Dueling Pot Billboards at the Stoner Bowl: Marijuana Is Safer vs. Marijuana Will Ruin Your Life

When teams from the two states that have legalized marijuana for recreational use clash at Sunday's Super Bowl, so will activists on both sides of the debate about pot prohibition. The Marijuana Policy Project (MPP) is sponsoring five billboards near MetLife Stadium in East Rutherford, New Jersey, where the Denver Broncos will face the Seattle Seahawks. The anti-pot group Project SAM is responding with an ad that "will be placed on digital and vinyl billboards throughout the New York-New Jersey area."

MPPMPP

Four of MPP's ads are variations on the marijuana-is-safer theme that played a conspicuous role in Colorado's legalization campaign and was recently echoed by President Obama. Two ads criticize the National Football League's anti-pot policy, showing generic players asking, "Why does the league punish us for making the safer choice?" The other two note that marijuana is safer than football as well as alcohol. The fifth MPP ad shows a tally of attendance at the last 10 Super Bowls next to a tally of marijuana arrests in 2012 (about 750,000 in both cases).

How does Project SAM respond? It can't very well deny that marijuana is safer than alcohol, since its chairman admitted as much on national television last week. Nor can it deny that pot prohibition generates hundreds of thousands of arrests each year, the vast majority for simple possession. Here is what the group came up with instead:

Project SAMProject SAM

That's right: Project SAM—which stands, believe it or not, for Smart Approaches to Marijuana—is warning Americans about amotivational syndrome. In 2014. The theme reflected in this billboard was hoary when it was first applied to marijuana in the 1960s, having figured prominently in anti-cigarette propaganda two decades before the federal ban on marijuana, which before it was portrayed as a soporific that renders people lethargic and unambitious was feared as a "killer drug" that made them aggressive and irrationally violent.

I am not sure what target Project SAM had in mind when it created this ad, but even kids are apt to smell the bullshit here. After all, many NFL players use marijuana to relax or relieve aches and pains, and it does not seem to have affected their motivation, perseverance, or determination. It may even have helped. The swimmer who won more Olympic medals than any other athlete in history was a pot smoker, for crying out loud. Nor did marijuana prevent our last three presidents from ascending to the highest political office in the land. MPP has a list of various other high-achieving cannabis consumers, in case you are curious.

Many people who are not celebrities also manage to consume marijuana without losing in the game of life. Yet Project SAM is still trying to persuade Americans that if they smoke pot it will kill their drive and prevent them from accomplishing anything worthwhile. In a country where most people born after World War II have tried pot, it is hard to make this tired slacker stereotype stick. But I guess it's the best pot prohibitionists have to offer.

Update: MPP is adding two new billboards in response to Project SAM's. One quotes the statement by Project SAM Chairman Patrick Kennedy that I mentioned: "I agree with the president. Alcohol is more dangerous [than marijuana]." Here is the other one:

MPPMPP

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Smilin' Joe Fission||

    The anti-pot billboard is just typical nanny state BS. I'd like a billboard that basically is the anti-pot one but with the some added text saying something along the lines of "But we're all adults, we can decide for ourselves if we want marijuana. Tell your representative you are not a child."

  • Dead or In Jail||

    I'm happy to have this debate in public, although it's too bad it has to occur in such a lobotomized form as dueling billboards.

    What was really annoying was when CBS and others would refuse to run ads in favor legalization.

    I know that private non-association is not censorship but choking off a public debate is fucking illiberal. (Yes they have the right to create a supposedly "politics-free zone" around the Super Bowl but I also have the right to point out that the Entertainment-Industrial Complex is populated almost exclusively by dicks.)

  • Rich||

    Marijuana kills your drive.

    Citation needed. I *think* it may be a Michael Phelps quote.

  • ||

  • crazyfingers||

    That bong has way too much water in it.

  • Death Rock and Skull||

    Phelps can just suck a golf ball through a garden hose.

  • ||

    The man has to have some serious lung capacity.

  • ||

    Yeah. When I was on the swim team, I could take a bong hit that seemed to last forever. I'm pretty sure Phelps has to be able to at least double what I could do, seeing that he's Aquaman.

  • kris713||

    what Patrick said I'm shocked that a mom able to get paid $5552 in four weeks on the internet. did you read this site link ..,.,..,.,.,., jobs80
    (Go to site and open "Home" for details)

  • ||

    The theme reflected in this billboard was hoary when it was first applied to marijuana in the 1960s

    Yes, it's simply preposterous. It's not like it's been reinforced by every stoner since 1960 or anything. Harold and Kumar Go To White Castle r teh new Reefer Madness!!

  • ||

    Propaganda and lies are fun, especially when it denigrates a demographic I hate! Yay!

  • anon||

    If it weren't for propaganda and lies, who would we ask permission & take orders from?

  • Dead or In Jail||

    If it weren't for propaganda and lies, who would we ask permission & take orders from?

