General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsCivicGrief
(147 posts)the cartoonist has no right to comment on gun regulations.
Emile
(23,034 posts)PJMcK
(22,059 posts)Think Ill light a bowl right now!
MiHale
(9,788 posts)peppertree
(21,688 posts)And for that, you need plenty of the former - and none of the latter.
NNadir
(33,577 posts)It has no relation to the fact that I don't own a gun and have no desire to do so.
I don't regard either of these practices as being good for anyone, which is the only relationship that personally strikes me.
Were I stoned, I might be amused by these cartoons, but I'm not, happily.
Overall, my generation, where smoking pot was a very cool thing for a certain amount of time, has disappointed me to no end.
We should have been more.
You don't have to smoke it. There's other ways to enjoy it. I hate to say it, but you sound like an old negative person.
NNadir
(33,577 posts)I definitely have a negative view of pot and wouldn't dream of smoking it and am quite sure I wouldn't "enjoy" it in any form.
I'm not in support of criminalization; but that is different than saying I support promotion of the drug. I have a nephew who seems to be unable to stop smoking the stuff; and I'd hate him to be jailed for it, but on the other side of the coin, I wish he wouldn't smoke it. My opinion is that it takes away from him and brings him every little.
My job is, for the record at least peripherally, connected with neurobiology, and for professional reasons, not necessarily for enjoyment, I find myself reading about the topic all the time in the scientific literature. Just this week in fact, I was considering compounds that bind to the 5-HT1a receptor that do not induce hallucinations. I can't imagine that I'd "enjoy" trying to read scientific papers stoned. I would not claim to be an expert on the endocannabinoid system, as distinct from 5-HT1a, although I am occasionally drawn into reading about that system as well, but to the extent I have been exposed to such reading, it my personal choice not to screw with my own endocannabinoid receptors, CB1 or CB2.
If that practice makes me "negative" about pot smoking - and I'm sure it does - I certainly cannot offer an apology for that. It's who I am and in this respect, pot abstinence, I'm rather happy about it.
I am generally suspicious of needing a substance to control my feeling of well being. I do realize that other people feel differently, but as a neutral observer sometimes interacting with such people, let me say, I'm glad it's not me.
I find amazing that it seems to offend people sometimes, but that's not my problem. Is it?
haele
(12,685 posts)It's always been a question in our house if pot smoking caused some of the young folks around the house as kidlet was growing up to become slackers, or if they were slackers already and hanging out smoking pot in the lower backyard just replaced hanging out and drinking beer.
A lot of kids never grow up for whatever reason, be it mental health or just sorry ego based on upbringing. These kids were slackers when I was young, when my parents were young (my uncle was technically a slacker), and when my grandparents were young.
I view pot similar to beer. Though there can be a medicinal quality, most pot users are trying to get to a place of comfortable relaxation. If the user is also a slacker or an addictive personality, excessive pot smoking is a symptom, just as any other substance abuse.
Haele
aocommunalpunch
(4,245 posts)the constitutionally-protected and promoted side for one, but demonization and prohibition for the other.
NNadir
(33,577 posts)...promoting gun ownership.
I'm not for the prohibition of pot, but I'm not fond of promoting it either. Regrettably the two stances, prohibition vs. promotion in the case of pot are often conflated. One hears it this way often: "Pot shouldn't be illegal because it's good for you." I can embrace the independent clause without agreeing to the dependent clause.
I don't think pot is good for you.
The OP seems to have a giggle sort of promotion as if smoking pot is a desirable thing to do, and that if you smoke pot, you won't have a gun.
I do know people who smoke pot and own a gun, lots of guns in fact. My son went to school with such a person and for reasons far beyond his habit of proudly advertising his pot use, he put a scare into us. The kid was, excuse the term, a fucking mess. (Happily he was expelled, but not for pot use.)
I'm a baby boomer. I certainly was exposed in my life time to the world of pot smoking. I even was in a band where Grateful Dead covers were performed; I sometimes sang pieces Jerry Garcia sang in the Grateful Dead, although unlike the Dead themselves, I always insisted on being in tune. Thus, I've experienced lots of stoners. I just don't agree that pot is good for people. I don't think it makes people demons, or that "demonization" is appropriate, but, at the risk of hearing all about Carl Sagan, I do think that drug use tends to reduce one's effectiveness, that it takes away far more than it adds.
I'd rather people not have guns, and not buy pot, both.
womanofthehills
(8,784 posts)Take a toke, have a beer - whatever. Living out in the country where lots of retired people live - probably 75% of people smoke and half the small town grows. Its funny - (town of under 900 people) the local hardware and dollar stores (2 dollar stores in a tiny town) say they cant keep planning soil in stock since anyone can now grow 6 to 12 plants depending on their household size.
DownriverDem
(6,232 posts)is legal in Michigan now. It has made a lot of tax money too. BTW You don't have to smoke it either.