Cannabis  

432 members have voted

  1. 1. Have you ever used Cannabis?

    • Yes
      267
    • No
      165
  2. 2. Will you use Cannabis? again?

    • Yes
      154
    • I am not Opposed
      58
    • Not Sure
      45
    • No
      175
  3. 3. Do You Support Legalization / Decriminalization of Cannabis?

    • Legalize Cannabis
      179
    • Decriminalize Cannabis
      119
    • Keep Cannabis Illegal
      134


Recommended Posts

It's nice to see some anti-cannabas sites in your list.

I grew up in the 60's & 70's and had many, many friends that smoked pot on a daily & very regular basis. With those I've kept in touch with over the years, either with themselves or family & other friends:

3 were in Prison for Posession with Intent to Sell as soon as a year after High School Graduation.

7 still use, and have absolutely no direction or ambition in their lives other than to have enough money to buy more weed.

12 no longer use and still suffer the effects of prolonged use. One has to hand her keys to her husband when she arrives at home because she can't seem to remember where she puts them (just one of her memory-loss problems).

2 no longer use, and regulary express thanks that they don't suffer any adverse effects.

2 are dead due to increased & expanded drug use.

In addition:

2 close friends are dead due to someone driving stoned - one was killed when the other driver was actually trying to light-up while driving, and the other died when the other, stoned driver plowed into the rear-end of her car going at 60mph while she was at a stop-light. This was when there were no Airbag systems in cars, and most cars had only lap-belts - she was ejected through the windshield and ended-up 25ft into the intersection. Her funeral was close-casket.

...and they say that Pot isn't dangerous?

I've seen first-hand how drug use & abuse ruins lives. I've seen first-hand the consequences of illicit drug use & abuse in the lives of those who use illicit drugs and the lives they touch - even indirectly. To ignore the negative effects of illicit drugs is, IMHO, the pinnacle of ignorance and stupidity.

Now, remember - this is only my opinion, and to tell me that my opinion is wrong is utter stupidity; everyone's opinion is 100% valid. Your opinions may differ than mine, but I'm not going to attack you if your opinion differs from mine or go on a public tirade if you don't agree with my opinion, and I expect you to do the same and respect my opinion. If not, then don't even bother replying.

--ScottKin

No No No

I hate drugs, I have enough to care about trying to get away from Caffeine, I can't imagines true drugs.

Medical drugs (therefore Medical use of Cannabis) are ok and controlled by professionals.

My view is closed on this.

Never used it, never will. I am opposed to any drug use simply because it is a major cause of a lot of violence and most people just use it to escape their true life/problems, which in the end is just wasting time you could be using to fix those problems.
QFT

I use cannabis on a daily basis. I have been using it for quite some time now, approximately 10 years. I run a restaurant, have two wonderful kids, I own my house and I'm only 24. It hasn't slowed me down a bit. You can't get stoned and chill in your basement every single day, you've gotta stay active.

@Gary7: You made it sound as if your friend started smoking weed after he put a bullet in his head, but your friend didn't get $150,000k into debt because of marijuana, he was addicted to coke. Marijuana did not force him to snort his first line man, you can't pass blame like that.

No.

No.

Keep Cannabis Illegal.

I never liked drugs, especially because I have seen what it can do to you. Someone I know personally (will not name him here, no need to) started using soft drugs like cannabis, after that he took on more and more harder drugs until he was caught stealing money from the register at his work to buy another shot. He didn't even think about what he did, he just had to get that shot. So I say: funk it, never touched the stuff and I never will.

Yes

Yes

Legalize it.

First point, Being a drug addict is not a crime. To lock people up for having marijuana is waste of time and money. The D.E.A. Spends far to much time and money worrying about Marijuana when it should be concerned with drugs like coke and heroine. If you legalize it then it can become more controlled like cigarette's and alcohol. Not to mention the money it would generate from taxes. Our jail system is overflowing with people locked up from marijuana use, when it should have room for real criminals such as pedophiles and murders.

No drugs kill. A good friend of mine went over 150,000 in debt on cocaine and ended up putiing a bullet in his head. He started smoking pot. So no, I will never support the legalization of any mind altering drug.

and that's why drugs are bad?

if a man can't manage himself, he'll find a way to **** it all up sooner or later. it's a personality thing.

it just as well might have been horse races, alcohol, prescription drugs, whatever. you can't keep everything illegal just because some people can't cope with it.

The way I see it for any drug/service/whatever.

The only reason there should be a law created to handle the situation is if by doing something you are putting others at risk... i.e. drunk driving. I think we should be allowed to choose for ourselves, even if others don't agree, as long as it only affects us or the people who agree to be in our presence.

I can pretty much use the examples of alcohol and cigarettes. Alcohol has certain restrictions, age, how much you can drink if you drive, etc... and those are meant to protect others along with yourself. But on a random day of the week, you can get trashed in your own place and nothing's wrong with that, it's your choice, and it doesn't really put others at risk. Cigarettes, we talk about "drugs" while ignoring all the **** in cigarettes... while we can argue the benefits of cannabis, i rarely see anyone trying to defend the usefulness or reason why cigarettes are legal to obtain, so why this disconnect?

The system is stupid, and I don't care if you don't want to do drugs, the point should be that in some capacity, I should be allowed to take drugs as long as I do not put you or anyone else in danger. Such as only doing drugs in a private residence. Restrictions similar to those for alcohol?

