« "Blood Swept Lands and Seas of Red." | Main | In the wake of his party’s thrashing, Barack Obama on Saturday announced that he’d chosen a replacement for the repellent Eric Holder »

November 9, 2014

The fact that they wish to ban things that are not smoking

in order to keep people from smoking is lost on these people.

Tobacco and anything related to it is bad because the Cult associates it with the type of white people who shop at Walmart and make fun of men who wear dresses. Weed is cool because it's what young people like and you can now buy it at those quaint boutiques near that ski resort you went to in Colorado. Tobacco is what the guy fixing the lifts uses.
Bad Religion at The Z Blog

Posted by gerardvanderleun at November 9, 2014 5:03 PM. This is an entry on the sideblog of American Digest: Check it out.

Your Say


"Cannabis Indica (hashish, marijuana). --The effects of this drug have been frequently and luridly described: disturbance of space-time perception, acute sensitivity to impressions, and flight of ideas, laughing jags, silliness.

Marijuana is a sensitizer, and the results are not always pleasant. It makes a bad situation worse. Depression becomes despair, anxiety panic.

I have already mentioned my horrible experience with marijuana during acute morphine withdrawal. I once gave marijuana to a guest who was mildly anxious about something ("On bum kicks" as he put it). After smoking half a joint he suddenly leapt to his feet screaming, "I got the fear!" and rushed out of the house."

Posted by: chasmatic [TypeKey Profile Page] at November 9, 2014 6:11 PM

Yeah I've asked many a leftist why they are so opposed to smoking tobacco but support smoking marijuana.

They either sputter incoherence, or say "it makes no sense to me either."

The blog does bring up a good point though: it was progressives who pushed for banning pot to begin with and old school right wingers were opposed to the laws (federal limitations, not constitutional etc).

But the push to ban candy cigarettes and and disolvable smokeless tobacco. And his conclusion:

"A sane person would ask whether it is better for the guy fixing the chair lift to be smoking a Marlboro or a jumbo? I’m OK with the repairman sucking on a cancer stick while he repairs the lift. Nicotine helps concentration. The same repairman doing bong hits before working on the lift is probably about to kill a bunch of people. Of course, he probably called out of work so he can play video games and eat chips all day, but that’s another story."

Yeah, exactly.

Smoking is bad for you, and if you believe some studies, for those nearby. Pot is bad for you, maybe others nearby, and maybe anyone who relies on your having sharp mind your reflexes keen. And anyone that relies on having any ambition or motivation whatsoever.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor [TypeKey Profile Page] at November 9, 2014 6:38 PM

I've smoked various forms of that shit over 10,000 times on 3 continents and don't think I ever had a bad experience other than occasional paranoia because it was illegal.

A lot of bad info has been spread about by people that should know better or don't know what they're talking about.

Posted by: ghostsniper [TypeKey Profile Page] at November 9, 2014 8:49 PM

Weed is a psychotropic drug. It alters one's reality. It distorts spatial and temporal perception. It causes indecision and disrupts train of thought.

Do I want a pot smoker fixing the brakes on my car or doing maintenance on an airplane I'd be using? No and hell no. I am sure it happens but it ain't good.

People that do drugs and overdo alcohol vibe loser.

Posted by: chasmatic [TypeKey Profile Page] at November 9, 2014 11:00 PM

For all the chatter about smoke not interfering with motor skills, it seems Colorado has quite an increase in accidents since the pot laws changed.

The suck part isn't the dickheads offing themselves, but taking non-users with them.

Posted by: Vermont Woodchuck [TypeKey Profile Page] at November 10, 2014 2:53 AM

Well, yes and no, Vermont. It would seem that there's more to the "drugged driver" story than it would seem at first look:

"It seems to me that the best way to gauge the effect legalization has had on the roadways is to look at what has happened on the roads since legalization took effect. Here’s a month-by-month comparison of highway fatalities in Colorado through the first seven months of this year and last year. For a more thorough comparison, I’ve also included the highest fatality figures for each month since 2002, the lowest for each month since 2002 and the average for each month since 2002. As you can see, roadway fatalities this year are down from last year, and down from the 13-year average. Of the seven months so far this year, five months saw a lower fatality figure this year than last, two months saw a slightly higher figure this year, and in one month the two figures were equal.

