Seth Rogen Calls Nancy Grace a "F--king Dumbass" Over Anti-Marijuana Tweets

[manningmsj]

Well I started about 16 yoa, so I'm good there. Plus I'd rather have natural calming meds as opposed to man made drugs that will kill you. I hate pills. HATE them because they killed one of my brothers. It's all about money IMO.

I hear you and so sorry for your loss. My brother was a pretty heavy stoner in his teens and early twenties, until he was forced to quit when he got a job that drug tested. Addiction runs high in our family and being aware of the dangers of cross addiction, I feel confident saying that quitting pot actually contributed to his dependence on alcohol. He has always had a temper, but while marijauana seemed to calm it, alcohol exacerbates it to the point where he often flies into blind rages. Having experienced his personality on both substances, I'd take pot over booze any day. I'm not saying it's for everyone or that it is an antidote to every psychological problem, but I do believe it's beneficial more often than it's harmful. Just like most medicine.

In undeveloped brains, I see the need for caution. Same as those with mental health issues. But I also think legalisation might actually decrease the risk of pot getting into the wrong hands. And the risk of getting anything else mixed in that the buyer doesn't know about. My feeling about marijuana is that it is the only substance I could live with my kids using one day. Though I doubt I'd want them doing it in front of me, the same way I hide my cigarette smoking from my own parents and them. Still, IMO, it's no biggie for most people.

[faithanne]

I also think that young people experiencing the first signs of mental illness/schizophrenia tend to self-medicate in order to feel "normal" again as they don't understand what's happening to them.

[Bellatheball]

If Seth R was trying to use this as an opportunity to expand his platform, maybe he should have put down the pot and formed a coherent rebuttal to Nancy Grace instead of calling her names.

And screw him for making me defend her too.

[Kathie_Moffett]

I also think that young people experiencing the first signs of mental illness/schizophrenia tend to self-medicate in order to feel "normal" again as they don't understand what's happening to them.

That's a very good point. One kid I knew who began going off the deep end in junior high school also started to drink a lot. (He's now hopelessly schizophrenic, has to be institutionalized all the time.)

Or maybe the dad was a homicidal maniac and the pot use was coincidental. Conjecture like that is just scaremongering. She's a fucking dumbass.

Exactly, correlation isn't causation, as the scholars say. She was a dumbass before this and I'm sure she will remain one. Ugh, her voice slices my brain.

Why do you think I'm not in jail.

i actually agree with you that pot isn't harmless. it absolutely can have serious consequences. it can also be pretty much harmless.
you know what else can be harmless on some people, dangerous or a problem for some? alcohol and cigarettes. and yet they're still legal. but highly taxed and controlled substances.
so i'm with you that pot isn't harmless. but i just don't agree with it being illegal. it props up an entire illegal trade and the criminal element that goes with it. taking with it potential billions in tax revenues so that governments can then pay for, say, the health resources required to deal with it, just like with alcohol and cigarettes. and by criminalising, you're making something a law enforcement issue instead of a social and health issue, which is what it is.
not to mention the billions lost each year fighting the war on drugs and trying to get rid of crime that wouldn't exist if weed was legalised. and the billions lost prosecuting and incarcerating consumers or low level criminals, most of them addicts themselves.

A thousand times this. We really need to stop. Remember Prohibition? Yeah, that didn't work either.

I grew up in Berzerkeley. I probably have seen more stoned people in my life than most. I've never seen anyone flip out while simply stoned, except one girl who felt paranoid and decided she didn't like it...yeah, it was rough....she ate some cereal and went to bed.

Acid, coke, yes. Bad stuff. Drunk, YES, a couple of truly frightening encounters. And of course, in Berkeley we've got babbling acidheads, crackheads, junkie punk kids, 60s burnouts, and worse. Like the kid, strung out on PCP, who thought it would be fun to slit my poor cat's wrist. (She survived and became an indoor kitty.) Sometimes just getting to class in the morning was harrowing back in the 80s. It's better now; I don't recoil from going downtown anymore.

In my experience, stoned people mostly make silly noises and fall over--after laughing multiple times at the same joke, eating all the leftovers or perhaps, attempting to cuddle you. A few will start really intriguing, esoteric conversations. An even more elite minority will suddenly clean your house or cook a bunch of yummy food. Wish there were more of those.

