Slashdot Mirror

Which is why most chronic marijuana users don't continually smoke joints. Have you seen some of the gadgets that are produced to ease the inhalation of marijuana? I think you'd be hard pressed to find a chronic user that only, or even mostly, smoked joints.

On a less glib note, the amount of studies that show the complete opposite to be true are far more prevalent.While I'm hesitant to link a forum post I found through a Google search, this is extremely well sourced and articulated. http://www.marijuana.com/medicinal-marijuana/11006-marijuana-vs-tobacco-tars-not-so-bad.html

try here for more delicious ideas

The movie itself would be displayed encrypted, and only viewable by someone trained to decrypt it -- which ability they would naturally lose as the effects of the drug wore off. For future watchings, or party viewings, more pills would be required. (This would suit the studios, as every instance of viewing must be paid for -- someone who watches a movie at a friend's house represents a lost opportunity to sell a movie. This creates a new business model: give away "unwatchable" movies for free and charge for the pills that make them watchable.) If you combined the psychotropic with another substance which reacts with growth hormone to produce nausea or other undesirable effects, you might be able to get enforced age-restriction into the bargain.

There's already a drug that allows you to watch unwatchable movies, and for that matter cable fishing shows. It doesn't render Fox News any more watchable though.

funny, I heard it was "Big Cotton"

It's a consensus that no brain cells are killed from the ingestion of marijuana, it will impare learning, but what do you expect when you're stoned? After a period of time of not using it, IQ levels and intelligence goes right back to normal levels. The only emperical evidence of brain damage comes from an experiment with monkeys where they were administered with 200x the normal amount. Check this out: http://www.marijuana.com/Exposing_08_1095.html it has sources

FCC RF safety FAQ

IMO, one should be more concerned with mosquito bites, chemical mutagens, and if contemplating offspring, teratogens.

Grow GIANT tomatoes! OR Reefer!

May be he was checking something like this and just got carried away. Or didn't check the facts and relied on his memory. Anyway, I don't care. Europe rulez. Even Russia today is more free than the US. Expect the revolution soon. :)

Is it just me, or do an awful lot of the hardcore war on drug politicians have an awful lot of drugs up nose in their past?

It actually would be quite useful in a number of situations.

For paper let's consider the fact that not all paper is of the same grade. There is packaging paper products, crappy paper drink containers at movie places, writing paper, and toilet paper. I personally wouldn't want to be wiping with hemp paper as it's a bit rough, but for packaging paper and shaped paper drink holders it'd work great.

Some of the really great things about hemp is it doesn't leach minerals out of the ground at anywhere near the same rate cotton does, nor does it take anywhere near as long to grow as a tree. In fact, I may have heard it is the single fastest growing biomass plant in the world, though you may want to check me on that.

The thing about it's biomass is that it can be turned into biofuel. Not totally sure how, but I know the idea behind it is sound.

It's interesting to take a look at the prohibiton of hemp, which occured simultaneously with the prohibition on cannabis, and look at some of the people who contributed to it being made illegal. I don't recall all but I know Dow, some national wood producer, and some oil companies were involved. I think it's all detailed in the book "The Emperor Wears no Clothes" by Jack Hanna or something like that.

My favorite website for news on prohibition, general civil liberties abuse, and marijuana is www.marijuana.com

He didn't give an accurate quote. You see, they don't consider alcohol a drug, so when they say "In a roadside study, one in three reckless drivers who were tested for drugs, tested positive for marijuana," they really mean "of the reckless drivers who were caught, 33% of those not drunk were stoned," which I figure works out to about 5% of the reckless drivers who were caught. I see lots of reckless drivers, and I never see any of them pulled over. Most of them are reckless because they're damn fools in a hurry, not because they're drunk or stoned.

So, apparantly a larger percentage of the population uses marijuana than is impared by marijuana while driving, which makes sense, because most of the smokers I know don't drive stoned. Unlike the drunks, they're smarter than that.

Actually pot is not a barbiturate. It is only classified with barbiturates to impose stiffer penalties on those who break the law by using or selling.

Read this

On a side note, any coffee shop that wants to kick Starbuck's ass ought to buy a cheap DSL line/Cable modem and hang a 802.11b base station and give away free bandwidth for the cost of a $4.95 mocha carmel frappa latte skim half-caf double-decaf cappachino.

golly

> Or, just as everything else from speeding to marijuana, will we simply keep breaking the rules rather than reforming them?

Key difference: In their minds, copying music means less money, (that has proved otherwise as napster's growth has meant an increase in CD sales) whereas smoking marijuana is a personal freedom, which, if decriminalized, would give profits to no major corporations until it was socially accepted.

Story posted to Marijuana.Com, that will get their attention.

And justice for all?

Happy 4/20, everyone!