From:
Tim Kerr
Date:
Nov 03 08:03 UTC
Short link
I don't enjoy smoking cannabis - never really have. But while there are
arguments between members of this forum about its effects and legality I
think it pertinent to discuss other drugs as well.
Until the late 1960's tobacco was the main drug of choice (excluding alcohol
of course) and it served its function admirably. From the late 1960's the
RATE of cigarette smoking amongst males declined. To some degree this was
unrecognised as more women took up smoking.
The decline was a "natural" decline - males were taking up sport, the
detrimental effects of tobacco smoking were becoming more noticeable and
younger males were less stressed than the previous generation. Also, I
suppose, cannabis smoking began to increase - often young tobacco smokers
took up cannabis smoking as it was - in the Hippie era - more "green".
Tobacco smoking has been declining ever since the late 1960's - NOT entirely
because of the actions of the anti-smoking lobby and law changes. The REASON
smoking tobacco began to decline was simply other stress-release substitutes
were becoming available. And the level of stress was being reduced. In a
phrase, the first and second world wars had finished, the great depression
had passed by - and those who experienced these periods of history were
getting older and fading away. There was bugger-all stress left! I mean life
and death stress.
In last Saturday's edition of "The Press" Beck Eleven wrote a telling
article. She went off her prescription of whatever it was (I keep forgetting
the name of the stuff!) and tried surviving without it. She did not enjoy
the experience. Not that she enjoyed the experience of using the stuff
either...
Tellingly she stated that in Canterbury one in eleven (? Did I get that
figure right?) is on some sort of prescribed anti-depressant. Bugger me!
While the Government puts up the taxes on tobacco products the rate of
prescribed substitutes gallops upward!
It seems a large portion of the population needs some form of anti
depressant. I won't ask why - I am simply stating this was one of the
figures bandied about in Beck Eleven's article.
Now, I bet the anti-depressants that are being prescribed aren't harmless
over the long term.... Neither is tobacco... and cannabis probably isn't the
best stuff for you over the long term either... But, the fact is, unless
people have easy access to low-strength anti-depressants they will lead
miserable lives... So without getting into a pro-anti argument about fags
and pot - why can't they be looked upon more tolerantly? (Cannabis is
mind-altering like alcohol so maybe people should not be allowed to smoke
too much of the stuff and drive....)
And if fags and pot cannot be acceptable - then for God's sake why are
well-heeled members of the state-supported "Health System" allowed to
PRESCRIBE freebee drugs?
And what is that stuff that Doctors are prescribing all over the place - the
stuff I can't remember the name of.
Just wondering...
Tim Kerr
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Campbell" <michael.campbell@xtra.co.nz>
To: <canterburyissues@forums.e-democracy.org>
Sent: Monday, November 03, 2008 3:56 PM
Subject: Re: [Canterbury Issues] Local Issues and Weed?
> Natalie re weed
>
> I think locally we really do need to start at the basics such as 'did you
> talk to your neighbour today and if not, why not'
>
> When an elderly person can die in their home and not be found for 4 days I
> think society's leaders particularly the Bob Parkers of this world need to
> make comment
>
> Also the media have a leadership role to play in this too by publishing
> editorial which represents society's view on these issues
>
> I think it's far more important that we talk to our neighbour and far more
> contentious and basic than whether we have the right to smoke wacky baccy.
>
> What about the witnesses to crime (familial abuse and the like) who ignore
> or won't call in the authorities - "it's not our problem" - if not ours
> then whose?
