> "Pot" *does* harm the user *immediately*. That is part of the definition
> of all hallucinogens. You only have a chance for a case in "long-term"
> analysis.
Pot is not a hallucinogen. Even if it was, hallucinogenic doesn't mean
harmful. Take the effects of the hallucinogenic, Peyote. No harm has
ever came from that hallucinogenic.
> 1st) You can trace the exact issue of the KC Star, 1994-present.
Whatever "KC Star" is.
> 2nd) This is documented as of the early 1980's. Whether it's common
> knowledge is another story.... Complicated tools are not required in
> extreme cases, just as for alcohol. A few hours in a large public
> library should suffice.
Documented as what? Fact? The library will uncover much contradictory
material on pot because it is in the interests of the media to spread
much disinfomation on it as possible. A few hours in a large public
library will suffice to uncover many ridiculous claims made about the
"dangers" of pot in anti-drug campaigns of the 1960s, most of which
made claims that aren't claimed anymore (because they were
blatantly untrue).