Dagga boy wins his case

D3x! said:
why must your answer always be a retort? can you not hold a civil conversation?
Click to expand...
Because I remember the other things you have said. So I'm asking you a question so that you may examine the various contradictory positions you've tried to take.

Do you feel like you're abusing every drink you have? It's a simple question, and the answer should tell you much about how people generally feel about recreational experiences in general.
 
D3x! said:
I assume you are classifying recreational use as not abuse?
Click to expand...
Are you even aware that shrinks have been using MDMA or Extacy, a party drug, to treat patients who struggle to open up? Amongst others shrooms have been used to treat depression etc.

And also, recreational alcohol consumption isn't considered abuse so where are you going with that argument?
 
evilstebunny said:
Are you even aware that shrinks have been using MDMA or Extacy, a party drug, to treat patients who struggle to open up? Amongst others shrooms have been used to treat depression etc.

And also, recreational alcohol consumption isn't considered abuse so where are you going with that argument?
Click to expand...

i didn't bring alcohol into it so no where thanks redirect that to the one who did maybe
 
Xarog i cannot see your posts as you are now ignored, laters. will constructively communicate with those who can hold a conversation like Sherbang.
 
D3x! said:
i didn't bring alcohol into it so no where thanks redirect that to the one who did maybe
Click to expand...

It's a pointed comparison D3x!, surely even you can see that.

You asked if the poster was classifying recreational use as not abuse.
The answer is yes, and it's a correct classification to make, since use is not abuse.

Just like having a glass of wine with dinner, or drinking a few beers on a Sunday afternoon doesn't mean you abuse alcohol
(see, a pointed comparison) or that you're an alcoholic, in the same way, recreational use of cannabis does not mean you abuse it or that you are a drug addict.
 
Sherbang said:
It's a pointed comparison D3x!, surely even you can see that.

You asked if the poster was classifying recreational use as not abuse.
The answer is yes, and it's a correct classification to make, since use is not abuse.

Just like having a glass of wine with dinner, or drinking a few beers on a Sunday afternoon doesn't mean you abuse alcohol
(see, a pointed comparison) or that you're an alcoholic, in the same way, recreational use of cannabis does not mean you abuse it or that you are a drug addict.
Click to expand...

I agree, but what then do you define abuse as? using a substance a lot? using a substance for its non intended purpose?
 
D3x! said:
I agree, but what then do you define abuse as? using a substance a lot? using a substance for its non intended purpose?
Click to expand...
Using a substance in such a way that it prevents you from being able to deal with other aspects of your life such as maintaining social relationships, your job, etc. etc.
 
Xarog said:
Using a substance in such a way that it prevents you from being able to deal with other aspects of your life such as maintaining social relationships, your job, etc. etc.
Click to expand...

I would agree with this.

Although, to be honest, the definition of abuse is vague - widely differing definitions of drug abuse are used in public health, medical and criminal justice contexts.

I would agree with D3x! as well, to an extent, that using a substance excessively (so that it interferes negatively on aspects of your life as noted above) or using a substance for its non-intended purpose might also be considered abuse.

In psychiatry, the DSM-IV-TR criteria for diagnosing substance abuse are as follows:

A. A maladaptive pattern of substance use leading to clinically significant impairment or distress, as manifested by one (or more) of the following, occurring within a 12-month period:
- Recurrent substance use resulting in a failure to fulfill major role obligations at work, school, or home (e.g., repeated absences or poor work performance related to substance use; substance-related absences, suspensions or expulsions from school; neglect of children or household)
- Recurrent substance use in situations in which it is physically hazardous (e.g., driving an automobile or operating a machine when impaired by substance use)
- Recurrent substance-related legal problems (e.g., arrests for substance-related disorderly conduct)
- Continued substance use despite having persistent or recurrent social or interpersonal problems caused or exacerbated by the effects of the substance (e.g., arguments with spouse about consequences of intoxication, physical fights)
 
Sherbang said:
I would agree with this.

