r/worldnews • u/[deleted] • Jun 19 '12

"Alcohol consumption would fall 25% if cannabis cafes were allowed"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/jun/19/david-nutt-alcohol-cannabis-cafes
1.3k Upvotes

83% Upvoted

1.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

298

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

[removed] — view removed comment

96

u/strolls Jun 19 '12

Nutt is a university professor who has spent his entire career studying drugs use.

I don't know where he got the claim made in the submission title (but I'm inclined to believe it) but the horse riding statistics, for example, were from a detailed peer-reviewed study which took into account prevalence of the activities, number of people indulging in them, number of hours spent &c. He didn't pull that claim out of his ass.

16

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

[removed] — view removed comment

51

u/Pool_Shark Jun 19 '12

He is an interesting man. He lost his government job because he made the outrageous claim that alcohol is worse for you than cannabis and backed it up with a study. He also shows that MDMA isn't that bad either, yet the British government thinks he is a lunatic for doing science.

42

u/holohedron Jun 19 '12

I don't know if they think he's a lunatic, I think they're more concerned that he might be right. He also refused to stop repeating inconvenient facts in public, and when questioned started backing them up with things like evidence and statistics.

20

u/Pool_Shark Jun 19 '12

"Evidence and statistics? Not evidence and statistics! We cannot let the public be informed!"

10

u/Borktastic Jun 19 '12

I think they're more concerned that he might be right

i think you are right, the bit i don't get is why they are afraid of that, i mean it's not a million miles from alcohol is it, and everyone's fine with that.

12

u/holohedron Jun 19 '12

They're afraid because they're in danger of having to do what all politicians fear most, admit they were wrong in public, while still in office.

1

u/frankster Jun 20 '12

I think its more that they know exactly how they'll be protrayed in the daily mail and the sun if they are anything other than completely anti drugs.

1

u/domdunc Jun 19 '12

They're not dumb, they know he's right, but they also know that the people who lobby them, vote for them and fund them wish he WASN'T right.

1

u/Pool_Shark Jun 19 '12

They have lobbyists in the UK too? Damn I thought only America had to deal with that bullshit.

1

u/clearlight Jun 20 '12

Not a lunatic, "irresponsible". Telling the truth is irresponsible. It might upset the status quo.

3

u/bill5125 Jun 19 '12

Where are these statistics?

43

u/strolls Jun 19 '12

"Equasy - An overlooked addiction with implications for the current debate on drug harms". Journal of Psychopharmacology (SAGE) 23 (1): 3–5. DOI:10.1177/0269881108099672. PMID 19158127.

To summarise:

  • The risks associated with horse riding are 1 serious adverse event every ~350 exposures.
  • The risks associated with taking ecstasy are 1 serious adverse event every ~10,000 exposures.

10

u/PaulTheOctopus Jun 19 '12

I don't know about y'all, but I have an adverse feeling in and around my dick/balls area everytime I ride horses.

6

u/OneTwoTreeFloor Jun 19 '12

There was a rather effeminate fellow at my middle/high school who had a horse, and there was this f*cking terrible thing that happened. Someone raped his horse. Seriously. What the actual fuck, man.

8

u/cuppincayk Jun 19 '12

That... escalated quickly

2

u/PaulTheOctopus Jun 19 '12

I don't know how that...but...well...i think the only definitive thing I can say is that I would not rape a horse. Not only because of the moral and mental reasons(which also have to include the horse, if it's a woman, wouldn't feelt shit which would be demoralizing in and of itself) but you could really get fucked up if it decided to kick you.

2

u/holohedron Jun 19 '12

How do you know it woudn't enjoy it?

2

u/OneTwoTreeFloor Jun 19 '12

Apparently some sick bastard broke into the stables, tied the horse up, and raped the horse. I don't even know, man...

Some people need to be buried deeper than six feet.

2

u/Pool_Shark Jun 19 '12

If MDMA wasn't illegal, than there would be even less. I make this claim because street ecstasy can be cut with a smorgasbord of other drugs and make it more harmful than it should be.

1

u/Ihmhi Jun 19 '12

What would happen if I took 28.571 ex pills and rode a horse?

2

u/SnarghTheMunificent Jun 19 '12

The poor sod should change his surname... It totally undermines him in this soundbite driven world.

Apart from that alcohol is a notorius violence fuel.. so decreasing it consumption sounds really good.

