Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Mac Community > Community Discussion > Politics, Religion, Social Issues

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Jun 1, 2014, 09:20 AM   #101
jnpy!$4g3cwk
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Before we get started, I am definitely in favor of some form of legalization, for the simple reason that the war on drugs has been an absolute disaster. But, that doesn't imply that I think pot is good for you. The evidence shows otherwise.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Southern Dad View Post
Tell me what jobs you would want the person doing them to have just gotten high?

Installing the brakes on your new car?
No.

Quote:
Cooking your chicken at KFC?
They probably already are high. At least, from what I read in the Sunday newspapers, a large number of fast food workers smoke pot. I guess their jobs make more sense that way.

Quote:
Flying a comercial 777?
Directing air traffic?
Driving a bus?
Crossing guard near a school?
Day care worker?
Train brakeman or engineer?
No, no, and no. This does raise an interesting question-- how long after pot use does impairment persist? With alcohol, your BAC does return 0.00% after a while.

Quote:
Originally Posted by localoid View Post
Maybe someone should call a few newspapers in Colorado and ask if they've experienced a noticeable increase in banding-machine accidents since the 1st of the year.
Discussed right here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/01/us...dayspaper&_r=0
jnpy!$4g3cwk is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 1, 2014, 09:45 AM   #102
localoid
macrumors 68020
 
localoid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: America's Third World
Quote:
Originally Posted by jnpy!$4g3cwk View Post
Where exactly in that article is there any about an increase in accidents on the job?
__________________
My remake of the definitive Populuxe film on 1950s automotive, industrial/interior/architectural design: American Look (1958), Reimagined
localoid is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 1, 2014, 11:31 AM   #103
zioxide
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Massachusetts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Southern Dad View Post
EXACTLY! But how can an LEO or an employer tell if you did it on your own time or during your lunch break? People smoking marijuana, mainlining heroin, snorting cocaine, or whatever you do with meth but I want to have a way of knowing they are stoned. With alcohol we have the breath test. There is a standard .08% BAC to drive, .04% BAC to fly an aircraft.
We have THC saliva swab test kits. They can detect if you have smoked in the last 4-6 hours or so. And they can't be faked as easily as a piss test.

Also, blood tests can be used in the event of some type of incident. And the normal field sobriety tests as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jnpy!$4g3cwk View Post
Before we get started, I am definitely in favor of some form of legalization, for the simple reason that the war on drugs has been an absolute disaster. But, that doesn't imply that I think pot is good for you.
Nobody said it was good for you. But neither are booze, cigarettes, drinking a lot of caffeine, etc.


Quote:
They probably already are high. At least, from what I read in the Sunday newspapers, a large number of fast food workers smoke pot. I guess their jobs make more sense that way.
A large number of Americans in general smoke pot. Many people who don't smoke don't even realize it.



Quote:
This does raise an interesting question-- how long after pot use does impairment persist? With alcohol, your BAC does return 0.00% after a while.
Anecdotal here, but in my personal experience, somewhere in the 1-2 hours range for the most of the buzz to wear off, and 3-4 hours to be back to normal.



There's a few anecdotes in there of sad stories but it's pale in comparison to the amount of problems alcohol cause. Also more proof to the whole "owning a gun increases the risk of you or your loved one dying by a gun." Still, none of this makes a good argument to why it should be illegal. If I want to sit on my couch at on a saturday night and smoke a joint while watching a game or movie, why shouldn't I be able to? I'm not hurting anyone just like someone who wants to sit back on a Saturday night and have a couple beers while watching the game. It's supposed to be a "free" country after all.

Last edited by zioxide; Jun 1, 2014 at 11:40 AM.
zioxide is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 1, 2014, 11:36 AM   #104
mactastic
macrumors 68040
 
mactastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Colly-fornia
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdowns View Post
The cynic in me thinks they're doing this to try and attract younger voters.
Are you suggesting the GOP would engage in giving voters things they want in exchange for votes?
__________________
I salute you Sean [Hannity]. I salute you for bravely standing by a man whose only crime, was breaking federal law.
- Stephen Colbert
mactastic is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 1, 2014, 01:02 PM   #105
Southern Dad
In Time-Out
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: The Peach State
Quote:
Originally Posted by zioxide View Post
We have THC saliva swab test kits. They can detect if you have smoked in the last 4-6 hours or so. And they can't be faked as easily as a piss test.