Although, to be honest, the definition of abuse is vague - widely differing definitions of drug abuse are used in public health, medical and criminal justice contexts.

I would agree with D3x! as well, to an extent, that using a substance excessively (so that it interferes negatively on aspects of your life as noted above) or using a substance for its non-intended purpose might also be considered abuse.

In psychiatry, the DSM-IV-TR criteria for diagnosing substance abuse are as follows:

A. A maladaptive pattern of substance use leading to clinically significant impairment or distress, as manifested by one (or more) of the following, occurring within a 12-month period:
- Recurrent substance use resulting in a failure to fulfill major role obligations at work, school, or home (e.g., repeated absences or poor work performance related to substance use; substance-related absences, suspensions or expulsions from school; neglect of children or household)
- Recurrent substance use in situations in which it is physically hazardous (e.g., driving an automobile or operating a machine when impaired by substance use)
- Recurrent substance-related legal problems (e.g., arrests for substance-related disorderly conduct)
- Continued substance use despite having persistent or recurrent social or interpersonal problems caused or exacerbated by the effects of the substance (e.g., arguments with spouse about consequences of intoxication, physical fights)
Click to expand...

ok so excluding other drugs, unless you want the discussion to go that route, what is the purpose of weed? maybe push the medical use thing, sure ok, but otherwise?

/waits for counter alcohol argument
 
I think my shorthand version fits rather nicely with the DSM list tbh. If your use of anything causes you to act in such a way that you have problems accepting the outcome of your behaviour then that's when using it becomes a problem by itself.
 
D3x! said:
ok so excluding other drugs, unless you want the discussion to go that route, what is the purpose of weed? maybe push the medical use thing, sure ok, but otherwise?

/waits for counter alcohol argument
Click to expand...
Why's there something wrong with recreational use of weed? The entire reason it ought to be legalised is so that people can enjoy it recreationally. We have other laws that make it illegal to use drugs and get behind a steering wheel etc. So long as the smoker doesn't harm anyone else while high and they live a successful life, what's the harm?
 
D3x! said:
ok so excluding other drugs, unless you want the discussion to go that route, what is the purpose of weed? maybe push the medical use thing, sure ok, but otherwise?
Click to expand...

Is "to get high" the wrong answer in your book? What exactly is wrong with using it to make yourself feel good?
 
D3x! said:
ok so excluding other drugs, unless you want the discussion to go that route, what is the purpose of weed? maybe push the medical use thing, sure ok, but otherwise?

/waits for counter alcohol argument
Click to expand...

The wonderful thing about weed is that it has multiple uses - it can be medicinal, recreational, relaxing, creative, spiritual.
Some varieties are better suited for some uses than others

BjMUcluCIAACE0m.jpg
 
Last edited:
Cray said:
Is "to get high" the wrong answer in your book? What exactly is wrong with using it to make yourself feel good?
Click to expand...

at least you are honest that you just want to get high instead of hiding behind the multiple other plays. if someone got high in isolation without afffecting anyone, nor the effects of the supply chain etc harming people then i can agree let them /*comments left out due to mod scrutiny*/ get high
 
D3x! said:
at least you are honest that you just want to get high instead of hiding behind the multiple other plays. if someone got high in isolation without afffecting anyone, nor the effects of the supply chain etc harming people then i can agree let them /*comments left out due to mod scrutiny*/ get high
Click to expand...
You should try it before you judge it, you know.
 
D3x! said:
at least you are honest that you just want to get high instead of hiding behind the multiple other plays. if someone got high in isolation without afffecting anyone, nor the effects of the supply chain etc harming people then i can agree let them /*comments left out due to mod scrutiny*/ get high
Click to expand...

What do you mean by 'hiding behind multiple other plays'?
 
D3x! said:
It is the same old argument, ignoring any issues and highlighting the supposed side benefits to justify his drug use.
Click to expand...

I still don't get it. What 'supposed side benefits' are you talking about? And what issues are being ignored?

It is the same old argument, ignoring any real benefits and highlighting the supposed side issues to justify prohibition.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X