Non weed drugs

I highligted the relevant part.

I think it isn't.

We can go round and round in circles, with you calling me all sorts of names, if you want; frankly, I'm bored of this already.

I have given and offered hard conclusive evidence supporting all my comments, and you have not. I know my theory holds more water than yours, so does most of the informed cannabis community. The fact that you are unable to accept that is not my fault...

I suspect, even when my fact-based theory is proven conclusive beyond any doubt, that you will still choose to believe that you know better than any scientist...

 

That's my fuckin point. You talk like you know all this shit for fact, and I'm saying you don't. Who's to say YOUR theory is gonna be proven, anyway? You really do think you're the shit, don't you? I don't give a fuck about theories "holding water" or whatever the fuck; that's all they are.....theories, so stop posting as if everything you say is fact. I never said I KNOW better than anyone. I simply said that I THINK that prohibition of marijuana increases the chances for people to move onto other drugs, and that seems WAAYYYY more likely that anything you have posted on this thread, if I do say so myself.

Whatever man. Maybe we're both just a couple of idiots.

 

Yes, and I said you are wrong, as there is absolutely no evidence to support this! That is not a theory, it is a fact; it has been proven! Are you a psychologist? Do you understand things like addiction patterns, in a psychological sense? NO! So, my 'theory' as you put it is more relevant than your own.

Once again, you are rude and ignorant, and utterly missing the point...

And no, I don't think I'm 'the shit' (whatever that mans); I think I know my subject matter better than you, as you keep helping me prove every time you post something aggressive and irrelevant...

I could give you a psychology lesson, showing you exactly what I mean by each and every one of my points, and backing them up not only with reported findings, but also my own case studies. But I suspect you'd dismiss it all as hooey, anyway. Seems you are that kind of a person.

 

I'm not talking about fuckin addiction. I'm talking about curiousity and experimentation. If people see those other drugs when they buy their weed, then they will become curious and want to try it. I have said this a bunch of times, but you don't seem to be reading shit. Just because I'm getting frustrated by your ignorance and hardheadedness is getting on my nerves doesn't prove anything.

 

whoa seiously, wow. i have to agree with TNS on this one. just because zerogrrl has knowledge of psychology doesnt mean that she can perfectly predict every persons actions. she obviously doesnt consider that ppl are different(ever heard of addictive personalities?). TNS dont take it personally, just becauser an argument is said over and over doesnt make it any less relevent. your argument is indeed valid. the only reason there arent any facts to support you is because there are no models available, somthing zerogrrl hasnt considered before jumping to her conclusion.

Zerogrrl, you can argue all you want but book smarts are useless when you dont use common sense in your argument. what TNS says makes plenty of sense. and some of the most educated ppl i know are also the most ignorant. so step off your high horse please and use common sense. thanks

 

I agree with you TNS. Your theory is quite clear, and you clearly stated that it's what you think and you're not acting like a know-it-all who has nothing better to do but argue with people you don't know on the internet.

Zerogrrl, it doesn't matter how much you know about psychology. It doesn't change the fact that you're ignoring the theory based on common sense that TNS presenting. It also doesn't change the fact that you're acting completely immature you're and trying to start fights with well respected members on here.. for what reason? Get a life.

Your theory makes perfect sense to me, TNS. Another point to back it up besides the curioisity when visiting dealers thing you mentioned would be the fact that since marijuana is illegal, it is placed in the same category as all of the other illegal drugs. Then people think "hey marijuana isn't so bad, even though it's illegal, so maybe meth and heroin aren't that bad either," when they are. If marijuana was legalized it would be thought of like alcohol/cigarettes and the dangerous addictive drugs would have their own separate place in society that intelligent people would avoid.

 

I'd thank you not to make assumptions about me. TNS, you misunderstood my last post, too; addiction patterns is completely relevant to this argument. This issue goes beyond kids experimenting; if that wasn't an aspect of it you were incorporating into your theory, then you should have told me so; I'm not a mind reader. I assumed we were talking about the issue as a whole, not a small part of it.

Perhaps I am not making myself clear, I don't know... I'm too tired and too ill a present to deal with petty name-callers. Plus, all I am doing is repeating myself; I have already answered TNS' questions etc over and over; the fact he is not getting what I am saying is not my fault.

If I have appeared in any way dogmatic, then I apologise (I'm not a well individual, and it isn't always easy for me to communicate effectively), but it is because every post TNS has made on this subject has said the same thing, just using different combinations of words. I haven't ignored his argument, as he says; he just doesn't like what I have told him on the subject. If anything, I was the one being ignored and shot down in flames; he has been rude to me all the way through this thread.

You all call me names, yet I have not been rude at all. Nor have I acted 'immaturely; I'd have joined in with the petty nastiness, if I was. You accuse me of being argumentative, yet it was TNS' post that started the bad feeling in this thread, by being unessecarily aggressive, and implying I am a liar or a thicko. I find that pretty offensive, but still, I haven't attacked anyone.

And MMC, if you had read the whole thread, you would have seen that I did state there are more than two types of drug takers in the world; this is, in fact, how this all started. I made that statement, TNS attacked me, so I gave him the wealth of my experience (in the real world, not from books, as you seem to suggest).

Anyway... The long and short of it is, there is very, very little evidence to support his theory, and a wealth that supports mine, both on the pro and anti pot spectrums.