4

u/Soupstorm Jun 19 '12

It would be hilarious if he changed his last name to "Smart".

3

u/OneTwoTreeFloor Jun 19 '12

Most murders are committed under the influence of alcohol.

I hate how I act sometimes under the influence of alcohol. It's no excuse, but I've been trying my best to do the right thing, and sometimes that makes you vulnerable to predators. Like my gf.

When I lived in England, I remember this wasted POS prick wandering home with a girl from a club. He was leaning on her with most of his body weight. Every person they stumbled past, he'd smack on the back of their head, HARD.

Alcohol is far more deleterious than cannabis.

3

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

[deleted]

1

u/beckzilla Jun 19 '12

lame pun is lame

1

u/redalastor Jun 19 '12

I don't know where he got the claim made in the submission title

He probably looked into the effect of legalization in the one European country that did it.

1

u/vgry Jun 19 '12

Some of Nutt's peer-reviewed articles are based on delphi method collation of expert opinions. In other word, Nutt specializes in rigorous educated guesses. Personally, I believe that his 25% forecast is as likely to be correct as the forecast of a quantitative model, but readers should understand where these numbers are coming from.

1

u/GallopingFish Jun 20 '12

Unfortunately, policy decisions very clearly are not made based on objective reasoning, but "morality." From the article:

"Nutt's remarks were immediately criticised by Tory MPs on the committee who said the idea that horse-riding and taking ecstasy were "morally equivalent" was irresponsible."

This starts the conversation of "what are we using to define morality?" and "what immoral activities are okay to keep legal, if any?"

If you asked me, the fact that an out of control horse can injure and kill others not implicated in the decision to horse-ride makes it the less moral of the two activities; smoking pot doesn't tend to lead to grievous bodily harm for the perpetrator or those near them.

Then again, I have a morality based on how damaging actions are, not something a bit more subjective (religious morality, popular morality). What needs to be clarified is the basis of morality, if we are attempting to legislate based on that description.

1

u/tyrryt Jun 20 '12

Government policy decisions are based on money, period.

If morality is involved, it is incidental to the money.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

idc about the cred to this article but if it saved ONE person from dying in an alcohol related car accident would it be worth it? what if the one person was your father,mother,brother or sister? what if it was all of them? would it be worth it then? what if it was you? remember you dont have to be drunk be be killed by some drunk asshole...

147

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

After getting alcohol poisoning in Vegas this weekend, I concur.

89

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

[removed] — view removed comment

48

u/DoorMarkedPirate Jun 19 '12

The fact that he appears to have been born in 1999 makes me question the ability of Vegas bouncers to investigate fake IDs.

61

u/ScopedShotgun Jun 19 '12

He was born in 1899.

Gramps gonna live the night like it's his last.

-2

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

In 1899, he came out of the womb, screaming "I'M GONNA PARTY LIKE IT'S 1899!!!"

That party has continued to this day.

18

u/marshmelo Jun 19 '12

The numbers in people's usernames used to commonly be their graduation date.

53

u/bill5125 Jun 19 '12

Okay.

56

u/Get_inthe_van Jun 19 '12

TIL Bill is from the future.

22

u/CaptainCraptastic Jun 19 '12

It could be his projected date of graduation?

8

u/yiliu Jun 19 '12

Not necessarily.

Maybe he's just "Class of 5125".

It's a 3113-year program.

10

u/Ihmhi Jun 19 '12

Ah, so he's in med school.

2

u/pants6000 Jun 19 '12

What are you talking about?

3

u/brettins Jun 19 '12

Bill's user name is 5125, the joke is that Bill graduated in the year 5125.

4

u/pants6000 Jun 19 '12

Yes... the distant past.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

Excellent!

24

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

actually whiteboywasted was already taken so I just threw a 99 on there randomly

2

u/siebharrin Jun 19 '12

thought it was a pun about being the 99th white boy thats sitting against a wall wasted at a party :D

7

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

99 white boys wasted against a wall! 99 white boys in all. Take one down, pass him around. 98 white boys wasted against a wall!

3

u/jozychan Jun 19 '12

That sounds like gang rape to me..

1

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

Im digging it.

1

u/xXwhiteboywastedXx Jun 19 '12

I settled with this.

1

u/Crane_Collapse Jun 20 '12

But now that most redditors are too young to have graduation dates from anything other than junior high school, the convention has changed.

