General Updates and News

[DigitalNinja]

Rye, if this is not anti-capitalist then how come they have post videos on youtube of protestors wanting to abolish capitalism?

I would hope that everyone can agree that these "protests" got taken over by modern day hippies who want to live for free and get high all the time. I walked through the protest the other day and all I could smell was BO and weed.

If governments didn't give hand outs to banks the world would have been a bigger pot of piss than it is now. There are over 288k people who work for Bank of America if that went down all those people would be out of jobs. Would you have liked that? Protesting against the same corporations that offer people jobs while asking for jobs is backwards and makes no sense. Any you say that these people are educated and qualified. Anyone can say they have a degree now. They hand them out to anyone.

These people don't have jobs because they are lazy, stink, probably don't have good work habits, and just want to get money so they can get high. And comparing this to the Middle Eastern protests is a disservice to those people who died in them. This is no where near the same sort of thing.

[JET]

Originally Posted by DigitalNinja

I would hope that everyone can agree that these "protests" got taken over by modern day hippies who want to live for free and get high all the time. I walked through the protest the other day and all I could smell was BO and weed.

These people don't have jobs because they are lazy, stink, probably don't have good work habits, and just want to get money so they can get high. And comparing this to the Middle Eastern protests is a disservice to those people who died in them. This is no where near the same sort of thing.

and you're hoping that everyone will agree with you? Don't think so.

[Empire]

Originally Posted by RyeJay

This video is so warped, it's as though the 1% collectively authored it.
This comes from the perspective of someone moaning that he doesn't have enough money to make his private boat payments because the government taxes too much in order to pay for public services.

If you want to get into the issue of the Western World's non-empathy toward how people less fortunate have it: we should discuss the quality of life of the majority of people in undeveloped countries.

Here are a couple videos I'll throw out there, in response. My videos discuss the issues, unlike your video which attempts to misrepresent who the vast majority of the protestors are. The only sense of entitlement the protestors have is the belief that one has the right to paid employment.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZgZeAOaq4U

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAhHPIuTQ5k

You must understand RyeJay that these smelly protesters have no regard for civic law and order, no respect for fellow citizens, no real appreciation of the corporate world or what makes it tick. Also, they have no appreciation of how they ended up with a North Face tent to stay warm in while smoking pot and protesting. This misunderstanding of their surroundings then allows them to be misguided on a grand scale!

[JET]

Originally Posted by Empire

You must understand RyeJay that these smelly protesters have no regard for civic law and order, no respect for fellow citizens, no real appreciation of the corporate world or what makes it tick. Also, they have no appreciation of how they ended up with a North Face tent to stay warm in while smoking pot and protesting. This misunderstanding of their surroundings then allows them to be misguided on a grand scale!

Empire, at first I thought that you were being paternalistic, simplistic and over generalizing; and then I realized that you were just joking; right?

[Jstaleness]

This protest confuses me. Initially I couldn't choose a side but I'm not getting that clear message of what it is they are against. Usually protests disrupt something or shut something down all together. What have they stopped? They moved for the Remembrance Day Ceremonies without major issues. While there they just sort of camped. That's no different than a cultural fest of something. Doing what you are told by a higher is something that they are supposed to be fighting against. I don't want this protest to end either but c'mon shit or get off the pot. Disrupt something, send a clear message.

One side comment though. Smoking pot does not make you a bum. Many business folk do the same thing. I'm not at all trying to defend it as I quit 5 years ago but over half of Canadians have probably smoked or currently smoke the precious plant.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by Jstaleness

One side comment though. Smoking pot does not make you a bum. Many business folk do the same thing. I'm not at all trying to defend it as I quit 5 years ago but over half of Canadians have probably smoked or currently smoke the precious plant.

More stark evidence of our national decline. Hopefully Canada's government will pass tough legislation and begin to eliminate this scourge from our society.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

More stark evidence of our national decline. Hopefully Canada's government will pass tough legislation and begin to eliminate this scourge from our society.

I know many brilliant and incredibly productive people who smoke pot. If it were so harmful these people would not exist. It's also worth pointing out that pot genuinely helps some people with medical conditions and it's really cheap to produce.