So, if I'm so obviously incorrect, perhaps one of you can explain these?:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/2538065.stm

http://www.drugscope.org.uk/druginfo/evidence-select/cannabisgateway.htm

http://www.ukcia.org/culture/effects/gateway01.php

http://www.physorg.com/news84468374.html

Also, bear in mind that the streets of Holland are not exactly crawling alive with junkies, either.

Common sense has nothing to do with this (frankly, ridiculous) non-argument; factual evidence does.

And why the hostility towards someone in a professional capacity? Are you all afraid I'm going to grab your balls and make you cough, or something? You seem to mistake knowledge for me being on a 'high horse'.

Anyway, all the evidence is therein.... I'm going to watch some mindless drivel on TV.

 

Wow zerogirl, you absolutely have no idea what the fuck you are talking about. Just because there is no evidence that legalization of marijuana wouldn't help decrease the percentage of people who would move on to other drugs does not mean it's not true. In fact, you havn't even given any evidence to back up your claims, but just made up your so called "evidence" just to make yourself look smart.

Heres a site for your ignorant mind to look at:

erowid.com/plants/cannabis/cannabis_faq1.shtml

 

And zerogirl, ofcourse the plant itself will not lead other people to drugs. But because weed is illigal and people can get them easily on the streets, people have a better chance of getting to other harder drugs. Your point is not valid no matter how many BS evidence sites you throw at us because they only target the plant itself and not the circumstances of how they are being obtained.

 

What are those links above, then, if not evidence?

And, like I said before (this is the last time I am repeating myself), cannabis was downgraded here a few years back, and there has been no real change in trends. I also refer you back to my comment about Holland.

Seen it, thanks; I should tell you that certain information in there is not accurate... but then, what the fuck do I know about anything, eh?

Sorry, but you know what? Disbelieving everything you read is every bit as naive as believing it all...

 

Are you aware that you just utterly contradicted yourself?

This bit makes no sense, sorry.

'They'? Who?

If you want to believe that cannabis is a gateway drug, in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, who am I to argue...?

Incidentally, can any of you back up your claim with any evidence? My guess is no....

 

It's not accurate in your opinion because you are giving us a lot of misleading facts. Just ebcause it was downgraded a few years beack dosn't mean it was not legal and available in stores. And I must say that you're one BIG hypocrite for accusing someone for making assumptions like yourself. You cannot support any hardcore evidence and you know it. We're all making assumptions, but our assumptions are more accurate than yours.

If you have seen erowid's site and read it carefully you might have a change of an opinion.

 

What are you on about? This makes no sense... Cannabis available in stores? What?

I have given you plenty. Now, let's see yours, if you can find any.

It's an inaccurate and often misleading site, like I said.

 

Ok to clarify. How in the hell did I contradict myself? all those sites that you have linked to me was simply stating that the CANNABIS plant itself is not a gateway drug, no shit. The reason why people do other harder drugs is because they can get them easily thanks to the prohibition of marijuana, understand?

And what I mean't by "they" were the other harder drugs.

 

Sorry, I meant that it doesn't mean it was not illigal and avaiblable in stores.( If MJ was legal, stores would sell it)

 

The point I'm trying to make here is that MJ was never legalized so you don't know how the population would be affected. Like I said before, our assumptions made much more sense than yours. And sorry for the namecalling, I'm just in a bad mood.

 

I am sorry if I have been rude. I just got frustrated.

And of course I said the same shit over and over, just like you did, because the points we were both trying to get across didn't change. I haven't ignored your posts, and it has seemed that you have been ignoring my posts. Maybe that's why we were both getting so frustrated. Plus, I had been awake for about 30 hours, but I have slept since then and I am thinking straighter.

I agree that both of our arguments are possible, but like everyone has said, your's was that of an info-based argument and mine has been that of a common sense based argument, so we are not gonna agree.

 

I'm not with why you are making a distinction between the cannabis plant and cannabis products; in this instance, they are one and the same. I am genuinely not sure what you are trying to get at, here...

The links I posted talk about the issue we were discussing; does using cannabis lead to using harder drugs. The answer is a resounding 'no'. How much simpler do you want it to be..?

The reasons why people do hard drugs vary greatly from individual to individual; you cannot generalise on those things. If someone wanted to take heroin to mask emotional pain for example, they'd go and find it, illegal or not, readily available or not. Why do you think there are so many people hooked on pharmaceuticals out there?

The actual number of people that take harder drugs just because they can is incredibly low.

And I ask again; where is your evidence? I have given mine... whether you choose to accept it or just continue to see reds under the bed is not my problem.

Apologies accepted, by the way; you are lucky, I'm not normally so forgiving - it's only because I feel desperately ill, and cannot be bothered to chase my tail anymore.

'Bad moods' and 'frustration' are not an excuse for calling a lady horrible names, especially when she has been nothing but polite... It may surprise you both to know that, aside from being a health pro, a writer and various other weird and wonderful things, I am also a fucking human being, and one that does not deserv to be spoken down to...

 

Your evidence neither helps nor hurts your case, because we are talking about completely different thing than were discussed in those articles. OUR point is that the fact that weed is illegal means we all have to come in contact with people selling those other drugs, which will make them curious about the drugs they see before them. I am sure this isn't the only reason people use other drugs, sure, but it doesn't help.

 

You never presented your case in this way, though, did you? If you had, I would have agreed with it.

Originally, we were talking about the gateway thing; if you deviated from script, you forgot to tell me...