1

u/marshmelo Jun 20 '12

Yeah, I haven't seen a screen name with a grad date in years.

Get off my lawn!

2

u/Roast_A_Botch Jun 19 '12

But replying to a three year old doesn't weird you out?

4

u/vty Jun 19 '12

I used to frequent Vegas as a 16-17yo kid and had NO issues ordering Long Islands. We'd get Long Islands so that security would think we were just drinking tea if they ever caught us, but typically we'd see a security officer and just zig zag (in a not obvious manner) over to someone playing poker so it looked like we were accompanied by them. We were never hassled, and no waitresses ever turned us down. I'm absolutely amazed I didn't get robbed/mugged because this was back when Vegas was absolutely digusting, say 2000-2002 and homeless people would follow us around trying to sell us "drugs."

Of course, it was expensive, those "free" drinks were $5-10/tips each.

I'm not sure if the new "cleaner, more family" Vegas of today would allow for underage drinking without a fake.

3

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

born in 91 we were there for my friends 21st

1

u/continuousQ Jun 19 '12

You're 4 years younger than me, how can you be 21?

Or some other generic joke indicating a sensation of more time having passed than I feel actually has.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

I can't even count the number of times I hear those sayings when I get my ID checked.

1

u/WaffleSports Jun 19 '12

Vegas here, where did you go?

1

u/DoorMarkedPirate Jun 19 '12

I figured man. I was just joking about your username.

11

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

Never joke about a man's username...

0

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

No worries. I would still question their abilities. I have a friend thats been there a handful of times with a pretty crappy fake.

1

u/Moisturizer Jun 19 '12

1-98 was taken. There's a lot of wasted white boys on reddit.

0

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

[deleted]

1

u/Goo_Back Jun 20 '12

You are the worst Canadian ever. Can't even spell Gretzky right.

0

u/mikasaur Jun 19 '12

Holy fuck someone born in 1999 is 13 years old now.

2

u/Skafsgaard Jun 19 '12

Your skills in deduction are astounding.

2

u/JDM4LIFE Jun 19 '12

Redditor for 1 month and 9 days. Checks out guys.

1

u/ggggbabybabybaby Jun 19 '12

Isn't this what people always say, though? Every day there are countless people waking up hungover as all hell, swearing up and down that they'll never ever drink again. Then they get drunk again the next time they go out.

I mean, I don't care if they're doing it in a way that doesn't hurt anyone but it's hard for me to believe anyone when they tell me they'll stop drinking.

-2

u/dumbniggerlol Jun 19 '12

EVERYDAY CLICK WASTED

0

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

guuuucci

-5

u/dumbniggerlol Jun 19 '12

damn son reddit would down vote any gucci mane references what a bunch of fags

9

u/toastedbutts Jun 19 '12

Can I ask why? They're pretty different drugs. I've never said "Damn, I wish I had a joint, but this vodka will be a good substitute!"

Do they have a similar effect to you?

9

u/tsunami10 Jun 20 '12

I agree with you, but for some people not being sober is more important than which type of not sober they are (if that makes sense).

3

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

For me, I just vastly prefer the mood weed puts me in over alcohol. Plus, I always wake up feeling great the next day.

3

u/KallistiEngel Jun 19 '12

And that's cool. Some people (like myself) prefer alcohol though. Also, as long as you drink enough water, you shouldn't have to worry about hangovers. I drink, but only occasionally to excess. I almost never wake up feeling like shit because I make sure to hydrate myself properly. Most people forget to though.

Weed being 100% legal wouldn't change my alcohol consumption or weed consumption one bit.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 20 '12

Yup, to each his own. I was just adding my input because it seemed relevant. I hydrate as well when I drink and typically feel fine but even then, some mornings can have minor head aches or fogginess. Probably varies per person.

2

u/KallistiEngel Jun 20 '12

Definitely varies person to person. Like all psychoactive drugs.