    I'm having this tatoo'd in very small letters on my taint. Removing the piercings before-hand is going to be painful but worth it.

  • ||

    And pretending slacker stoners don't exist because you like to get your bud on every so often is even better! Hurray!

  • ||

    KULTUR WAR IS FUN! FUCKING HIPPIES!

  • ||

    Holy shit dude! You're so fucking clever! Hey, did you hear the one about the SOCONZ!!!!!

  • ||

    Congratulations, you're not only tiresome, you're utterly unfunny. I guess KULTUR WAR really does rot your brain...just like pot!

  • ||

    Coming from the master of wit, I'll take that for the cutting criticism it surely must be.

    LOL! I CALLED SOMEBODY WHO DISAGREED WITH ME A SOCON KKKULTURE WARRIOR!

    Very original. Let me know when you learn a second joke. I'd recommend "RACIST!" - works for most of the same shit.

  • ||

    I see you're working the tiresome meme pretty hard. All power to you.

  • ||

    I see you're working the tiresome meme pretty hard.

    Lol. You should work in a movie theater.

  • Dead or In Jail||

    This is one of the most enjoyable libertarian-on-libertarian smack-downs I have seen in some time. Thank you, gentlemen. Thank you.

  • anon||

    And pretending slacker stoners don't exist because you like to get your bud on every so often is even better! Hurray!

    You do realize it's probably the "slacker" that causes slackers to want to get stoned, and not the other way around, right?

    Disregarding this red herring though, why do you care about slackers so much?

  • ||

    You do realize it's probably the "slacker" that causes slackers to want to get stoned, and not the other way around, right?

    Yeah, most likely. Kinda gets at the point. "Pot makes you lethargic and unmotivated" ain't exactly a damnable lie out of hell - it's half the fucking point of using it. Do you toke up to get yourself energized and motivated or to chill out?

    Disregarding this red herring though, why do you care about slackers so much?

    Don't know what would have given you the impression I care about slackers. I say let a thousand flower children bloom. I just think it's a bit disingenuous to pretend that the intended effects of fucking pot don't exist.

  • anon||

    I just think it's a bit disingenuous to pretend that the intended effects of fucking pot don't exist.

    Meh, I'm apathetic; I don't care enough about what other people do to relax or have fun to use it as a talking point for one side or the other.

  • ||

    Meh, I'm apathetic; I don't care enough about what other people do to relax or have fun to use it as a talking point for one side or the other.

    So don't make it a talking point. Doesn't mean you have to pretend a depressant isn't a fucking depressant.

  • Mensan||

    "Doesn't mean you have to pretend a depressant isn't a fucking depressant."

    It's not a depressant; it's a hallucinogen.

  • ||

    It's not a depressant; it's a hallucinogen.

    Those aren't mutually exclusive. It's also a hypnotic, which is depressant by definition.

  • Felicitouslut||

    Cannabis is NOT A hypnotic(n), it MAY be considered hypnotic(adj) but.. WORDS have MEANINGS, STOP your blathering. Where do you get your info? The DEA(DERP)?

  • Felicitouslut||

    Cannabis is NOT a depressant. If you don't know what you're talking about (you don't) STFU

  • Death Rock and Skull||

    "Do you toke up to get yourself energized and motivated or to chill out?"

    Yes, I have gotten high to push myself like crazy before.

  • ||

    Yes, I have gotten high to push myself like crazy before.

    Stimulants tend to work better for that than depressants, but whatever works for you. I'd say you're probably in the minority.

  • ||

    You do realize there are many strains of pot, right? That there's indica and sativa, with different effects?

    Oh, right, I forgot that you know jack and shit about pot, and just like to assume you know something about "slackers" and whatnot. Carry on being tiresome.

  • ||

    You do realize there are many strains of pot, right?

    Whoa! Really? Tell us more Mr. Science!

    Oh, right, I forgot that you know jack and shit about pot, and just like to assume you know something about "slackers" and whatnot.

    Natch, breh. Your personal experiences constitute objective reality for every man, woman and child on planet earth universally, so of course we defer to you for all knowledge.

  • ||

    You know, if you're going to fold and suck this fast, this ceases to be any fun. You were doing much better before.

  • ||

    You know, if you're going to fold and suck this fast, this ceases to be any fun. You were doing much better before.

    You're gonna just declare victory and wallow in your obvious superiority already? It usually takes you a few more rounds of non-sequitur personal insults.

    Well I guess that's it then. All that's left now is for Warty to validate your victory with a scatological reference and I think we're good.

  • CampingInYourPark||

    Cannabis exhibits both stimulant and depressant properties. It's a mild hallucinogenic, which means it affects different people in different ways. It might work for some people to smoke to push themselves. Then again, it might not work the next time, or not at all for someone else.

    The "marijuana is safer than" argument concedes that it matters, and it shouldn't matter at all.

