Drinkers - Nondrinkers on Benheck

Want to just shoot the breeze? Forum 42 is the place!

Moderator: Moderators

Adam G
Posts: 212
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 7:33 pm
Location: Olympia, WA
Contact:

Post by Adam G » Thu Mar 20, 2008 10:58 pm

samus wrote:countless studies have been done on the affects of marijuana. mostly, if not all, agree that alcohol is way worse for you than marijuana will ever be.

i personally believe in decriminalizing it. we're crowding our prisons with the wrong people.
Image
I couldn't resist.

I've never touched alcohol, tbh. I don't really care about the laws against it, I just don't need it; I'm just a relaxed person. 8)

User avatar
warmachine
Posts: 118
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2005 1:33 am
Location: Ferris, Texas, USA
Contact:

Post by warmachine » Thu Mar 20, 2008 11:17 pm

HBN wrote:
bicostp wrote:Drinking is only bad when you drink to excess and wind up with your head in the toilet and a splitting hangover. That's when you do real damage to your brain and liver.
Exactly. Thats what I was trying to imply for myself.
timmeh87 wrote:I personally think that the drinking age should be way lower, esp. in the states. People are all like "oh well teenagers shouldn't be able to drink", but why? As soon as these kids hit 21 they go out and get trashed for like a week. Not everyone, but you know it happens all the time. Is that better? We are giving 16 year old kids licenses, but we aren't letting them learn to drink responsibly until 21. Does that make sense?
That makes perfect sense to me. Heres another way to look at it:

At eighteen years of age, you are allowed to die for your country. But you aren't allowed to drink. Wheres the logic? Sure, drinking can be deadly. But a bullet is far more deadly, and a land mine even worse. Not to mention suicide bombers.

Its jacked. But thats how it works. *shrug*, I guess you either live with it, or ignore it.
As a constitutional law student, I can explain why things are the way they are in regards to the legal age for alcohol consumption.

First, in regards to "At eighteen years of age, you are allowed to die for your country. But you aren't allowed to drink." The logic behind that goes back to the Vietnam War. The same argument was made then and, the age was lowered to eighteen; as a result, alcohol-related vehicle deaths skyrocketed amongst those in the 16-21 year old age bracket. The reason: immaturity. Argue as you might, but it's common sense that teenagers are not anywhere near as responsible or mature as those even relatively slightly older than them. Age [give or take your occasional moron] instills responsibility. By the early 1980s, almost all of the states had raised the age back up to 21 and [citation pending, but I do remember the statistic] alcohol related deaths in the above age bracket dropped 63%. A combination of very justified government lobbying (and the eventual formation of MADD), common sense, and severe public outcry resulted in the age coming up to 21, not meany, poo-poo-head parents that wanted to deprive their children of the somehow magical tastes of alcohol.

As for the prior point stating: "We are giving 16 year old kids licenses, but we aren't letting them learn to drink responsibly until 21. Does that make sense," the argument is three-pronged: it is sociological, medical, and development-based. First, in the development-based realm, we do not just "hand over" licenses to 16-year-olds; before we let juveniles get a permit, not a license, they have to pass a test proving they are competent enough to learn how to drive. Then, they must actually learn how to drive, operate a car, and what traffic laws are and how to properly obey them. Teenagers spend a while learning how to drive safely due to the fact that they are moving a half-ton or heavier chunk of metal 30-70 miles per hour through populated areas. Know why insurance rates are so high for people between the ages of 16-25? It takes just about that long to fully master the art of driving and learn how to be truly responsible when operating a motor vehicle. The same principle goes for alcohol; we don't just let people (in theory) go after alcohol, we attempt to educate them in how to be competent in handling alcohol until they are [or at least should be] of proper age and competence, thus leading to the next point...