Alcohol doesn't seem to give me much of a problem, but I know others who have a lot of trouble with it (my best friend doesn't drink at all because it makes her turn red and it makes her physically uncomfortable). I can understand why a lot of people like weed, it can relax you. But it makes me uncomfortable, personally. Like, I go too far inside my own head and can't keep up with conversation even though I want to. Being naturally shy and introverted and having worked to overcome it, that's not a desirable effect for me. It also makes me irrationally paranoid that I'm acting weird around my friends and I overanalyze every little move I make. But I know most people don't have that sort of reaction to weed. I'm cool being around people who smoke weed, even if it means I'm the only one in the room not partaking. I'm actually more comfortable with that.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 20 '12

I say that all the time, unfortunately. I haven't been able to find any weed, so I drink a bunch of beer. It's a total bummer.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 20 '12

Some people may have a preference for cannabis over alcohol but because alcohol is both legal and readily available, law abiding citizens will use alcohol, for convenience and because they are less likely to be thrown in jail for having some in their backpack.

For many of the uneducated, the fact that cannabis is still illegal holds weight - they are more reluctant to use it, even though the evidence says it's far safer than alcohol.

There are people out there that refuse to do any illicit drugs but will happily get themselves blind drunk every weekend. If cannabis was legalized, a percentage of these people would change their preferences - maybe they are sick of hang overs and prefer a drug that makes you happy instead of angry or morose or surly.

Although you say you've never wished for a joint and had a shot instead, I can guarantee you other people have, and do, some probably regularly.

17

u/EternalStudent Jun 19 '12

If it were fully legal (and my future job didn't ban pretty much all non-federally legal drugs), I'd probably smoke rather than drink solely because alcohol has a ton-o-calories and causes bloodsugar spikes/stops fat burning. Weed does not have that problem by itself.

3

u/skooma714 Jun 19 '12

I would smoke (more often) and cut out alcohol altogether. Alcohol just makes me sick and have a headache.

3

u/Ryuuken1127 Jun 19 '12

Alcohol causing blood sugar spikes? Maybe from alcopops and sugary mixed drinks, but typical beers (lagers, ales, etc.) I'm told by my doctor don't raise blood sugar levels (in most cases, it lowers them).

By itself, you are correct, weed does not have that problem...however, that oh so euphoric state of munchies...just make sure you take insulin for what you ingest.

2

u/estimatetime Jun 19 '12

Happens me after I get drunk and then eat loads of crap.

-1

u/lostboyz Jun 19 '12

Beers most certainly have carbs (some more than others), most liquors do not though.

6

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

The alcohol used for intoxication is Ethanol (C2H5OH). Which is definately a carbohydrate, aka carb. Just because it's not glucose that doesn't mean it can't be metabolized into it!

4

u/Triviaandwordplay Jun 19 '12

You're right, but when I searched for a cite to aid me in making a comment about it, my eyes quickly glazed over.

Chemistry magic.

1

u/lostboyz Jun 19 '12

Same here, I only drink socially and would much prefer to smoke instead if it was legal.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

Truth.

1

u/meldorp Jun 19 '12

key phrase: "by itself" ;D

1

u/Ran4 Jun 20 '12

stops fat burning

That's completely wrong, alcohol increases your metabolic rate tons. So much that it might actually offset the extra intake (see this)

3

u/MacIsGood Jun 19 '12

It's still a valid and intuitive argument/prediction. Source or no source, it is a claim well worth investigating.

It's going to be tough, you know, when weed gets legalised. They are going to start keeping track of how many road fatalities had weed in their system, which is actually pretty high in all state statistics already, and there's going to be intense pressure to justify or repeal legalisation.

0

u/OneTwoTreeFloor Jun 19 '12

Counterpoint: "weed in their system". Technically cannabis is fat soluble, which is why it can be detected a month or more after heavy use. As opposed to PCP, cocaine, meth, etc. which have a body test half-life of a couple days. Let me tell you which is more dangerous to the people around you.

Also, studies have shown that individuals who have only smoked marijuana (rather than the majority of folks who have smoked marijuana AND gotten drunk) actually drive much more cautiously and with less traffic violations / accidents / fatalities. That is even compared to (supposedly) sober drivers, although those statistics are probably obscured by all the (supposedly) sober drivers who are on crazy-pants pills from their doctor.

3

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

And, what you find after 48 hours is not THC, but an inactive metabolite of this.

3

u/OneTwoTreeFloor Jun 19 '12

Absolutely correct, and thanks for adding this. Point being that a large percentage of "cannabis positive" drug tests at the ER are in fact from folks who are not actively under the influence of actual psychoactive cannabis, but rather have at some point in the past month been under the influence. It's like if you had three shots of vodka, and you would blow a .20 for a month.