"Here, the “high” bar (pardon the pun) is what you get when you add the worst January since 2002 to the worst February, to the worst March, and so on. The “low” bar is the sum total of the safest January, February, etc., since 2002. What’s notable here is that the totals so far in 2014 are closer to the safest composite year since 2002 than to the average year since 2002. I should also add here that these are total fatalities. If we were to calculate these figures as a rate — say, miles driven per fatality — the drop would be starker, both for this year and since Colorado legalized medical marijuana in 2001. "


Posted by: Van der Leun [TypeKey Profile Page] at November 10, 2014 5:50 AM

And..... at Forbes....

"Do these data mean that legalizing marijuana for medical or recreational use results in more blood on the highways? No. What Salomonsen-Sautel et al. call “marijuana-positive drivers” actually tested positive for metabolites that linger in blood and urine long after the drug’s effects wear off. “THC metabolites are detectable in an individual’s blood or urine for several days and sometimes weeks for heavy marijuana users,” the authors note toward the end of the article. Hence a “marijuana-positive” result does not indicate the driver was under the influence of marijuana at the time of the accident, let alone that marijuana was a factor in the crash. “This study cannot determine cause and effect relationships, such as whether marijuana-positive drivers contributed to or caused the fatal motor vehicle crashes,” Salomonsen-Sautel et al. concede. “Colorado may have an increased number of drivers, in general, who were using marijuana, not just an increase in the proportion who were involved in fatal motor vehicle crashes….The primary result of this study may simply reflect a general increase in marijuana use during this same time period in Colorado.” (Salomonsen-Sautel et al. assume that marijuana consumption continued rising in Colorado after 2010, although the NSDUH numbers suggest otherwise.)

Another reason to doubt that greater tolerance of marijuana boosts traffic deaths: “There was a decreasing trend in fatal motor vehicle crashes in Colorado since 2004.” There was a similar decline in the 34 comparison states, so it does not look like readier access to marijuana has interfered with this welcome trend. In fact, there is some evidence that it has on balance reduced traffic fatalities by encouraging the substitution of marijuana for alcohol, which has a more dramatic effect on driving ability."


Posted by: Van der Leun [TypeKey Profile Page] at November 10, 2014 5:55 AM

If traffic accidents are increasing and the people involved are testing for weed, whether 'lingering after effects' or more recent use, that's still significant data. What it means isn't exactly clear yet, but there is something there.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor [TypeKey Profile Page] at November 10, 2014 7:44 AM

Weed vs tobacco is the same pop generational arrogance that prompted hatred of acoustic guitars in favor of 100 decibel amped metal-blasters.

Ignorance is our only renewable resource *sigh*

Posted by: Anon43 [TypeKey Profile Page] at November 10, 2014 9:01 AM

Whatever happened to the idea that if you hurt someone you make it right? And everybody else can go pound sand.

As far as guitars go, I have plenty of both and play the shit out of them all the time and have no preference between acoustic and electric, they both have their own niches. Same with guns.

Posted by: ghostsniper [TypeKey Profile Page] at November 10, 2014 10:36 AM

I have known the occasional person who becomes paranoid on grass. In my limited experience, they were all naturals for speed. But at any rate it isn't for everybody. Nicotine cuts 50/50, but for at least 10% of the population it is a godsend. The drugs, and maybe the only ones, which deliver the same experience for all are from the poppy.

About fifteen years ago the cops here in Vegas were forced by the politicians to bust Ecstasy out of the rave scene. The cops were unhappy about that because in their experience things had never gone smoother.

My drug of choice would have been Qualude. After fifty tabs it began to lose it's effectiveness and I didn't pursue it. It definitely turned me into a mellow and fine fellow, not something which I had cultivated for sure.

Posted by: james wilson [TypeKey Profile Page] at November 11, 2014 12:15 AM

I don't believe I want to be that civilized, but thank you anyway. - Hoot Gibson.

Conservative values. Class Warfare is for dope-smoking commies. Stand on your own. No leeching. No whining. Fuck the hippies.

Posted by: chasmatic [TypeKey Profile Page] at November 11, 2014 5:15 AM

Post a comment

Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)