  • Robert||

    The "marijuana is safer than" argument concedes that it matters, and it shouldn't matter at all.


    It's a lot easier to convince someone that something is safer than something else than it is to convince them that such consider'ns shouldn't matter as to their legality.

  • Death Rock and Skull||

    "I'd say you're probably in the minority."

    Not really. It may cut performance, but it also blocks perception of affects of whatever you're doing. You still have whatever energy you had to do stuff.

  • ||

    What I meant was that it's probably a minority of pot users who use it for performance reasons. It's not exactly a classical PED. This is a really fruitless discussion though. Seems pot has no desirable depressant effects and is usually only used by elite olympic athletes and high performing professionals. I have no idea why you'd even want it legalized for recreational use considering how boring it is. It really should be prescription only.

  • CampingInYourPark||

    ...but it also blocks perception of affects of whatever you're doing. You still have whatever energy you had to do stuff.

    So, you can write very fast when you're high but it's all gibberish? Interesting.

  • Jon Lester||

    At some point, the severely unmotivated will come down from his high and find his money for weed, rent and food has run out. For many, this is a cure in itself.

  • Death Rock and Skull||

    Slacker stoners are stoners because they're slackers, and they would have been fuckups no matter what. Most fuckups aren't addicts of anything at all.

  • Sam Grove||

    "It was in 1951, when I was 14, when grass swept the neighborhood. We hadn't been into grass before, we were into gang fighting, and wine and beer in the park, and punching the shit out of people, and having jackets with your name, and your girls were your 'debs', and you had turf, and all that dumb shit, and we would get into fights over girls...and then pot came along and gang fighting went away. In one semester, in shop class, all the guys went from making zip guns to hash pipes."

    George Carlin

  • Zeb||

    I think you'd be surprised how many motivated and successful people smoke pot on a daily basis.

  • ||

    Some A are B. Therefore all B are A.

  • ||

    Also, if it helps get your panties out of a wad, I said exactly the same thing right here.

  • Zeb||

    Where did I make an argument of that form? All I'm trying to say is that the way people use drugs and the way drugs affect various people is not as cut and dry as your initial comments seem to suggest. You said:
    It's not like it's been reinforced by every stoner since 1960 or anything.
    That suggests to me that you think that every stoner is an unmotivated loser. Later comments show that you do have a more nuanced view, but I hadn't seen those yet. Of course there are lots of losers who smoke pot.

  • ||

    Probably a dumb choice of words on my part on the internet where sarcasm and nuance don't always come through. I didn't mean "every" in the perfectly literal sense. I merely meant to suggest that the lazy, unmotivated stoner stereotype isn't without any basis in reality, as the article seemed to suggest.

    And I did mischaracterize your argument. For that I apologize. I took it as an all-or-nothing view (some motivated and successful people smoke pot, therefore all pot users are motivated and successful) when it clearly wasn't.

  • Gadianton||

    Marijuana is a dangerous drug. Here's the proof. It causes:

    1) Property damage - when the police bust down your door and trash your place looking for your stash.

    2) Brain damage - when the police officer whacks your head with his nightstick to get you to tell him where your stash is.

    3) Death - When the police officer caves in your head or shoots you for resisting arrest. Alternatively, marijuana related death can occur when your cellmate shivs you.

    You see? It's obviously true that marijuana is dangerous.

  • sarcasmic||

    Add to that all the things you cannot do if you've got something drug related on your record. You can't get student loans. You can't join the military or get a government job. You can't go to Canada.

    Well, some of those things matter more than others, but still.

  • anon||

    You can't go to Canada.

    Is that true, or is this an overstatement? Are you talking specifically about felony drug charges?

    Not being sarcastic, honest question.

  • ||

    If you have ever had a DUI, you can't go to Canada (you can, but they will charge you a $200 "temporary visa" after hectoring the fuck out of you) either, so the pot thing wouldn't surprise me at all.

  • sarcasmic||

    A little googling got me this.

    What are the common convictions that will make a person inadmissible to Canada?

    Drink driving or impaired driving convictions (even if they are recorded as a traffic offence) where the blood alcohol reading is 0.081% or above – or a breath reading of 0401mgms/L or above, will make you inadmissible to Canada. Other common convictions that may make a person inadmissible to Canada are: reckless or dangerous driving, common assault, street racing, hinder or resist a police officer in the execution of duty, possession, supply, trafficking of drugs (including cannabis) and shoplifting (theft), fraud or criminal damage, to name a few.
  • anon||

    hinder or resist a police officer in the execution of duty

    Wait, so 100% of americans aren't allowed into canadia?

    Don't canadians know that we're all resisting arrest and just don't know it yet?

  • Jon Lester||

    I thought it was only a 10 year ban.

  • Jon Lester||

    I see it now:

    My conviction occurred and was completed over 10 years ago. What now?

