What does it prove if one person has smoked drugs? You aren't asking me a debatable question, you are asking me a personal question that really has no benefit to know the answer. You should have expected me to wonder what point you are trying to prove and why you need that info to prove it
I am really confused that people think the education system is doing a good job in this area. Especially from thadeus
I have been smoking mar1juana since sophomore year of high school and no a little more than halfway through college. Not once have I had the urge to try harder drugs, even after being offered them. In fact, the first drug I tried was a snort of cocaine from a key freshman year in hs. Didn't like it one bit. So yeah, the gateway theory is complete bs. Only reason it exists is because mar1juana is illegal.
This is the wisest thing that's been said in this thread. When I was an equal opportunity user (and I used everything at one time or another), pot NEVER made me want to do another drug. Alcohol ALWAYS did.
You absolutely can call mar1juana a gateway drug, because it is the most available, accepted, cheap and enjoyable of the illegal intoxicants. But the association is that the people who decide to experiment the chemical alteration of their minds and bodies have already chosen to ignore the laws and convention. That's their tendency; rebellious, nonconformist, excitement seekers. If they try pot and like it they will probably see if there are some other substance they like because of who they are.
Flat out wrong here man. You could say the same thing about alcohol. Just because someone smokes weed doesn't mean they will try heroin or cocaine because some other weed smoker has.
Stop speaking from experience. I would rather hear loud, fear-driven sophomoric rhetoric coming from inexperience at the topic at hand.
It's true. There's a lot of folks on here who are MJ users, and are biased due to being "personally invested" in the topic. Their anecdotal evidence is the weakest form of evidence out there. Their judgment, dare I say, is *clouded".
I love the fact that everyone here assumes using or not using them somehow decides your ability to determine if drugs are harmless
Wrong again. It would be difficult to explain the nuances of the effects of these various drugs to someone that is arguing from an entirely abstract perspective, in other words one of no experience. And sticking to inane, banal, outdated talking points to do so. It has nothing to do with inhibitions. Pot never leaves the user wanting more intensity of a new sort. Alcohol often does. Beers are followed by shots. Shots by cocaine, let's say, if it's around. It is the energy of the drug, the drive the drug gives you. mar1juana does no such thing; ergo, by definition, it is not a gateway drug. Never mind your textbooks. Why not try listening to any of the many people in this very thread that actually know what they're talking about -- not because someone told them but because they've experienced it.
What am I afraid of again? I could be taking a bong hi right now and it wouldn't change anything about what I said.
BUT let me ask you this, you wise, "experienced" sage If one tokes a lot of tree.... ...then finds that they were not harmed -- e.g., they had no negative side effects the next day, for example... ...would that make them more or less likely to experiment with other drugs?
I'm not personally invested. The legality of pot has never had any bearing on my experience. When I began using all these drugs (high school) none of them were available to me legally and it was easier for me to get pot, acid or coke than alcohol or cigarettes. There weren't any booze dealers; you had to get someone older to stick his neck out for you. And I'm against all drug use for myself. Yes, I have benefitted from it, drugs have given me things, but they have taken more things away. Most especially alcohol. I've done heroin, crack, meth, whatever. Alcohol was the only one that ever really messed me up and boy did it mess me up. My position on drug legalization is the same as my position on abortion. I'm against recreational drugs, all of them. I don't want to use any of them. Just as I am against abortion and I wouldn't be in favor of my girlfriend having one. But much more than any of that, I am against putting people in jail for those things, I am against the public health problems that come from people using unregulated substances and I am against the illegal markets these laws create. People are going to use drugs just as people are going to have abortions. If we need special restrictions to benefit the public health, like drunk driving laws, so be it. But put all this stuff through the FDA, take it out of the hands of criminals and tax it to help pay for the treatment of addicts that want to get off the stuff. And whether on this issue or any other, never make the mistake of listening seriously to anything said by CaseyH or bigtexxx.
Your logic is flawed. What it would do is make them question the reliability of the person that told them weed was seriously dangerous, which they would be right to do. From there, they might determine they couldn't trust whomever told them that first thing and disregard advice on the rest. If one is told, as I was at a young age, that pot is bad but booze is okay, one will soon learn to figure it out for himself rather than taking the advice of someone that is obviously ignorant or lying.
I don't have anyone on ignore anymore. And the "assumptions of your life" don't appear as a genie from a puff of smoke; they are like any opinion, formed from experience. Years of reading your posts here give us all a pretty good perspective from which to draw some conclusions (none of them flattering, by the by).
LMAO. I'm for legalizing and regulating drugs. However, I do believe pot leads users to try other more dangerous drugs.