Also, blood tests can be used in the event of some type of incident. And the normal field sobriety tests as well.
The problem is that a blood test would show that a person had used it in the past couple weeks not the level of impairment at the time of the fatal wreck Also if someone smoked it 6 hours ago, are they still under the influence of it?
Southern Dad is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 1, 2014, 01:35 PM   #106
localoid
macrumors 68020
 
localoid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: America's Third World
Drivers stoned on marijuana test their driving skills



Quote:
How did the 'impaired' volunteers actually do? Well at a certain point, the substance had an undeniable effect on their ability to navigate a vehicle sensibly. But they all maintained surprising control, even at incredibly excessive levels of marijuana consumption. Moreover, unlike drunk drivers, they were very much aware of their state and agreed they were not on top of their game. Without over-indulging, it seems people's critical thinking can be trusted more with a few hits than a couple of drinks.
__________________
My remake of the definitive Populuxe film on 1950s automotive, industrial/interior/architectural design: American Look (1958), Reimagined
localoid is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 1, 2014, 03:06 PM   #107
zioxide
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Massachusetts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Southern Dad View Post
The problem is that a blood test would show that a person had used it in the past couple weeks not the level of impairment at the time of the fatal wreck Also if someone smoked it 6 hours ago, are they still under the influence of it?
THC only remains in the blood stream for 2-3 days for most average users, and you should be able to measure concentration to determine a time frame. Concentrations will be much higher in the first hours after smoking than 2 days later. Of course, none of this is 100% accurate, but neither are breathalyzers for alcohol.

As for the 6 hours, it's highly unlikely if someone smoked a bit that they would still be under the influence, unless they were chain smoking blunts for hours on end. Edibles can have a longer-lasting effect though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by localoid View Post
Drivers stoned on marijuana test their driving skills

YouTube: video
I wish I could do that test. Or better yet, take some professional drivers, let them toke up, and then see the results. The results of that video test doesn't prove much because those people appear that they could just be crap drivers to begin with. The one thing it does illustrate is that there can be very different levels of THC "intoxication".


Still, I'd rather have a driver on the road after a few tokes than a few beers. If anything, it slows you down and makes you more cautious, while alcohol does the opposite and makes you more reckless. Not that it's good for people to go out and get blasted/ripped and then drive, but just like alcohol, there's a threshold where you would become unable to function normally. I could take a couple small pokes and it wouldn't change my ability at all (and nobody could even tell) but if I smoked a blunt to my face I shouldn't be near the wheel. Similar to having one beer and driving or crushing a 6 pack then driving.

I think the biggest problem for people driving while stoned isn't critical thinking but maintaining focus and reaction time.

I'm sure there are companies working on trying to develop more accurate tests for being under the influence of THC (especially with the push towards legalization) and it will be interesting to see what comes out in the next few years.
zioxide is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 1, 2014, 03:47 PM   #108
jnpy!$4g3cwk
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by localoid View Post
Where exactly in that article is there any about an increase in accidents on the job?
Didn't mean to imply that it did. Apparently the most obvious difference is a big increase in the number of incidents involving children and edibles.

Quote:
Originally Posted by zioxide View Post
Nobody said it was good for you.
Well, actually, during a pot-related campaign/vote a while back, I did receive pro-port propaganda, and, yes, they did say it was good for you. Including some claims about a study done at Harvard that allegedly proved how good it was for you. My own journey through the literature has suggested otherwise.

Quote:
But neither are booze, cigarettes,
When I was a kid, the tobacco industry was still claiming that cigarettes were not proven harmful, and, were a good way for women to lose 5 pounds.

Quote:
drinking a lot of caffeine, etc.
Define "a lot". As far as I know, people who drink 2-3 cups a day actually live longer than teetotalers. Isn't science wonderful?

Quote:
There's a few anecdotes in there of sad stories but it's pale in comparison to the amount of problems alcohol cause. Also more proof to the whole "owning a gun increases the risk of you or your loved one dying by a gun." Still, none of this makes a good argument to why it should be illegal. If I want to sit on my couch at on a saturday night and smoke a joint while watching a game or movie, why shouldn't I be able to? I'm not hurting anyone just like someone who wants to sit back on a Saturday night and have a couple beers while watching the game. It's supposed to be a "free" country after all.
I think I began my response by writing that I am in favor of legalization. I think the evidence shows that pot isn't good for you, but, I would agree with you that, on the whole, it is probably less harmful for most people, and the people around them, than drinking. And, if you are working at McDonalds or KFC, maybe the 8 point IQ drop actually helps. Has there been a decrease in booze consumption in Colorado since pot was legalized?
jnpy!$4g3cwk is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 1, 2014, 03:48 PM   #109
localoid
macrumors 68020
 