    If you only have one conviction of a less serious nature, after a prescribed period of ten (10) years has passed since the completion of any imposed sentence (and there have been no other convictions that affect your admissibility) you will be deemed to be rehabilitated pursuant to R18(2) of Canada's Immigration Regulations. You do not have to contact this office. If you have more than one offence, deemed rehabilitation may not apply to your case and you will require a formal assessment.
  • 07Negative||

    That's crazy. I didn't know that.

  • Sam Grove||

    "You can't join the military or get a government job."

    Is this good or bad?

  • Sam Grove||

    "You can't join the military or get a government job."

    Is this good or bad?

  • anon||

    I like how this is pretty much a comprehensive list of reasons the pot prohibitionists use, yet they draw your sarcastic conclusion in spite of the evidence before them.

  • Gadianton||

    I just realized that I missed 2:

    Lack of drive - Your career is dead in the water while you sit on your ass in jail, and you can't get a job with a drug conviction.

    Gateway drug - While rotting in jail you have a good chance of getting addicted to harder drugs.

  • ||

    This was pretty much the pitch when I was in school. "Marijuana will ruin your life because the police will come after you." And everyone knows that if the police are after you for something, then they must be in the right.

  • Tim||

    " Project SAM is still trying to persuade Americans that if they smoke pot it will kill their drive and prevent them from accomplishing anything worthwhile."

    I've never used the stuff, yet I've never accomplished anything worthwhile. I do understand that at least two Presidents have smoked it.

  • Hugh Akston||

    To be fair, they haven't accomplished anything worthwhile either.

  • Rich||

    To be fair, they *intended* to accomplish something worthwhile.

  • ||

    I do understand that at least two Presidents have smoked it.

    Yeah, but don't base your opinion on that. Plenty of decent, productive, mentally stable people have smoked it as well.

  • anon||

    100% anecdotal here, but bear with me:

    I used to smoke pot. It affects my memory to the point that I find it frustrating, to say the least. I need to maintain that particular cognitive function as I really enjoy remembering where specific bolts go, how a bearing race was installed, etc; therefore, I quit smoking pot probably 10 years ago.

    I've smoked up with the SO every now and then, and every time I do, I'm reminded of why I quit to start with.

    That said, I have zero problem with anyone that wants to smoke pot. I encourage it; not because I believe it's good for them, or "better than alcohol," or any other bullshit than people should be free to make their own choices, right or wrong. I find that experience is by far the most valuable teacher available, and I want everyone to have a chance to learn from that teacher and decide for themselves what they want out of their own life.

    K, that's all.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Dave's not here.

  • ||

    I should get baked for you right now.

  • waffles||

    Please do. I'm on the same wagon as anon.

  • Sunmonocle Backwards Tophat||

    Same. The older I get, the fewer things I do which pot enhances. I still love going on easy bike rides while high and just thinking about stuff, but everything else - work, sports, hobbies - require too much concentration. I don't drink anymore for the same reason. Maybe if I had hobbies or work that involved creativity, things would be different.

  • Sunmonocle Backwards Tophat||

    And by bike I mean bicycle, with a helmet, on bike paths. I don't want to become a pot-related fatality because someone with a MADD bumper sticker talking on her cell phone runs me over when I'm in the bike lane.

  • anon||

    I laughed, just because this is exactly how I imagine such a death occurring.

  • Jan S.||

    This is pretty much why I don't smoke or drink any longer, either, and all of my hobbies are creative (cooking, writing, crocheting, photography). Drinking just makes me sleepy (then makes it hard to actually sleep) and grass makes me paranoid; the last time my daughter convinced me to partake, I spent the next 2 hours analyzing every twinge, burp and gurgle my body experienced, wondering if I were on the verge of a heart attack/colon cancer/Alzheimer's.

    Yeah, I'm that old.

  • Death Rock and Skull||

    I once got drunk and hung three closet shelves, and they all turned out perfectly balls level.

  • Jon Lester||

    I was drunk when I started printing out the Patriot Act on a printer that I had to hand-feed one sheet at a time. Thankfully it was only 176 pages, as I recall. No jams.

  • ||

    Try it with the ACA

  • ||

    While discussing the war on drugs with my libertarian cousin and my conservative parents my mother said she'd rather smoke a joint for pain relief than take a pill (NSAIDs don't agree with her). Then my parents started discussing why they quit smoking in the first place and it came down to the fact that my dad "got weird" in unspecified ways when he smoked and my mother preferred not smoking to dealing with his weirdness.

    Needless to say, having found Jesus and Reagan in the '80s they generally support the WOD.

  • ||

    So...are we betting on him wanting anal, or oral? Sorry about speculating about your dad, jesse, but if you're going to put it out there...

  • ||

    "Or"?

  • anon||

    Is ass-to-mouth still a thing?

  • ||

    Jesse's dad is an ATM machine.

  • ||

    Does that make jesse a Cylon?

