Kush friendly is not only a brand that stands for quality, but also for truth in the battle against the wrongful bans on Marijuana the world over. Many researchers have shown that in a relatively short period in America since 1936, the scientific and social foundations of the ban changed radically, amounting to nonsense shortly after each change. These changes are interesting because they refer to the phenomenon where the talk is about the survival of the culture of the ban.
It will not take a lot to convince you that the only thing relevant to cannabis prohibition, is the prohibition itself and its survival, rather than the stories that are told about cannabis and its dangers. During a certain time, why the ban originated, and which authorities stood to benefit from it in any way, is of course important, and also nice to give you some background on the issue. You can instantly realize that the New York Police Department benefits from it, for example.
It is not their ambition to answer the question of what dangers are wrongfully attributed. Cannabis supporters realize that these dangers are not recognized in Greece, Sweden, Holland and Belgium. Having the same hazards described in different ways depending on the country or political culture has led to a lot of change between 1936 and 2007.
If you have had the opportunity to meet people who think that good research in the field of cannabis, you will be surprised by their views. They have proven that consumption and production will affect the way in which cannabis prohibition is retained, modified, or perhaps dissolved! This recommendation aims to show that the idea claiming that cannabis prohibition has been a shield from discourse is far from scientific.
The English tend to be was much shorter in their answer to being asked why prohibition continues with them, simply not wishing to get into details. None of them, not even the smartest can claim that their statements are scientifically tenable. They just simply say that cannabis is 'just bad' for people, in all sorts of ways, and also widely seen as a step towards the use of other drugs.
The story is the same when you look at the sacredness of cannabis prohibition. This applies to its connection to "purifying" and the belief in it. The fact that it eludes ordinary considerations of scientific, economic or social nature is simply ignored.
The more mundane aspects of the ban also need some contemplation. The example of organizations that benefit from the culture of cannabis prohibition comes from ongoing research into cannabis arrests in New York by Harry Levine. His thesis is that the driving force behind the arrest of large and growing number of people for the possession of cannabis in the city of New York is not the use of cannabis, or any possible increase in risks for local police.
There is no need to go into the debate about cannabis as a stepping stone drug. Just leave that statement as one that would lead to a series of epidemiological publications to tear it apart with proof about the unsustainability of cannabis as a stepping stone drug. The solution? Put your kit and show your colors for what's right!
It will not take a lot to convince you that the only thing relevant to cannabis prohibition, is the prohibition itself and its survival, rather than the stories that are told about cannabis and its dangers. During a certain time, why the ban originated, and which authorities stood to benefit from it in any way, is of course important, and also nice to give you some background on the issue. You can instantly realize that the New York Police Department benefits from it, for example.
It is not their ambition to answer the question of what dangers are wrongfully attributed. Cannabis supporters realize that these dangers are not recognized in Greece, Sweden, Holland and Belgium. Having the same hazards described in different ways depending on the country or political culture has led to a lot of change between 1936 and 2007.
If you have had the opportunity to meet people who think that good research in the field of cannabis, you will be surprised by their views. They have proven that consumption and production will affect the way in which cannabis prohibition is retained, modified, or perhaps dissolved! This recommendation aims to show that the idea claiming that cannabis prohibition has been a shield from discourse is far from scientific.
The English tend to be was much shorter in their answer to being asked why prohibition continues with them, simply not wishing to get into details. None of them, not even the smartest can claim that their statements are scientifically tenable. They just simply say that cannabis is 'just bad' for people, in all sorts of ways, and also widely seen as a step towards the use of other drugs.
The story is the same when you look at the sacredness of cannabis prohibition. This applies to its connection to "purifying" and the belief in it. The fact that it eludes ordinary considerations of scientific, economic or social nature is simply ignored.
The more mundane aspects of the ban also need some contemplation. The example of organizations that benefit from the culture of cannabis prohibition comes from ongoing research into cannabis arrests in New York by Harry Levine. His thesis is that the driving force behind the arrest of large and growing number of people for the possession of cannabis in the city of New York is not the use of cannabis, or any possible increase in risks for local police.
There is no need to go into the debate about cannabis as a stepping stone drug. Just leave that statement as one that would lead to a series of epidemiological publications to tear it apart with proof about the unsustainability of cannabis as a stepping stone drug. The solution? Put your kit and show your colors for what's right!
About the Author:
When you are looking for information on Kush friendly products, visit the web pages here today. You can see details at http://www.kushwear.net now.
No comments:
Post a Comment