localoid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: America's Third World
Quote:
Originally Posted by zioxide View Post
... I wish I could do that test. Or better yet, take some professional drivers, let them toke up, and then see the results. The results of that video test doesn't prove much because those people appear that they could just be crap drivers to begin with. The one thing it does illustrate is that there can be very different levels of THC "intoxication".
That's the thing -- the level of "intoxication"... The same amount of THC seems to have different effects on different people. People have different experiences with pot. Some people don't like the effect, some get paranoid, some love the effect, etc.

Some research seems to suggest these differences could be due to the variation in the patterns of the different cannabidiol receptors in the brain, but since actual scientific research has been so limited, no one seems to really have much of a (scientific) clue.

Then too, an unseasoned pot user usually has a very different reaction than a seasoned user. But a unseasoned user of (prescription) beta blockers usually has different reaction than a seasoned beta blocker user for that matter. I take two beta blockers for a heart condition, and I had to get used to the effects before I felt safe doing certain physical tasks, otherwise I'd get dizzy, stumble, or simply have to stop what I was doing and sit down, etc. After a week or so of taking these meds, most of these sorts of problems disappeared. Three years later, I rarely experience them.
__________________
My remake of the definitive Populuxe film on 1950s automotive, industrial/interior/architectural design: American Look (1958), Reimagined
localoid is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 1, 2014, 05:15 PM   #110
zioxide
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Massachusetts
Quote:
Originally Posted by jnpy!$4g3cwk View Post
Didn't mean to imply that it did. Apparently the most obvious difference is a big increase in the number of incidents involving children and edibles.
Unfortunately irresponsible parents will always be irresponsible parents.


Quote:
Well, actually, during a pot-related campaign/vote a while back, I did receive pro-port propaganda, and, yes, they did say it was good for you. Including some claims about a study done at Harvard that allegedly proved how good it was for you. My own journey through the literature has suggested otherwise.
Gotta love propaganda. That stuff doesn't help out our arguments to have it legalized no more than reefer madness helps out the argument to keep it illegal. I wish people could just lay out the facts instead of resorting to propaganda, but alas that will never happen.

Quote:
When I was a kid, the tobacco industry was still claiming that cigarettes were not proven harmful, and, were a good way for women to lose 5 pounds.
Luckily we have moved past that. I'd never be in favor of pot being marketed as being totally safe because it's not. But not very many things in life are totally safe.

Quote:
Define "a lot". As far as I know, people who drink 2-3 cups a day actually live longer than teetotalers. Isn't science wonderful?
I know some people who I used to work with when I worked in restaurants who would drink like 3 of those big ass dunkin cups every morning then suck on caffeinated soda throughout the whole day. That can't be good for you. Like almost anything, moderation is key. Even for something like smoking.. smoking cigarettes all the time is very bad.. but enjoying a cigar once or twice a summer out by a campfire won't do much harm.

Quote:
I think I began my response by writing that I am in favor of legalization. I think the evidence shows that pot isn't good for you, but, I would agree with you that, on the whole, it is probably less harmful for most people, and the people around them, than drinking. And, if you are working at McDonalds or KFC, maybe the 8 point IQ drop actually helps. Has there been a decrease in booze consumption in Colorado since pot was legalized?
That's a good question.. I doubt we have statistics on that just yet, but no doubt we will see them eventually. It will be interesting to say the least.

The biggest thing that enrages me about the whole marijuana thing is that it's still classified as Schedule I by the federal government.. meaning the feds position is that there isn't even legitimate medical use. That causes problems for medical research, and when we have documented proof of many medical benefits, we need to drop that and leave it up to the states to make their own laws about it.

Look no further than Charlotte's Web. It's been shown by over 100 patients that CBD (cannabidiol) can reduce or even completely eliminate seizures in patients with severe epilepsy and other related seizure conditions. CBD is one of the 85+ cannabinoids in the cannabis plant and it's not psychoactive.