  • ||

    Does that make jesse a Cylon?

    Absolutely.

  • EDG reppin' LBC||

  • Pulseguy||

    He wanted nothing, and well....we all know about Jesse's Mom.

  • CampingInYourPark||

    That said, I have zero problem with anyone that wants to smoke pot drink a big gulp soda. I encourage it; not because I believe it's good for them, or "better than alcohol," or any other bullshit than people should be free to make their own choices, right or wrong.
  • ||

    Try some better weed.

  • anon||

    The drug warriors have already lost on Pot. I don't know why they continue to throw good money after bad.

  • Rich||

    The drug warriors have already lost on Pot.

    *** giggles uncontrollably ***

  • Sunmonocle Backwards Tophat||

    I expect their final, top-of-the-sinking-ship campaign to involve "Who's killed more people: Pot or Pol Pot" with a graphic showing number of people who have died since the country's founding * % of people who've smoked in the last 30 days = number of people killed by pot. Pearls will be clutched, childrenz will be lamented, roadz will be addressed, and moar welfare will be rationalized.

  • anon||

    I like your math on that. It makes me think of how they calculate "drunk driving fatalities."

  • ||

    Throwing good money after bad is what the government's in business to do. That aspect of the WOD is a feature, not a bug.

  • Sunmonocle Backwards Tophat||

    One of my favorite scenes from the Woodstock documentary had nothing to do with music. They interviewed some old guys in town about how they feel about the hippies, and one old guy went on a rant about how it makes them lethargic and passive. Another old guy countered by saying that, considering how violent and aggressive people are (Vietnam), maybe we could all afford to smoke a little more pot.

    I wish society wouldn't take such an interest in my productivity. I can't remember who, but an HnR sister-from-another-mister pointed out that productivity is a means to an end, which is exactly right. My drive and motivation are the reason I have a left IT band tighter than a '79 Fleetwood Mac rehearsal. Some of us need to relax, and pot helps.

  • anon||

  • Brett L||

    SF'd the link

  • anon||

    woops.

    We warned, goddamned autoplay.

  • waffles||

    "This country is on the brink of creating a massive marijuana industry..."

    Sounds good. Jobs! Growth!

    "...that will inevitably target teens and other vulnerable populations..."

    Uh oh. You mean the people that already consume this product even under the threat of severe punishment?

    "Misconceptions about marijuana are becoming more and more prevalent"

    No kidding.

  • Sunmonocle Backwards Tophat||

    It's national drug facts week, so last night I took the 2014 Drug IQ Challenge. 2 out of 12! I answered honestly, as if the statistics weren't rigged and the statements were based on facts. I also left cookies out for the DEA agents that will probably raid my home.

  • anon||

    I lost my shit at about question 6. This quiz is so fucking rigged with false premises that I literally could not read the next question without typing up a 16,000 word essay rebutting it.

  • Sunmonocle Backwards Tophat||

    The only science they really got right was the one about flooding your brain with dopamine, and even that's an asterisk since some drugs work primarily on other neurotransmitters. I still got the question wrong because it was an "all of the above" that had to include some lie about chemical addiction. The Grammys and MTV are Drug Facts Week sponsors, which is more evidence that the drug war may be deescalating.

  • Jan S.||

    All of this "sugar stimulates the same 'reward center' of the brain as cocaine!" bullshit just makes me gnash my teeth. ANYTHING that brings us pleasure, be it work or recreation or food, stimulates the "reward center" of the brain, or else we wouldn't do it. The problem with drugs and alcohol is that it doesn't really require any real effort on the part of the individual, aside from that of acquiring said drugs or alcohol. Which, as someone pointed out earlier, can often be quite a powerful motivator.

  • Andrew S.||

    You think those questions are bad? Follow a few more links to a chat with some carefully chosen High School/Middle School students, including this gem.

    REW90 - North Carroll Middle, Maryland: Can you die if you smoke marijuana once?

    Ruben Baler:
    not directly, but you could become decision impaired and drive your car into a tree or become infected with HIV. Think about it.

    be safe and be smart

  • waffles||

    The combination of answers confused my addled brain. How do you get HIV from marijuana? You don't inject it and it doesn't really give you beer goggles for risky sex. Okay, I thought about it. Now what?

  • Death Rock and Skull||

    So mari-huana is okay to use as long as I don't care about being good at football?

  • anon||

    And especially if you do want to win 8 gold medals in swimming.

  • Death Rock and Skull||

    I have been able to run way more laps on a track when high than when not high. I generally don't care for running at all.

  • Dibbler||

    Bronchial expansion, mayhap?

  • Death Rock and Skull||

    Maybe just not giving a fuck about how stupid of an idea it is to run that much after also bouldering, swimming, and lifting.

  • ||

    Because everybody who smokes pot is an Olympic champion, natch.

