Hindsight

Back in 2006, then-U.S. Attorney for Western Washington John McKay appeared on 60 Minutes to defend his attempts to arrest and extradite Canadian marijuana seed seller Marc Emery. McKay argued that Emery was a drug kingpin and a threat to Americans. Four years later, Emery ended up in an American prison.

But after being pushed out by the Bush Administration later that year, McKay has had an interesting change of heart about our drug policies in the years since then. And in a guest column Friday in the Mommy Journal, he expands on his newfound enlightenment:

As Emery’s prosecutor and a former federal law-enforcement official, however, I’m not afraid to say out loud what most of my former colleagues know is true: Our marijuana policy is dangerous and wrong and should be changed through the legislative process to better protect the public safety.

Congress has failed to recognize what many already know about our policy of criminal prohibition of marijuana — it has utterly failed. Listed by the U.S. government as a “Schedule One” drug alongside heroin, the demand for marijuana in this country for decades has outpaced the ability of law enforcement to eliminate it. Perhaps this is because millions of Americans smoke pot regularly and international drug cartels, violent gangs and street pushers work hard to reap the profits.

Law-enforcement agencies are simply not capable of interdicting all of this pot and despite some successes have not succeeded in thwarting criminals who traffic and sell marijuana. Brave agents and cops continue to risk their lives in a futile attempt to enforce misguided laws that do not match the realities of our society.

I applaud McKay for speaking out on this now, and I hope that this does move the ball forward. He’s right to point out that many in law enforcement know exactly what he’s saying is true, but are afraid to say so publicly. Part of it may be that they fear having their professional hypocrisies exposed. McKay clearly doesn’t, and it would be pointless for me to harp on that – other than to encourage him to request a pardon for Emery, who was very far from the “drug kingpin” McKay accused him of being.

But one other thing did stick out to me. McKay’s column is dripping with his still-lingering contempt for those who actually do use marijuana. He calls them “idiots”, and despite even acknowledging that it can have medical benefits for some, he still thinks that it’s “dumb” to want it. I think this also plays a large role in why so many in law enforcement cling to this outdated policy. There’s still a strong element of contempt for those who drive the market.

Over the years, marijuana use has gone from being representative of counter-culture rebellion to being far more mainstream. Most of the people I know who use marijuana are regular folks who enjoy it the way many people enjoy a glass of scotch or a microbrew, but the idea of it being part of some sort of reckless rebellion still lingers. Even for those who’ve seen the light on what this devastating policy has done to our country, there’s still a blind spot to the fact that for a lot of people, it’s not by default a “dumb” thing to do.

Comments

  1. 1

    worf spews:

    From the front page of Daily Kos:

    Let’s pretend for just a moment that legal marijuana would generate the same number of extra deaths, the same amount of extra diseases, car and job accidents, bar fights, marital troubles, violent crimes and addictions as alcohol. I know, I know. Ludicrous. But just for the sake of argument, pretend. If someone could prove to a certainty, with psychic powers, say, that re-legalized marijuana would become as deadly as re-legalized alcohol, wouldn’t that be a good reason to join Sen. Dianne Feinstein and various others of our leaders in opposing Prop. 19?

    It might. Assuming we plan to re-prohibit alcohol, too. Which we will never do.

  2. 2

    proud leftist spews:

    Too bad there are so few John McKay types left in the Republican Party. He actually recognizes reality and lets reality guide his opinion on an issue. I wonder when the GOP Truth Police will come after him.

  3. 3

    Politically Incorrect spews:

    Many people I talk to on the legalization issue seems to be concerned with smoking pot and driving. I don’t see that being much of a problem because the vast majority of pot smokers like to watch TV and indulge their munchies: they have no interest in driving anywhere.

    It’s time to come to grips with this situation: people like to smoke pot, and there’s nothing we can do to get them to stop that activity. As far as I’m concerned, keeping pot illegal is against the Constitution’s right to pursue happiness and live one’s life as he or she chooses.

  4. 5

    lostinaseaofblue spews:

    Can’t speak for anyone else, but I do see your point about attitudes towards pot users.

    The involuntary image that comes to mind for me is that of a long haired unshaven 23 year old living in his parents basement. I’m sure this is unfair, but it’s probably a fairly common stereotype.

    Stereotype or not, there are plenty of legal means of escapism. Many jobs drug test. It can risk property under seizure laws in Washington State. Risking legal trouble or loss of employment to get high really does seem dumb. Or indicative of the kind of serious addiction that would risk these possibilities.

    I honestly don’t see the advantages of legalization either. Money spent on interdiction and the criminal justice system will be spent elswhere. It isn’t as if a lot law enforcement resources were currently spent on enforcment of the statutes anyway.

    Seems to me the two big advantages would be a more rational legal status and happier MJ users. I really can’t say that the legal system is known for rationality, so the gain there seems a bit obscure. And given the very real challenges facing elected officials happier pot users isn’t a high priority legislatively for me.

    All in all, good luck at legalizing the stuff. I can’t say I care much one way or the other.

  5. 6

    worf spews:

    Most people I know partake at least occasionally, and none would fit the stereotypes of lost. Most are over forty and have successful careers. I know doctors, nurses and bus drivers who are tested, but know how to flush their systems with herbal remedies from Tenzing Momo in the Market. I know AIDS patients who use it to keep their appetite up and people with chronic pain who use it for relief. There is absolutely no rational reason why MJ is illegal – none. It’s an excuse to lock up brown people, nothing more.

  6. 7

    ripconstitution spews:

    I ‘ve always thought it funny that in some places(such as where I used to live) if the cops find an eighth on you, they give you a grilling and then let you go, while in other places, people get years for less tree than could fill a one-hitter. Pot should definitely be legalized, and honestly, it would be a great idea for the GOP to get behind: a source of tax revenue that we could tax the hell out of, because non-users would have no problem with high taxes, and if users complained, everyone else would tell them to “shut up, ya hippy!”
    However, it will NEVER happen. Because as long as the prison industry thrives and lobbies, they will continue to lobby for anything that will get more bodies into cells. Maybe in a few generations’ time it’ll happen, but I highly doubt it. Keeping it illegal is just too lucrative.

  7. 8

    lostinaseaofblue spews:

    Re 6

    Couple of things. I never claimed to represent any view but mine. I’m neither proud of nor ashamed of that immediate image of pot smokers as perenial adolescents, whatever their adult occupation.

    Most of the people I know don’t smoke pot. That speaks more to the people I know than to the kind of people that smoke pot though.

    So you know, if you spend a lot of time covering up an activity it makes certain statements about how important that activity is to you. You might ask why the activity is so important to these neuro surgeons and theoretical physicists you know that they need it so badly as to seek ways to hide it. The word is addiction.

    And again, I don’t care if it’s legal or not. No skin off my nose either way. In a general way drugs and prostitution and the other ‘consensual’ crimes outght to be legal. I just think that the legislatures have much more important business to attend to just now.

  8. 9

    Deathfrogg spews:

    @ #5

    I honestly don’t see the advantages of legalization either. Money spent on interdiction and the criminal justice system will be spent elswhere. It isn’t as if a lot law enforcement resources were currently spent on enforcment of the statutes anyway.