It's a really interesting read if you haven't heard of it before.. you can read up on Charlotte Figi (the little girl the strain is named after) and the over 100+ patients who have moved to Colorado to get the benefits of this medication. The growers created the strain Charlotte's web which is very high in CBD and low in THC, and then they isolate the CBD into an oil that's given in a dropper form under the tongue. This little girl was having upwards of 300 seizures a week, and with the CBD oil treatment, she's down to an average of 4 per month. Yet this medicine is still criminal according to our federal government, and if her parents were in a state other than Colorado, they could be thrown in jail just for giving their daughter medicine to stop her seizures and help her live a normal life.



Quote:
Originally Posted by localoid View Post
That's the thing -- the level of "intoxication"... The same amount of THC seems to have different effects on different people. People have different experiences with pot. Some people don't like the effect, some get paranoid, some love the effect, etc.

Some research seems to suggest these differences could be due to the variation in the patterns of the different cannabidiol receptors in the brain, but since actual scientific research has been so limited, no one seems to really have much of a (scientific) clue.

There's also hundreds of different strains, all with different chemical makeups and different concentrations of the various cannabinoids. All these strains can effect people differently. Someone who is perfectly fine with a sativa could have the paranoia from a specific strain of indica, or vice-versa. One of the benefits of legalization would be people would actually know what they are buying. Instead of buying a random strain from a sketchy drug dealer that you have no proof it's actually what they say it is, you can go into the store and buy a specific strain you are looking for that you know works for you (for whatever you're using it for, be it recreation, medicine, whatever).
zioxide is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 1, 2014, 06:46 PM   #111
jnpy!$4g3cwk
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by zioxide View Post
Unfortunately irresponsible parents will always be irresponsible parents.
Sure. Nevertheless, edibles are not as benign as some folks think.

Quote:

The biggest thing that enrages me about the whole marijuana thing is that it's still classified as Schedule I by the federal government.. meaning the feds position is that there isn't even legitimate medical use. That causes problems for medical research, and when we have documented proof of many medical benefits, we need to drop that and leave it up to the states to make their own laws about it.
Yes, I was aware of Cannabidiol. There is getting to be a lot more information about Cannabidiol (CBD) out there now. It looks to be very useful.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabidiol

Quote:
Look no further than Charlotte's Web. It's been shown by over 100 patients that CBD (cannabidiol) can reduce or even completely eliminate seizures in patients with severe epilepsy and other related seizure conditions. CBD is one of the 85+ cannabinoids in the cannabis plant and it's not psychoactive.

It's a really interesting read if you haven't heard of it before.. you can read up on Charlotte Figi (the little girl the strain is named after) and the over 100+ patients who have moved to Colorado to get the benefits of this medication. The growers created the strain Charlotte's web which is very high in CBD and low in THC, and then they isolate the CBD into an oil that's given in a dropper form under the tongue. This little girl was having upwards of 300 seizures a week, and with the CBD oil treatment, she's down to an average of 4 per month. Yet this medicine is still criminal according to our federal government, and if her parents were in a state other than Colorado, they could be thrown in jail just for giving their daughter medicine to stop her seizures and help her live a normal life.

---

There's also hundreds of different strains, all with different chemical makeups and different concentrations of the various cannabinoids. All these strains can effect people differently. Someone who is perfectly fine with a sativa could have the paranoia from a specific strain of indica, or vice-versa. One of the benefits of legalization would be people would actually know what they are buying. Instead of buying a random strain from a sketchy drug dealer that you have no proof it's actually what they say it is, you can go into the store and buy a specific strain you are looking for that you know works for you (for whatever you're using it for, be it recreation, medicine, whatever).
No disagreement generally-- we need much more research, and drop the whole "war on _____" mentality. High-CBD marijuana may prove to be very useful for some people. I'm just not an "enthusiast" -- unfortunately, the increase in social isolation and drop in IQ is obvious in some young people, and, then there are things like my friend who suffered psychotic episodes-- it wasn't very good for him, back in the day. Statistically, pot-heads probably are better drivers than drunks, all other things being equal, but, I would prefer that people drive sober.
jnpy!$4g3cwk is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 2, 2014, 04:51 AM   #112
LIVEFRMNYC
macrumors 68030
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by localoid View Post
Drivers stoned on marijuana test their driving skills

YouTube: video
I agree that it's way safer than driving while drunk, but it's still dangerous.

As a teen and even my early 20's, I would smoke and drive plenty. An argument can be made that going at high speeds could be just as dangerous as if you were drinking, but I would always drive slow while high. I think most people do.