    This was what I was getting at earlier. It's okay if the majority of pot users aren't high performance athletes or Nobel laureates, and pretending they all are makes you look as retarded as any other post hoc fallacy would.

  • Sunmonocle Backwards Tophat||

    When I lived in Ann Arbor, about half my friends smoked pot. Yet when Hash Bash came around, guess who was tearing up the law quad? It wasn't the students, who are generally private about their use. It was the out-of-towner stoners who represent the public face of pot use. They're the tip of the iceberg, yet they're all the drug warriors see.

  • Dibbler||

    Did you really get that mad over a joke? People like you are the real threat.

  • ||

    People like you are the real threat.

    Yep. Libertarians in favor of full legalization of all drugs, recreational and therapeutic. Dangerous fellas, lemme tell ya. Be nice if we could lock 'em up, wouldn't it?

  • Dibbler||

    I was referring to the fact that you responded with such vitriol to an obviously tongue-in-cheek comment, not your stance on the WOD.

    Need a brain for that straw man?

  • CampingInYourPark||

    I was referring to the fact that you responded with such vitriol to an obviously tongue-in-cheek comment

    Calling a fallacy a retarded fallacy is vitriol? I thought weed made you MORE self aware?

  • Dibbler||

    Why are you guys treating a passing joke as every pot consumers unwavering manifesto? Seriously?

  • ||

    Why are you guys treating a passing joke as every pot consumers unwavering manifesto? Seriously?

    If you find yourself vigorously defending a post hoc fallacy in the form of a stale, 5 year old joke, missing the context of the comment in which it was criticized entirely, it might just be you taking something too seriously or reading too much into it. Just sayin.

  • Dibbler||

    " it might just be you taking something too seriously or reading too much into it."

    Holy projection, Batman!

  • ||

    Holy projection, Batman!

    Ummm... it's not projection when the comparison is intentional and a response to a clearly stated point. But uhhh, sure.

    FUCKING HILARIOUS JOKE MAN! TOP LEL! FUNNIEST SHIT I'VE HEARD SINCE 2009!

    There you go.

  • Dibbler||

    I never said it was a good joke, but your response to it was astoundingly ridiculous. How many magazines do you empty after someone tells a knock knock joke?

  • ||

    your response to it was astoundingly ridiculous.

    Considering the discussion that had taken place prior to that, there was some context for the comment. Coming from somebody who thinks responding to a joke by pointing out a fallacy is a "threat", the "how many magazines do you empty" line is rich.

  • Dibbler||

    There was one comment before it I'm the thread, also a joke. But you cant nail jello to the wall I guess. So, fine, you win. I submit to your mighty powers of incoherence.

  • Dibbler||

    *in the thread

    Damn autocorrect.

  • ||

    I kinda meant the rest of the comments section, being focused as it was on downplaying or denying negative stereotypes about pot users.

    Not to beat on the point, but you've spent 7 or 8 posts now, the first of which referred to my ostensible crime of responding too seriously to a joke as "the real threat", restating that I'm an asshole for taking something too seriously...

  • Dibbler||

    So I'm an asshole to assholes. I can live with that.

  • Dibbler||

    So I'm an asshole to assholes. I can live with that.

  • ||

    So I'm an asshole to assholes. I can live with that.

    Whatever works for you. Treating minor disagreements as threats is libertarian as fuck.

  • anon||

    downplaying or denying negative stereotypes about pot users.

    But the point you've proven you're incapable of comprehending is...

    Negative, to whom?

  • ||

    Negative, to whom?

    Negative to the people calling me a socon culture warrior asshole cunt sack for suggesting they might actually have a basis in reality, I guess. I forgot that at Reason it's unpossible to favor legalizing something without first holding it harmless.

  • Dibbler||

    Making massive negative assumptions about marijuana users is completely different from making positive assumptions, eh?

  • Dibbler||

    "There no way most blacks can be intelligent or successful, that's a fallacy. But I can say with full certainty that they don't tip well."

    That's the vibe I'm getting.

  • ||

    Not that it wasn't hysterical the first, like, 999 times and all...

  • Azathoth!!||

    I know too many 'wake-n-bake' potheads that are pushing 50 and still have jobs that include the phrase 'would you like fries with that?' to believe that pot sapping ones ambition is a myth.

    I think the 'amotivational syndrome' they're talking about is what happens when you smoke too much pot.

    But the operative term is 'too much'. Acting like the problem version of pot--or any drug--usage is identical to occasional recreational use that mirrors occasional recreational alchohol use is insane.

    But so is pretending that the problem version isn't real.

  • anon||

    I know too many 'wake-n-bake' potheads that are pushing 50 and still have jobs that include the phrase 'would you like fries with that?' to believe that pot sapping ones ambition is a myth.

    What place is it for you to judge one's ambition, or lack thereof?

    Why do you get to determine the value of ambition for everyone else?