Marijuana has been used as a political ploy. It's not a real issue. The worst tragedy of it is that for political reasons we have people wasting away in prisons and we have to spend money on policing and corrections. Making pot illegal also puts more money into the hands of people who are willing to break the law -- if it were grown legitimately a big revenue source for organized crime in places like Mexico would evaporate and we would be better off as a result.

[ZET]

Well Keith, you have definitely stirred the POT this time.
Not that I agree with you, of course.
Can we now get back to the other off-topic topic and leave this off-topic topic.?

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by someone123

I know many brilliant and incredibly productive people who smoke pot. If it were so harmful these people would not exist.

I prefer to think that they would be even more productive and brilliant without it. However, I expect such advocacy coming from the pot capital of Canada.

It's also worth pointing out that pot genuinely helps some people with medical conditions and it's really cheap to produce.

I am aghast at the inability of our pharmaceutical industry to produce the same allegedly beneficial effects from this substance without having to ignite the stuff in a paper cylinder and inhale the products of combustion into the lungs. Smoking of tobacco in such a way has been virtually banned in our society, but this gets a free pass. Bizarre.

Marijuana has been used as a political ploy. It's not a real issue. The worst tragedy of it is that for political reasons we have people wasting away in prisons and we have to spend money on policing and corrections. Making pot illegal also puts more money into the hands of people who are willing to break the law -- if it were grown legitimately a big revenue source for organized crime in places like Mexico would evaporate and we would be better off as a result.

Not at all. It is far from a harmless drug and has many negative effects which the advocates conveniently overlook. It is illegal for a reason and being illegal the laws need to be enforced, just the same way that the law goes after dealers of other types of drugs and, indeed, goes after those who smuggle illegal tobacco and alcohol. As for putting money in the hands of organized crime, the same argument was used in favor of govt-run gambling. That has not worked out so well.

[someone123]

As for putting money in the hands of organized crime, the same argument was used in favor of govt-run gambling. That has not worked out so well.

That's quite different. If pot were not controlled its price would drop to almost nothing because it is so cheap and easy to produce. I'm not proposing the government get involved -- in fact I am arguing for less government intervention.

[FuzzyWuz]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

... It is illegal for a reason....

Very true, as so eloquently stated by that great sage of government wisdom in the early part of the 20th century,

"There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the US, and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz and swing, result from marijuana usage. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers and any others."http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_J._Anslinger

-- Henry J. Anslinger, First Commissioner of the U.S. Treasury Department's Federal Bureau of Narcotics (FBN)

This is where the war on drugs started in North America, on the front lines of the war to keep the racial status quo.

[resetcbu1]

She was living in a single room with three other individuals.
One of them was a male and the other two, well, the other two were females.
God only know what they were up to in there.
And furthermore Susan, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to learn that all four of them
habitually smoke marijuana cigarettes... reefers

-Reefer Madness
-Sublime

[Empire]

Originally Posted by JET

Empire, at first I thought that you were being paternalistic, simplistic and over generalizing; and then I realized that you were just joking; right?

Wrong, we live in one of the best free countries in the world. In addition to having a corporate system and government that works reasonably well we have mountains, oceans, pristine forests and vibrant urban centers.

Considering the vastness of this country it is a small miracle that we have a system that works at all. So, to have protesters that understand none of this occupying public spaces of great significance in the history of our city and the history of our country is revolting. When you scale a statue of Robert Burns and lash a cardboard sign that says Occupy Nova Scotia to this copper edifice you have somehow skipped a few important life lessons.

[pchipman]

Just thought I would comment on the discussions, as I read this thread often but am frustrated at obviously misinformed and irrational arguments. I thought I would comment on this particular topic because it highlights my growing frustration with the lack of evidence-based political decision making which seems to be running rampant in Canada at the moment, with the new crime bill proposed by the Conservatives and in their approach to climate change. This problem is also relevant here because it is also employed in the tactics that the Hertigate Trust and other special interest groups use against urban densification.
The argument for intensified criminalization of pot highlights a dogmatic political agenda with little basis in reality.

