Prompted by “By Allowing Pot Pubs, A Massachusetts Measure Would Treat Cannabis Consumers More Like Drinkers”: http://www.forbes.com/sites/jacobsullum/2015/08/20/by-allowing-pot-pubs-a-massachusetts-measure-would-treat-cannabis-consumers-more-like-drinkers/
As a scientific constitutionalist, I firmly believe and have fully logically described the fact that Certain Drug Prohibition cannot possibly be legal by any rational (therefore uncorrupted) judicial measure. That fact is a monstrous “elephant in the room” that even major drug policy reform groups ignore, because that corrupt measure is largely the basis for deep traditional political leftist reach into regulating the private sector (starting with President Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal), and such leftists (still overwhelmingly dominating drug policy reform) don’t want to rock that ship powerfully against their overall political agenda.
Respectfully putting aside that scientific constitutionalism fits honorable political leftist intentions (innovatively with honorable — e.g. non-hypocritical — American conservative and libertarian ones), in order to save millions of non-violent lives from the demonstrable scourge that is drug prohibition addiction, I refuse to ignore that “elephant”, and will entertainingly press my “slam dunk” case in the true highest court of the land — the court of public opinion.
Take away constitutional support for Certain Drug Prohibition by unavoidable truth, and the seriously powerful self-interest groups sustaining the war on some drugs will instantly be judicially disarmed. That means “game over” for the Controlled Substances Act, the Supremacy Clause in our Constitution kicks in to eliminate state and local anti-drug laws, and the lacking constitutional support instantly ends our national obligation to uphold relevant international treaties.
However, humanity clearly isn’t ready for purely objective (so fair, so actually just) law by way of purely relying upon certainties to form legal constructs (i.e. popularly embracing scientific constitutionalism is apparently temporally distant).
As such, our Respect Cannabis campaign focuses upon stirring up scientific constitutional awareness solely by way of the Fed Up program, but pragmatically supports current ‘regulate and tax’ style of reform. That especially includes the 2016 voter initiative to legalize recreational cannabis in my home state addressed in the prompting piece.
Treating cannabis like alcohol in terms of public perception makes sense on the one hand, because there really is no better comparison in terms of popular recreational drugs.
On the other hand, alcohol is not cannabis in many (if not most) regards.
From my Respect Cannabis informational roots…
Despite conventional wisdom publicly entrenching the contrary, cannabis is not ‘alcohol plus’, so comparison with that latter drug can be terribly misleading.
Basically stated, alcohol kills brain cells, while cannabis does not – and cannabis apparently produces a contrary mental protection and perhaps even healing effect upon proper use.
Alcohol causes disorienting and all-encompassing effects (even one drink basically starts discouraging exercise – i.e. alcohol and exercise basically rarely, if ever, simultaneously fit together). Some cannabis strains combined with a sufficiently loud intake intensity can basically replicate the disorienting alcohol effect, but comfortably respectably stable effects are easy to achieve with correct strain selection, and even a reasonably loud vaporized cannabis effect volume (e.g. 70/30 a2u ratio – i.e. altered to unaltered perception ratio) would still allow a reasonably skilled cannabis user to responsibly engage in (even fairly, if not outright, heavy) exercise with reasonably low risk.
Alcohol brings stupidity to even the wise, while cannabis never affects the ‘wisdom’ part of the brain. If a cannabis user remains wise while sober, that wisdom remains unaffected by even heavily intense cannabis effects comfortably fitting for the user.
Since major currents are carrying society to basically equate cannabis and alcohol, I simply offer my prediction regarding ‘pot bars’.
Smoking cannabis produces a powerful odor that sometimes deeply disturbs anti-cannabis folks to a degree where they petition our public servants to act against cannabis culture.
Vaporizing cannabis at least greatly reduces that odor.
Except in cases of high tolerance (e.g. people like a friend of mine who joked that he smoked daily just to feel normal), smoking cannabis essentially (if not completely) dismisses the possibility of mild effects lightly squeezed in from sobriety.