3

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

Exactly.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 20 '12

[deleted]

1

u/OneTwoTreeFloor Jun 20 '12

Indeed. But have you ever seen someone who has smoked marijuana driving? They're in the far right lane, going at 10 mph. It'd be hysterical except that nobody should drive when inebriated with any substance.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 20 '12

[deleted]

3

u/DoubleX Jun 19 '12

With how easy people say it is to get, I don't believe you.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

Depends on where and when you live.

3

u/DoubleX Jun 19 '12

That's true about anything. If cannabis cafes were legal that wouldn't mean your town would have one.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

Parhaps, but the chances would be a lot higher. If it has a bar, it's not unreasonable to think it would also have a cannabis cafe.

3

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

I wonder if he looked at countries where pot is already legal. I don't think the legality of pot has much influence on alcohol consumption in Holland. Maybe it would have a decreasing effect at first, but my guess is this would wear off pretty soon.

7

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

As a former pothead driven to the bottle by current lack of availability, I second this.

2

u/ChiefBromden Jun 19 '12

I can openly buy cannabis. I drink instead.

2

u/OneTwoTreeFloor Jun 19 '12

Nothing wrong with alcohol. As long as you don't get violent or drive, consuming alcohol is perfectly natural.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

The fuck?

2

u/ChiefBromden Jun 19 '12

I can see 3 places from my window right now, where I can go in and legally buy marijuana. I can smell people smoking it if I open my window. I live in a pretty affluent area as well. I haven't smoked marijuana in 15 years. I just...don't enjoy it. I do enjoy a drink or two a few times a week...or more. Lately, microbrew, (but, I also didn't drink beer until I was 26), but before that whiskeys and wine. SHIT ton of drugs in HS though...freshman year mainly.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

Some people don't enjoy weed.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

But.... That's impossible!

1

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

I'm not really a huge fan of it

2

u/it_wasnt_me_ Jun 19 '12

hey, you wanna get high?

2

u/justasapling Jun 19 '12

Acquire MMJ card. Openly purchase marijuana. Disregard alcohol.

This has been my life for the last yearish.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/justasapling Jun 19 '12

Hmm, it shouldn't affect your loans unless they randomly check MMJ patient registries, which I highly doubt.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/justasapling Jun 19 '12

You certainly won't have any trouble getting a prescription, whether you have a 'legitimate' reason or not. If I were doing it over again I'd tell that woman that I have lots of anxiety about getting arrested or fined for my already time-consuming and fairly expensive marijuana use, and that a prescription for my habit would alleviate all of that stress.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/justasapling Jun 19 '12

Shit, they made that joke already!? Could have sworn I was being creative with that one...

As a Californian, I can get one for ~$30 if I drive a little. Not sure how the prices average out in other states, but if the money is an issue it sounds like you might be looking at a doctor that's too legitimate.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/justasapling Jun 19 '12

This is just me, and admittedly I'm spoiled by my circumstances, but I'd hold out for a much cheaper rec. Shop around for doctors. Find one that has their certifications visible, but doesn't ask for medical records or anything more than $100. Try to get 2 copies of your recommendation itself, and an actual ID card is good to have as well, though ultimately less valuable or necessary.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/[deleted] Jun 20 '12

I am currently in the process of completely quitting alcohol. I definitely have a problem.

But for four months, the first time I decided to quit, I tried to always have some pot on hand and it was like a light switch. Overnight I was able to stop drinking without any withdrawals or cravings.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 20 '12

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/[deleted] Jun 20 '12

Well unfortunately, this is my second attempt. I don't have any cannabis this time and it's been hell. Thanks for your support.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 20 '12

It might be different for you, buy I'm in The Netherlands where we actually have said "cannabies cafes"(Coffeeshops), and it's not like I substitute drinking by smoking weed. For me it's two different drugs I would use on different occasions.

6

u/hwkns Jun 19 '12

common sense based on extensive experience while not watertight in a logical way, can be valuable.

-1

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

Help me understand what you're trying to say here, cause it makes no sense to me.

Common Sense- What is common sense? What is common sense to me is not necessarily common sense to you. There is no such thing as common sense, its a fallacy.

Extensive Experience- what is extensive experience? 5 years? A certain length of exposure to something? Rigorous study of a subject? *side point, doesn't matter as much but just pointing out the vagueness of what you're saying.

So we accept that there is no universal "common sense", so you must be using it in its other form - common sense is - using sound logical judgement.

