> > I used to have a friend who indulged in smoking pot. When not
> > under the influence he was a reasonable driver, but, when stoned
> > he was totally incapable of driving safely. He would run stop
> > signs (he did not notice them), run lights, and generally not
> > pay nearly enough attention to the task at hand (i.e., driving).
> > During the period i knew him, he was involved in 5 accidents
> > (all under the influence, none involving deaths). I do not
> > know if he eventually killed anyone or himself.
>
> One friend? I would hardly call that reliable evidence. That is
> called generalization and stereotyping.
Not at all. It merely demonstrates that there is at least one person
in the world who has had accidents (although not necessarily fatal),
due to the effect of pot. This points out that your assertion that
road deaths have never happened due to pot is highly unlikely to be
true. There is a good probability that if this person has had
accidents, he's not the only one out of about 3 billion who has.
> I know that pot is not a risk. While smoking the burning leaves of
> anything is bad for ones health, so is eating fried or smoked anything,
> such as steak. I wouldn't call eating steak a risk, would you?
It's got loads of cholesterol in it, which weakens your heart. But it
doesn't impare your abilities on the road for a start.
>
> > (Perhaps pot brownies are safer.)
Try a Pot Pot Noodle :)
> >Many (most, all?)
> > people who use pot acknowledge short term memory deficiencies.
Yep.
> Doesn't anybody do anything more than
> speculate?
Very rarely ;)
> Doesn't anybody check out the facts or do research?
Not if it means I have to get out of bed :)
> "A Primer of Drug Action" is easy to find and look at any bookstore
> in America. What is so hard to verify it?
I don't live in America.
Drakir
-------------
Richard Jones
jonesr@gatwick.geco-prakla.slb.com
-------------
"We are the New Breed,
We are the Future."
-------------