Limerick-Royersford-SpringCity
Current Weather
- Today
- 69°
- Local every day in
12:03 pm on Sunday, February 24, 2013
Cannabis is not synthetic cannabis, not by a long shot. Let's not forget that synthetic cannabis is an unanticipated consequence of the epic, proven failure of public policy that we call the war on (some) drugs. Mr. Gimbel is advocating more of the same behavior that delivered synthetic cannabinoids to our children. The University of Michigan's Monitoring the Future survey tells us that the rate youth use of drinking alcohol and smoking tobacco in the United States is at or near 30 year lows. Conversely, that same data tells us that the rate of youth use of cannabis is at 30 year highs. Doesn't anyone care about the children? I don't know, but it's plain to see that Mr. Gimbel does not.
12:03 pm on Sunday, February 24, 2013
Smoking is not required to gain the benefits of cannabis, whether for medicinal need or just for enjoyment. Any potential health hazards due to smoking are not the hazards of cannabis, but of smoking.
Vaporization is proven safe, less expensive, and preferred by patients over smoking by a margin of 7:1 in peer reviewed research published in 2007.
http://www.cmcr.ucsd.edu/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=149:vaporization-as-a-qsmokelessq-cannabis-delivery-system&catid=41:research-studies&Itemid=135
Hypocrisy? Look in the mirror Mr. Gimbel. The war on (some) drugs is built on a platform consisting of nothing other than bald faced lies, half truths, and hysterical rhetoric. It's time to end the madness.

8:45 pm on Saturday, February 16, 2013
Arturo: Me! Me! Me! Blah, blah, blah.
Give us a call when you quit being innummerate Arty, then maybe you'll understand just how much such idiotic policies would actually cost you.

8:41 pm on Saturday, February 16, 2013
"Amotivational syndrome" is another old wive's tale. If you've ever seen cannabis "rip the ambition" out of people you must have been drunk.

8:39 pm on Saturday, February 16, 2013
Not Abraham Lincoln. You've been scammed.
http://druglibrary.org/schaffer/LincolnQuote/lpq0001.jpg

8:37 pm on Saturday, February 16, 2013
mac, I guarantee you that you can't embarass a malignant narcissist. It just ain't possible.

8:34 pm on Saturday, February 16, 2013
Smoking is not required to gain the benefits of cannabis, whether for medicinal need or just for enjoyment. Any potential health hazards due to smoking are not the hazards of cannabis, but of smoking.
Vaporization is proven safe, less expensive, and preferred by patients over smoking by a margin of 7:1 in peer reviewed research published in 2007. http://www.cmcr.ucsd.edu/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=149:vaporization-as-a-qsmokelessq-cannabis-delivery-system&catid=41:research-studies&Itemid=135
Can we agree to use facts and evidence, rather than old wive's tales and irrational fear to make public policy?

8:31 pm on Saturday, February 16, 2013
Heroin is semi-synthetic. If you don't even have a grasp of the fundamental facts why in the world would you comment on an issue.
Are you aware that fentanyl is 80 times more potent than heroin and available by prescription in the US?
Are you aware that heroin is legal by prescription in Great Britain for children as young as age 3? Not for getting high, don't be asinine.
Are you aware that in 2008 the voters in Switzerland voted to keep heroin legal and provided to their junkies at government expense by a margin greater than 2:1?
http://worldradio.ch/wrs/news/video/switzerland-embraces-heroin-assisted-treatment.shtml?12825
Regardless, anyone who is unable to differentiate between heroin/crack/meth and cannabis is in desperate need of a check up from the neck up.

8:22 pm on Saturday, February 16, 2013
Because uneducated street urchins grow up to be dregs of society. If you really cared about your net worth being penny wise/dollar foolish just isn't very smart.
Kevin Sterling
2:05 pm on Monday, April 29, 2013
Actually we've seen a significant reduction in the number of people who die in drinking alcohol involved highway fatalities since we've gotten more serious about enforcing both the laws against driving impaired and enforcing the age limit at the point of sale. It's just plain absurd to pretend that we haven't been successful in improving our world by keeping the drunks off of the highway.
I was in high school in the 1970s. The common "wisdom" among my fellow students about drunken driving was if you get pulled over be nice to the cop. If you're polite he'll probably offer to follow you home to make sure that you get there safely.
http://www.centurycouncil.org/drunk-driving/drunk-driving-statistics
from article linked above:
In 2011, the rate of alcohol-impaired driving fatalities per 100,000 population was 3.2, representing a 65% decrease since 1982, when record keeping began, and 49% since the inception of The Century Council in 1991. What this translates into is, for every 100,000 people in the US in 2011, slightly more than three people were killed in a drunk driving fatal crash, a rate that has been cut almost in half over the past two decades - down from a rate of 6.3 in 1991.
Alcohol-impaired driving fatalities accounted for 31% of the total vehicle traffic fatalities in 2011. Between 1991 and 2011, the rate of drunk driving fatalities per 100,000 population has decreased 49% nationally, and 63% among those under 21.
/snip/