I have went the wrong way on one way streets, especially at night. So yes driving while high is definitely dangerous.
LIVEFRMNYC is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 2, 2014, 05:55 AM   #113
Southern Dad
In Time-Out
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: The Peach State
We already have laws making it illegal to drive drunk. We have a means to test level of impairment. Can you say that driving while high is safer than driving sober? Not compare it to driving drunk but compare it to driving without any drugs.
Southern Dad is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 2, 2014, 12:07 PM   #114
chown33
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Southern Dad View Post
We already have laws making it illegal to drive drunk. We have a means to test level of impairment. Can you say that driving while high is safer than driving sober? Not compare it to driving drunk but compare it to driving without any drugs.
Has anyone here said that? Has anyone said it has no effect ("same as driving sober", as distinct from your "safer than driving sober")?

The posts I see, including the one directly above yours, say driving high is more dangerous than driving sober. He even uses the word "dangerous" 3 times.
chown33 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 2, 2014, 12:49 PM   #115
localoid
macrumors 68020
 
localoid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: America's Third World
Quote:
Originally Posted by Southern Dad View Post
We already have laws making it illegal to drive drunk. We have a means to test level of impairment. Can you say that driving while high is safer than driving sober? Not compare it to driving drunk but compare it to driving without any drugs.
Even when completely sober, drivers vary. Some are very safe while others are very unsafe. And there are still others who fall somewhere between the two. So yes, I do believe its possible for some drivers who are high to drive "better" and safer than some drivers who are 100% sober. But saying that doesn't mean I'm claiming that driving high is a "good thing"...

I have several friends and acquaintances that I would avoid riding with. Some are simply too old to be driving. Others are recklessly aggressive while others have yet to master the art of staying on their side of road. I have some young nieces and nephews don't seem to understand the basic concepts defense driving. And so on...

I understand your concerns about impaired driving... But surely today's technology would allow us to could come up with some accurate standardized tests (that the NTSB could review, test and ultimately sanction) that could be used to measure a driver's level of "impairment", be it due to senility, lack of skills, drugs, alcohol, lack of sleep, or road rage.

Forty-plus years ago, the cops seemed to be willing to work within the limitations of available technology to deal with the problems of drunk driving.
Back during that era, I was playing in bands, 2-3 nights a week, in the area's bars and nightclubs. While on break or after the gig was over, my bandmates and I would watch the show, as the cops who hung out in the parking lots, patrolled the nearby streets, etc., went about their business of watching for drunks that weaved when they were walking to their cars or while they were driving.
__________________
My remake of the definitive Populuxe film on 1950s automotive, industrial/interior/architectural design: American Look (1958), Reimagined
localoid is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Jun 9, 2014, 08:27 AM   #116
Wild-Bill
macrumors 68020
 
Wild-Bill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: ?
Quote:
There's also hundreds of different strains, all with different chemical makeups and different concentrations of the various cannabinoids. All these strains can effect people differently. Someone who is perfectly fine with a sativa could have the paranoia from a specific strain of indica, or vice-versa. One of the benefits of legalization would be people would actually know what they are buying. Instead of buying a random strain from a sketchy drug dealer that you have no proof it's actually what they say it is, you can go into the store and buy a specific strain you are looking for that you know works for you (for whatever you're using it for, be it recreation, medicine, whatever).
You can go into dispensary, read the label and know exactly what the THC and CBD levels are, what it's good at treating (pain, PTSD, whatever). You know it hasn't been treated with chemicals, it has been examined under a microscope for dust, insects, etc. Quality control.

Much like you can pick different beers with different flavor and alcoholic content by volume. You find what you like. But that's where the similarity ends.

Some of that "paranoia" is often self-fulfilling in new and inexperienced users.
If a person thinks they're doing something bad, they are already going into the experience with anxiety.
__________________
Wild-Bill is offline   1 Reply With Quote


Reply
MacRumors Forums > Mac Community > Community Discussion > Politics, Religion, Social Issues

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Revolutionary msPad is a Medical Symbol Keypad/Medical Shorthand Keypad heyluckum iPad Apps 11 Sep 27, 2013 01:49 PM
White House Backs Petition in Support of Mobile Phone Unlocking MacRumors Politics, Religion, Social Issues 76 Mar 6, 2013 02:37 PM
31st time's a charm? House GOP votes again on Obamacare Repeal yg17 Politics, Religion, Social Issues 72 Dec 3, 2012 04:18 PM
Wifi from house to garden house chaci Community Discussion 2 Aug 2, 2012 11:29 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:44 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC