●Stories
●Firehose
●All
●Popular
●Polls
●Software
●Thought Leadership
Submit
●
Login
●or
●
Sign up
●Topics:
●Devices
●Build
●Entertainment
●Technology
●Open Source
●Science
●YRO
●Follow us:
●RSS
●Facebook
●LinkedIn
●Twitter
●
Youtube
●
Mastodon
●Bluesky
Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed
Forgot your password?
Close
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Load 500 More Comments
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
/Sea
Score:
5
4
3
2
1
0
-1
More
Login
Forgot your password?
Close
Close
Log In/Create an Account
●
All
●
Insightful
●
Informative
●
Interesting
●
Funny
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
byAnonymous Coward writes:
We are a police state regardless of what the Obamaites would have you think.
And this isn't to say that the right was any better but Bush & Company was a lot more honest about what they were up to. The silence from the left is deafening.
bycold fjord ( 826450 ) writes:
We are a police state regardless of what the Obamaites would have you think.
And this isn't to say that the right was any better but Bush & Company was a lot more honest about what they were up to. The silence from the left is deafening.
A "police state"? In what respect? Who has been sent to jail for making jokes about Obama? Who gets arrested for voting for the "wrong" political party? What is the nature of this so called "police state"? I would think it is about more than banning 32oz soft drinks.
bybetterunixthanunix ( 980855 ) writes:
What is the nature of this so called "police state"?
Does being the world leader in imprisoning people count? We have more people in prison than China, North Korea, Iran, etc. -- and that is more people in prison period, not merely per capita.
bycold fjord ( 826450 ) writes:
Does being the world leader in imprisoning people count?
Not really, no. A nation being termed a "police state" generally is associated with political oppression. It is drug use that has really driven up the prison population, and like it or not that isn't political crime. The question of the US prison population is getting more political attention, and maybe there will be some changes. Or, maybe youth will decide that drugs aren't the way to go seeing how it can turn out.
But to reiterate, no, it doesn't count by the usual criterion.
byForty Two Tenfold ( 1134125 ) writes:
It is drug use that has really driven up the prison population, and like it or not that isn't political crime.
Really? Not the inconsiderate drug laws? Weren't they designed to stifle dissent? Still not a political crime? Still not oppression? You're still stupid.
bycold fjord ( 826450 ) writes:
The drug laws were passed to reduce illegal drug trade and use, not voting for the "wrong" political party.
bybetterunixthanunix ( 980855 ) writes:
The drug laws were passed to reduce illegal drug trade and use, not voting for the "wrong" political party.
So why were the drugs made illegal in the first place? Maybe you are not aware of the history of the drug war, but before the 20th century recreational drugs were legal -- one could buy cocaine and heroin over the counter.
Parent
twitter
facebook
byForty Two Tenfold ( 1134125 ) writes:
GUNS, ETHANOL. No problems there, I guess? Also, the law was so efficient in eradicating "drug problem" that even alcohol prohibition worked! ANd now the USA is drug-free!
bycold fjord ( 826450 ) writes:
Alcohol use fell greatly due to prohibition, and the rate of use took many decades to return to the previous level.
Did Prohibition Really Work? Alcohol Prohibition as a Public Health Innovation [nih.gov]
Are you suggesting that there would be the same or less drug use if it wasn't illegal?
You don't go into any detail about what you think the issue is with "guns", but I assume you've heard that ownership of them is a Constitutionally protected right. Some people think that a murder with a gun is a gun problem when it
bycold fjord ( 826450 ) writes:
The start of prohibition meant the loss of production of 2 billion gallons of beer and 150 million gallons of liquor. That didn't just appear out of thin air for people to drink, so yes, consumption did fall greatly. After prohibition ended sales were slow to rise again.
I have little doubt that you are free enough to get yourself into serious trouble due to poor judgment. I hope someone is watching over you.
● your current threshold.
byForty Two Tenfold ( 1134125 ) writes:
What was the great harm caused by marijuana again?
harm became widespread due to those substances formerly being legal and ensnaring portions of the population.
Yeah, only latinos and negroes. White folk didn't have/generate that problem, right? No poppy seeds were available in the US EVER!
bycold fjord ( 826450 ) writes:
What was the great harm caused by marijuana again?
It's unclear if you forgot or never knew, which is consistent with your interest.