[QUOTE]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

I am aghast at the inability of our pharmaceutical industry to produce the same allegedly beneficial effects from this substance without having to ignite the stuff in a paper cylinder and inhale the products of combustion into the lungs.

Cannabinoids are a well sought pharmaceutical agent. The clinical benefits of THC and it derivatives are well proven. Research into the therapeutic effects of tetrahydrocannabinol analogues are continuously met with restrictive legislation most recently being enforced by conservative ideologies, thus making drug development problematic. The molecule and receptors are known, as is much of its metabolism- the problem is irrational policies promoting non-tolerance. Unfortunately, rather than base decisions on informed science and evidence, many current government decisions are based solely on dogmatic assumptions. It does, however seem that research is being directed towards development of THC analogues which would have therapeutic effects, but lack the controversial cognitive effects.
IMO, given the ease and low cost of growth, the rational option is local, regulated production. The current government seeks to criminalize this solution further.

Smoking of tobacco in such a way has been virtually banned in our society, but this gets a free pass. Bizarre.

You’re kidding right? I suppose that the consumption of marijuana isn’t as villainized as you may think it should be in society, but comparing the stigma associated with cigarette vs marijuana usage in and around Halifax is simply laughable. I suspect this may gradually change in a progressive society, but it’s not currently the case. Is this what you are worried about?

Not at all. It is far from a harmless drug and has many negative effects which the advocates conveniently overlook. It is illegal for a reason and being illegal the laws need to be enforced, just the same way that the law goes after dealers of other types of drugs and, indeed, goes after those who smuggle illegal tobacco and alcohol.

Can you please explain those reasons to me. Blind declaration of a law does not make it just or rational. Look at the negative social and physiological effects of chronic alcohol consumption and compare to chronic marijuana use.

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by pchipman

I thought I would comment on this particular topic because it highlights my growing frustration with the lack of evidence-based political decision making which seems to be running rampant in Canada at the moment

Ah yes, "evidence-based", the buzzword of the moment. Someone produces a study and uses its conclusions to propose a social agenda. Of course the validity of the study or its data is seldom questioned by the media or the proponents, despite ample opportunities to do so. What is never taken into account by the evidence-based advocates is the accumulated wisdom of living - what is generally known as "common sense", something most evidence-based advocates seem to lack, in my experience.

Cannabinoids are a well sought pharmaceutical agent. The clinical benefits of THC and it derivatives are well proven. Research into the therapeutic effects of tetrahydrocannabinol analogues are continuously met with restrictive legislation most recently being enforced by conservative ideologies, thus making drug development problematic. The molecule and receptors are known, as is much of its metabolism- the problem is irrational policies promoting non-tolerance. Unfortunately, rather than base decisions on informed science and evidence, many current government decisions are based solely on dogmatic assumptions. It does, however seem that research is being directed towards development of THC analogues which would have therapeutic effects, but lack the controversial cognitive effects.
IMO, given the ease and low cost of growth, the rational option is local, regulated production. The current government seeks to criminalize this solution further.

You seem to confuse the medical aspects of its use with the recreational aspects. This is exactly why any legitimate use of the stuff for medical purposes took so long to occur. The behavior of a typical pothead makes a very good argument against legalization and was a significant reason why medical use took so long to occur. Codeine and cocaine also have beneficial pharmacological effects, but that does not mean they too should be made freely available for recreational use.

You’re kidding right? I suppose that the consumption of marijuana isn’t as villainized as you may think it should be in society, but comparing the stigma associated with cigarette vs marijuana usage in and around Halifax is simply laughable. I suspect this may gradually change in a progressive society, but it’s not currently the case. Is this what you are worried about?

Environmental smoke has been deemed a health hazard serious enough to warrant bans against exposure in virtually any public space, and even in private ones such as vehicles occupied by children. The concept of govt deciding that environmental cannabis smoke is somehow not as harmful is simply ludicrous. The fact the the stuff is generally smoked to obtain the high is a major mark against it in our current public policy environment.

Look at the negative social and physiological effects of chronic alcohol consumption and compare to chronic marijuana use.

The only result of marijuana use is to obtain a high. Alcohol is used in a far different manner and the two cannot be compared.