    Thats because you support the following positions on the matter:

    “Makes darkies think they’re as good as white men.” -H.J. Anslinger, Bureau of Narcotics, 1925

    “Marihuana influenced negroes to look at white people in the eye, step on white men’s shadows, and look at a white woman twice.” -Hearst Newspapers, 1933

    “Negro entertainers with their jazz and swing music are declared an outgrowth of marihuana use which possesses white women to tap their feet.”
    – Anslinger in testimony before Congress, several times between 1927 and ’35

    The average felony convict in all of our nations prisons IS in for simple possession or low level distribution. There are more people in prison for marijuana possession than murder, rape and child molestation combined. Blacks and Hispanics are charged for felonies at a rate nearly 15 times that of Whites, for the same levels of possession.

    You seem to find no troubling issues with that.

    The primary influence in Congress and State legislatures for maintaining and even increasing the penalties for possession of marijuana are the lobbyists working on behalf of the private prison industry, the law enforcement pension funds and insurance industries, and the large multinational construction firms that build the prisons and contract to maintain them.

    The law enforcement pension and insurance industries are heavily invested in the private prison corporations, thereby having a vested interest on maintaining that industry at its most profitable capacity by lobbying for tougher drug laws. Butts in the seats (or cells as it may be) is what makes the money. And money is all that is important to a corporation. The DARE program was nearly 100% funded by Wackenhut (now GEO Industries) and The Corrections Corporation of America.

    From WIKI:

    Private companies in the United States operate 264 correctional facilities, housing almost 99,000 adult offenders.

    Companies operating such facilities include the Corrections Corporation of America, the GEO Group, Inc, and Community Education Centers. The GEO Group was formerly known as Wackenhut Securities.

    Corrections Corporation of America (CCA) has a capacity of more than 80,000 beds in 65 correctional facilities. The GEO Group operates 61 facilities with a capacity of 49,000 offender beds.

    Most privately run facilities are located in the southern and western portions of the United States and include both state and federal offenders.

    As long as there is profit in crime, there will always be crime to create profit. Maintaining a legal resource for revenue such as the incarceration industry is always politically correct, and guarantees a steady flow of campaign contributions to legislators from the companies that have a stake in the game, and that game is terribly lucrative.

    Hundreds of billions of dollars change hands in this country, based on that industry alone.

    “The Corporative System is destined to become the civilization of the twentieth century.”
    -Benito Moussolini

    Oh, so true by this example alone.

  9. 10

    ahem.... spews:

    until the people who smoke come forward and say hey, it’s people like us who smoke pot, people who don’t smoke pot will have a poor understanding of pot and the people who smoke pot. IOW the vaccuum in public understanding is rather understandable since this is a political movement where the people most involved still don’t come forward and identify themselves. I am sure if they did then people who say they don’t know anyone who smokes pot will suddently find that the teacher across the street smokes pot and so does the mountain climbing dude they know at work. You really can’t have political change and you shouldn’t expect it if the people who need it and want it don’t come forward and identify themselves. Also they need to stop pretending it’s mainly for medical reasons. why not come forward and say hey, it gets me HIGH, that’s why I like it. It’s cool, it’s fun, you know, like when other people go on a tour of the Yakima Valley to drink wine? Like when you have a couple of scotches? It’s the pot smokersadhering to the taboo of talking about it that is the thing that has to change to bring about the end of the war on drugs. (Well, lots of things have to change but they won’t change as long as pot smokers stay hidden in the closet, or in the garage, or under the back stairs or out behind the barn…..)

    Shedding that whole hempfest tiedyed image would help a lot too. IOW all the professional type stoners need to come out of the closet, dudes.

  10. 12

    Bluecollar Libertarian spews:

    It would be interesting to see what the courts would say as to the use of cannabis and the ninth amendment which reads; ” The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people”.

  11. 13

    lostinaseaofblue spews:

    Re 9

    For calling me a racist I have only one response. Try learning to read. You selectively read anything with something bad to say about this country or the people who live here or the businesses which make it work. Try actually reading something for the content, not the bits with which you agree.

    Had you done so you would have noted that I don’t care if MJ is legal or not. I just don’t think it all that important one way or the other. Those who do are likely addicted, the sole reason why it would become a crusade.

    For those people in prison or who lost there jobs for drugs, there is a simple solution. Don’t use drugs. Really easy. Don’t like that ‘brown’ people are locked up for using drugs? If folks don’t break the law, the law can’t punish them, whatever their ethnicity.

  12. 15

    worf spews:

    @ 8 – Addiction has nothing to do with it. First of all, MJ is non-addictive. I know, there are some folks who insist they are addicted to MJ. But, like addictions to gambling, it is a mental problem, not a physical one. During the dark days of alcohol prohibition, average people went to speakeasys and lied about it – not because they were alcoholics, as your logic would dictate, but simply because they wanted a cocktail in a social setting. And in reference to #9’s point, I know you are fully aware that drug laws are disproportionately applied to people of color, while we white folk are generally left unmolested by the penal system. So your insistence that:

    “I just don’t think it all that important one way or the other.”

    is inherently racist, even if unintentionally so.

  13. 17

    Doc Daneeka spews:

    People like Rick Steves smoke pot.
    And in my experience, his averageness typifies what anyone can expect from a pot smoker.

    Yet John McKay would describe Steves as an “idiot”. And some commenting here would insist upon portraying Steves as a cringing addict hiding in a dirty stairwell. It’s silly and childish.

  14. 19

    Deathfrogg spews:

    @ 13

    If folks don’t break the law, the law can’t punish them, whatever their ethnicity.

    Without the prohibition laws as an excuse for law enforcement to go hog wild, these people would still be alive.

    Where drug prohibition is concerned, we are in a Police State no different from what everyone in the U.S. was told the Soviet Union was all throughout the Cold War. It is exactly the same, when masked, heavily armed soldiers can force entry on your house and shoot you, your family members or your housepets dead on pure reactionary impulse, and be praised, promoted and rewarded for those actions.

    Where you have politicians who make huge amounts of money for themselves and their corporate sponsors through an ever increasing level of forcefulness in that prohibition, you have fascism, and corruption.

    You say you don’t care one way or the other? That just makes you a nihilist, and a coward. That means you agree with the basic premise, and the methods, and the rationale for the laws that enable government officials to summarily execute civilians and confiscate their property without trial, or even prosecution in court. That means you agree with the outright falsification of evidence, the perjurious actions on the part of law enforcement when requesting permission to search a residence.

    The only thing that permits those actions, is the prohibition laws. Take those laws off the books, and the psychopaths in law enforcement have no reason to commit violent action under pretext of enforcing the law.

    You thuglicans claim to be for having a “smaller” government? How small is it, when soldiers armed with machine guns can invade your house and kill you for possession of plant matter, even on a pretext?

  15. 20

    lostinaseaofblue spews:

    Re 15

    Sorry, but risking my job, my property and possible jail time to obtain a high is a pretty good working definition of addiction. This is true whether I’m a police officer scouring the market for a means to hide my use of MJ or the desperate stairwell addict you mention.