I smoked off and on for years, until I felt it was making me forgetful. Plus, I was just bored with it. If I wasn't in a drug-testy field of work I would still do it now and then to help me sleep (or, frankly, it can be awesome for sex because it intensifies pleasurable sensations while numbing painful ones...you just have to stay focused and not....zzzzzzzz.)

Like any mind-altering substance, it can be troublesome. The classic deadbeat stoner boyfriend, for example. The kind that won't get a job, won't grow up...but a guy like that would find some other crutch, I think? Of course driving stoned should carry penalties just like driving in any other sort of impaired state. And nobody with a "developing brain" aka under 18-21, should ever smoke it--that's just common sense.

My cop friends are paranoid about pot's theoretical status as a 'gateway drug'. (I should add that after hearing how things are going in CO and the other legalized states, they are changing their minds a bit.) But what I've seen again and again x eleventy is that alcohol is THE gateway drug, and a nasty one too. Legal weed probably won't change that. Getting drunk is just way more of an exhilarating rush for most people...even me.

(But I swear, don't mix the two. Especially if you've got a determined woman making lethal cocktails and super powerful Humboldt ganja in the bong. That was insane. And we were at the beach at night! I don't remember much except a sort of glowy haze where the few thoughts I could hold onto included, "okay, are we chanting yet?", "are there more sausages??", "oh no I have to pee again, can I make it up that dune one more time?" and "for the love of god stay away from the fucking ocean! do NOT stagger in that direction!!" Luckily we were all equally shitfaced so nobody felt too embarrassed the next day.)

[KrisNine]

I 100% believe that pot should be legal. Just the way alcohol is legal. It's almost silly that it isn't. I also believe that pot can be harmful to certain people, just the same way that alcohol can be harmful to some people. People can make bad decisions under the influence of just about anything.

I do think the pro-pot legalization camp needs some better spokespeople. Not some stupid stoners like Miley Cyrus and Seth Rogen. Anyone that talks about being high, drunk, or generally fucked up on anything all the time is not a good person to represent a cause.

[Novice]

My experience of hardcore"stoners" was that they were addicts, that it made them paranoid, psychotic and had the usual "addict" functions (cheating, stealing, etc).
I am talking addiction here, not a casual user. There is a BIG difference imo.


And just for shits & giggle since someone quoted a berkley study...
Even casual use of cannabis alters brain, warn scientists
Experts have said that cannabis is far from being a “safe” drug and no one under the age of 30 should ever use it
Experts have said that cannabis is far from being a “safe” drug and no one under the age of 30 should ever use it
Picture: Stuart Aylmer/ Alamy
Twitter
464
Facebook
16K

Share
16K
By Rebecca Smith, Medical Editor9:18AM BST 16 Apr 2014
Smoking marijuana once or twice a week for a matter of months found to have effects on the brain in sections that govern emotion, motivation and addiction

Experimenting with cannabis on a casual basis damages the brain permanently, research has found.

It is far from being a “safe” drug and no one under the age of 30 should ever use it, experts said.

RELATED ARTICLES
Why are Brits so reckless when it comes to drugs?
Mother thought to be first woman in Britain to die from cannabis poisoning
Vending machine selling cannabis for consumers debuts in Colorado
People who had only used cannabis once or twice a week for a matter of months were found to have changes in the brain that govern emotion, motivation and addiction.

Researchers from Harvard Medical School in America carried out detailed 3D scans on the brains of students who used cannabis casually and were not addicted and compared them with those who had never used it.

Two major sections of the brain were found to be affected.

The scientists found that the more cannabis the 40 subjects had used, the greater the abnormalities.

Around 10 million people in Britain, almost a third of the population, have used illegal drugs, with cannabis the most popular. The research author, Dr Hans Breiter, professor of psychiatry and behavioural sciences at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, said: “This study raises a strong challenge to the idea that casual marijuana use isn’t associated with bad consequences. Some people only used marijuana to get high once or twice a week.

“People think a little recreational use shouldn’t cause a problem, if someone is doing OK with work or school. Our data directly says this is not the case.

“I’ve developed a severe worry about whether we should be allowing anybody under age 30 to use pot unless they have a terminal illness and need it for pain.”

