Silkroad Online Forums

Maybe 4 times a year, at most.

I will say this: I'd much rather weed be legal so that at a party I could smoke a joint and have a good time with no after effects, unlike alcohol. Which is usually what happens those 4 times a year.

I've tried weed only once myself, so perhaps I haven't given it enough of a chance to make a valid opinion of it. But none the less, I'll say it anyway.

I'm not really the biggest fan of weed myself. Although during my experience with weed I was quite intoxicated beforehand, so this may have altered the effects (perhaps? I have no idea). I found that the feeling I got from weed is more so annoying than pleasing. I was quite happy, I remember being happy. I was pretty relaxed too, which was nice. But I found myself losing my ability to think. I did some fair stupid things, like trying to run up walls, driving around the city whilst under the influence etc etc. I was even smoking it in the middle of a subway restaurant with the guy behind the counter. Not really the smartest thing if I say so myself >_>

I also found that the effects lingered too much. Instead of being a constant effect like alcohol gives me, it sort of "came and went" every so often. I'd feel a sudden hit, I suppose that’s what people mean by tripping balls. After 10 minutes or so, it would fade then come back in another 2-3 minutes. I sort of disliked that to be honest, It made me feel unsure about when it would wear off.

Speaking of wearing off, it took a long time to do that. I didn't really feel "not stoned" until about 6 in the morning, perhaps 5 hours after we started smoking or 2-3 hours after we finished smoking. By the end I just wanted to pass out and sleep but the constant hits prevented it. It wasn't really the best feeling.

Perhaps I just had a bad experience and it's better than what I make it out to be. Perhaps that's what it's normally like and it sucks balls. I'm not sure, like I said I've only tried it once. But based off that experience, it's not really my kind of thing and I won't be doing it again. It doesn't bother me if other people do it though, it's their body.


Perhaps I'm reading this wrong, but to me it sounds like the problem lies within the people and not the drug. If the people don't have the responsibility or restraint to not over indulge in something, than it's a personal fault on their behalf. Instead of blaming weed for being gateway drugs that leads to their demise, should we not blame their lack of control and restraint for leading them "astray?". This may be a bad analogy, but I see it like blaming high-fat & high-sugar foods for making people obese. It's not the foods causing it, rather the individual not having restraint and moderating their intake of these foods.

The trying to run up walls and stuff sounds more like you smoked salvia.

Weed doesn't generally make you "trip balls" at all.

I also don't really like mixing weed and alcohol. Where I'm from we call it like 'strunk', stoned and drunk together. Which is never seen as a good thing.

Tried it a few times

Its overrated / overhyped and not as dangerous as people think, normally.

Gotta try something before you can comment on it, which is the reason i tried it.. like lots of other things.

Probs wont have it again.. i prefer drink simply because its legal.

The most dangerous thing about weed is that it can easily lead to heavier drugs for a lot of people... never tried it due to a principle kind of thing so cant comment on it but based on being at partys and the difference of the people there I think i will stick to being drunk, funnier for other people.

Yeah, neither do I.. lulz

<-- Never did and never will do weed or any other kind of drugs =p oh and yeah I'm Dutch o.O

^not even alcohol??

Wouldn't classify alchohol as drugs but ok yes I did drink alchohol a few times but been pretty much 'clean' for several years now, just don't find it so interesting.

Actually alcohol is harddrugs

Time to get it banned then? >.> I know it can do more damage than weed over time but it's not classified as drugs like weed/pot/lsd/speed/crack and what not.

So it's not a gateway drug but it is a gate way drug. Whether you'd like to admit it or not that's what you're saying and have been saying. You actually do need to prove causation if you're going to maintain an argument like this. Saying it's 100% just leads me to believe you have little experience in the matter, if any. What Dom said should've ended this little discussion because he's right. A rotten egg is a rotten egg and they were probably rotten before they ever got a hold of weed.

Since alcohol is a lot easier to obtain anyway especially in Europe and Australia where some countries don't even have a drinking age limit a person would think that drinking would be considered the gateway drug here which leads to heavy drinking which leads to weed which leads to etc. Some how you've got kids who want to party and skip the alcohol and go straight to weed, then go back to do extreme amount of alcohol which makes no sense at all.


Another gem. Why aren't you applying the same logic to alcohol which is much more socially acceptable and harmful and in much higher use than weed? Your common sense sounds like your own sheltered opinion and really doesn't make sense at all. Saying that because "some weed users" might move on to harder drugs gives no evidence whatsoever that weed is the cause of that.

Weed has actually been proven to help certain anxiety and depression. The accident rate is low. It's effects on the brain aren't damaging in moderate use and even with extreme long term use it mostly only effects memory. It's not addictive (though it can be habit forming). It can have positive effects on pain and certain diseases.

Alcohol is practically the opposite. It makes depression worse. Causes long term damage to brain, heart, kidneys, liver. It's addictive. Some people are even genetically inclined to be alcoholics. It's one of the leading causes of automobile accidents which are the leading cause of teen deaths. It's extremely easy to get a hold of...etc

If you were looking for a harmful substance that leads to other harmful substances why don't you start with the substance that's proven to be harmful.

The order logical order would be

drinking->heavy drinking->hard drugs NOT weed->heavy drinking->crack and other fun things...

but even that's a load of BS because i'm willing to be that most people who smoke aren't also heavy drinkers. Sort of like you play PC shooters or Console shooters but rarely both with the same level of interest...

alcohol is a drug yo!! im glad you dont do other drugs but a lot of people do beer once in a while

It is harddrugs, and the only reason they're not banning it is because people got used to it and now will not accept for it to be banned. they tried it in the U.S., but they failed. the governments learned from alcohol though and as soon as a new drug popped up, they immediately banned it. scientific research showed that alcohol is far more dangerous than xtc, but yet xtc is banned and alcohol not.