    Nor is there any real corallary to alchohol or prohibition. Prohibition attempted to change widespread existing social practices. Interdiction attempts to control small scale use by a distinct minority never a part of mainline society.

    And I’m an unintential racist. How does that work exactly?

    RE 19

    Amazing. Because I think legislatures have things to do in times of enormous economic stress than ease the lives of a few potheads I’m-

    A racist who supports the inequities in our judicial system (though I never once mentioned them.)

    A fascist supporting the privatization of penal systems (again, though I never mentioned this.)

    A supporter of police brutality, perjury and general misbehavior (againe a new argument just raised by Deathwish.)

    A nihilist and a coward. I like this one, shades of Turgenev here.

    Good God man, are you sane? The inequities in the penal system will continue regardless of whether you can escape into a pharmaceutical haze to dull your self created paranoic fear of everyone and everything around you. Want to address that? Fine, do so, but don’t pretend legalizing your addiction will accomplish it.

    Police misbehavior isn’t taken seriously enough, I’ll grant you. But it isn’t particularly common, and it is a defense at trial for the accused. The kind of full scale perjury to murder behavior you mention is the product of your fevered paranoi, not the real world. My cousin is a sherriffs deputy. By your statement he is a psychopath, a murderer and a perjurer. What he really is, is a young man who cares deeply about the city he lives in and feels a responsibility to serve and protect.

    On his behalf and that of the thousands of decent men and women doing likewise, fuck you.

    Private prisons? Don’t know enough about them to comment.

    You really need help. I’m not kidding or making a political point. You need serious pschiatric help. This dark view of the world and everything in it, this sense of the government and the law being out to get you, or involved in evil conspiracies will poison your life. Again, not making a political comment, or any attempt to be insulting. Life is far too short to live it in the dark as you are choosing to do.

  16. 21

    Mr. Cynical spews:

    Lost–@13-
    The Progressive’s have worn out the race card.
    I remember posting comments alerting them to the inevitiable outcome of overuse.
    It is now viewed as simply an “I surrender” banter when they have lost arguments.

    They are desperate to retain what they believe is power. But they have been clearly used by ImamObaMao. ImamObaMao desperately wants the R’s to regain power in the House, Senate or both as it is his only hope of re-election and not being cast into the cesspool of Jimmy Carter II.

    Here is ImamObaMao’s reality today–
    Monday, September 06, 2010

    The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Monday, Labor Day, shows that 26% of the nation’s voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as president. Forty-six percent (46%) Strongly Disapprove, giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -20.

    Sixty-nine percent (69%) of voters nationwide view President Obama as politically liberal. Republicans and unaffiliated voters see him that way. Democrats are fairly evenly divided. Among those in his own political party, 47% see the president as liberal while 40% view him as a moderate.

  17. 22

    worf spews:

    @20 – No, that is not a “pretty good working definition of addiction”. It is strictly anecdotal. The American Society of Addiction Medicine has this definition for Addiction:

    Addiction is a primary, chronic disease of brain reward, motivation, memory and related circuitry. Dysfunction in these circuits leads to characteristic biological, psychological, social and spiritual manifestations. This is reflected in the individual pursuing reward and/or relief by substance use and other behaviors. Addiction is characterized by impairment in behavioral control, craving, inability to consistently abstain, and diminished recognition of significant problems with one’s behaviors and interpersonal relationships. Like other chronic diseases, addiction involves cycles of relapse and remission. Without treatment or engagement in recovery activities, addiction is progressive and can result in disability or premature death.

    Using that definition, I suppose one could make a tenuous, weak argument for the correlation you are making, but it’s not an argument I find compelling.
    I never mentioned any “desperate, stairwell addicts”, so I am unsure what that is in reference to.
    Your assertion that there is no correlation between between alcohol prohibition and marijuana prohibition is patently absurd, as is your assumption that:

    Interdiction attempts to control small scale use by a distinct minority never a part of mainline society.

    In fact, the majority of the last few generations have at least tried marijuana. They are not “a distinct minority”, they are the mainstream, and include the last three Presidents.
    Lastly, didn’t you, earlier in the thread, tell someone else to learn to read? I never called you a racist. I said

    your insistence that:

    “I just don’t think it all that important one way or the other.”

    is inherently racist, even if unintentionally so.

    Which is quite distinct from asserting that you are in fact a racist, which I suspect you are not. However,your positions have racist consequences, whether you want to admit it or not.

  18. 23

    solarp spews:

    Here is ImamObaMao’s reality today

    Ha. He doesn’t get mentioned much on these pages so much anymore, not like during the “hope and change” phase when Goldy and the HA faithful couldn’t get enough of that message, eh?

    Thank god Goldy spends so much time promoting the Seattle Times, where people can still actually discover Obama is still in office . . .

  19. 24

    Doc Daneeka spews:

    Racism isn’t a “card”.

    Try this:
    Provide an explanation in some sort of concrete terms for some particular aspect of racial disparities in our society. For example, explain why African American males are incarcerated at more than six times the rate of the whole adult population. Don’t be simplistic. Because they commit six times more crimes? Then explain that. Because of higher rates of single parent households? Then explain that. Etc. Keep following the elaborate chain of “cultural” explanations until you run out of them. Then where are you?

    You call that a card?

  20. 25

    spews:

    I was quite offended by McKay’s gratuitous insults about pot-users, who are after all a large part of our society. How would McKay like it if I wrote an editorial saying that I supported the rights of homosexuals although I find them to be idiots and disgusting people?

  21. 26

    rob spews:

    How would McKay like it if I wrote an editorial saying that I supported the rights of attorneys although I find them to be greedy and disgusting people?

    There, fixed.

  22. 27

    rob spews:

    lost @20,

    Nor is there any real corallary to alchohol or prohibition. Prohibition attempted to change widespread existing social practices. Interdiction attempts to control small scale use by a distinct minority never a part of mainline society.

    You’re completely wrong. Marajuana use is widespread and hardly “small scale” or a “distinct minority”. The fact that you don’t “know” anyone who uses it is likely because no one will tell you they use it, because they know your reaction will be judgemental.

  23. 28

    Mike Jones spews:

    Lee

    You want McKay to be like this, the fact that he is personally against pot yet sees the rules have to be changed helps the cause. It shows that not just pot lovers are for a change in the law.

  24. 29

    Sj spews:

    LSIB

    I have some, if limited, sympathy for your POV on this issue.

    While I see no rational reason NOT to legalize MJ and find Lee’s arguments unconvincing, I fail to see why this issue deserves the sort of fanatic .. perhaps addictive .. attention it gets from Lee.

    Personally, I would rank legalizing pot several points below legalizing prostitution. The same arguments pertain as Lee makes for MJ except that the prostitution laws are intrinsically sexist and deprive women (mostly anyway) of free choice in how they wish to make a living.

    I would also rank funding our schools as far higher than either of these. We now spend less than 8.000 per pupil per year in WAstate. That is insanely low and obviously inadequate. As one measure, our public schools now cost less than the heavily subsidized tuition at Schools run by the Catholic diocese. Try buying daycare for 8k/yr .. never mind that day care workers are paid minimum wage. Talk about a recipe for future disaster .. this is it!

