Quote:
Originally Posted by President
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
The obvious point everyone here is trying to make when they say "weed is not a drug" is that is should not be labeled as a drug in the same way that harder drugs are which is the status quo. Nobody walks around and calls tobacco a drug which really is the closest thing out there to weed. Obviously you wouldn't classify caffeine the same way you would classify crack even though under your handy little checklist they would both be considered addictive.
.
|
Very well, then lets play it your way.
Why? Who should weed be exempt, or even reclassified as a food additive (the only currently existing alternative btw, like nicotine and caffeine). You just agreed with the addictive statement by another poster on weed, remember. That i do not agree with myself btw, ONLY the psychological dependence, not physical has been proven.
Peop
The argument on people not calling tobacco a drug is also flawed, because I have yet to meet one person who did not in some way acknowledge tobacco and nicotine were a drug.
You also seem to misrepresent the argument at hand, so I ask again why exactly did this touch a cord in you?
Professionally we do not treat nicotine as we do crack, nor caffeine. Are they all addictive? Yes.
But that argument is inherently flawed sir presidente. Is a heart attack as fatal as a gun shot wound? Yes, it can be, circumstances depending im sure. Do you treat them differently? Yes. Yet they both remain medical conditions.