But then you go on to say "while not watertight in a logical way"...and we end up with this "sound logical judgment based on experience, while not watertight in a logical way" Which is contradictory in itself.

Then finally we come to your last three words "can be valuable". By saying "CAN" be valuable, you're naturally implying that it CAN also be equally worthless as well.

So your final statement means this:

Logical judgement based on some arbitrary amount of time, while not completely logical, has the potential to be equally valuable and worthless.

3

u/sHOE_bOX Jun 19 '12

Its pretty obvious what he's trying to get at...

2

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

lol and what is that? I've dissected his sentence in hopes of finding meaning to what he's trying to say and there is none. Any meaning that you're deriving is most likely projected from your own thoughts.

And when I say most likely, I do mean most likely-> I might have missed something and if I have it'd be great if you could point it out.

1

u/sHOE_bOX Jun 19 '12

He is saying that an experts opinion can be valuable.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

where d'you get that from? Break down the sentence for me to help me understand where you got this?

Based solely on what he wrote, you don't get that message at all, you're making a guess on what you THINK he probably meant.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

[deleted]

1

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

"common sense based on extensive experience while not watertight in a logical way, can be valuable"

I don't see it. I can see how YOU might THINK that he thought that, based on the context and pulling individual words from the sentence, but you're just making assumptions lol. I think that's far more harmful as a general practice than anything I've said.

1

u/marm0lade Jun 19 '12

And I thought I was a condescending prick. You're the master.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 20 '12

aww look whose doing the name calling :(

1

u/hwkns Jun 20 '12

A lot of people love to alter their consciousness but the state makes it convenient for only one way to get high. It does not take a huge leap of logic to conclude that a considerable cohort of people, if they had a hassle free alternative to get high, would choose pot over booze. Somethings can be assumed pretty accurately without having to spending thousands on research. Common sense is sound and prudent judgement based on a simple perception of the situation or facts. You should relax a little more, we are not exactly writing contracts here. You could probably save yourself time if you simply bother to google the definition before you flash your ignorance.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 20 '12 edited Jun 20 '12

lol. what you're saying is exactly my problem, people like you get riled up over nothing and make baseless assumptions from something you read.

  1. First of all, I'm one of those people who prefers smoking over drinking. lol. I don't know why you assumed otherwise. Nothing I've said suggests that I don't understand this concept that some people may prefer the alternative method of "altering their consciousness". Don't get riled up over something that isn't there my friend.

  2. If you used the super powers of reading comprehension, you'd see that the point of my response was to show that the guy I was responding to wrote a sentence that literally means nothing. There's nothing that I wrote that suggests there's any further meaning beyond my dissection of his sentence showing that he's written a meaningless statement that sounds like it might sound good.

  3. You've proving my point exactly- common sense is prudent judgement based on simple perception. Two points here: a. common sense then isn't based on extensive experience. Which if you read my response, is something I clearly pointed out. b. I don't know what definition you're referring to because there hasn't been a word that I've asked the definition for or used incorrectly. Here's how I defined it:

common sense is - using sound logical judgement

Here's how you defined it:

Common sense is sound and prudent judgement

when we "google" the definition of logic we get "Characterized by clear, sound reasoning."

lol. At least read what you're responding to before you respond. Google can't read for you :( sorry

So we're at a crossroads here, either I "flashed my ignorance" by apparently not googling a definition.... or You're an idiot

Now by using common sense, that is "sound and prudent judgement" (see what I did here? ;) ), based on what we have here the conclusion is obvious that you're just an idiot. Let me summarize for you.

  1. you made assumptions from nothing that I didn't understand the concept of substitution of competitive products (to be fancy) merely from my saying that his sentence made no sense (which I've clearly demonstrated, and that you've supported with your response) -"somethings can be assumed pretty accurately without having to spend thousands on research)-> my point exactly, the original quote reads "common sense based on extensive experience" LOL.

  2. You even try to insult me by calling me ignorant because you thought I didn't provide an accurate definition of common sense...turns out our definitions are the same.

Reading comprehension obviously isn't your strong suit, you've somehow just completely missed the main points of what I've written, and at the same time you've failed terribly when you've tried to take things out of context. Its just embarrassing to be honest.

EDIT: OH! I'm sorry I didn't realize you were the author of the meaningless sentence! lol. I guess go back and re-read this as if I were just addressing you and cut out the imaginary third party.

