So true Angroid.

I think it all comes down on my feelings Kimi.

Feelings are difficult to deny.'Things usually either feel good or bad, so it 's easy to choose from.
I think my determination process goes like this :

I imagine like I was dropped in this time in age by some kinda time machine, and now am having to cope with my person beeing an observant of the present situation.
Looking back in History I can be an observer of everything that has went wrong, so now I d'like to add to the present situation by reducing, reversing or improving upon our pasts impact.
(so that's how my opinions are beeing shaped )
At some point my feelings will tell me what is real and what is not.
Definatly not my rational ways of thinking since with those there will always be one more catch to catch.

So then it 's all about ones willingness to cross the treshold and get out of ones comfort zone ?

Beeing open minded, in other words.

It,s difficult to find absolute proof unless you do your own experiments Kimi.
Everything based on hear say already is flawed at the
beginning.
For instance: Does smoking cause cancer ? All science will tell you it does, but other resources claim the opposite.
Everyone has seen the tar blackened lungs on an anti smoking propaganda poster so by now everyone became conditioned to the idea that smoking is bad.
Some voises state that both lungs of either a smoker or non smoker are actually pink after autopsy.
When I called some pathologues on this issue I got confronted with codes of medical secracy.
To get exclusion on this I wil have to test it somehow myself.
Same with everything else but impossible to execute in ones lifetime.

To me it all comes down on my "gut" and let time be the deciding factor.
I basicly don't trust anyone, All matter can be looked upon from multiple sides.
Verry frustrating to live in a world full of infowars and trying to make sense out of it.
All good is beeing used for evil usually. Knowingly or not.

No prob. mate, I appreciate your hanging in here too. ;-)
Most, if not all your comments actually make sense.

Asked about medical marijuana on the campaign trail in New Hampshire just a year and a half ago, then-Senator Barack Obama said, “I would not have the Justice Department prosecuting and raiding medical marijuana users. It’s not a good use of our resources.” Admittedly, he’s been on the job just a few days, but now-President Obama’s administration has just overseen its first medical marijuana raid. It’s time for him to live up to his promise and call off the dogs.

It’s not right to blame the new White House team for the raid in South Lake Tahoe, California. Drug Enforcement Administration officials are still hold-overs from the old administration, with the priorities of the Bush White House. So when the DEA stormed into Holistic Solutions and stole money and marijuana, they were following an old game plan — not necessarily the new one.

So consider this a test. Did Barack Obama mean what he said about pulling the federal government out of the business of kicking in doors and hauling people to jail for using marijuana to treat medical problems? The ball is in your court, Mr. President.

Asking the new president to live up to his promises on medical marijuana is hardly radical. No, radical would be to ask him to respect people’s right to consume whatever substances they please, to produce those substances, to buy them from willing sellers, and to sell them to eager customers. Radical would be to demand that he recognize that people should be free to do whatever they want so long as they don’t violate the equal rights of others.

In other words, whatever is peaceful.

Asking the president to live up to his own promise on medical marijuana isn’t radical at all. It’s just a matter of pointing out that we want to see him walk the walk after talking the talk.

President Obama will be off to a great start if he quickly reins in the DEA and offers credible assurances that this raid will be the last such raid on his watch. If he doesn’t … Well, that will say an awful lot about what we can expect from this administration.

As for whether what we get is enough … Well, some of us think it’s long past time to make a few radical demands.

Love to hear you say that Igi.

Just making sure, keeping an eye on thatone myself too. ;-)

By finding the mechanics that trigger the mind into a psychosis, it is possible to stay in control of the situation.
Weed can be helpfull into triggering oneself in psychosis provided the mechanics are put in place.
If the mechanics are not in place, also weed won,t be able to trigger it by it self since it needs cooperation of the one succepteble to it.
There's plenty to know to continue about this, but unfortunatly this would take to long for this blog.
Only thing i wanted to say still is; I understand you want to warn people about making a wrong decision but a better way would be to inform the public objectivly along legally provided studies

eh, yes Igimom, I 'm Dutch by origine, but live abroad.
I'm aware of what you say about MJ not beeing suiteble for the mentally weak.
There are so many theories about how MJ triggers people into psychosis n'stuff and that it supposedly should add to the prohibition to continue.
What I try to stress only is that it's all token out of context.
I for one am someone who is in full control of my "psychosis". I can snap into one on command or out again, just like I please.
I can do it while using MJ and I can do it without.
The mentally "weak " are not able to do so.
When they find a psychosis to occur after smoking weed, they are likely to blame it on the weed.