  • ||

    I don't think he was placing a value on ambition. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and say he supports everyone having the freedom to place that value for themselves. But simply saying that pot reduces ambition is not the same as placing a value on ambition for everyone else. It's only once you actually throw people in jail because you don't think they have enough ambition that you've crossed that line.

  • anon||

    But simply saying that pot reduces ambition is not the same as placing a value on ambition for everyone else. It's only once you actually throw people in jail because you don't think they have enough ambition that you've crossed that line.

    Saying that it reduces ambition assumes the ambition existed in the first place.

  • Sevo||

    Azathoth!!|1.30.14 @ 1:02PM|#
    "I know too many 'wake-n-bake' potheads that are pushing 50 and still have jobs that include the phrase 'would you like fries with that?' to believe that pot sapping ones ambition is a myth."

    Yep, I'm sure this was an exhaustive study!

  • ||

    Anyone who is 50 and waking and baking isn't someone who would ever be considered ambitious in the first place. You're putting the cart before the horse. Weed doesn't make them unambitious, they're almost assuredly that way in the first place.

    Why the fuck do people feel the ever-present need to ascribe qualities to weed that just don't exist?

  • Death Rock and Skull||

    Most people aren't ambitious when they are fifty anyway.

  • ||

    Most people aren't ambitious when they are fifty anyway.

    Generalizations are wrong, except the ones we like.

  • ||

    Oh my god, that's rich. Are you even remotely self-aware? I think we need to subject you to a Turing Test.

  • ||

    Needz moar SOCONZ!!!!!! KKKULTURE WARRRRR!!!!!!

  • Pulseguy||

    Obviously not a 50 year old. 50 would be pretty young to lose your ambition. I'm pretty sure it goes with hormones, and hitting semopause at 50 is really young.

  • ||

    Wake-and-bakers would find some other way to be losers if dope didn't exist.

  • Zeb||

    Pot effects different people rather differently. I'd never get baked before work because it doesn't work well for me that way. But I know a good number of motivated and successful people who do smoke that way.

    As long as it is illegal, we are never going to know what the prevalence of people like this, or loser slacker stoners is.

  • Jan S.||

    My mother was one of the biggest potheads I ever knew - she smoked every day, every chance she got, and ran a successful business while she did it.

    Of course, she also died at 51 of heart disease, of which the pot was probably just as much a contributing factor as the 2 packs of cigarettes she smoked every day. You're still inhaling carcinogenic smoke into your lungs, folks.

  • Zeb||

    Carcinogens don't cause heart disease. I think the nicotine is the part of tobacco smoking that contributes to heart disease.

    And some studies seem to indicate that there is some anti cancer effect from something in cannabis. The smoke has most of the bad things in it that tobacco smoke does, but lung cancer rates among pot smokers are not as high as one would expect.

    Of course, given the legal status, it is impossible to do really good research about it, so I'm not going to claim to know any of this for sure. Too bad the fucking FDA and DEA won't let us find out.

  • Jan S.||

    Too bad the fucking FDA and DEA exist in the first place, but "the smoke has most of the bad things in it that tobacco smoke does" statement rather makes my point.

    What might be considered interesting - and germane to this conversation - is that after Mom developed an aeortal aneurysm (at 46), she more or less quit smoking pot. She never put down the cigarettes.

  • ||

    There's always vaping or edibles.

  • Pulseguy||

    I know a lot of seriously bright kids who became pretty slow adults and this was apparently because of the use of pot. The other seriously bright non pot addicted kids stayed bright.

    Pot has hurt a lot of people. I still think it should be legal, for myriad reasons. But, pretending it is harmless, and pretending there are no bad side effects is just lying.

    And, yeah, if you smoke pot once in a blue moon it is harmless. But, not if it is a regular part of your life.

  • Sevo||

    If one ends up on the screen, I know which one it will be.
    Imagine the FCC's response if the first one got air-play.

  • space junk||

    Think I am gonna go smoke a bowl before I read this article...

  • Notorious G.K.C.||

    Maybe pot does impair your drive to succeed, I wouldn't know.

    But video games could have the same effect. Likewise yakking it up on political blogs. Or getting a government job.

    And to most people, these activities (well, the first two) shouldn't get people locked up/fined/forced into anti-addiction programs.

  • Notorious G.K.C.||

    And I may be repeating a point, but injuring your brain in football could affect your drive, too.

  • db||

    I can't wait for the war on drugs to be ended, simply so I don't have to be bombarded by all the "marijuana is awesome and so much better than alcohol" from marijuana boosters. Look guys, I get that it is your favored intoxicant. It is not, however, a floor wax and a dessert topping.

  • ||

    It is not, however, a floor wax and a dessert topping.

    I don't know about floor wax, but it's definitely been made into some desserts.

  • Dibbler||

    Calmly stating or advertising proven facts isn't being overzealous, in my eyes at least.