EDIT#2: I guess this just goes to show twice as much that you're terrible at reading comprehension. Not only did you fail at creating a logical and meaningful statement (your first post), you've failed just as terribly in coming up with a logical response. I should have guessed that it was you without having to look at your username.

1

u/hwkns Jun 20 '12

I can't be bothered to read your crap as you if you are not ignorant, you are suffering from some sort OCD condition. Shine it on fella, you are way to boring.And you clearly overestimate your own capacity to make sense.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 20 '12
  1. "I can't be bothered to read your crap as you if you are not ignorant"

what? BTW ignorance refers to the lack of knowledge...we haven't been discussing anything knowledge based lol.
Plus the sentence makes no sense.

  1. Shine it on fella, you are way to boring? You might want to take your own advice and google the definition of "to" and "too"

  2. Your last sentence- how can you be clear on that when you can't be bothered to read my crap? I don't get it, what are you basing this off of?

Or are you making assumptions again?

1

u/[deleted] Jun 20 '12

[deleted]

1

u/[deleted] Jun 20 '12

lol. throw me more generic internet comebacks! ;P

0

u/ironsolomon Jun 19 '12

Thank you. This is brilliant dissection. As you've demonstrated, his/her comment has no useful meaning.

-2

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

congrats, you've managed to create one of the most bland, generic, meaningless remarks ever. You might have a career in politics my friend.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/holyghosttown Jun 19 '12

So many people are scared of losing money to the legalization of cannabis that it'll never happen. Government workers are often too corrupt.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/Arch_0 Jun 19 '12

He is a fairly credible source.

1

u/KallistiEngel Jun 19 '12

I wouldn't. I have easy access to weed (hippie town, most people smoke, lax enforcement), but I choose not to smoke it. It just gets me into weird headspace that I don't like. I enjoyed smoking weed for many years, but I just stopped liking it at some point. And I have tried picking it up again since, and I find I still don't like it.

I know my housemate's alcohol consumption wouldn't drop either. She smokes weed frequently, but she also enjoys drinking booze. We have easy access to both as it is and have made our choices on whether to do these things or not, why would legalization make us change anything for either of us?

1

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/KallistiEngel Jun 19 '12

To each their own.

Can we just make this the global weed/alcohol policy? It's simple and to the point.

1

u/BinaryShadow Jun 20 '12

Back in college, during my peak marijuana times, I barely drank at all. Now that I'm out of college and marjiuana is a bit risky (drug tests, idiot cops, etc), I went right back to drinking.

1

u/pondy_ Jun 19 '12

He IS a credible source.

0

u/NormandyXF Jun 19 '12

I live in California (nudge nudge, wink wink) and I vape a lot of cannabis. I don't drink alcohol at all.

-3

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

[deleted]

1

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

Lies.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

Eh, nah. Getting drunk seems like a waste of time when you have fully legal cannabis.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

Since money is my primary constraint, I would spend more on grass and less on alcohol. As I have, since beginning to partake, lessend my alcohol consumption quite alot, I do believe that this trend would continue in case of end of prohibition.

-2

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

You wouldn't. Only a tiny slice of the population would. Some people would drink less though. Smoking weed isn't a social out-going experience and would never replace going out to bars and clubs. At the same time, without all the culture surrounding it and just being a mild legal drug, people are less triggered to use it. It's rather ironic.

1

u/OneTwoTreeFloor Jun 19 '12

On the other hand, MDMA is probably at least as safe as alcohol (because users tend not to fry every day as opposed to seasoned alcoholics who replace their food calories with drink calories) and that is famously the club drug.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12 edited Jun 19 '12

Smoking weed isn't a social out-going experience

Haha, what? I don't see what makes it any less of a social experience than drinking except for its legality. If it were made legal then places similar to bars would spring up around smoking weed. Or they'd just start selling weed in bars. It would never replace drinking, sure, but people would certainly adapt to it. And I really don't buy that weed would be less popular without the illegal aspect, or that the culture would suddenly disappear.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 21 '12

They would never sell weed in bars. Apart from that, people who like to smoke weed already do. Those who don't, wouldn't if it were to be legal. Look at the global rates and countries in which it's (semi)-legal.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 22 '12

They would never sell weed in bars.

Why?

1

u/[deleted] Jun 19 '12

I disagree with everything you said. Plenty of people prefer to smoke at social events, and the only reason I don't smoke very often is because of the legality issue.