  25. 30

    spews:

    @29
    While I see no rational reason NOT to legalize MJ and find Lee’s arguments unconvincing, I fail to see why this issue deserves the sort of fanatic .. perhaps addictive .. attention it gets from Lee.

    It has something to do with the tens of thousands of people who’ve been killed in the past few years alone in Mexico. Not to mention the billions of dollars it’s costing the American economy. And our prison overcrowding problem. And the ease with which young people can get their hands on both pot and harder drugs. And the environmental damage from illicit grows in the back woods.

    Keep trying to imply that my support for this issue is some irrational “addiction”, and you’ll continue to convince everyone here that you’re an idiot.

  26. 31

    spews:

    @27
    He’s convinced that if he keeps repeating that, it will make it true. Nearly 100 million people in the U.S. have tried it, and somewhere between 15-25 million people use it regularly. That’s not small scale use by a distinct minority. That’s a $100 billion+ per year industry.

  27. 32

    spews:

    @28
    You want McKay to be like this, the fact that he is personally against pot yet sees the rules have to be changed helps the cause. It shows that not just pot lovers are for a change in the law.

    True, and I don’t expect – or even care to have – McKay to change his opinion on this. I just point it out because it can’t be understated how much personal animosity has often played into the inability to reach the logical conclusion that marijuana use should be treated the same as alcohol use by our society. By convincing yourself that alcohol use is an acceptable and rational human choice, while marijuana use is “idiocy” is one way to make that distinction in your mind. Maybe McKay thinks that people who drink alcohol are idiots. I don’t know. But if not, he’s still establishing those barriers in his head, even if it doesn’t prevent him from coming to the correct conclusion on the overall policy.

  28. 33

    God spews:

    @30

    Keep trying to imply that my support for this issue is some irrational “addiction”, and you’ll continue to convince everyone here that you’re an idiot.

    Projection? … Or did you not take Psych 101?

    As I have said many times, I support and would vote for legalization. As to the ideas that legalizing marijuana would solve Mexico’s problems, fix the environment, and cut our prison population … not so much.

    The term “addiction” is loosely used by many … including the anti pot fanatics. On the other hand, when anyone has such an intense devotion to a hobby, political party, internet, TV, sports team or food that is commonly called an “addiction.” FWIW, I see your addiction to this issue as no worse than any of these.

    Your own “addiction” to use of foul language is another example. Some friends say I am addicted to you! Could be!

    BTW .. as a user of an e-cig, I wonder why more folks do not use these to take K2. Any ideas?

  29. 34

    spews:

    @33
    As to the ideas that legalizing marijuana would solve Mexico’s problems, fix the environment, and cut our prison population … not so much.

    I understand that, and that’s why I’m pointing out that you’re wrong. You’re wrong about all of those things, which is why you believe that my advocacy for this issue is rooted in something else. When people believe in dumb things, they tend to say dumb things. You’re a constant reminder of this fact.

    The term “addiction” is loosely used by many … including the anti pot fanatics. On the other hand, when anyone has such an intense devotion to a hobby, political party, internet, TV, sports team or food that is commonly called an “addiction.”

    No, it’s called an interest. No one is ever described as being “addicted” to skiing, or the Republican Party, or Seahawks football. That’s absurd. I have an interest in marijuana law reform because I’ve followed it for years.

    Your own “addiction” to use of foul language is another example. Some friends say I am addicted to you! Could be!

    No shit. You’ve been asked on several occasions not to comment in my threads and you still do. And I only respond when you attempt to say things about me that are ridiculous. And that’s precisely what you did here.

    BTW .. as a user of an e-cig, I wonder why more folks do not use these to take K2. Any ideas?

    I have no idea. No one I talk to knows much about – or cares much about – K2. It arguably has some similar effects to actual marijuana, but people who enjoy marijuana have no reason to switch to a synthetic version when the real thing is just fine.

  30. 35

    Sj spews:

    On “addictions” …

    common usage .. sexual addiction, gambling addiction, addiction to politics, etc etc.

    As I said, I obviously have addictions, in this sense, as well. As one benign example, I am utterly addicted to Treme and NO jazz.

    On scope of problem,

    Believe it or not I have real respect for5 you when you write factually. However, your over the top writings abut medical marijuana, false claims (see coverage at The Stranger) of police activism vs. MJ in Seattle, yada yad .. these make it hard to “listen” to you well thought out pieces,

    K2 vs MJ

    I do not see your point. K2 would seem to have huge advantages over MJ, not the least of which is that it is legal, esp at the federal level. I assume a K2 user or even a seller in Seattle would have no legal problems.

    There are a number of clinical advantages as well. K2 does not contain the tars that contaminate MJ. It should, therefore be completely safe, esp given its receptor specificity.

    Presumably. since K2 is legal and cheap to make, this would have all the effects you claim for making the MJ drug trade obsolete ,, though I doubt Mexico would be as crime free as you suggest.

    The only advantages I can see to MJ are for those with an oral fixation or a Quixotic addiction to fighting with the state.

    I suspect the real reasons the MJ community does nto move to K2 are a need for oral gratification and a counter culture obsession with defying “the man.”

  31. 36

    spews:

    @35
    Believe it or not I have real respect for5 you when you write factually.

    And the feeling is not mutual. I think you’re one of the dumbest people I’ve ever met in my life.

    However, your over the top writings abut medical marijuana, false claims (see coverage at The Stranger) of police activism vs. MJ in Seattle, yada yad .. these make it hard to “listen” to you well thought out pieces,

    And I’ve challenged you repeatedly to point to false claims, and you’re never able to. My “over the top writings” only exist in your imagination.

    I do not see your point. K2 would seem to have huge advantages over MJ, not the least of which is that it is legal, esp at the federal level. I assume a K2 user or even a seller in Seattle would have no legal problems.

    The fact that it’s legal has little effect on whether or not people want it. People will choose the better product.

    I assume a K2 user or even a seller in Seattle would have no legal problems.

    Marijuana users (and even sellers) in Seattle, have relatively few problems already. It’s in other parts of the state where people have to be more concerned.

    There are a number of clinical advantages as well. K2 does not contain the tars that contaminate MJ. It should, therefore be completely safe, esp given its receptor specificity.

    Well, I don’t think we know enough yet, but there’s some evidence that K2 is not completely safe. Not to mention that if you vaporize marijuana rather than combust the plant and smoke it, you’re not getting any of the tars into your lungs anyway.

    Presumably. since K2 is legal and cheap to make, this would have all the effects you claim for making the MJ drug trade obsolete ,, though I doubt Mexico would be as crime free as you suggest.

    As I said, very few people I talk to even know what K2 is. For whatever reason, it’s not replacing actual marijuana. Regular users either don’t think it’s as good as the real thing, don’t think it’s as safe to use, or perhaps it’s more expensive. I’m not sure at this point. It’s something I haven’t had the time to investigate, and it’s not something that anyone really talks about.