>
> Or perhaps we are too busy (too keen) smoking mind altering drugs or
> getting drunk or blowing our wages on a casino to worry about our
> neighbours
>
>
> Brain re Greens
> Have you read the story about the "reds in the beds" in the Green Party in
> Investigate Magazine, I think Brian should rephrase to "a vote for green
> is a vote for communism" (I'm sure Brian would tell us that it's the
> democratic type of communism he espouses)
>
>
> Michael Campbell
>
>
> Michael Campbell
> North Beach, Christchurch
> Info about Michael Campbell:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/michaelcampbell
>
> This topic's messages may be viewed at:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/6LtOLWRvefeBxStO3Fas44
> -----------------------------------------
> To post, send your message to: <email obscured>
> To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on,"
> in subject line and send to: <email obscured>
>
> More info about Canterbury Public Issues Forum:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/canterburyissues
>
> E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules
> -----------------------------------------
> Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://OnlineGroups.Net
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.175 / Virus Database: 270.8.5/1763 - Release Date: 11/2/2008
7:08 PM
From:
Joy Bishop
Date:
Nov 03 21:52 UTC
Short link
Hi Tim
Its name is Prozac. I can well believe the figures quoted in Beck Eleven's
column. I have a family member on anti depressants and know of at least two
friends also on them. I don't have a huge circle of friends so the odds may
well be correct. (I'm no mathematician). Unfortunately one of the side
effects of pot and alcohol is a form of natural depressant. So your depressed
person "Self medicates" on the booze or the pot and feels great for a short
time and then eventually as bad if not worse than they did before.
Joy Bishop
--- On Mon, 3/11/08, Tim Kerr <Tim.Kerr@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
> From: Tim Kerr <Tim.Kerr@xtra.co.nz>
> Subject: [Canterbury Issues] Weed, Fags and Mogadon
> To: <email obscured>
> Received: Monday, 3 November, 2008, 9:02 PM
> I don't enjoy smoking cannabis - never really have. But
> while there are
> arguments between members of this forum about its effects
> and legality I
> think it pertinent to discuss other drugs as well.
>
> Until the late 1960's tobacco was the main drug of
> choice (excluding alcohol
> of course) and it served its function admirably. From the
> late 1960's the
> RATE of cigarette smoking amongst males declined. To some
> degree this was
> unrecognised as more women took up smoking.
>
> The decline was a "natural" decline - males were
> taking up sport, the
> detrimental effects of tobacco smoking were becoming more
> noticeable and
> younger males were less stressed than the previous
> generation. Also, I
> suppose, cannabis smoking began to increase - often young
> tobacco smokers
> took up cannabis smoking as it was - in the Hippie era -
> more "green".
>
> Tobacco smoking has been declining ever since the late
> 1960's - NOT entirely
> because of the actions of the anti-smoking lobby and law
> changes. The REASON
> smoking tobacco began to decline was simply other
> stress-release substitutes
> were becoming available. And the level of stress was being
> reduced. In a
> phrase, the first and second world wars had finished, the
> great depression
> had passed by - and those who experienced these periods of
> history were
> getting older and fading away. There was bugger-all stress
> left! I mean life
> and death stress.
>
> In last Saturday's edition of "The Press"
> Beck Eleven wrote a telling
> article. She went off her prescription of whatever it was
> (I keep forgetting
> the name of the stuff!) and tried surviving without it. She
> did not enjoy
> the experience. Not that she enjoyed the experience of
> using the stuff
> either...
>
> Tellingly she stated that in Canterbury one in eleven (?
> Did I get that
> figure right?) is on some sort of prescribed
> anti-depressant. Bugger me!
> While the Government puts up the taxes on tobacco products
> the rate of
> prescribed substitutes gallops upward!
>
> It seems a large portion of the population needs some form
> of anti
> depressant. I won't ask why - I am simply stating this
> was one of the
> figures bandied about in Beck Eleven's article.
>
> Now, I bet the anti-depressants that are being prescribed
> aren't harmless
> over the long term.... Neither is tobacco... and cannabis
> probably isn't the
> best stuff for you over the long term either... But, the
> fact is, unless
> people have easy access to low-strength anti-depressants
> they will lead
> miserable lives... So without getting into a pro-anti
> argument about fags
> and pot - why can't they be looked upon more
> tolerantly? (Cannabis is
> mind-altering like alcohol so maybe people should not be
> allowed to smoke
> too much of the stuff and drive....)