In the sociological realm, the US government and it's subsidiaries, the state and local governments, assume that parents should have some degree of responsibility in teaching their children that alcohol consumption can be dangerous. It is the duty of the parents [in the eyes of the law] to instill at least some primal mores into children, namely, educational values [school attendance is mandatory in almost all states until the age of 17 or 18], alcohol awareness, driver's education, proper social values [i.e. murder is wrong], and so forth. The government has to look out for the safety of the public at large, and so relies upon parents and guardians to teach their children that somethings require moderation. Again, this is a long and time-consuming process that lasts several years, hence the heightened age laws.

Finally, the human brain is still developing until around 21-23 years of age. Alcohol is a horrible impairment in substantial quantities to developing bodies: it can stunt growth, impair hormone production, promote future impotence in men, inhibit brain development, and so forth. Let me say it again: impotence. :shock:

So, basically, that's why the drinking age is, and will always be, 21 in the United States. Don't take any of this as personal opinion or flame-bait, it's jurisprudence, simple political theory, and medical science at its simplest and best. As for myself, I personally have a drink or two every week or so, usually much less due to studies and work.
Last edited by warmachine on Thu Mar 20, 2008 11:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
NUCLEAR

User avatar
Kurt_
Portablizer
Posts: 5748
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 10:32 am
Steam ID: kurbert
Location: Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Post by Kurt_ » Thu Mar 20, 2008 11:18 pm

*Foresees this getting locked for drug talk, but knows if everyone keeps it mature and sane enough it'll be alright.*

*Remember's the 3 word story efforts*

*Foresees this getting locked again*

Weed doesn't kill people. That isn't why it's illegal. It's illegal because over time, it messes with your mind. It permanently decreases something or other that makes you happy so that you'll never be quite as happy off of it as you were before you ever took it. Also, it alters your behaviour permanently. See "potheads". Legalizing it wouldn't benefit society, but for the most part it doesn't hurt society either.

User avatar
warmachine
Posts: 118
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2005 1:33 am
Location: Ferris, Texas, USA
Contact:

Post by warmachine » Thu Mar 20, 2008 11:31 pm

Kurt_ wrote:*Foresees this getting locked for drug talk, but knows if everyone keeps it mature and sane enough it'll be alright.*

*Remember's the 3 word story efforts*

*Foresees this getting locked again*

Weed doesn't kill people. That isn't why it's illegal. It's illegal because over time, it messes with your mind. It permanently decreases something or other that makes you happy so that you'll never be quite as happy off of it as you were before you ever took it. Also, it alters your behaviour permanently. See "potheads". Legalizing it wouldn't benefit society, but for the most part it doesn't hurt society either.
Well said, although I do have my reservations about the use of marijuana for medicinal purposes solely. If it can relieve the horrible pains of terminal cancer patients without smashing them up like some other painkillers do, then I might be persuaded to argue for medicinal legalization of the drug. I'm pretty sure doctors can tell the difference between potheads and suffering patients, so "doctor-shopping" can probably be safely ruled out with this drug.
NUCLEAR

User avatar
ShockSlayer
Niblet 64
Posts: 5059
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 12:47 pm
Location: In my inbox.

Post by ShockSlayer » Fri Mar 21, 2008 12:25 pm

I dont drink and never will
http://twitter.com/ShockSlayer" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
theelk
Posts: 323
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 9:48 am
Location: boring old connecticut
Contact:

Post by theelk » Fri Mar 21, 2008 12:48 pm

Weed's a fun thing to do occasionally with friends, but I don't do it that often. I get sort of nauseous and really lethargic. But if you get some buddies together, light up, and watch TV, it can be a lot of fun.
Image
I don't want to make an "I'm leaving" thread, but I've sort of lost interest in this board. So if you notice that I'm gone, that's why.

User avatar
G-force
Moderator
Posts: 3609
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2004 1:43 pm
Location: Sweet home Indiana
Contact:

Post by G-force » Mon Mar 24, 2008 2:04 pm

Drinking's good. But like anything, too much of a good thing, and it turns bad.... As I found out over spring break when I donated plasma and then had two freakin beers... And lost it.

Weed, I dunno. I just ended up really scared and freaked out. I was a little depressed at the time, so that might have been why. Everyone tells me its supposed to be the opposite reaction.