Vaporizing cannabis is increasingly done electronically with temperature control. That conveniently opens up a whole new universe of respectable experience (e.g. alcohol-crushing cannabis nightcap) by introducing casual users to seriously mild, but still very responsibly positive, effects — a serious game-changer towards increasing cannabis wisdom and popular embrace. That’s especially true when the strain “Cheese”, with its popularly invitingly simplistic and Zen-like balancing and gently uplifting effect, is typically chosen.
Vaporizing cannabis will competitively leave smoking behind in its own smoke — left in the hands of a tiny community of folks passionately (if not also nostalgically) embracing the smoke style of toke.
Why such a blunt end to what I assume is still the most popular cannabis intake method (perhaps even by far)?
In a word (followed by a parenthetical), efficiency (and therefore cost).
My mom is a licensed medical cannabis user in our state, and among other health issues brilliantly managed by cannabis, her prime usage is for treating Alzheimer’s disease (AD). In addition to my personal caregiver experience, I have good witnesses to support my mom’s continuing improvement against the disease. While I won’t extend to claim cannabis is the only cure for AD, after just less than a year of using cannabis (contrasted by a lifetime of commonly heavy mental stressors), she has shown remarkable progress matching the best claims of the best traditional western medical alternatives available as I write this post. Beyond that claim remains the brilliant hope that cannabis will match suggestive science, so she will be the first person to escape the black hole of dementia (wonderful news for the literally many millions of people crossing that deadly event horizon and the people dutifully caring for them).
I bring her usage up, because she’s mildly using cannabis daily (three puffs each day), so half of an ounce (actually two quarter ounces — one for a daytime strain and the other for sleep issues) are positioned to (at least) last a full year. A full year’s worth of the highest quality medicine covering many health issues costs only about $200 (less than $17 monthly).
Moreover, that price will dramatically fall, if regulation doesn’t severely impact competitive market forces involving a plant that can be professionally grown in all 50 states — supply will greatly outweigh demand, so prices will fall sharply via intense competition (a fall perhaps limited by a potentially limited number of truly talented professional growers).
Find me one daily cannabis smoker capable of even coming close to claiming that a half ounce lasts them a whole year.
Vaporization is better in terms of health (including limiting social disturbance) and financial impact, so logic dictates that many (if not most) daily cannabis smokers will switch to vaporization and new users will responsibly start with mildest vaporization to respect that cannabis use is a skill necessarily staring with ‘level one’. Hardcore smokers may even turn to vaporize concentrates, if they really want to go psychedelic.
Granted a sharp price drop will support the smoking generations, but I maintain convenient electronic vaporization is too compelling for popular ignoring. That’s especially true in poor communities ravaged by alcohol as a cheap stress management “solution”. High-quality and inexpensive cannabis will revolutionize stress management across the board, but giving poor communities access to an awesome stress management tool will go a long way towards helping folks take back their communities for civility (cannabis is not dope).
A ‘pot bar’ is not necessarily going to be a stoner’s paradise (albeit those will obviously exist) where obnoxious odors, loud music, and laughter radiates into the public to potentially offend non-fans of cannabis.
A ‘pot bar’ could be the equivalent of a specialized library — a place where lightweight cannabis is “vaporizingly” consumed in an environment designed with fittingly cool presentation for the psychedelic mindset, but encourages cerebral social experiences.
Ultimately, the caffeine comparison will join the cannabis fit, because what caffeine does for a healthy work ethic, mild cannabis does for a healthy relaxation ethic.
When both of those ethics are finally balanced (rationally speaking — balance is required for stability), society will logically be much more peaceful with the improved mental health (e.g. intellect) from protective cannabis “clothing” still prevailing to strongly ensure that peace by proper law enforcement and military defense remains always at the ready in our demonstrably unstable (e.g. irrational) world.
That’s my idea for pragmatic civility, and I hope you join our Respect Cannabis campaign to help drive us there.
I see well-beyond that prediction to an unimaginable Psychedelic Renaissance, where other psychedelics are also healthily consumed very mildly and responsibly (and making a major leap of a positive contribution to modern brain science via symphonic mental tuning for maximum bodily health leaving the current generation of psychological pharmaceuticals the deprecated equivalent of bloodletting by leeches), but brevity finally says enough with one minor but important statement…
I would love to read your opinions on the matter, so don’t hesitate to participate.