>
> And if fags and pot cannot be acceptable - then for
> God's sake why are
> well-heeled members of the state-supported "Health
> System" allowed to
> PRESCRIBE freebee drugs?
>
> And what is that stuff that Doctors are prescribing all
> over the place - the
> stuff I can't remember the name of.
>
> Just wondering...
>
> Tim Kerr
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Michael Campbell"
> <michael.campbell@xtra.co.nz>
> To: <canterburyissues@forums.e-democracy.org>
> Sent: Monday, November 03, 2008 3:56 PM
> Subject: Re: [Canterbury Issues] Local Issues and Weed?
>
>
> > Natalie re weed
> >
> > I think locally we really do need to start at the
> basics such as 'did you
> > talk to your neighbour today and if not, why not'
> >
> > When an elderly person can die in their home and not
> be found for 4 days I
> > think society's leaders particularly the Bob
> Parkers of this world need to
> > make comment
> >
> > Also the media have a leadership role to play in this
> too by publishing
> > editorial which represents society's view on these
> issues
> >
> > I think it's far more important that we talk to
> our neighbour and far more
> > contentious and basic than whether we have the right
> to smoke wacky baccy.
> >
> > What about the witnesses to crime (familial abuse and
> the like) who ignore
> > or won't call in the authorities - "it's
> not our problem" - if not ours
> > then whose?
> >
> > Or perhaps we are too busy (too keen) smoking mind
> altering drugs or
> > getting drunk or blowing our wages on a casino to
> worry about our
> > neighbours
> >
> >
> > Brain re Greens
> > Have you read the story about the "reds in the
> beds" in the Green Party in
> > Investigate Magazine, I think Brian should rephrase to
> "a vote for green
> > is a vote for communism" (I'm sure Brian
> would tell us that it's the
> > democratic type of communism he espouses)
> >
> >
> > Michael Campbell
> >
> >
> > Michael Campbell
> > North Beach, Christchurch
> > Info about Michael Campbell:
> > http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/michaelcampbell
> >
> > This topic's messages may be viewed at:
> >
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/6LtOLWRvefeBxStO3Fas44
> > -----------------------------------------
> > To post, send your message to:
> <email obscured>
> > To leave or for daily digest, type
> "unsubscribe" or "digest on,"
> > in subject line and send to:
> <email obscured>
> >
> > More info about Canterbury Public Issues Forum:
> > http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/canterburyissues
> >
> > E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules
> > -----------------------------------------
> > Technical assistance thanks to our friends at
> http://OnlineGroups.Net
>
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
> Version: 8.0.175 / Virus Database: 270.8.5/1763 - Release
> Date: 11/2/2008
> 7:08 PM
>
>
> Tim Kerr
>
> Info about Tim Kerr:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/timkerr
>
> This topic's messages may be viewed at:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/LGaxEJth2SthKd2gV7u4M
> -----------------------------------------
> To post, send your message to:
> <email obscured>
> To leave or for daily digest, type
> "unsubscribe" or "digest on,"
> in subject line and send to:
> <email obscured>
>
> More info about Canterbury Public Issues Forum:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/canterburyissues
>
> E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules
> -----------------------------------------
> Technical assistance thanks to our friends at
> http://OnlineGroups.Net
From:
Kevin O'Connell
Date:
Nov 03 22:34 UTC
Short link
when will they invent the perfect drug! or do we already have it? - majic
mushrooms!!!
but seriously, i am a marijuana tea drinker (or eater) not a smoker and have
been since 1995 (with the occasional bong hit). i get a mild depression after
several evenings on and a day or two off. Nothing to worry about..gone
completely the next day. I am a happily functioning pot-head most of the time
(it is an after work activity), but then i know plenty of smokers who are too.
btw, as many of you know, much of Chch and canterbury parks, riverbanks,
cemetaries and playgrounds were tidied and repaired hugely by beanman and
trusty hound stimpy.
what you may not know is that beanman's secret technique is to do the work
while his 'high' comes on (after consuming the holy bhang leaf)- very rewarding
- without pot i am not nearly so inspired to go the extra mile.
