View Poll Results: Should Marijuana be legalized in the U.S.?

Voters
34. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    23 67.65%
  • No

    11 32.35%

Should it be legalized?

This is a discussion on Should it be legalized? within the A Brief History of Cprogramming.com forums, part of the Community Boards category; Maxorator, you are too ignorant. Accept it. It's not big deal. You just need to inform yourself better and you ...

  1. #91
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,510
    Maxorator, you are too ignorant. Accept it. It's not big deal. You just need to inform yourself better and you will cease to be one. It's not that you are plain dumb like cigarette smokers. You are just ignorant.

    I'm even surprised you have the face to keep going on this discussion since you clearly shown already you know nothing about marijuana. You are discussing something you don't know. Accept it.

    Quote Originally Posted by maxorator
    Anecdotes? Since when are crying mothers anecdotes? You must have a weird sense of humour.
    Yes Anecdote. Read a dictionary.

    Noun: anecdote
    1. Short account of an incident (especially a biographical one)

    You prefer to to believe stories in a newspaper than scientific reports. That's just pathetic.


    Quote Originally Posted by maxorator
    There's a genetical information databank in an Estonian university with gene samples from 20000 different people. For you everything is an anecdote? Anyway, how sure are you that noone of them has schizophrenia? You know if they're taking serious medicines frequently it reduces the effects of schizophrenia (side effects aren't very nice though).
    What does that database has to do with anything? Is this you just inventing to save your face? And I know arounf 13 people who smoke marijuana, me included, and none has any signs of schizophrenia. Are you for real maxorator?

    How about you give room for others to debate and just go away with your unfounded and ignorant comments? I would rather prefer to discuss my points of view with someone that, while not agreeing with me, was at least informed. You clearly aren't.

    For your information schizophrenia was only diagnosed on cases of extremely heavy abuse of marijuana or those who already exhibit the disease or have a tendency towards it before they smoke.

    Go away. You are polluting this room more than my pot.
    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

  2. #92
    & the hat of GPL slaying Thantos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    5,681
    Interesting due to the timing. Heavy pot smoking can shrink your brain. Heavy in this case was given as
    at least five marijuana cigarettes daily for on average 20 years
    .

    The study is not, IMO, a reason for or against the drug as that type of use is what I would consider very excessive. Too much of anything is bad for you.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/newsO...27147420080602

  3. #93
    Dr Dipshi++ mike_g's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    On me hyperplane
    Posts
    1,218
    @ brewbuck & mario,
    The schizophrenia thing is a very real issue. It happens to a few people that binge on weed, by far most commonly when the habit starts during adolescence. The thing is, this is not something that happens all of a sudden. Its not like if you smoke a joint you're suddenly going to end up mad. Its a gradual process, and to the people it affects it becomes very unpleasant. What most of the modern scaremongering dosent say is that induced schizophrenia only takes hold while the drug is in effect. Therefore when people spin out they take it easy for a while, or give up on the habit. To actually cause long term mental illness requires a person to repeatedly subject themselves to very unpleasant experiences, which requires a strong will to cause harm to ones self. If these, few, people wernt harming themselves by overdoing it with marijuana they would be doing it via some other means. It is possible to force an overdose with cannabis, but then its possible to overdose salt, sugar, or literally anything else for that matter.

    Edit: also this issue exist regardless of whether the drug is legal or not

  4. #94
    Registered User whiteflags's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    7,739
    Here is the science for that argument:

    http://www.schizophrenia.com/prevent...reetdrugs.html

    I'm not sure if these people have an agenda but I did notice that they simply recommended those at risk or with genetic disposition stay away from street drugs. As mike_g says though ...

  5. #95
    Malum in se abachler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    3,189
    Actually the LD50 for THC would require you to smoke something like 500 lbs in one hour. I don't think this is technically or physically possible. The LD10 is something like 10,000 times higher than the level at which most people lose conciousness. Not one single person in the history of mankind has clinically overdosed on marijuana.
    Until you can build a working general purpose reprogrammable computer out of basic components from radio shack, you are not fit to call yourself a programmer in my presence. This is cwhizard, signing off.

  6. #96
    and the Hat of Clumsiness GanglyLamb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    between photons and phonons
    Posts
    1,109
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/e...on/7431640.stm Someone like Elysia must have been in charge of airport security that day (sorry for this OT but whilst reading this I had to think about the fact that everything can be considered a danger to society - obviously this one had the same mindset)

  7. #97
    Dr Dipshi++ mike_g's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    On me hyperplane
    Posts
    1,218
    Literally, anything becomes poisonous at a high enough dose. In reality, no-one is likely of ever od'ing on marijuana. But as said, it can have bad cumulative effects to people vulnerable to schizophrenia.

  8. #98
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,510
    Quote Originally Posted by mike_g View Post
    But as said, it can have bad cumulative effects to people vulnerable to schizophrenia.
    Precisely my point. I know of no case, mind you. But I cannot reject medical evidence I have read on the matter, so I won't ever deny that statement.

    However it needs to be said clearly marijuana smoking does not cause schizophrenia. If you are not schizophrenic or vulnerable to the disease, you won't become one. But it is conceivable that prolonged heavy use may spur the disease. Although I simply never heard of it, I am ready to accept it. But so does rice cause cancer if you eat too much...

    Does this mean marijuana is healthy? No bloody way! Of course it is not. For one there's always the issue you smoke it which is an excellent candidate for lung problems. Then there's the fact it is a narcotic which makes it a great candidate for mental and heart problems.

    Smoking marijuana is bad for your health. Period. I never said it wasn't. There is of course the exception of controlled dosages to treat sclerosis and coronary related diseases (some doctors are also looking into depression and hyper activity applications). But that's an uncalled for exception.