Governments make far too much money from alcohol to ever consider banning it.

I don't like beer, I'm like the 1% of men who don't drink beer rofl...Actually don't even like many alchoholic drinks, just a few mix thingy's. Don't like coffee either, such a shame I love energy drinks though or I would've been caffeine free too.

Drugs are stupid. Never done any, never will.

I don't smoke cigarettes which is the most popular around here, it's just a waste of money and gives you nothing good. I've never smoked weed either, but if someone I know is smoking and asks me to try it, I'll probably do it.

But any drugs like coke or any of that is a no-no.

The only thing that makes me hesitant in trying weed is that both my parents are/were regular smokers of nicotine, they both tried it once and got hooked, my father even quit and got back into it a couple times, and I don't know if weed would go the same way, if I'd get hooked with just one try.

Oh and I play PC and console shooters with the same level of interest.

I know some people that hate the taste of weed and dont get hooked on it, and then I hear about those who get instantly addicted the moment they puff once. must be like genetic or something

Yeah that's why I'm hesitant

Marijuana is not an addictive substance. Physically it's only addictive after extreme and prolonged use and even those cases are rare so again. Please stop spouting off your he said, she said, i saw a warning on TV garbage like it's actual fact or hold any sort of credibility. You don't know anyone nor has anyone ever told you about a person who actually got addicted to weed the moment they puffed it because it's physically impossible.

ughhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

someone like you has the honor of being the only one on my foe list, and I just happened to open your post, and I don't really know how many times you've ever replied to my posts since you got shut out, but how long is it going to take until you realize I don't care what you write? anyways, now that I read it, might as well write something too?

studies of social/psychological behavior is difficult to quantify and "scientific" studies and other tests done on things like marijuana use/addiction/gateway drug theory/etc etc is really all debatable. I don't care whether the addiction/dependence rate is 0.001% or or 2% or 17%, there probably are a number of cases where people get addicted to it through some time. Its possible for a certain person to smoke just one joint to push the snowball down the hill, maybe someone liked the taste of it and went back for a 2nd joint, then a third, then etc etc.

I mean your just being a hypocrite when you accuse everyone of pulling stuff out of their ass when here you are, acting like your the surgeon general and saying flat out "marijiuana is not addictive" as if there is 60 years of research that backs this claim. what the fuck?

So your theory relies on the concept that there is probably some specific case, despite how impossibly rare it is, in which a person became physically addicted to weed because they tried it once and liked it, so made the conscious decision to try it again?

Edit: Lets add more context due to quote segmentation.

First, your stated this

Please take careful note of the words instantly addicted.

The argument your trying to make, which is based off the concept that it probably occurred once, is that of an extended period of use may lead to addiction. I'lll quote you on that, too, just to further add to my point.


Xenmas is conveying the point that it is not instantly physically addictive, he is stating that there is no chemical substance in it that causes a physical dependency or need to it. Your reply is that you have blocked him and that his argument is invalid because someone might have been addicted to it through some time. Just... erg. Atleast read his post ffs.

/flaming ranting bullshit

You probably won't see this which will only drive home my point anyway. My responses to most of your inaccurate, subjective, and otherwise ignorant posts isn't for your benefit. I'd gain nothing arguing with someone like you because obviously since you keep making the same type of post you only do harm to yourself but it becomes a problem when other people start listening to you. Then by the laws of balance and general standards it becomes my problem.

When you combine your ignorance with other peoples ignorance then a strange phenomenon occurs where a bunch of people who are normally (but especially here) wrong start feeling like since someone else agreed with their point it must have some kind of weight. And then you all hold some sort of weird circle jerk of idiocy where you trade incorrect information back forth until you climax drowning out all intelligent discussion beneath your torrent of hot raw illogical postings....

My responses to jstar1 are more for ppl like Thee_Unique who in this case is being mislead. In another case I'm probably just trying to stop the circle jerk from occurring.

and Thee_Unique i'm not trying to push drugs on you i would never do that but if you're actually interested i'd suggest you do a google search and try to find the most unbiased sources of information you can about marijuana and go from there. It's a fascinating little plant to say the least and it's reputation has been hit hard over the years by the media and ppl like jstar who know so much about something they have so little experience with...

Xemnas is right. Jstar is wrong.

Just incase you're a bystander and dont know who to believe.

If you regularly smoke weed, and you care about your future, then keep up with cannabis research. This is not the latest, but its a great summary of most of the evidence looked through up to 2001

http://bjp.rcpsych.org/cgi/content/full/178/2/101

best of all, the paper is free access.

Since then there are more research concerning cannabis use, but mostly within specific areas of interest. The best study design to evaluate potential harm of any drug from best to worst:

1. Randomized controlled trial (best)
2. Cohort study
3. Case controlled study
4. Personal experience or testimonial (worst)

What I see from this thread is a lot of very low level evidence.

tldr; the effects of cannabis is dose dependent, the more (and frequently) you take the higher the chance of side effects (tolerance, dependence, psychosis, chronic airway disease).

If your parents are idd easy to get addicted to something I wouldn't take the chances with stuff like that. I look like my mother and she's addicted to smoking, well I'm kind of addicted to gaming. If I knew that before I might've not started to game more seriously lol >.<

Ok thank you, and yes I'm very ignorant when it comes to weed so I'll probably just take everything I hear as the truth...

But I'll take your advice and do some research. Thank you.

Edit: And my parents don't get easily addicted to everything, just nicotine.