Cannabis is a mind-opening intoxicant - not everyones cup of tea, but then
neither is single-malt whisky.
Well ive outed myself now (perhaps it explains why i can get no publicity for
my environment project?, despite its massive effectiveness in helping turn
around the litter problem in chch greenspace). But was anyone hurt, or were
there actually positive side effects from my responsible use of pot?
how much is our community denying, by the unjust criminal status?
regards
Kevin
--- On Tue, 11/4/08, Joy Bishop <joy.dave@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
> From: Joy Bishop <joy.dave@xtra.co.nz>
> Subject: Re: [Canterbury Issues] Weed, Fags and Mogadon
> To: <email obscured>
> Date: Tuesday, November 4, 2008, 10:52 AM
> Hi Tim
>
> Its name is Prozac. I can well believe the figures quoted
> in Beck Eleven's column. I have a family member on anti
> depressants and know of at least two friends also on them.
> I don't have a huge circle of friends so the odds may
> well be correct. (I'm no mathematician). Unfortunately
> one of the side effects of pot and alcohol is a form of
> natural depressant. So your depressed person "Self
> medicates" on the booze or the pot and feels great for
> a short time and then eventually as bad if not worse than
> they did before.
>
> Joy Bishop
>
>
> --- On Mon, 3/11/08, Tim Kerr <Tim.Kerr@xtra.co.nz>
> wrote:
>
> > From: Tim Kerr <Tim.Kerr@xtra.co.nz>
> > Subject: [Canterbury Issues] Weed, Fags and Mogadon
> > To: <email obscured>
> > Received: Monday, 3 November, 2008, 9:02 PM
> > I don't enjoy smoking cannabis - never really
> have. But
> > while there are
> > arguments between members of this forum about its
> effects
> > and legality I
> > think it pertinent to discuss other drugs as well.
> >
> > Until the late 1960's tobacco was the main drug of
> > choice (excluding alcohol
> > of course) and it served its function admirably. From
> the
> > late 1960's the
> > RATE of cigarette smoking amongst males declined. To
> some
> > degree this was
> > unrecognised as more women took up smoking.
> >
> > The decline was a "natural" decline - males
> were
> > taking up sport, the
> > detrimental effects of tobacco smoking were becoming
> more
> > noticeable and
> > younger males were less stressed than the previous
> > generation. Also, I
> > suppose, cannabis smoking began to increase - often
> young
> > tobacco smokers
> > took up cannabis smoking as it was - in the Hippie era
> -
> > more "green".
> >
> > Tobacco smoking has been declining ever since the late
> > 1960's - NOT entirely
> > because of the actions of the anti-smoking lobby and
> law
> > changes. The REASON
> > smoking tobacco began to decline was simply other
> > stress-release substitutes
> > were becoming available. And the level of stress was
> being
> > reduced. In a
> > phrase, the first and second world wars had finished,
> the
> > great depression
> > had passed by - and those who experienced these
> periods of
> > history were
> > getting older and fading away. There was bugger-all
> stress
> > left! I mean life
> > and death stress.
> >
> > In last Saturday's edition of "The
> Press"
> > Beck Eleven wrote a telling
> > article. She went off her prescription of whatever it
> was
> > (I keep forgetting
> > the name of the stuff!) and tried surviving without
> it. She
> > did not enjoy
> > the experience. Not that she enjoyed the experience of
> > using the stuff
> > either...
> >
> > Tellingly she stated that in Canterbury one in eleven
> (?
> > Did I get that
> > figure right?) is on some sort of prescribed
> > anti-depressant. Bugger me!
> > While the Government puts up the taxes on tobacco
> products
> > the rate of
> > prescribed substitutes gallops upward!
> >
> > It seems a large portion of the population needs some
> form
> > of anti
> > depressant. I won't ask why - I am simply stating
> this
> > was one of the
> > figures bandied about in Beck Eleven's article.