  • ||

    Also, the drug war isn't going to end for at least another century, if ever. Legalizing marijuana != ending the drug war. When marijuana does get legalized it'll be interesting to see how many libertarians still give a fuck about the war on drugs. It'll be nice to finally get Bill Maher to quit calling himself a libertarian.

  • ||

    It is not, however, a .... dessert topping.

    Uhhh....

  • db||

    Oh, great. Go ahead. But then you get off my lawn.

  • Jan S.||

    +1 for the floor wax and dessert topping reference. A lot of the commenters here are too young to get it.

  • Mand13||

    These propaganda campaigns are terrible. The reasoning behind marijuana being safer than alcohol means it is also safer than water, on which you can overdose. I don't like the pro pot lobby trying to make pot seem harmless. The anti pot lobby uses pathetic scare tactics that won't work when over 3/4 of people have smoked. I wish both sides would shut up and let adults take care of themselves.

  • Dibbler||

    I agree with you, but sometimes one had to fight fire with fire. Especially when so many people take things at face value.

  • ||

    The whole "let adults do what they want with their own bodies" argument doesn't work on these people, though.

  • ||

    The approach should be "I can put whatever the fuck I want in my body", but the fact that no one has ever died from pot, and that it's essentially harmless, are so in contrast with the way people demonize it, that it's not surprising that people get defensive. It shouldn't obfuscate the real point, but it often does.

  • Zeb||

    The reasoning behind marijuana being safer than alcohol means it is also safer than water, on which you can overdose.

    Uh, not really. How many people die from water intoxication? Very few. Lots of people die from alcohol poisoning. The fact that two things can kill you does not make them equally dangerous. I can't believe I even have to say this.

    Pot is clearly much safer than alcohol as both substances are commonly used. That shouldn't be relevant to an argument against prohibition, but unfortunately, most people don't find the personal liberty argument good enough on its own.

  • anon||

    That shouldn't be relevant to an argument against prohibition, but unfortunately, most people don't find the personal liberty argument good enough on its own.

    I'm sad this is true.

  • Mand13||

    I don't know where you inferred that I was stating water to be as dangerous as alcohol, clearly I was merely stating that if death from overdose is a criteria for deadliness, water is more dangerous than weed. I was using hyperbole to illustrate that the points and comparisons that the group were drawing were trite. Many of them could be attributed to the ubiquitous nature of alcohol and the correlation to being a fall down drunk and a general POS that would beat their spouse. There is likely a similar correlation between weed and gang violence, but the correlation amounts to the fact that gang members like their marijuana.

  • brec||

    Project SAM is still trying to persuade Americans that if they smoke pot it will kill their drive and prevent them from accomplishing anything worthwhile.

    I don't think there's anything wrong with Project SAM or anyone else trying to persuade. And I think for some people the "kill drive" and "prevent accomplishment" points are valid. We should separate persuasion and legal prohibition, though.

  • Zeb||

    There is a lot wrong with any group that wants to criminalize consensual behavior that doesn't harm anyone else.

  • Aresen||

    Considering the information that is coming out about how the NFL covered up the effects of concussion on football players, the comparison of football players to marijuana users is not a particularly good one from the prohibitionists' POV.

  • Robert||

    The quality of the "high" from liquor is much better than from cannabis IMO, although you do tend to pay for it later. Gamma-butyryl lactone, however, has the potential to supplant etOH some day to produce the best booze-like effect with no hangover.

  • Pulseguy||

    I've read the average ex NFL player dies at 57. Considering most of them were in amazing shape and went to college makes it all the more horrific a statement. To get those kind of numbers in a country you have to get to Burkino Faso or something like that, and a large portion of them die during childhood. I don't think there is a country that has an even close to average life span of 57 if you consider only those who make it to adulthood.

    Boxing should be illegal, as should football, if you want to go with harm as the reason why you outlaw something.

  • Ralph Wylie||

    Why not have free screenings of the movie Reefer Madness if the anti-cannabis group(s)want to make an impact? Surely this scare tactic "documentary" will show the true evil of marijuana!

  • BambiB||

    Why doesn't SAM just show "Reefer Madness" on the Jumbotron at half time?

  • pob||

    my classmate's ex-wife makes $75/hour on the computer. She has been without a job for 6 months but last month her pay was $21713 just working on the computer for a few hours. view ➤➤➤➤➤➤ www.works77.ℂℴ¬m

  • pob||

    Carter. even though Raymond`s postlng is astonishing... on monday I got a new audi since getting a cheque for $8920 this-past/four weeks and-just over, $10 thousand this past-munth. this is definitely my favourite-job Ive ever had. I started this five month . www.works77.ℂℴ¬m

  • julia14juli||

    my best friend's sister-in-law makes $70 /hour on the computer . She has been without work for 7 months but last month her check was $12532 just working on the computer for a few hours. you can look here

    =========================
    http://www.tec30.com
    =========================

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement