A functional stoner is a person who smokes up in order to deal with stress or to redirect that negative energy into something more productive or positive12. Smoking weed can make people more productive, useful, and happier2. It allows people to think about things differently, stay calm, and realize there may be alternative ways to deal with stressful situations2. A functioning stoner can be defined as someone who smokes up through the day or needs a joint before undertaking any task3.
A functional alcoholic is someone who consumes as much alcohol as someone with an alcohol use disorder, but does not exhibit outward symptoms of intoxication1. They may be able to carry out daily tasks of living without showing clinical impairments2. However, this does not mean that they do not have a problem with alcohol. They have developed a tolerance for alcohol that makes them need more to feel the effects1.
Both of those statements were copied from a Google search. I simply typed in functional alcoholic and functional stoner. It seems to imply that being a functional stoner isn't such a bad thing. After all it can make people more productive, useful and happier. A functional alcoholic drinks as much as a drunk, that's when you are a non-functional alcoholic, but can function anyway. They have developed a tolerance. Apparently, it doesn't make them productive, useful or happier. So, pot good, alcohol bad.
I'm no scientist, psychologist, psychiatrist or behavioral health specialist. I'm just a regular guy. Some think I'm disadvantaged by not having any advanced degrees, not having attended any classes on a campus. For those reasons I should simply trust the science, accept whatever I am told by the experts as to what is best. In this case I'm being told being a functional stoner isn't a problem at all. I wonder if that has anything to do with the current push to decriminalize the use and possession of marijuana. Many states have chosen to not enforce federal law which still lists pot on schedule one.
I'm guessing those states figure being a functional stoner doesn't indicate an addiction. Functional alcoholics are still addicted to alcohol you know. Yes, that's legal too although there was an attempt to outlaw the sale of that stuff. We all know what happened. The law was repealed because of the spike in crime, and it was generally ineffective. Also, and probably more importantly, it was an election year. FDR ran on that, promising a repel to the twenty-first amendment. He won, hands down. I've heard that argument being used today, they are going to do it anyway, so it should be legal. If something isn't illegal, you can't commit a crime. Liberal logic.
It's no secret to anyone that reads my stuff or listens to what I say about pot. It is an illegal substance according to federal law. Until it is removed from that schedule one listing it remains a crime regardless of what the individual state says. Just saying you are not going to enforce federal law doesn't change federal law. But whatever, that point is moot as far as I'm concerned. It's illegal. What I'm trying to understand is why the push to legalize that stuff. What benefit does it provide, what good to society, what is positive about it? Does it really make people more productive, useful and happier. Does it redirect negative energy into something positive? That's what the experts say, according to Google.
Law, it could be said are the rules of conduct. This what you can do, and this is what you can't. Is that determined by the number of people that want to do a certain action? That is to say, determined by how many choose to obey the law? If the majority of the people decide to just ignore the law does that invalidate the law? Are we going to say the majority always makes the best choices for a society? I don't know about that, ask those groups that have been discriminated against because of their race, creed or religion. I'm thinking that response will be a resounding no.
That leaves us with a bit of a conundrum. In our Republic we have established various standards to enact legislation. In some cases, a 2/3 majority is required, in others a 3/5 majority and in others a simple majority will suffice. What is the reason for that? I suspect it is simply because without that nothing would ever get passed. Still the purpose of our laws is to establish a uniform code of conduct. That's what the military calls their laws. The Uniform Code of Military Justice. It's not because everyone is wearing a uniform, it is because it applies uniformly to everyone in the service regardless of rank or anything else. Congress has the authority to change those laws. The president then signs the bill, and it becomes the law. If all of our military personnel just decided to ignore certain sections of the Uniform Code of Military Justice would that then invalidate that? I don't care what the Admiral or General says, I'm not getting a haircut, it's not hurting anyone else.
I don't believe anyone could possibly believe the world would not be a better place without alcohol and drug abuse. That's always been a problem in every society. It is the abuse of those substances that cause much of the crime, the unrest, and the downright stupid decisions being made by some. Now I'm hearing from the experts if we just did away with guns that would end gun violence, homicide and murder. If we just did away with alcohol, we wouldn't have any drunks either. If we all just followed the instructions on our prescription bottles, we wouldn't have drug abuse.
But we should legalize marijuana use because it makes people more productive, useful and happy. Yeah, ok. That's the best choice I guess, people are going to do it anyway. So why do we need the FDA, the WHO, the ATF or any other legislating body? People are going to do all that stuff anyway. Think of the money we could save on speed limit signs alone. Of course, we should all be made to wear our seatbelts. My flying body could hurt someone else right? It's what the majority wants right, to be protected from bodies being ejected from automobiles. Ok then.
No comments:
Post a Comment