> >
> > Now, I bet the anti-depressants that are being
> prescribed
> > aren't harmless
> > over the long term.... Neither is tobacco... and
> cannabis
> > probably isn't the
> > best stuff for you over the long term either... But,
> the
> > fact is, unless
> > people have easy access to low-strength
> anti-depressants
> > they will lead
> > miserable lives... So without getting into a pro-anti
> > argument about fags
> > and pot - why can't they be looked upon more
> > tolerantly? (Cannabis is
> > mind-altering like alcohol so maybe people should not
> be
> > allowed to smoke
> > too much of the stuff and drive....)
> >
> > And if fags and pot cannot be acceptable - then for
> > God's sake why are
> > well-heeled members of the state-supported
> "Health
> > System" allowed to
> > PRESCRIBE freebee drugs?
> >
> > And what is that stuff that Doctors are prescribing
> all
> > over the place - the
> > stuff I can't remember the name of.
> >
> > Just wondering...
> >
> > Tim Kerr
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Michael Campbell"
> > <michael.campbell@xtra.co.nz>
> > To: <canterburyissues@forums.e-democracy.org>
> > Sent: Monday, November 03, 2008 3:56 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Canterbury Issues] Local Issues and
> Weed?
> >
> >
> > > Natalie re weed
> > >
> > > I think locally we really do need to start at the
> > basics such as 'did you
> > > talk to your neighbour today and if not, why
> not'
> > >
> > > When an elderly person can die in their home and
> not
> > be found for 4 days I
> > > think society's leaders particularly the Bob
> > Parkers of this world need to
> > > make comment
> > >
> > > Also the media have a leadership role to play in
> this
> > too by publishing
> > > editorial which represents society's view on
> these
> > issues
> > >
> > > I think it's far more important that we talk
> to
> > our neighbour and far more
> > > contentious and basic than whether we have the
> right
> > to smoke wacky baccy.
> > >
> > > What about the witnesses to crime (familial abuse
> and
> > the like) who ignore
> > > or won't call in the authorities -
> "it's
> > not our problem" - if not ours
> > > then whose?
> > >
> > > Or perhaps we are too busy (too keen) smoking
> mind
> > altering drugs or
> > > getting drunk or blowing our wages on a casino to
> > worry about our
> > > neighbours
> > >
> > >
> > > Brain re Greens
> > > Have you read the story about the "reds in
> the
> > beds" in the Green Party in
> > > Investigate Magazine, I think Brian should
> rephrase to
> > "a vote for green
> > > is a vote for communism" (I'm sure Brian
> > would tell us that it's the
> > > democratic type of communism he espouses)
> > >
> > >
> > > Michael Campbell
> > >
> > >
> > > Michael Campbell
> > > North Beach, Christchurch
> > > Info about Michael Campbell:
> > > http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/michaelcampbell
> > >
> > > This topic's messages may be viewed at:
> > >
> >
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/6LtOLWRvefeBxStO3Fas44
> > > -----------------------------------------
> > > To post, send your message to:
> > <email obscured>
> > > To leave or for daily digest, type
> > "unsubscribe" or "digest on,"
> > > in subject line and send to:
> > <email obscured>
> > >
> > > More info about Canterbury Public Issues Forum:
> > >
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/canterburyissues
> > >
> > > E-Democracy.Org rules:
> http://e-democracy.org/rules
> > > -----------------------------------------
> > > Technical assistance thanks to our friends at
> > http://OnlineGroups.Net
> >
> >
> >
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >
> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
> > Version: 8.0.175 / Virus Database: 270.8.5/1763 -
> Release
> > Date: 11/2/2008
> > 7:08 PM
> >
> >
> > Tim Kerr
> >
> > Info about Tim Kerr:
> > http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/timkerr
> >
> > This topic's messages may be viewed at:
> >
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/LGaxEJth2SthKd2gV7u4M
> > -----------------------------------------
> > To post, send your message to:
> > <email obscured>
> > To leave or for daily digest, type
> > "unsubscribe" or "digest on,"
> > in subject line and send to:
> > <email obscured>
> >
> > More info about Canterbury Public Issues Forum:
> >
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/canterburyissues
> >
> > E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules
> > -----------------------------------------
> > Technical assistance thanks to our friends at
> > http://OnlineGroups.Net
>
>
> Joy Bishop
>
> Info about Joy Bishop:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/joybishop
>
> This topic's messages may be viewed at:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/4bPUoWpEBhqAl1pA3VNc2m
> -----------------------------------------
> To post, send your message to:
> <email obscured>
> To leave or for daily digest, type
> "unsubscribe" or "digest on,"
> in subject line and send to:
> <email obscured>
>
> More info about Canterbury Public Issues Forum:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/canterburyissues
>
> E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules
> -----------------------------------------
> Technical assistance thanks to our friends at
> http://OnlineGroups.Net
From:
Paula Lambert
Date:
Nov 04 03:41 UTC
Short link
A very good and thought-provoking post Tim :)
I believe the uptake of pharmaceutical anti-depressants in most Western
countries is similar or higher. In particular here, Australia, the UK and
the USA.