    The only advantages I can see to MJ are for those with an oral fixation or a Quixotic addiction to fighting with the state.

    That doesn’t make any sense. You can smoke K2 just as you smoke marijuana, so I don’t understand why the oral fixation aspect would be any different.

    I suspect the real reasons the MJ community does nto move to K2 are a need for oral gratification and a counter culture obsession with defying “the man.”

    And this is why I consider you one of the dumbest people I’ve met in my life. The “oral gratification” is exactly the same between K2 and actual marijuana. You put it in a bowl and smoke it, or you put it in a vaporizer and heat it up. As far as I know, K2 is ingested in the exact same way as marijuana. Why are you making a distinction here that doesn’t exist?

  32. 37

    rob spews:

    Hmm, I see that SJ has now admitted to also posting as “God”. And I’m kinda curious why sockpuppets are allowed to persist.

  33. 40

    spews:

    @39
    It’s not my blog either, it’s Goldy’s (and he has been reluctant to ban him over the sockpuppetry). When I did have my own blog, though, SJ was the only person banned in the 4 years I wrote there. I’ve already expressed to Goldy that I would like him banned, although my main concern with SJ isn’t the sockpuppetry as much as it is his attempts to slander people – by accusing them of saying things they’ve never said.

  34. 41

    rob spews:

    It’s not my blog either, it’s Goldy’s

    OK. Goldy, please for the love of $DEITY ban the fucking sockpuppetiers from your fucking blog. They add nothing of value.

  35. 43

    spews:

    @42
    It is. But it’s also a synthetic product that supposedly simulates the high you’d normally get from marijuana.

  36. 44

    lostinaseaofblue spews:

    Re 31

    I’ve repeatedly written that if pot were legal it wouldn’t bother me. Nor do I think consensual crimes generally are a legitimate matter for the criminal justice system. Resources used for interdiction and prosecution are resources better used elsewhere or cut from the budget.

    It is my ancecdotal experience that very few of the folks I know use it. I don’t’ claim this to be scientific. If you have legitimate numbers that 12-15 million regular users, I’m okay with that also.

    But I stand by the comments. The kind of energy and trouble described to hide use of this substance indicates a destructive habit, if not addiction. Putting ones’ job, property and possibly liberty at risk to get high seems pretty indicative of addiction as well. Out of curiousity, does your initiative do anything about job based drug testing? If not, I can’t say I see the point. Personally, I’d be much more concerned about my job than a bored policeman who doesn’t care if I’m a pothead or not and won’t waste his time charging me with possession.

    And I stand by the comment that our legislature has bigger fish to fry just now than keeping a lot of addicts happy.

  37. 45

    rob spews:

    lost,

    people hide it because it’s illegal. If it weren’t illegal they wouldn’t have to hide it, any more than drinkers or tobacco smokers. It’s no more destructive than either of those, arguably less so. Why is this so hard for you to understand?

  38. 46

    lostinaseaofblue spews:

    RE 45
    “people hide it because it’s illegal”

    Exactly. Yet, despite the possible repercussions of smoking it, they still do. Despite possibly going to jail they still smoke the stuff. Were we discussing anything else we’d describe this kind of behavior as that of an addict, where much is risked for comparitively little gain.

    Why is smoking it so important to those who do that they would take these risks?

  39. 47

    rob spews:

    If it weren’t illegal they wouldn’t have to hide it

    I notice you fail to address this point. You’re either really clueless or deliberately dense, I can’t tell.

  40. 48

    lostinaseaofblue spews:

    Look, we basically agree as to whether MJ should be legal or not. If someone has the kind of life from which they need pharmaceutical escape it doesn’t matter to me if they do so. It simply isn’t my business.

    But to mask attempts to legalize it as ‘everyone does it’ or ‘it’s basically harmless’ really does miss the point. Just say ‘my life sucks and I need to get high to forget that fact for a while. And this is none of your business.’ Fine. It isn’t my business. But don’t pretend that those trying to legalize it aren’t mostly habitual users trying to normalize their habit. And don’t try to hide from yourselves that an activity undertaken with risks like illegal drug use is recreational. There are plenty of legal ways to accomplish the same thing. Those currently habitually using MJ are no more or less than addicts.

  41. 49

    spews:

    @47
    I’m voting for clueless.

    LIASOB,
    People use marijuana because it’s an enjoyable drug, not because they have an addiction that they can’t control.

    If they returned to alcohol prohibition tomorrow, people who aren’t alcoholics would still drink alcohol. In fact, that’s exactly what happened during the initial prohibition. Moderate drinkers sought out speakeasies and even more enjoyed some illicit scotch and bourbon in the privacy of their own home.

    Marijuana has one of the lowest percentages of user-to-addict ratios of any drug.

    It is my ancecdotal experience that very few of the folks I know use it. I don’t’ claim this to be scientific. If you have legitimate numbers that 12-15 million regular users, I’m okay with that also.

    Here’s the NIDA survey, which puts the number at 14.4 million

    http://drugabuse.gov/infofacts/marijuana.html

    It’s also very possible that the number is higher. A lot of people aren’t truthful in those surveys. Other surveys I’ve seen have put the number closer to 25-30 million.

  42. 50

    spews:

    @48
    And don’t try to hide from yourselves that an activity undertaken with risks like illegal drug use is recreational. There are plenty of legal ways to accomplish the same thing. Those currently habitually using MJ are no more or less than addicts.

    Again, that’s absurd. You appear to have the same definition of “addict” as SJ. Addiction is a very well-defined thing, and it’s not “a willingness to do something even though it’s illegal”. If the government made non-marital sex illegal tomorrow, that would not make everyone who had non-marital sex a “sex addict”. You can disagree with the government attempting to regulate your morality without it being impulsive behavior that you have no control over. That’s silly.

  43. 51

    Steve spews:

    “If someone has the kind of life from which they need pharmaceutical escape it doesn’t matter to me if they do so.”

    “Just say ‘my life sucks and I need to get high to forget that fact for a while. And this is none of your business.’”

    The problem here, Lost, is that it’s like you’ve gotten your impressions of a marijuana high from watching films such as Fast Times at Ridgemont High and Cheech and Chong. On one hand it’s kind of funny, but on the other you deserve a slap because you’re acting so damned condescending and judgemental while being entirely wrong and eager to stereotype. And if you’re sipping on some fine wine or cognac while you do this, then you’ve really got your head up your ass. What you do is as intelligent and thoughtful as equating someone who drinks an evening cocktail with the town drunk who is passed out in the park.

  44. 53

    worf spews:

    Lost is a perfectly typical conservative. He can’t handle facts. Despite repeatedly being shown in this thread that his alleged “definition” of addiction is nothing but his own judgemntal, anacdotal definition with no basis in scientific fact, he keeps repeating it. Maybe Conservatism is a type of autism. I’ll just keep repeating that until I’m blue in the face. The more blue my face, the more true the statement will be. Fucking scientists – who needs ‘em?

  45. 54

    Steve spews:

    “Those currently habitually using MJ are no more or less than addicts.”

    From habit to addict in less than a dozen words.