The team examined sections of the brain involved in emotion, motivation and addiction in 20 students who had used cannabis and 20 who had not. Anne Blood, assistant professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School, said: “These are core, fundamental structures of the brain. They form the basis for how you assess positive and negative features about things in the environment and make decisions about them.”

The changes are thought to be the first steps towards addiction as the brain alters the way it perceives reward and pleasure, making ordinary experiences seem less fulfilling compared with drug use.

Jodi Gilman, a researcher in the Massachusetts General Center for Addiction Medicine, said: “It may be that we’re seeing a type of drug learning in the brain. We think when people are in the process of becoming addicted, their brains form these new connections.

“Drug abuse can cause more dopamine release than natural rewards like food, sex and social interaction. That is why drugs take on so much salience, and everything else loses its importance.” The study is published in the Journal of Neurosciences.

Mark Winstanley, chief executive of Rethink Mental Illness, said: “For too long cannabis has been seen as a safe drug, but as this study suggests, it can have a really serious impact on your mental health.

“Research also shows that when people smoke cannabis before the age of 15, it quadruples their chance of developing psychosis. But very few people are aware of the risks involved.”

Prof David Nutt, from Imperial College, London, said a sample of 40 was not big enough to draw conclusions.

Prof Nutt, who was sacked as a government drugs adviser for his views, added: “Whatever cannabis does to the brain its not in the same league as alcohol which is a proven neurotoxin.”

Bolded in agreement.

[manningmsj]

^^^^ I'm too lazy to quote, but ITA what you said about addicts in the beginning. I don't have enough experience with addicts who only use marijuana, so I'm not sure if the paranoia, psychosis, etc. is a result of smoking pot or other drugs. I know paranoid addicts, but most of them abuse other drugs and alcohol so I can't say for sure that it is caused by marijuana from what I've experienced. But I do think anyone who is prone to addiction is going to be more likely to experience negative side effects from all drugs, including cannabis. There is no safe drug for an addict, IMO, and that includes marijuana. Two of my siblings are addicts and while I would love to see them both clean and sober, I will say that pot has been the least damaging of the various things they've used. My brother's temper was mollified by his pot use, but it definitely had drawbacks on his cognitive abilities. He was lazy, forgetful, and not quite as sharp.

It's a double-edged sword, IMO. It can be very useful for some people, especially those undergoing treatment for cancer. My aunt was a square peg and held out for as long as she could, but nothing helped her nausea as much as cannabis. And I think it can be useful for treating anxiety, with milder side effects than Xanax or Klonopin. But put it in the wrong hands and it's as dangerous as any narcotic or upper. People will misuse it. I think it just comes down to whether or not those issues would be made better or worse by legalization. Personally I absolutely support it for medicinal use (for more than just nausea), and think with the right stipulations, it could be safe (or as safe as liquor and alcohol) for recreational use. But without the government monitoring it's distribution, I think it is always going to be out there for the wrong people to get their hands on. Criminalizing it has not seemed to change anything.

[faithanne]

I know plenty of people who would be considered pot "addicts" (smoke 10 cones or more on a daily basis) and they all hold down jobs, have families/interests and aren't total dropkicks. I do have a neighbour though who smokes all day every day, can't keep a job and is always in trouble with the cops. But he's also an alcoholic so I don't know which is worse in his case. But I have never met a stoner who is "psychotic" from using pot unless they have some other problem (mental illness, harder drugs, alcohol etc) and the average heavy smoker I know certainly doesn't steal to support their habit. I used to live with a weed dealer and his regular customers included doctors, lawyers, people in the fitness industry etc and they were very together people in their everyday life but they smoked a LOT.

[manningmsj]

^^^^ I agree with you, faithanne. But I think the difference between the first group you mentioned and the neighbor who abuses alcohol is that the first group are not addicts. Even if they smoke everyday and have no inclination to quit, I don't think that is necessarily a sign of real addiction or even functional addiction, like people who drink every day but still get up in the morning for work (like my brother). Those people smoke pot and still function, whereas my brother needs alcohol in order to function. And though he is able to keep his drinking separate from his career, it has devastating effects on other areas of his life. I tend to believe true addicts are addicts through and through, that no drug is safe for them because the problem is not the drug, but how drugs affect their minds differently than the rest of us. But maybe it is possible to be addicted to one substance, without falling prey to others. In my experience, though, the addicts in my family cannot control themselves with anything. If they cannot smoke pot, then something else will give way. They will abuse another substance in its place. However, even for an addict, I see pot as the least of all evils. Every addict has their favorite vice and I much preferred my brother and sister sticking with that one. It satisfied that need, and kept them away from the truly dangerous stuff.