Additionally, parents in those countries are drugging their children with
pharmaceuticals for behavioural issues at what I think is an alarming rate.
(For busy parents is it so much easier than learning new parenting
strategies ?)
I wish it was time we all took a good look at ourselves,at all our medical
professions, as well as the way pharmaceuticals are marketed (in the USA
pharmas spent literally tens of millions lobbying there last year, in
addition to their massive marketing spend), and the yawning abyss between a
rational policy for legal and illegal drugs.
Incidentally, New Zealand is the only other country in the world where
direct-to-consumer (eg. tv and radio ads) pharma drug marketing is legal,
although they've been trying hard to crack EU barriers for a couple of
years.
When the first NZ National Drug Policy was formulated years ago - around
1998 I think - the intent was to rate relative harms of all drugs on one
scale, so as to be absolutely clear, to provide an accurate context. At
least the first draft came out that way. However by the time the final
draft was publicly revealed, after a lot of lobbying by pharma and liquor
interests, the illegal and legal drugs were separated. Very sad day for
public health that day.
cheers, Paula.
On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 9:02 PM, Tim Kerr <Tim.Kerr@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
> I don't enjoy smoking cannabis - never really have. But while there are
> arguments between members of this forum about its effects and legality I
> think it pertinent to discuss other drugs as well.
>
> Until the late 1960's tobacco was the main drug of choice (excluding
> alcohol
> of course) and it served its function admirably. From the late 1960's the
> RATE of cigarette smoking amongst males declined. To some degree this was
> unrecognised as more women took up smoking.
>
> The decline was a "natural" decline - males were taking up sport, the
> detrimental effects of tobacco smoking were becoming more noticeable and
> younger males were less stressed than the previous generation. Also, I
> suppose, cannabis smoking began to increase - often young tobacco smokers
> took up cannabis smoking as it was - in the Hippie era - more "green".
>
> Tobacco smoking has been declining ever since the late 1960's - NOT
> entirely
> because of the actions of the anti-smoking lobby and law changes. The
> REASON
> smoking tobacco began to decline was simply other stress-release
> substitutes
> were becoming available. And the level of stress was being reduced. In a
> phrase, the first and second world wars had finished, the great depression
> had passed by - and those who experienced these periods of history were
> getting older and fading away. There was bugger-all stress left! I mean
> life
> and death stress.
>
> In last Saturday's edition of "The Press" Beck Eleven wrote a telling
> article. She went off her prescription of whatever it was (I keep
> forgetting
> the name of the stuff!) and tried surviving without it. She did not enjoy
> the experience. Not that she enjoyed the experience of using the stuff
> either...
>
> Tellingly she stated that in Canterbury one in eleven (? Did I get that
> figure right?) is on some sort of prescribed anti-depressant. Bugger me!