    However marijuana sits right there with tobacco as a less damaging drug when smoked unaltered by chemicals. It is no more dangerous to someone's health than a legal constant diet on fat food or plastic food. It is no more dangerous to someone health than a legal life made of no physical exercise. It's no more dangerous than many of the anti-depressives and pain killers people legally o.d. on. It's no more dangerous than getting legally drunk.

    In short, banning marijuana makes no sense when much more dangerous drugs and lifestyles have a more pronounced and active role in social cost.
    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

  9. #99
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    890
    The arguments against are classically misguided. The government has no business regulating activity between consenting adults as long as they don't harm others through force or fraud. No matter how offensive you find that activity.

    Is illicit drug use potentially harmful to a person and their loved ones? Yes. The same can be said of drinking, cigarette smoking, overeating, not exercising, overworking, adultery, gambling, video game addiction, television addiction, internet addiction (I may have this one), sports addiction, and on and on.

    To what degree do you want the government regulating your private life?

  10. #100
    Captain Crash brewbuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    7,249
    Quote Originally Posted by mike_g View Post
    @ brewbuck & mario,
    The schizophrenia thing is a very real issue. It happens to a few people that binge on weed, by far most commonly when the habit starts during adolescence.
    I was considered "extreme risk" for schizophrenia. It runs in my father's side of the family -- my uncle is severly affected. My brother has developed severe OCD (severe enough to dramatically impact every hour of his life). So this was always something that I kept in the back of my mind. Nothing ever happened. At 28 years old, I'm starting to get past the life stage where schizophrenia would manifest itself.

    So yes, I'm certainly aware of the potential connection.

    On the other hand, THC is the only drug we know of that seems to have its own dedicated receptor in the human brain. No other drug is known to affect this receptor, and curiously, the receptor is entirely absent from the areas of the brain responsible for critical life functions (e.g. the brain stem and cerebellum). This explains why the LD50 of THC is so incredibly high. It simply doesn't act on the parts of the brain where it could kill you by stopping your heartbeat or breathing.

    There are theories (of varying degrees of plausibility) that mankind and cannabis "co-evolved" with humans selecting stronger forms to get more effect from the drug, with our brains simultaneously evolving to be more sensitive to the drug itself. At any rate, cannabis has been used for many thousands of years, perhaps longer than alcohol.

  11. #101
    Ethernal Noob
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    1,901
    Quote Originally Posted by Thantos View Post
    Interesting due to the timing. Heavy pot smoking can shrink your brain. Heavy in this case was given as .

    The study is not, IMO, a reason for or against the drug as that type of use is what I would consider very excessive. Too much of anything is bad for you.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/newsO...27147420080602
    True, but it always comes back to what is legal. Too much Alcohol can damage your brain, have the dependency passed on to your children, cause deformations in the child (and that's just from the father being an alcoholic) and kill your liver. Smoking can cause cancer, stillbirth, etc. I think that if people want to make bad choices then the government really needs to stop deciding which ones are just bad enough to be illegal, and those that are too bad illegal. Marijuana is but a few steps away from alcohol.

  12. #102
    Malum in se abachler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    3,189
    Quote Originally Posted by brewbuck View Post
    On the other hand, THC is the only drug we know of that seems to have its own dedicated receptor in the human brain. No other drug is known to affect this receptor, and curiously, the receptor is entirely absent from the areas of the brain responsible for critical life functions (e.g. the brain stem and cerebellum). This explains why the LD50 of THC is so incredibly high. It simply doesn't act on the parts of the brain where it could kill you by stopping your heartbeat or breathing.
    For those interested, he is refering to the CB-1 and CB-2 receptor sites, which selectively bind with various cannabinoids. While technically more than one molecule binds with these receptors, all such compounds are cannabinoids which are found exclusively in cannabis and the human body (endocannabinoids).

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabinoid_receptor
    Until you can build a working general purpose reprogrammable computer out of basic components from radio shack, you are not fit to call yourself a programmer in my presence. This is cwhizard, signing off.

  13. #103
    C++まいる!Cをこわせ! Elysia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    22,788
    Quote Originally Posted by indigo0086 View Post
    True, but it always comes back to what is legal. Too much Alcohol can damage your brain, have the dependency passed on to your children, cause deformations in the child (and that's just from the father being an alcoholic) and kill your liver. Smoking can cause cancer, stillbirth, etc. I think that if people want to make bad choices then the government really needs to stop deciding which ones are just bad enough to be illegal, and those that are too bad illegal. Marijuana is but a few steps away from alcohol.
    But then again, wouldn't you think the government would have banned alochol and smoking if they could? I do believe they would.
    As for the whole regulating... I like to say: why throw another dangerous element into the mix? Try getting people to stop drinking and smoking instead and ban those and we'll have a healthier society. I don't believe anything good can come from those two elements.
    Quote Originally Posted by Adak View Post
    io.h certainly IS included in some modern compilers. It is no longer part of the standard for C, but it is nevertheless, included in the very latest Pelles C versions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Salem View Post
    You mean it's included as a crutch to help ancient programmers limp along without them having to relearn too much.

    Outside of your DOS world, your header file is meaningless.

  14. #104
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    2,129
    I highly doubt a father can physiologically pass on an alcoholic dependency.

    edit: you know what I mean.

  15. #105
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,510
    Quote Originally Posted by abachler View Post
    For those interested, he is refering to the CB-1 and CB-2 receptor sites, which selectively bind with various cannabinoids. While technically more than one molecule binds with these receptors, all such compounds are cannabinoids which are found exclusively in cannabis and the human body (endocannabinoids).

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabinoid_receptor
    Thanks. I was searching for it actually.
    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

Similar Threads

  1. Should it be legalized - Part Deux
    By medievalelks in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 124
    Last Post: 06-11-2008, 06:17 AM

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21