User avatar
CronoTriggerfan
Moderator
Posts: 4131
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2006 3:07 pm
Location: University of Michigan - Ann Arbor
Contact:

Post by CronoTriggerfan » Mon Mar 24, 2008 4:07 pm

Neildo_64 wrote:Actually marijuana smoke isn't bad for your lungs, believe it or not, and the brain affects are temporary. Over time though marijuana is bad because you become psychologically dependent, and then you FEEL you need weed for things, and since you really think you need it, you do. But weed isn't physically addictive at all.
Well, it is if you're physically allergic to the stuff, like me! :P Stupid asthma...

I don't drink or do drugs. Never have, probably never will. I mean, I may have the occasional beer or two once I turn of legal age, but only as a social thing. I see both drinking and drugs as a sign of weakness, not to mention the kids that do all this crap aren't exactly people I'd catch myself hanging about. :roll: Even the ones who aren't bad, or are even my friends, only hurt my experience when they come to school drunk, with a hangover, high, or a combination of all three.
Image

User avatar
Life of Brian
Moderator
Posts: 2867
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2005 5:55 pm
Location: Oklahoma
Contact:

Post by Life of Brian » Mon Mar 24, 2008 5:27 pm

warmachine wrote:What warmachine said
Wow. Does that qualify for a "ZING"? Regardless, that was the most thoroughly detailed argument for conditions being the way they are in regard to alcohol that I've ever read. Well written!
dragonhead wrote:sweet. ive spent a third of my life on benheck!
Image

User avatar
gamemasterAS
Senior Member
Posts: 3309
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 10:30 pm
Steam ID: lolz1337face
Location: Ohio
Contact:

Post by gamemasterAS » Mon Mar 24, 2008 5:40 pm

I don't drink, the worst thing I drink is a lot of energy drinks. Personally I would probably smoke pot before I would drink though, but I don't plan on either.
.

User avatar
soundwave
Senior Member
Posts: 3653
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2005 1:51 pm
Location: Connecticut
Contact:

Post by soundwave » Tue Mar 25, 2008 11:34 pm

In my opinion, the reasons Marijuana are illegal are:

1. it cannot be taxed. Its the same ideology that keeps tobacco legal. Tobacco, while being extremely bad for ones health, cannot be home grown, thus there is an industry for it. As a result of that, the government puts huge taxes on tobacco, and because so much tax money is brought in through this one industry it will never be criminalized. Marijuana, on the other hand, can be grown in a closet, (and if you want nasty brown grass) takes little attention to grow. There could be an attempt to legalize and tax Marijuana, but it would be futile, as the taxes would be high enough to make home growing of reefer a more viable choice, which is exactly what the government does not want.

2. Marijuana became popular around the turn of last century (~1900), when an influx of Mexican immigrants came to the country. Bigotry against Mexicans was high, and the American politicians thought that criminalizing reefer would keep the Mexicans from coming to the country, as they very much liked the herb.

3. It is considered by many to be a gateway drug to many of its users. If you look at the slums across America, they are entwined with Crack Cocaine, Heroine, Methamphetamines, and Marijuana. Its my belief that this stems from the lifestyle many inhabitants of the lowerclass share, in which marijuana is openly smoked in the home, together by all members of the family. I think it gives the children the idea that because Marijuana is okay, other drugs are okay too; so the move is made from Marijuana to other, more harmful and physically addictive drugs.


As a note, I smoke Marijuana around 2-3 times a week and drink occassionally (usually more because I like a good beer than for the purpose of getting drunk).

At G-Force, its not abnormal for you to get more depressed and eratic after smoking pot. When my tolerance to THC was lower I would get quite paranoid. There was also a period where I was very depressed, and was smoking several times a day, which over served to amplify my depression, especially when I wasn't high.
Marijuana, once your tolerance to it adjusts and you no longer lose control, is a great drug, and I wish it could be legalized, but I do not think it would ever work out. Much like a drinking age of 16 or 18 would never, and didn't, work.

Locked