Basically, any mind-altering substance is probably not recommended for the altered mind of an addict. But it's still safer than a lot of the legal stuff they can access.

[thunder&lightning]

can't stand seth rogen fat ass no talent hack. refuse to watch any movie he's in.

[cheray]

The regular homicidal maniac................Im gonna kill my wife, Im sick of the bitch!

The pot smoker..................Im gonna kill my wife.......err what was I gonna do?.

[mjw]

Almost everyone, regardless of age, probably remembers Anita Bryant for two reasons: hawking Florida orange juice in her, “it’s not just for breakfast anymore” TV commercials, and for leading a hate-filled campaign for years against gay people.


Everyone, except HLN anchor Nancy Grace.


In a strange segment discussing the recent attack on Brad Pitt, Grace saw fit to bring up the pie that was thrown in Anita Bryant’s face by an LGBT activist in 1977. That was 37 years ago, yet Grace felt it was appropriate to bring up in her reporting on Brad Pitt.


Anita Bryant, of course, is the born again Christian who in the 1970′s launched Save Our Children, a vicious anti-gay campaign that successfully repealed a Miami, Florida ordinance that banned anti-gay discrimination in areas like housing and employment. Although she admitted he knew little about LGBT people, Bryant’s claim that she trumpeted through her campaign was, “Homosexuals cannot reproduce – so they must recruit. And to freshen their ranks, they must recruit the youth of America.”


The NGLTF reports that “Bryant’s 1977 campaign to legalize discrimination against gays and lesbians in Miami Dade County relied upon the most base characterizations of gay and lesbian people – abnormal, limp-wristed, militant and deviant in nature, involved in sadistic sexual rituals, and abominable practices – and was hugely successful. Bryant won with nearly 70 percent of the vote on election day.”


All of this rabid anti-gay hate, all these ugly anti-gay lies, however, are strangely lost on HLN’s Nancy Grace.


“Do you remember Anita Bryant?,” Grace asked her guest. “Anita Bryant was a religious singer, I think she represented the orange industry. She had a lot of conservative views, but she had this beautiful voice, and she was everywhere singing all the time. A lot of times it was Christian inspirational music…


“I still remember when I was a little girl, and somebody came up and did this to her, in public. She was speaking on some issue dear to hear heart, and I remember that as a little girl. I mean, she is a lady, to come. I don’t understand that. I don’t understand that, Bethany. I mean, why did that guy do that? That was the first time I recall this happening — to her. I mean, look at her. She makes me think of my own mother. Why would you do this to a sweet lady whether you agree with her politics or not?”


While we’re not condoning violence — even pie-throwing — the answer is simple: Anita Bryant had declared war on gay people. She was spreading lies and hate. Again — not condoning physical violence, even of the pie variety, but was there really a need to bring this up without putting it in its proper context?


Nancy Grace is 54. She was born in 1959, so in 1977 she would have been about 18. Does she really not remember why Anita Bryant ended her career? Does she really not remember all the vile things Anita Bryant did? Or is this an attempt to re-write history?


As Good As You’s Jeremy Hooper observes, this ode to Bryant was “obviously pre-planned, since producers had cued B-roll.”


Watch:

<b style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica, Arial, Verdana, sans-serif; font-size: 12px;"><b style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><b style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><b style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><b style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><b style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><b style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><b style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><b style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><b style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><b style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><b style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><b style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><b style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><b style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><b style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><b style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><b style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><b style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><span style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><b style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><b style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><b style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><b style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><b style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><b style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><b style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><b style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><b style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">

Read more at ONTD: Oh No They Didn't! - Anti-Gay Activist Anita Bryant ‘Makes Me Think Of My Own Mother’ Says HLN’s Nancy DisGrace

[Anaconda]

Didn't he also call Bieber a piece of shit? Is this guy trying to be more popular by attacking all the most hated celebs?

[MohandasKGanja]

While we are talking about all the cultural phenomena that Nancy Grace missed out on, here is a Tweet she actually sent out last week (May 29):

[twitchy2.0]

Trend? Where has she been since...forever?