  46. 55

    lostinaseaofblue spews:

    RE 51

    “What you do is as intelligent and thoughtful as equating someone who drinks an evening cocktail with the town drunk who is passed out in the park.”

    It would be exactly that, had alchohol been illegal.

    How many times do I have to write it? If someone wants to fry their lungs with tobacco, or destroy their liver with alchohol or fry their brain with MJ, it’s neither my business nor my problem. That is, if they aren’t driving, taking care of kids, on the job or otherwise endangering others. And if they aren’t asking for state support once the effects of their drug of choice are felt.

    As for habit or addiction, everything I read says MJ is probably not chemically addictive. All the behavior of those who habitually use it suggests that it’s at least strongly habit forming. Sufficiently to make a person risk job, home or car and possible imprisonment for their high, at any rate.

    I can’t help but wonder what makes Lee and the rest so defensive about this. I mean, I agree that pot is probably less harmful than alchohol or tobacco to the user. I agree that if someone needs a high that badly and isn’t endangering others with his or choice the law has no business there.

    So is it only the notion that if you currently use pot you do so at least partially irrationally, given the potential consequences? Fine then. It’s entirely rational and not at all indicative of a drug problem to risk nearly everything of importance for a quick high. Better?

  47. 56

    Steve spews:

    “destroy their liver with alchohol or fry their brain”

    “It’s entirely rational and not at all indicative of a drug problem to risk nearly everything of importance for a quick high. Better?”

    Enough with the hype already. A sip of wine does not destroy your liver. A puff of Indica will not fry your brain. In other words, a toke does not a Spicolli make.

    Does our faux-libertarian ever think in terms of freedom? How much should one risk to be free? Are you one to readily give up this little freedom or that because they’re just not worth taking a big risk? You turn up your nose, make snide remarks, and then look the other way as others are denied freedom. Pray that you don’t get the same treatment when it’s a freedom you cherish that’s on the block.

  48. 57

    Steve spews:

    “Expressing disdain for those you feel are inferior”

    Number nine on the list of NPD symptoms.

  49. 58

    worf spews:

    Christ on a fucking crutch. Did anyone else notice that the great libertarian @ 55 stated that all laws are just by reason of having been passed, and that all defiance of law is cause for damnation and ridicule?

    55. lostinaseaofblue spews:

    RE 51

    “What you do is as intelligent and thoughtful as equating someone who drinks an evening cocktail with the town drunk who is passed out in the park.”

    It would be exactly that, had alchohol been illegal.

    Must be the autism.

  50. 59

    lostinaseaofblue spews:

    Worf,

    Ah well, autism is better than your form of Tourettes Syndrome.

    How hard is this? How easy do I have to make it for you to get it?

    There are all sorts of laws I don’t agree with, but obey anyway. I think seatbelts and the new cell phone laws are not the business of Washington State, for instance. But I obey them anyway. This is because what I gain from breaking the law doesn’t overwhelm what I lose from the penalties lawbreaking incurs. Additionally, the issue simply doesn’t rise to a breach of my basic liberties. It’s called rational decision making, weighing the benefits against the costs.

    Of course, if one is in the throes of an addiction or habitual drug use this kind of decision making isn’t possible. The drug is more important than any consequence that might occur. Oh yeah, that was my point.

  51. 60

    worf spews:

    Your point is null because you have absolutely no idea what addiction is. You keep stating over and over again that consumption of alcohol during prohibition meant one was an alcoholic, and that consumption of marijuana now means one is “addicted” to marijuana. Like most conservatives, you seem to feel that repeating something ad nauseum makes it true. That is because conservatism is a form of autism.
    If I say it often enough, it will become truth.

  52. 61

    SJ spews:

    36. Lee spews:

    ” I think you’re one of the dumbest people I’ve ever met in my life.”

    sighhh!!!!!!

    And I’ve challenged you repeatedly to point to false claims, and you’re never able to. My “over the top writings” only exist in your imagination.

    OK. Marijuana does not cause cancer, it is a major analgesic, the Seattle cops have been running a get the potheads campaign, allowing kids to inhale MJ at Hempfest is perfectly reasonable, Marijuana can cure cancer ………………………………………………………………………………….

    The fact that it’s legal has little effect on whether or not people want it. People will choose the better product.

    So tell me bubbelah, why would an impure, uncontrolled, plant substance be “better” than a pure molecule that binds and activates the same receptor. Generations of pharmaceutical scientists are waiting to hear.

    Do you REALLY believe MJ users would keep on risking arrest if they could buy K2 cigs legally?

    Well, I don’t think we know enough yet, but there’s some evidence that K2 is not completely safe.

    True, buit there is a LOT more evidence that K2 is safe (since we know what it is) the whatever you happen to inhale when you burn or even steam MJ.

    Not to mention that if you vaporize marijuana rather than combust the plant and smoke it, you’re not getting any of the tars into your lungs anyway.

    Sorry bubbelah, but that is less than fully clear. Try chewing tobacco and see if you get oral or laryngeal cancer. Yeh, vapor is better but it pretty hard to claim than any uncharacterized, unanalyzed plant material is safe.

    Here’s a hint .. don’t eat the grass near the dog walk.

    As I said, very few people I talk to even know what K2 is. For whatever reason, it’s not replacing actual marijuana. Regular users either don’t think it’s as good as the real thing, don’t think it’s as safe to use, or perhaps it’s more expensive. I’m not sure at this point. It’s something I haven’t had the time to investigate, and it’s not something that anyone really talks about.

    So??? Wasn’t that the point of my post? Why would it be a bad thing if K2 did solve the problem?

    You can smoke K2 just as you smoke marijuana, so I don’t understand why the oral fixation aspect would be any different.

    Not really, it makes no sens to burn a cannabinoid. As for some other means of getting it by inhalation, if you want the pharmaceutical effect there are many ways to take K2 that do not require inhalation.

    And this is why I consider you one of the dumbest people I’ve met in my life. The “oral gratification” is exactly the same between K2 and actual marijuana. You put it in a bowl and smoke it, or you put it in a vaporizer and heat it up. As far as I know, K2 is ingested in the exact same way as marijuana. Why are you making a distinction here that doesn’t exist?

    Gosh you are so damned smart. Should I have used shorter sentences? K2 is a chemical, a m-o-l-e-c-l-e. If you burned it, you would get CO2, not a high. Taking it is likely to be up to you .. snort em if you got em, eat em if that is your fave, .. hell stick a K2 suppository up your ass or yes, inhale it as a vapor.

    Could you use it to assuage your need to suck? Sure. You could also buy a pacifier at the baby store or buy an e-bong from China.

    Oh well.

  53. 62

    SJ spews:

    @37 ..

    I am not aware that I have claimed to be God.

    It does sound like a good idea if God gets a pension plan.

    As for sockpuppets, Lee (or someone who dletes and replaces my posts) does sometime post as me so maybe that was Thehim passing as Theone?

  54. 63

    SJ spews:

    @59 LSIB

    Worf and Lee make quite a pair!

    Their use of language is very, very much like conservative newspeak. Freedom means worshiping God, the US is evolving into the USSR, there can not be global warming because that would not be scientific …..

