From: t...@y.jdyson.com (John S. Dyson)
Subject: Re: Switzerland and the GPL...
Date: 1999/06/24
Message-ID: <7ktthu$sqc@enews3.newsguy.com>
X-Deja-AN: 493478868
References: <slrn7iib04.gkk.cbbrowne@godel.brownes.org> <jjca3.1787$kS.257527@ptah.visi.com> <7kbjqg$ddv$1@bertrand.ccs.carleton.ca> <slrn7mj6h1.7o8.earlj@earlj.nesusa.com> <7kdfhu$4lb$1@bertrand.ccs.carleton.ca> <7kdmag$12or@enews5.newsguy.com> <m3so7i5mgo.fsf@209-122-232-183.s437.tnt4.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: http://extra.newsguy.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss

In article <m3so7i5mgo....@209-122-232-183.s437.tnt4.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>,
	Maciej Stachowiak <mstac...@alum.mit.edu> writes:
> t...@y.jdyson.com (John S. Dyson) writes:
> 
>> >
>> I have seen too many people with the long term, destructive effects
>> of pot also.  It is not going to be effective to ban something that
>> has been in widespread use and legal.  For our society, alcohol became
>> predominant first, and out of the luck of the draw, has won.  Since
>> pot is much worse for the body (in ways other than subjective
>> intoxication) than cigarettes, and those are being demonized, I suspect
>> that pot doesn't have a chance.
> 
> There's not one documented case of a person dying from the effects of
> soking pot.
>
Soking pot???  :-).  I never implied anything about dying, I am
speaking of damaging effects.

> 
> Look up the numbers. There are literally zero deaths directly
> attributable to pot each year. Whereas the numbers for alcohol (and
> this isn't even counting indirrect deaths as from drunk driving) are
> many orders of magnitude higher than the number of deaths caused by
> all illegal drugs combined.
>
The number of alcohol abusers is larger, it is more institutionalized,
and I am not an apologist for alcohol.  Just because pot often
qualitatively intoxicates less, you cannot justify it by condemning
alcohol.  Perhaps one can consider cigarettes to also be damaging,
yet it has only very subtile intoxicating effects (better described
as mood improving or altering.)

> 
> It sounds like your argument against the legality pot baasically boils
> down to the fact that you, personally, do not enjoy the effects. Well
> I, personally, have a severe aversion to parsley and am brought to
> nausea approaching vomiting at merely the smell of freshly cut parsly
> in the room. But I've never thought that was a good reason to advocate
> outlawing it.
> 
Pot in my face is *more* disgusting and irritating than cigarettes.
Those that I have evangelized away from pot have also noted
that their mood and anxiety problems also diminish (after mild
withdrawal.)  The sad thing about pot, is that sometimes (often
enough) causes addictive use (self medication so that the negative
withdrawal effects don't start.)  Also, the use of benzo's appears
to counter the anxiety effects of pot, and one individual who I
know doesn't have to get Xanax from her Dr. for panic attacks any
more.  This is very, very common, and certainly overlooked by
pot abusers that I know, of course, because they are addicted.

>
> Note also that although alcohol consumption by others near you may not
> directly harm or affect you, it may have quite a bit of indirect
> effect if they become angry and violent, or operate a motor vehicle or
> heavy equipment in your vicinity.
>
I am NOT evangelizing for alcohol, and it makes NO sense to justify
pot by expressing concerns about alcohol.  IMO, alcohol is too broad
spectrum for it to be useful to treat anxiety, and it has lots of
side-effects.  One effect of alcohol use is to somehow enable the
operation of the opiate receptors (alcohol increases permeability
and does lots to lots of things.)  These little devils are really
power packed when it comes to behavior.  Alcohol also increases
the amount of beta-carboline compounds in your brain (esp if you
are on an SSRI -- they are derived from seratonin), and those devils
do practically the opposite of the benzodiazepines.  There are
also other numerous effects -- bottom line, alcohol has been studied
as much as anything else, and if you really read on what it does
you'd think it to be the poison that I know it is.  But all of
this doesn't justify pot.

> 
> By your standard, vegetarianism is addictive, and quite seriously
> so. Longtime vegetarians who suddenly quit not only feel bad
> psychologically but often suffeer serious physical illness. Clearly it
> should be banned.
>
You totally miss the point -- pot's purpose is to intoxicate not
to nourish, and there is a mild seeking behavior when deprived.
A side effect of excessive long term intoxication include
motivational problems and anxiety (and the anxiety is temporarily
resolved by continued use, or by stopping entirely for several
weeks.)

> 
>> Even though with the small amount of liberalism in me, I can
>> see where legalizing pot wouldn't be the worst thing in the world,
>> I am against it.
> 
> Even assuming pot were as addictive and physically harmful as you
> claim, would smoking some pot still be worse than spending several
> years in prison on a mandatory minimum felony sentence, likely being
> raped and beaten by actual violent criminals when the guards aren't
> looking? Enough so that subjecting people to the latter to prevent the
> former is justifiable?
>
If using pot (or alcohol while driving) was necessary for maintenence
of life, then the choice that you suggest would be unconstitutional.
However, pot isn't necessary, but those who are addicted often believe
that it is necessary.  (If I was Roche labs, I would really encourage
pot usage :-).  The usage of Benzos would increase substantially :-)).

> 
> I actually find it incomprehensibly bizzare that you could
> simultaneously advocate the legality of guns and against the legality
> of pot, based on the arguments you've used in both instances.
> 
Guns are a tool of personal protection, pot is an addictive
intoxicant.  The saving grace of pot over many other intoxicants
is that it is possible to personally grow it, and dependence on
dealers is a less controlling factor on that temporary sense of
well being.  Of all illegal drugs, I am less adverse to it than
others, but it is still best to keep the usage minimized.  The
situation is not all good or all bad.

FWIW, I wouldn't mind a universal $100 misdemeanor (non felony) fine
for 1-2oz pot possession.  Jailing someone for personal usage pot
is kind of silly, and given my connections to the local police
department know that such offenses are mostly overlooked, except
for repeat (or dangerous) offenders.

This does *not* argue for legalization though.

-- 
John                  | Never try to teach a pig to sing,
dy...@iquest.net      | it makes one look stupid
jdy...@nc.com         | and it irritates the pig.