And realistically, these laws are not doing anything useful. Jails are getting crowded over bull**** charges, streets continue to be filled with drugs, and essentially all this gang **** is fueled by supplying illegal goods. I don't need big brother telling me what I'm allowed and not allowed to do in my home. Just like the government milks cigarettes, they could have a serious cash cow with drugs if executed properly, plus less time and money spent by law enforcement agencies who deal with this nonsense.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • My father still uses a programme written in dbase3. Still manages to work with a little help from dosbox. 
    • Microsoft hides these secret Windows 11 performance boost settings available on every PC by Sayan Sen Windows enthusiasts often look for ways to extract as much performance out of their systems as possible, and it's often the case that they try and do so while trying to minimize the heat and power consumption. This is especially relevant in the case of mobile Windows PCs since laptops and notebooks tend to get hot and management of that heat and power is harder in such a form factor. As such users often turn to techniques like under-volting which can be used to squeeze out the maximum capabilities of a chip while also maintaining lowered power levels. There are official apps from AMD and Intel with the likes of Ryzen Master and XTU (Extreme Tuning Utility). While these are quite handy, most enthusiasts probably prefer to dig into the BIOS and play around with settings there like Curve Optimizer on Ryzen, which lets users set various frequency-voltage scaling values. These are essentially called P-States. If you are not familiar with them, Processor Power Management is done through Advanced Configuration and Power Interface (ACPI) P-states and C-states. While P-states or performance pwoer states handle CPU voltage-frequency scaling, C-states deal with CPU sleep states so that some of the CPU functions, which are not necessary at that moment, can be disabled. The P-states and C-states work together to make the processor run more efficiently. It helps the OS and apps determine which cores can be parked and which should be boosted. Of course not every user is an enthusiast or knows the technicalities and integrities of how things like overclocking or undervolting work. Thankfully for them Windows itself offers something pretty cool, though it is hidden by default on all systems. By default, Windows only has two P-States, "Minimum Processor State" and "Maximum Processor State." However, this can be changed with a Registry trick to expand the options under a secret "Processor performance boost mode" dropdown. This essentially enables the HWP or hardware P-States available on a device, and these are not controlled just by the OS itself as the underlying hardware gets involved too. In total there are five Processor Performance Boost Mode profiles that control how Windows requests and allows CPU turbo/boost behavior under the different power policies. They are: Disabled: In this mode, processor boosting is effectively turned off. The CPU will avoid entering turbo or boost frequencies and instead operate closer to its base frequency ceiling. This can significantly reduce power consumption and heat output, but at the cost of reduced burst performance and responsiveness in short workloads. Enabled: This is the standard behavior where boost functionality is allowed under normal conditions. The processor can opportunistically increase frequency when workload demands it, balancing performance gains with power and thermal constraints as managed by the system. Aggressive: Aggressive mode favors performance more heavily, allowing the CPU to enter higher boost states more readily and sustain them longer. This should in theory improve responsiveness under bursty or heavy workloads but increases power draw and thermal output compared to the default enabled behavior. Efficient Enabled: This mode still allows boosting, but with a stronger bias toward energy efficiency. The system attempts to use boost more selectively, avoiding unnecessary frequency spikes when the performance gain is marginal. Efficient Aggressive: This is a hybrid approach where boost is still performance-responsive, but the system continuously weighs efficiency more heavily than in Aggressive mode. It aims to deliver noticeable performance improvements while reducing wasted power in less demanding scenarios. Here's how to enable the Processor performance boost mode: Open Registry Editor: Press Win+R, type regedit, and click OK. Go to: HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Power\PowerSettings\54533251-82be-4824-96c1-47b60b740d00\be337238-0d82-4146-a960-4f3749d470c7 (where HKLM stands for HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE_) Modify the value of Attributes from 1 to 2 (you can find modify option by right-clicking) After that, exit Registry, you should now be able to see the new "Processor performance boost mode" dropdown menu: As you can see there are now five new P-States or CPPC states or power profile available that help define the boost mode processor setting on your PC. Wrapping it up here's a quick run-down of the settings as defined by Microsoft itself. Setting Description Disabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is disabled. Collaborative Processor Performance Control (CPPC) behaviour is disabled. Enabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is enabled. CPPC behaviour is Efficient Enabled. Aggressive The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is enabled. CPPC behaviour is Aggressive. Efficient Enabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is Efficient. CPPC behaviour is Efficient Enabled. Efficient Aggressive The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is Efficient. CPPC behaviour is Aggressive. Aggressive At Guaranteed Windows calculates the desired extra performance above the guaranteed performance level, and asks the processor to deliver that specific performance level. Efficient Aggressive At Guaranteed Windows always asks the processor to deliver the highest possible performance above the guaranteed performance level. In the next part we shall be comparing these settings to explore how much of a benefit or regression they can provide in terms of performance and power efficiency. If you decide to change the values on your system and are experiencing problems like crashes or an overheating PC, make sure to revert the steps back to the original state.
    • I think he means you haven't reviewed previous UFC games. Of course it doesn't matter... Every time you just report on something that involves the President even if just simply what happened you guys usually get accused of being anti-Trump. We live in fun times.
    • So how did you solve the problem? Disabling Secure Boot isn’t a solution.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      Leroy Jethro Gibbs earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Conversation Starter
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Month Later
      AndreaB earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      agatameier earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      agatameier earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      518
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      198
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      147
    4. 4
      ATLien_0
      93
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      77
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!