> While the Government puts up the taxes on tobacco products the rate of
> prescribed substitutes gallops upward!
>
> It seems a large portion of the population needs some form of anti
> depressant. I won't ask why - I am simply stating this was one of the
> figures bandied about in Beck Eleven's article.
>
> Now, I bet the anti-depressants that are being prescribed aren't harmless
> over the long term.... Neither is tobacco... and cannabis probably isn't
> the
> best stuff for you over the long term either... But, the fact is, unless
> people have easy access to low-strength anti-depressants they will lead
> miserable lives... So without getting into a pro-anti argument about fags
> and pot - why can't they be looked upon more tolerantly? (Cannabis is
> mind-altering like alcohol so maybe people should not be allowed to smoke
> too much of the stuff and drive....)
>
> And if fags and pot cannot be acceptable - then for God's sake why are
> well-heeled members of the state-supported "Health System" allowed to
> PRESCRIBE freebee drugs?
>
> And what is that stuff that Doctors are prescribing all over the place -
> the
> stuff I can't remember the name of.
>
> Just wondering...
>
> Tim Kerr
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Michael Campbell" <michael.campbell@xtra.co.nz>
> To: <canterburyissues@forums.e-democracy.org>
> Sent: Monday, November 03, 2008 3:56 PM
> Subject: Re: [Canterbury Issues] Local Issues and Weed?
>
>
> > Natalie re weed
> >
> > I think locally we really do need to start at the basics such as 'did you
> > talk to your neighbour today and if not, why not'
> >
> > When an elderly person can die in their home and not be found for 4 days
> I
> > think society's leaders particularly the Bob Parkers of this world need
> to
> > make comment
> >
> > Also the media have a leadership role to play in this too by publishing
> > editorial which represents society's view on these issues
> >
> > I think it's far more important that we talk to our neighbour and far
> more
> > contentious and basic than whether we have the right to smoke wacky
> baccy.
> >
> > What about the witnesses to crime (familial abuse and the like) who
> ignore
> > or won't call in the authorities - "it's not our problem" - if not ours
> > then whose?
> >
> > Or perhaps we are too busy (too keen) smoking mind altering drugs or
> > getting drunk or blowing our wages on a casino to worry about our
> > neighbours
> >
> >
> > Brain re Greens
> > Have you read the story about the "reds in the beds" in the Green Party
> in
> > Investigate Magazine, I think Brian should rephrase to "a vote for green
> > is a vote for communism" (I'm sure Brian would tell us that it's the
> > democratic type of communism he espouses)
> >
> >
> > Michael Campbell
> >
> >
> > Michael Campbell
> > North Beach, Christchurch
> > Info about Michael Campbell:
> > http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/michaelcampbell
> >
> > This topic's messages may be viewed at:
> > http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/6LtOLWRvefeBxStO3Fas44
> > -----------------------------------------
> > To post, send your message to: <email obscured>
> > To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on,"
> > in subject line and send to: <email obscured>
> >
> > More info about Canterbury Public Issues Forum:
> > http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/canterburyissues
> >
> > E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules
> > -----------------------------------------
> > Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://OnlineGroups.Net
>
>
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
> Version: 8.0.175 / Virus Database: 270.8.5/1763 - Release Date: 11/2/2008
> 7:08 PM
>
>
> Tim Kerr
>
> Info about Tim Kerr: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/timkerr
>
> This topic's messages may be viewed at:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/LGaxEJth2SthKd2gV7u4M
> -----------------------------------------
> To post, send your message to: <email obscured>
> To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on,"
> in subject line and send to: <email obscured>
>
> More info about Canterbury Public Issues Forum:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/canterburyissues
>
> E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules
> -----------------------------------------
> Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://OnlineGroups.Net
>
Add to the topic
Weed, Fags and Mogadon
[?]
You cannot post because you are not logged in.
If you are a member
Canterbury Public Issues Forum,
login to post to this topic.
Otherwise
sign up,
become a member of
Canterbury Public Issues Forum,
and post to this topic.
.