Heavy pot use linked to memory loss, schizophrenia link [upi.com]
There are other documented effects, and it has been thought to play the role of a gateway drug. I'll get you dig into it if you're really interested, ... and you remember.
Yeah, only latinos and negroes. White folk didn't have/generate that problem, right? No poppy seeds were available in the US EVER!
Opium was one of the first drugs regulated in various places in the US, and an early drug for Federal regulation. It affected people of all sexes, races, classes, and ages.
America's First Drug Epidemic [deamuseum.org]
byForty Two Tenfold ( 1134125 ) writes:
Heavy pot use linked to memory loss, schizophrenia link [upi.com]
Wrong. [nih.gov]
[regulation] affected people of all sexes, races, classes, and ages
Read up on the current state of affairs. [drugwarfacts.org]
bycold fjord ( 826450 ) writes:
Wrong. [nih.gov]
Actually your link appears to support the research in the linked article [upi.com] I provided, specifically:
"This paper is among the first to reveal that the use of marijuana may contribute to the changes in brain structure that have been associated with having schizophrenia."
Chronic marijuana use could augment the underlying disease process associated with schizophrenia, Smith noted.
"If someone has a family history of schizophrenia, they are increasing their risk of developing schizophrenia if they abuse marijuana," he said.
byForty Two Tenfold ( 1134125 ) writes:
Actually your link appears to support the research in the linked article [upi.com]
From the abstract:
CONCLUSIONS:
The results of the current study suggest that having an increased familial morbid risk for schizophrenia may be the underlying basis for schizophrenia in cannabis users and not cannabis use by itself.
You're illiterate or simply retarded. Good day, sir.
byForty Two Tenfold ( 1134125 ) writes:
A further proof that it's cold fjord who's got negligible if any real knowledge of the matter. [wiley.com]
bycold fjord ( 826450 ) writes:
No, I simply bear unpalatable news. You should prepare yourself since more is likely to come in the future.
Good day to you.
bycold fjord ( 826450 ) writes:
Thank you for the link. It has a couple of key sentences you may have missed.
A number of studies support the hypothesis that cannabis consumption is an important risk factor for schizophrenia, which has been reported to increase with the frequency and dose of cannabis use.[41-43] Epidemiological studies confirm a high occurrence of schizophrenia in people smoking cannabis,[44] and chronic cannabis smokers show cognitive deficits similar to those seen in schizophrenic patients.[45] Moreover, cannabis use is associated with an early onset of schizophrenia; young people with genetic vulnerability to schizophrenia are particularly sensitive to the physical and mental effects of cannabis.[46]
A seminal 27-year longitudinal study involving more than 50 000 Swedish participants[41] showed that cannabis use in adolescence was dose-dependently correlated to the risk of developing schizophrenia, with individuals taking cannabis on more than 50 occasions being ca. 7 times more likely to develop schizophrenia. ......
Undeniably, the habitual use of cannabis increases the risk of developing schizophrenia, especially in vulnerable subjects, but evidence suggests that this may be largely attributed to THC.
If this is accurate, by simply removing the chemical responsible for marijuana's "high" it might have some therapeutic value. Maybe that is a good target for genetic engineering. Until then, marijuana use poses a threat to the mental health of young people, especially heavy use. Would you still be so interested in it if you didn't get a buzz from it?
byForty Two Tenfold ( 1134125 ) writes:
No, you're spreading Anslinger's fairytales. Your RDF isn't working.
byForty Two Tenfold ( 1134125 ) writes:
1. No reference groups or underlying familial risk were examined in those papers. Not conclusive.
2. No need to completely remove THC from the medication.
3. No need to GM cannabis. [huffingtonpost.com]
4. Dissenting voices (this one from David Nutt, the man behind the 2010 Lancet-published study) are stifled. [youtube.com]
●th your current threshold.
●your current threshold.
●r current threshold.
● current threshold.
There may be more comments in this discussion. Without JavaScript enabled, you might want to turn on Classic Discussion System in your preferences instead.
Slashdot
●
●
Submit Story
If A = B and B = C, then A = C, except where void or prohibited by law.
-- Roy Santoro
●FAQ
●Story Archive
●Hall of Fame
●Advertising
●Terms
●Privacy Statement
●About
●Feedback
●Mobile View
●Blog
Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information
Copyright © 2026 Slashdot Media. All Rights Reserved.
×
Close
Working...
Working...