logic is sound and backed up with numerical fact.
Please go back and follow the numbers. 57% are against their will, ordered by a "for profit court system".
This leaves 43%. Of this 43% some are teenagers. How many do you suppose?
How many do you suppose are mentally disturbed individuals?
Just how many does this leave for your point? 5%? 20%?

I take credit cards.
I'd take medicare too if I could get away with it.

 

[vesper]

You love to play games don't you?
You talk of addiction and treatment centers and so you are given testament of experience as well as scientific data indicating that both caffeine and nicotine are more addictive. You lost that debate. It is over. You have presented nothing to counter either science or experience.
Now you want to move on to the effect of marijuana and try to pretend it is the same argument. Either you are not reading, or you are being intellectually disingenuous.
You want to compare the effects of marijuana to coffee or nicotine, but this was not the debate. For effect, we compare to alcohol.
However, your ideas of the effect of marijuana are the old school misconceptions created by people who A) never smoked marijuana and B) tested people who were casual smokers without including data from frequent smokers.

I haven't lost any debate. On the cannibas lover's old and tired debate on comparing marijuana with alcohol. My response was that out of all the people that use alcohol only 15 % become intoxicated. Not everyone who drinks is looking to get drunk. The drug user on the other hand 100% of the time is looking for a high.

While the cannibas lover doesn't like focusing on the link between drug use and crime, I have shown multiple links to studies that proves there is such a link. But no matter proof I would present coming from experts in the field of drug rehabilitation, law enforcement and the medical field, of course your expertise will always be more valid. NO doubt you hold a degree in law enforcement, sociology, and a medical degree to invalidate their studies.

On the cannibas lover's old and tired debate on comparing addiction levels of legal drugs such as caffeine and nicotine being more addictive than marijuana, I never denied that only to state that marijuana is an addictive drug and that the stuff being produced today is testing much more potent than what grandpa may have smoked at Woodstock. Showing the increase in treatment centers popping up to help with the addiction of marijuana is evidence of that.

And today I would like to add another tid bit of information that many may not be aware (I know I wasn't) and that is while the cannibas lover likes to use the argument that smoking pot is much less harmful than smoking a cigarette......then why did California put a warning on medical marijuana?

Joints and baggies sold at California's medical marijuana dispensaries will soon carry a new warning label. Next to tags like "Purple Haze" and "White Widow" will be the advisory: Contents may cause cancer when smoked.

On Friday, California added marijuana smoke to its official list of known carcinogens, joining the ranks of arsenic, asbestos and DDT. Pot brownies, lollipops and other non-inhalables are not affected by the new ruling.

Scientists found the pungent smoke shares many of the same harmful properties as tobacco smoke, warranting its inclusion on the Proposition 65 warning list.

The law requires the state to publish a list of chemicals known to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity, and businesses and government agencies must post warnings when they use such chemicals or sell products containing them.

"Marijuana smoke is a mixture of different chemicals, and a number of those were already on the Prop. 65 list," said Allan Hirsch, chief deputy director of the state Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, which made the designation.

Marijuana smoke is a carcinogen

http://normanswei.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/marijuanahid.pdf

Stick that in your pipe and smoke it.

 

[Dittohead not!]

Lucky Luciano, Capone, Bonnie and Clyde, Baby Face Nelson, Dillinger, Pretty Boy Floyd. I heard stories from my grandparents about the infamous bootleggers and bank robbers. There was a pretty famous one in the early thirties named Dutch. Anyway he robbed the bank in the town my grandparents lived. The robbery went bad and Dutch got filled with lead in the alley. My grandfather watched it happen. When they took the body to the coroner, grandpa asked for his shirt. He got my aunt to patch all the bullet holes and he wore it into town on those days he met the ole timers for breakfast at the diner.

If you still have that shirt, it's worth a fortune on ebay.

 

[What if...?]

I never said pot is not addictive.
I said pot is less addictive than caffeine, a well known fact.

Google "Addiction rate of caffeine vs marijuana".
Cannabis dependence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Take note that this is not a pro marijuana site.

Here is one statement from a random search, "Dr. Jack E. Henningfield of NIDA ranked the relative addictiveness of 6 substances (cannabis, caffeine, cocaine, alcohol, heroin and nicotine). Cannabis ranked least addictive, with caffeine the second least addictive and nicotine the most."

I also said that Marijuana is less harmful than nicotine with a less effect than alcohol. Two more statements of proven fact.

As for your treatment centers, here is a quote that is interesting, "Only a minority of cannabis users seek medical help with addiction, though in the United States 57% of those seeking treatment were forced to do so by the criminal justice system as of 2007"
Note that I never read anything or heard anything pointing to the "for profit court" system as the cause of this. I merely made an assumption based on what I know.
Turned out I was pretty close eh? Of the 43% that do not go as a result of "for profit court" systems, how many do you think are teenagers sent by their parents?
What percentage does that leave?
Of that last tiny little percentage... what percentage of those are such weak and mentally disturbed individuals that they would need help for addiction to pretty much anything?

This is what happens when you actually parse statistics in propaganda messaging.

It all kinda falls apart.

 

[What if...?]

It's a very common attempt from a cannibas lover to use things like nicotine and coffee as addiction factors of legal drugs but you all always void the point that cigarettes nor coffee cause a person loss of motor coordination. A cup of joe and a cigarette normally don't cause a person's heart rate to greatly increase, they don't distort perceptions of sights, sounds, time and touch nor do they cause someone trouble with thinking and problem-solving but smoking weed does.

And if you would have bothered to look at the payment schedules and forms of insurances these help centers take as payment, you would have discovered they accept MEDICARE. Hardly a need for MEDICARE if we were only teenagers.

Portland Marijuana Addiction Treatment Centers and Rehab Programs | OR

A cup of joe and a cigarette will certainly raise your blood pressure. Long term use of both will have demonstrable negative health effects. Adrenal fatigue from coffee, a laundry list from cigarettes.

And more and more research is showing that regular use of pot results in "impairment" declining to the point of irrelevancy.