Hello all, my tag name is Monash, after a famous Australian WWI general whose qualities I admire greatly (a couple of members may recognize from other forums). Either way I've been thinking about joining for a while and have finally decided to stop dithering. In summary I am Police Detective with 25 years plus experience centering mostly around narcotic investigations and complex frauds with some counter terrorism and child protection work thrown into the mix. Politically I test out as a firm 'centrist' which means I'm pretty much guaranteed to annoy pretty much everyone else, so apologies in advance. Apart from that I have a keen interest in science, history, reading (just about any topic), wine tasting and gaming. In which context - let the games begin.
Hi, What's your take on pot? What I mean is that do you think it deserves to be a schedule I narcotic?
Welcome Monash! Start sharing your knowledge and experience with us. Annoying posts are good legal stimulants - most of us like them. Ddyad
Sorry for not responding sooner, I've been busy. To answer your question I don't think there's any answer. 'Solving' the drug question is basically trying to solve the human condition - whatever you do you lose. If you chart the health impacts of various illicit drugs pot and ecstasy come would come in on the low end of the curve with Ice for example being at the upper end. Yes, you can consume pot in sensible amounts, infrequently and not suffer much in the way of ill effects but medical studies are pretty clear on the harmful effects of long term frequent use. So I guess it goes in the same basket as alcohol, make it legal if that's what you want to do but be prepared for social costs, just like with alcohol. After all anyone over 21 can have a drink in the US and it's perfectly legal - and that has not negative social costs does it? I mean Police hardly ever have to deal with problems caused by alcohol do do they? Another issue is all those calling for its legalization on 'medical grounds'. Problem is there are scores of different cannabinoids in pot, many of which have valuable medical properties while (fact check anyone?) I believe there is only one main cannabinoid responsible for giving you a high. And they can be be easily synthesized so technically you could legalize pill versions of the medical components while keeping the 'natural' version illegal. An dhow many of those crying 'but I need pot for it's medical effects' would suddenly start crying fowl. So I would probably legalize it in pill form if only because this reduces the damage to the lungs caused by inhaling it. Good luck with the dealers though - all they'll do is start pushing harder drugs.
You are on the right site if you have interest in complex fraud. Please don't ask me to elaborate as it will expose itself.
There have actually been a lot of Jewish generals and admirals in the US military. http://military.wikia.com/wiki/List_of_Jewish_American_generals_and_admirals
Don't think it works that way. Happy to be proven wrong but I think the cannabinoid responsible for the high you get when smoking pot is not the same one responsible for the various anti-inflammatory/pain relieving effects that pot users with certain medical conditions can experience.
Errr .... do you mean on a statistical basis - as opposed to say, everyone else who fought during World War 1 or is there a specific person you had in mind? Because either way I'm not sure I get your point.
Welcome to the forum. We enjoy having annoying people around because conflicting points of view make for interesting civil discourse.
Jews were expelled from England in 1290. It is hard to reverse ethnic cleansing, and very hard for a tiny minority to produce many generals, but it did give the UK a rather effective PM. America OTOH: more Jews, more Jewish military officers, more Jewish general officers. Many of them were very effective.