    Anyway, I am with you on all this ..at least pretty much. I think the MJ ban is nuts, nuttier than even Lee and Worf’s evangelical Potism. Otoh, if MJ is addictive, my guess is that the effect is no worse than the common addictions to coffee, chocolate, or YouTube porn.

    For that natter, don’t you think the bible is addictive? I suspect more people turn to their KJ than to MJ when they are overwhelmed. I have no idea which addiction does more harm, do you?

  55. 65

    spews:

    @61
    OK. Marijuana does not cause cancer, it is a major analgesic, the Seattle cops have been running a get the potheads campaign, allowing kids to inhale MJ at Hempfest is perfectly reasonable, Marijuana can cure cancer ………………………………………………………………………………….

    Provide links to my actual quotes, asshole. All of those things are major distortions of what I’ve actually said. You want to prove I’ve said something inaccurate, provide a link to something I’ve actually said.

    So tell me bubbelah, why would an impure, uncontrolled, plant substance be “better” than a pure molecule that binds and activates the same receptor. Generations of pharmaceutical scientists are waiting to hear.

    Much of the marijuana sold today is not “uncontrolled”. Plants are often grown in very controlled environments and the chemical content of the plants is well-known. Medical marijuana dispensaries often use microscopes and other devices to inspect the plants for impurities or molds before providing them for customers. Not to mention that there are various defined strains where an individual knows the specific chemical make-up of the plant.

    Second, and this is the more obvious point, people choose the superior product. If marijuana weren’t the superior product, people would choose something else. As soon as the pharmaceutical industry produces something that’s superior to the plant itself, people will use it. Until then, they won’t. Up until now, no one has been able to create a synthetic substance that fully replaces the demand for the plant itself. That’s just an obvious point.

    Do you REALLY believe MJ users would keep on risking arrest if they could buy K2 cigs legally?

    Yes, they already do! There have been news articles about K2 – and about how it’s legal – yet the demand is not shifting. People still prefer the plant itself. You may think it’s irrational (and frankly, no one should care what you think), but people see the plant as being far safer than something synthetic. In fact, most people tend to believe that natural products are safer for us than synthetic ones. That’s not surprising, unusual, or even illogical.

    True, buit there is a LOT more evidence that K2 is safe (since we know what it is) the whatever you happen to inhale when you burn or even steam MJ.

    Absolutely not. The chemical make-up of the marijuana plant is well-established enough that we know what people are inhaling when they vaporize it. The idea that we don’t know what marijuana contains is laughable. We know a lot about the chemical make-up of the plant and we know a lot about its effects on our body.

    Sorry bubbelah, but that is less than fully clear. Try chewing tobacco and see if you get oral or laryngeal cancer. Yeh, vapor is better but it pretty hard to claim than any uncharacterized, unanalyzed plant material is safe.

    Who’s talking about uncharacterized or unanalyzed plant material? As I said, a lot of marijuana today is grown under controlled conditions (and true, a lot of it isn’t). The question for you is, if there’s such a huge problem with marijuana and its impurities, how are those dangers manifesting themselves? Where’s the damage? Where are the studies showing that the people smoking this dangerous impure plant are encountering all of these dangerous problems? If marijuana users were constantly running into problems due to the impurities of the plant, it would make sense for them to seek alternatives. But that never happens. In all my years, I’ve never once encountered anyone who’s had a problem with “impure pot”. Even back in college when the pot we had was cheap and had no idea where it was coming from. Why is that?

    So??? Wasn’t that the point of my post? Why would it be a bad thing if K2 did solve the problem?

    It wouldn’t be a bad thing. But K2 isn’t going to solve the problem. For whatever reason, people don’t want K2 instead of marijuana. I don’t know enough to say authoritatively why, but I have several hunches and I’ve explained them here.

    Not really, it makes no sens to burn a cannabinoid. As for some other means of getting it by inhalation, if you want the pharmaceutical effect there are many ways to take K2 that do not require inhalation.

    And there are many ways to consume marijuana that don’t require inhalation. You’re still not making a point here. You’re saying that people are reluctant to switch to K2 because of an oral fixation, but that’s simply not true. And second, people smoke marijuana to get the cannabinoids, even if it makes more sense to use a vaporizer. There’s no difference between how people would choose to consume either marijuana or K2. People who normally smoke marijuana would smoke K2. People who normally vaporize marijuana would vaporize K2, and so on and so forth. The point you tried to make here was silly.

    Gosh you are so damned smart. Should I have used shorter sentences? K2 is a chemical, a m-o-l-e-c-l-e.

    Hahaha. You can’t even fucking spell the word? It’s m-o-l-e-c-u-l-e, and by the way, marijuana plants have molecules too. Jesus, do you actually believe that molecules don’t exist in nature, they can only be manufactured by a pharmaceutical company? Are you really that dumb?

    If you burned it, you would get CO2, not a high.

    Excuse me?

    The combination looks like crushed potpourri. Blends are traditionally burned in incense pots; however, teens roll the K2 incense in wrappers to make joints, or they smoke it in pipes. When smoked, K2 delivers a high similar to that of marijuana. Users claim it’s almost impossible to tell the difference between the two.

    Do you think this article is wrong? If so, explain why.

    Taking it is likely to be up to you .. snort em if you got em, eat em if that is your fave, .. hell stick a K2 suppository up your ass or yes, inhale it as a vapor.

    People are going to consume it in a way that produces the desirable high. That’s true for either marijuana or K2. If K2 worked by shoving it up your own ass, people would consume it that way. Same for marijuana. People do consume marijuana in various ways because different types of consumption methods have their pros and cons. Many people bake it into foods because they don’t like to smoke it. Many people smoke it because they like the act of smoking (the oral fixation) and the effects are immediate. Many people vaporize because they want it to act quickly but worry about the health drawbacks from smoking it. And I’d imagine that anyone trying out K2 would consume it the same way they’d normally consume marijuana.

    Could you use it to assuage your need to suck? Sure. You could also buy a pacifier at the baby store or buy an e-bong from China.

    Bravo! This was an epic journey of stupid for you. Are you done embarrassing yourself yet? Do you have any more ways to demonstrate how little you understand this topic?

  56. 66

    spews:

    @64
    Yes, he actually thinks that we can’t tell when he sock-puppets. He’s like a little kid who puts his hands over his eyes and thinks he’s invisible (see my comment at #38).

  57. 67

    spews:

    @59
    There are all sorts of laws I don’t agree with, but obey anyway. I think seatbelts and the new cell phone laws are not the business of Washington State, for instance. But I obey them anyway. This is because what I gain from breaking the law doesn’t overwhelm what I lose from the penalties lawbreaking incurs. Additionally, the issue simply doesn’t rise to a breach of my basic liberties. It’s called rational decision making, weighing the benefits against the costs.

    Of course, if one is in the throes of an addiction or habitual drug use this kind of decision making isn’t possible. The drug is more important than any consequence that might occur. Oh yeah, that was my point.