[W.Sobchak]

If anyone is going to discuss marijuana and what it does, I recommend you read the Laguardia report, as well as the countless studies and journals by Harvard medical.

The two most outstanding long term effects of extended, and extended is stressed, (5-8 grams a day for 10 years), is slight schizophrenic symptoms, and pulmonary clogging. The former has been proven to dissipate after 3 months of not smoking. While the latter is a side effect of inhaling any carcinogen, which is predominantly the device to smoke it, ie. wood, and rice pulp based papers.


In the 50's they told us it would make you insane, in the 60's you would become a killer, the 70's it made you hate your country, and the 80's said it was the first step to heroin/crack/coke. So why isn't there insane, murderous, anarchists, with needles sticking out of their arms, and joints hanging out of their mouths running around with long as beards?

The reason cannabis is labeled as a gateway drug, is because the local laws have made it an underground drug, so it is found in the same environs as harder drugs. A pot dealer will have access, more often than not, to other more dangerous intoxicants that will always be offered, because a pot dealer is like a car sales man. Why buy the base level model, when for only a few extra buck you can get this, it makes you feel like you are going faster, and indestructable. Education is the key here not stricter rules.

little known factoids

The term "joint" comes from Jazz musicians in the 40's and 50's calling a spliff "pigs feet".

In 2003, a leather basket filled with cannabis leaf fragments and seeds was found next to a 2,500- to 2,800-year-old mummified shaman in the northwestern Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region of China. (wikipedia) The first anti-marijuana laws China enacted were as a result from US pressure in the early 80's.

[pchipman]

[QUOTE]

Originally Posted by Keith P.

Ah yes, "evidence-based", the buzzword of the moment. Someone produces a study and uses its conclusions to propose a social agenda.

I think you misunderstood. I am not referring to general public opinion here, but to general scientific consensus. It is easy to dismiss a rigorous scientific study or a whole body of scientific literature, but that is blatantly anti-intellectual (don't get me started on creationism in public schools). Scientists don't generate conclusions to promote a social agenda - and they shouldn't. They generate conclusions to describe a truth as the evidence suggests, regardless (good or bad) of the social implications.

Of course the validity of the study or its data is seldom questioned by the media or the proponents, despite ample opportunities to do so. What is never taken into account by the evidence-based advocates is the accumulated wisdom of living - what is generally known as "common sense", something most evidence-based advocates seem to lack, in my experience.

If you are referring to the dismal quality of scientific journalism, I agree with you. Studies should be questioned and critically assessed, this is the backbone of science. However, superficial and sensational interpretations seem to be more common in mainstream media.

Also, common sense is subjective and only works from a particular perspective. It fails to apply to other in or from different situations to yours. Science - done properly - is objective and is widely applicable.

I don't know who you are referring to when you write 'evidence-based advocates'. I feel this is another example of blind generalization. Do you mean rational people? Those people who disagree with your world-view? Do you support irrationality as a viable means of policy-making?

The only result of marijuana use is to obtain a high. Alcohol is used in a far different manner and the two cannot be compared.

This just confuses me. Do you suggest that the majority of alcohol use is purely for sustenance? Or are you referring to the widely social nature of the drug? And why can't the two be compared? They are widely used drugs throughout the entire world.

Anyway, we are far off topic here.

The Occupy NS camp at Victoria Park has been disassembled by police. Generally I feel this may be a good thing for the movement as the disorganization was starting to sway public opinion against the 'Occupiers'.

Also, the Park is in dire need of some TLC (not directly related to the Occupy protests). Asphalt walkways are a mess of potholes and bumps and the fountain is in a sad state.
It would be nice to see a reworking of the park in conjunction with all the new development happening in the area.

[hoser111]

All of this has what to do with construction & development?

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by W.Sobchak

The reason cannabis is labeled as a gateway drug, is because the local laws have made it an underground drug, so it is found in the same environs as harder drugs.

Ding ding. We have ourselves a winner.

I'm also going to echo hoser's question: construction and development, guys?

[Keith P.]

Originally Posted by hoser111

All of this has what to do with construction & development?

I agree. Let us move back to topic.