Posted on 08/15/2018 9:06:53 AM PDT by fwdude
Main Street Drive Thru Liquor
1005 E Main St, Mandan, ND
Meet the Business Owners: Shawn and Jerry moved to North Dakota in 2012. They came in with a different mindset being from a different area made them realize the need for a drive thru liquor.
https://www.facebook.com/mainstreetdt/?rf=468732593256276
Just because a person wants to do something doesn’t mean that person is addicted to that thing, even if they want to do it really darn badly all the time.
Physical addiction to a substance is totally different.
~~~~
They will always say they only enjoying and as you say they just ‘want’ it, but then they are sneaking out of work to hit some, or driving at strange hours of the night because they are out, or otherwise displaying high risk behaviors that they will rationalize away. You ask them about it and they become very defensive and agitated... classic signs of dependency. They can’t consciously acknowledge the need to themselves, so they certainly wont admit it to you, and attempts to get them to will be met with hostility.
I used to buy into the psychological dependency versus physical addiction argument, but I even question that anymore. If you get them to let their gaurd down, such as when they are talking to other chronic users, they will admit things like “I just can’t relax without it” or “I’m going to need more of it to get though [fill in the blank]”
That depends on the whiskey!
Apparently, President George Washington thought that defending a whiskey tax was the right position.
-PJ
What percentage of the time would you say you drive at or below the posted speed limit?
With Great Freedom comes Great Responsibility.
This being true, our country has a vested interest in Making America Great Again.
That goal is unattainable as long as we deregulate common sense laws and force same sex marriage, pro-dope laws, transgender rights, feces in the streets, open border policies and thousands of other liberaltarian ideals and objectives.
My problem with this is that pot is still a Schedule 1 drug. This means that companies who want to explore industrial hemp possibilities are out of luck. Currently US companies have to import hemp, becasue across most of the country growing it is illegal. The 2018 Farm Bill passed int he Senate made industrial hemp legal; the House blocked it's passage, though.
Low ball estimates of the industrial hemp market in the US at around $688M a year. That's $688M without a single puff of a joint.
Have no problem at all with the non-psychoactive cannabinoid, Cannabidiol, which can be produced from HEMP plants now genetically re-engineered to produce only Cannabidiol and ZERO THC (the psychoactive stoner component). CBD oil can be incorporated in agents as a pain reliever (non-opioid) topical, oral and vaped. CBD is a component of recently FDA approved seizure disorder pharmaceutical from the UK. The Israelis have patented the hemp/cannabis that has ZERO to almost zero THC. They are marketing this CBD oil source, as well as potentially breaking the Canadian “lock” on fiber producing Hemp plants.
THC has zero.. no clinical value as a pain reliever. It is legally approved (synthetically) as the product Marinol (tm) indicated to inspire appetite in bedridden elderly who are in danger of starving from lack of normal nutrition brought on by psycho social and nutritional deficiencies. It is effective in that usage. (Much as THC is effective in illegal pot— in creating feminized males with man tits and Oreo cookie pear shaped fatty waistlines... just saying, LOL). Sure to be flamed here— but talk to other clinical pharmacology experts who are not on the payroll of the “machine”.
reno wants to ban everything from tobacco to pit bulls. He is not much of a free type of person. I’m not sure why he is here.
whether physically or habituation related— the “dosing” of the destructive agent is merely a matter of semantics. The “dose” is administered regularly to affect the destruction.
An argument in semantics. Input of agent results in output of behaviour and clinically significant end points.
It’s no use debating pot smokers. They just repeat the same old bogus studies and false statistics to justify the right to kill off brain cells. Oh, and other harmful substances are legal too, so why not. Except pot also is really good for you, it kills cancer and stuff. It’s true, it’s on the internet.
Legalizing a previously illegal, illicit mind-altering substance (state-wise) always metastasizes into unintended consequences that the stupid never, ever anticipate. They don’t want to.
Professional organizations (MD’s, CPA, Legal, law enforcement, etc.) have standards of conduct for certain activities. Most look unfavorably on illicit drug use and deny or revoke membership upon evidence of guilt on this matter. “legalization” of drugs (it’s really not ‘legalized’) in a large degree makes it ‘licit,’ at least in the public mindset. Are these professional groups then no longer allowed to bar membership based on marijuana usage of members or applicants?
Do HS students who are 18 then get to smoke it at lunch or on their free time? College students on campus? Will public college campuses ever be allowed to ban it?
Which you just did, hypocrite.
Is it OK if I use your ad hominem attacks against YOU?
I assume you would NOT want children to freely buy and use marijuana, right? I could be wrong. You could be a complete idiot who thinks it’s fine for 7 years old smoke pot, but for sanity’s sake - I’ll assume you would want to keep pot illegal for kids.
Using your own words - that makes you a dolt.
Having made that clear - won’t you try and use a rational argument next time? Thanks.
Several close friends are transplant surgeons. Heart transplant surgeons. The will NOT transplant a heart into a person who is addicted to tobbacco— for CLINICAL reasons. So— yeah, there is an argument to stop the sale of tobacco. But politically— our “leaders” suck money out of the producers (who now IMPORT tobacco to the US from... Zimbabwe?..Seriously!!) from the tax revenue the addiction produces. And... on another level, the mortality tables of insurers (at least the socialist obamaumaumaocare ones) absolutely LOVE smokers— they have to pay the premiums and the die long before they can access the funds for their own care coverage. Once heard this “subject rate payer” described as a “perfect HMO enrollee” who dies young. And social security too— benefits from death before eligible age. Truth.
Listen, it doesn’t matter what they say or do not say.
Nothing in MJ is physically addictive. Nothing.
They might believe they can’t live without it, they might believe they can’t relax without it, they might believe they can’t sleep without it, but they can.
Someone who has been physically addicted to a substance, such as myself with the substance being alprazolam, knows the difference.
When you are a user of a substance, and your lack of access to that substance or act of quitting use of that substance presents you with a very great chance of literal death, that is when you are addicted.
And even in that state, it is in one’s greatest benefit to endure, find a way to survive the withdrawal, and quit.
If you want to know what true addiction is, take a bunch of benzodiazepines every day at large doses for several years, and then stop. Then you will know.
Do not do what I suggested above. It can kill you. I just said that to illustrate the difference.
A key point left out though is that Philadelphia needs the money.... I mean, if pot is legalized, then Philly wouldn't be able to confiscate your house when they find that your son was dealing pot out of his bedroom.
"Do you really want to be on the same side with the most radical of the left?"
I'm on my side. Frankly, I take offense to your logic. To me, one is a hypocrite if they do not champion the return of prohibition on alcohol while championing the criminalization of pot.
Furthermore, the 'social contract' stuff about the do-we-need-another-problem like alcohol belies personal responsibility and most assuredly is a position of the left.
furthermore, I cannot recall of a reported incident where someone overdosed and died on pot, or beat his wife or shot his neighbor. I'm sure the hit piece would have covered such instances if there were any.... or did I rush through the article too fast, having read the same stuff for years.
Oh, wait till October when pot becomes legal in Canada. Oh, that's right.... They're all commies and we can't do what they do even if it's the right thing, can we.
Please see my post #56.
It most certainly is not an argument in semantics.
I know what I am talking about.
You just described the average libertarian.
Yes, it is an industry of the Big State. There must be a way to get rid of them w/out legalization. That is to say near impossible “clever” law writing which our political types are intellectually incapable of doing (because they too are stoners?) You make very good points. Ones made once by William F. Buckley. My worry is the developing children’s brains— such as they are being warped at the same time by our “edumacators” of the public govt. school State.
Home school— the only way to keep away from this crap.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.