    And the point we’re making is that not everyone thinks like you do. In fact, I’d say you’re in the minority on the cell phone laws. Most people ignore them and still use their cell phones whenever they need to. And many, if not most, people will drive above the speed limit at times. That doesn’t make them “speed addicts”.

    And what about gun ownership? If they made it illegal to own a gun tomorrow, would you destroy any guns you owned? If not, would that be a sign of having an addiction to guns that resulted from an inability to make rational decisions?

    The real point here is that people refuse to follow laws that they find unjust. You can insist that you’re an exception to that rule, and maybe you are (I have no way of knowing), but you’re in the minority on that. The vast majority of people in this world generally believe that government takes a back seat to their own moral compass. In authoritarian societies, sometimes people can be beaten down enough so that everyone acts like you, but that’s a world that practically no one wants to live in (see: North Korea).

  58. 68

    worf spews:

    It’s hard to imagine a bigger pile of stupid than SJ. Here’s a thought – maybe people choose pot over K2 for the same reason they choose wine over Everclear – it tastes better, it’s more enjoyable, there are different varieties with different flavor profiles and effects… or for the same reason they prefer a Cuban Cohiba over a 7-11 Swisher Sweet.
    By the way, Lee, when is the next Deacon’s meeting at the Evangelical Church of Potism? I lost my appointment book. I have some important agenda items and don’t want to be late!!

  59. 69

    what rock did you live under? spews:

    cocaine brings in far more money to the mexican gangs than weed does.

    people who say that legalizing weed will stop the violence in mexico are either fibbing or stoned.

    Weed doesnt mean shit to the mexican gangs.

  60. 70

    spews:

    @69
    cocaine brings in far more money to the mexican gangs than weed does.

    That’s not correct. The ONDCP estimates that they make about 60% of the profits from marijuana.

    people who say that legalizing weed will stop the violence in mexico are either fibbing or stoned.

    It will reduce the violence – significantly – but will not stop it. It will take a while to fix what we’ve broken in Mexico.

    Weed doesnt mean shit to the mexican gangs.

    That’s absolute bull. The Mexican gangs spend a significant amount of effort sending people into the United States to set up illegal grows. And the profits all flow back across the border.

  61. 71

    spews:

    @68
    It’s hard to imagine a bigger pile of stupid than SJ.

    It really is. It’s a good lesson in how even people with scientific backgrounds can end up buying into pseudoscience.

  62. 72

    SJ spews:

    Gosh all this attention. AND Le can’s spell I-R-O-N-Y.

    Just two points for Lee and his apostle Worf.

    1. If Goldy wants to enforce the rules, I would welcome that. Starting with Lee’s sticking to facts, not censoring messages that disagree with him, and not writing under other’s names (see next message).

    2. OK, then perhaps lee might learn to argue by some means that might include actually answering questions. I never asked (nor would I) whether MJ users would switch because K2 is legal, all I asked was why not make this legal cannabinoid generally availble so Lee’s MJ victims and victims of mad dog MJ police can get their highs legally.

    3. Lee’s other problem is a medical syndrome called the Oxford Syndrome. People with the OS think they are the keepers of the dictionary and then feel free to define words as they want. OS is related to Orwellian Newspeech. Examples include ..

    addiction to MJ is NOT addiction but addiction to gambling, chocolate, TV, sex, gambling and HA are addictions.

    EVERYTHING is a molecule .. plants after all are made of molecules and these are “natural.” So MJ is safer and more “pure” then K2.

    “control” does not mean what it means in science and medicine. MJ is controlled because its saintly vendors work hard to assure that the green vegetable matter is grown under controlled conditions. Like Tobacco.

    What is esp weird is that Lee, if he gained a few lbs, shaved his van dyke, and lost some of his manly head of hair could pass for O’Reilly … same tactics, same bluster… hmmmm?

  63. 74

    Steve spews:

    @67 Redefining “addiction” is little different than what you saw previously with Lost’s use of “imaginary data”. What’s interesting is how he clings to this shit and won’t let go.

  64. 75

    spews:

    @72
    Gosh all this attention. AND Le can’s spell I-R-O-N-Y.

    Nice grammar there, chief.

    Just two points for Lee and his apostle Worf.

    My apostle? We’re just two guys laughing at how dumb you are.

    1. If Goldy wants to enforce the rules, I would welcome that. Starting with Lee’s sticking to facts, not censoring messages that disagree with him, and not writing under other’s names (see next message).

    I’ve never once censored a message that disagreed with mine. I have, however, deleted comments that were off-topic, sock-puppetry, or slanderous (all things that Goldy has said I could do). And again, I’ve challenged you to point out where I haven’t stuck to facts, and you’ve once again failed to do so.

    2. OK, then perhaps lee might learn to argue by some means that might include actually answering questions. I never asked (nor would I) whether MJ users would switch because K2 is legal, all I asked was why not make this legal cannabinoid generally availble so Lee’s MJ victims and victims of mad dog MJ police can get their highs legally.

    It already is legally available. I believe that K2 should be legal for adults and I’ve never said otherwise.

    3. Lee’s other problem is a medical syndrome called the Oxford Syndrome. People with the OS think they are the keepers of the dictionary and then feel free to define words as they want. OS is related to Orwellian Newspeech. Examples include ..

    Ok.

    addiction to MJ is NOT addiction but addiction to gambling, chocolate, TV, sex, gambling and HA are addictions.

    Bullshit. I’ve never said such a thing.

    EVERYTHING is a molecule .. plants after all are made of molecules and these are “natural.” So MJ is safer and more “pure” then K2.

    Yes. Plants are made of molecules and the marijuana plant is natural. Whether or not K2 is safer than marijuana is not fully known yet. I don’t think any studies have been done on K2, but there have been anecdotal reports of overdoses from K2. If that’s true, than K2 is clearly less safe than marijuana.

    “control” does not mean what it means in science and medicine. MJ is controlled because its saintly vendors work hard to assure that the green vegetable matter is grown under controlled conditions. Like Tobacco.

    True, and there are a number of devices available to measure the chemical makeup of a particular plant. Many food products are grown in controlled environments, and because of that, we know we’re getting a safe product. Marijuana isn’t – and shouldn’t be – any different.

    What is esp weird is that Lee, if he gained a few lbs, shaved his van dyke, and lost some of his manly head of hair could pass for O’Reilly … same tactics, same bluster… hmmmm?

    What in god’s name are you talking about? Do you not realize how thoroughly you’re embarrassing yourself here? Are you not aware that anyone who can read this back and forth we’re having can easily appreciate how big of a moron you are? Every time we do this, I end up challenging you to find someone, anyone, who thinks that you’re making sense. And you’re never able to. Why is that?

    If you really think that you’re the one making sense here, and that I’m the one living in some la-la-land, prove it. Have one of your colleagues at UW review this conversation and explain to me how I’m wrong. Otherwise, you have no leg to stand on. I know you’re an idiot. Everyone else in this comment thread knows you’re an idiot. The regulars at DL all know you’re an idiot. If you really think you’re not an idiot, prove it.

  65. 77

    What rock did you live under? spews:

    @70

    you go on ahead and keep believing that Lee.

    and there will be raindrops of skittles in Mexico City too….