# You steal a camera during MY Workshop? Fuck you, you piece of messed-up shit ! **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [July 19, 2010, 2:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-steal-a-camera-during-my-workshop-fuck-you-you-piece-of-messed-up-shit/547223 "2010-07-19T14:22:46Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 15
**Author:** ![zut](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zut/32/2875_2.png) [@zut](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zut)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2010, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-steal-a-camera-during-my-workshop-fuck-you-you-piece-of-messed-up-shit/547223/281 "2010-07-27T16:54:06Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Not sure I see your point here. If you think you see a contradiction then I retract the implication that I recognize any impairment. If it does not impair the ability to perform a task, then I don’t se how it can be called an impairment at all, because what else does that word mean? Well, yes. I would expect that if you categorically rejected the conclusions of a study, you’d say something like, “I categorically reject the conclusions of this study,” and follow up with some logical reasons and so forth. Answering, “thanks for the cite. I am one of those people who never seemed to suffer any impairment.” implies, to me at any rate, that you’re accepting the conclusions of the study, and implicitly recognizing that there are a class of people that _do_ seem to suffer impairment (since you explicitly place yourself in the opposite class). So. Do you categorically reject the conclusion of the study that regular marijuana users in our study showed cognitive impairment in the author’s maze task? ---
**Author:** ![Fuji](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a9a28c/32.png) [@Fuji](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fuji)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2010, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-steal-a-camera-during-my-workshop-fuck-you-you-piece-of-messed-up-shit/547223/282 "2010-07-27T16:54:45Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > > [@Fuji](#): > > > > > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > > > > > Anecodtes are not evidence.The actual empirical data shows that driving stoned does not increase tthe risk for accidents. There’s no way out of that box. That’s a checkmate for me. > > > > So… the nine people just in this thread who directly refute your assertion are supposed to privilege your interpretation of the findings of a scientist who draws conclusions based on probablistic inferences over their own direct experience of the matter at hand. > > No, I’m saying that hard empirical data trumps anecdotal bullshit. Why the fuck do you think it should be otherwise? :smack: > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > I AM the evidence. ---
**Author:** ![whole\_bean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/96bed5/32.png) [@whole\_bean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/whole_bean)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2010, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-steal-a-camera-during-my-workshop-fuck-you-you-piece-of-messed-up-shit/547223/283 "2010-07-27T16:57:16Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > > [@zut](#): > > > > > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > > > > > Yes, it _affects_ cognition, but that’s not the same as _impairing_ it. **Since it does not impair the ability to perform tasks,** I don’t see how it can be said to impair cognition. I would argue that it _enhances_ cognition. > > > > Perhaps you have forgotten this post: > > > > > [@mhendo](#): > > > > > > > [@](#): > > > > > > > > In conclusion, \*\*the regular marijuana users in our study showed cognitive impairment in the maze task \*\*and in the WCST on 17mg THC… This evidence is compatible with previous studies showing impaired cognitive function in regular users of marijuana. > > > > > > > > Weinstein et al, “A Study Investigating the Acute Dose-response Effects of 13 Mg and 17 Mg Δ 9- Tetrahydrocannabinol on Cognitive-motor Skills, Subjective and Autonomic Measures in Regular Users of Marijuana,” _Journal of Psychopharmacology_, Vol. 22 Issue 4, June 2008, 441-451. > > > > > > A quick read through the conclusions and/or the abstracts of a few other papers suggests that, while marijuana (or, to be more precise, the THC in marijuana) can and does impair cognitive and motor skills in most users, there are some users who show little or no effect from using the drug. This is generally explained by a combination of genetic predisposition (i.e., some people seem to have a sort of natural resistance to the effects) and accumulated tolerance (i.e., some people who smoke a lot can build up their tolerance for it, and avoid some of the worst effects). > > > > > > […] > > > > > > But a blanket statement that it doesn’t impair cognitive or motor function is simply unsupported by the recent medical literature. > > > > Which you actually replied to: > > > > > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > > > > > Thanks for the cite. I am one of those people who never seemed to suffer any impairment. > > > > > > […] > > > > > > I still maintain that whatever imparment occurs is still pretty negligable even for those more susceptable to it, and anyone who’s ever been a stoner or around stoners knows that it’s not even close to the same kind of impairment as being drunk. > > Not sure I see your point here. If you think you see a contradiction then I retract the implication that I recognize any impairment. If it does not impair the ability to perform a task, then I don’t se how it can be called an impairment at all, because what else does that word mean? After the retraction, how do you address the studies cited by **mhendo** - the studies that showed THC does impair the ability to perform a task. Do you just ignore them in favor of studies that show no increase in vehicular accidents among marijuana users? If so, then you’ve lost the argument. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2010, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-steal-a-camera-during-my-workshop-fuck-you-you-piece-of-messed-up-shit/547223/284 "2010-07-27T17:01:45Z")
> [@PlainJain](#): > > > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > > > Anecodtes are not evidence.The actual empirical data shows that driving stoned does not increase tthe risk for accidents. There’s no way out of that box. That’s a checkmate for me. > > > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > > > That was a joke. > > Bull-mother fucking-shit! It’s back-peddling pure and simple. You’ve been arguing that this entire thread. I bet it’s also a preemptive strike against the inevitable… > > > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > > > I AM the evidence. > > > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > > > Anecodtes are not evidence. > > … contradiction. If you want to post looney speculations that you believe, fine. But now you are just lying in an attempt to salvage your position. It was a joke, moron. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2010, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-steal-a-camera-during-my-workshop-fuck-you-you-piece-of-messed-up-shit/547223/285 "2010-07-27T17:06:39Z")
> [@zut](#): > > > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > > > Not sure I see your point here. If you think you see a contradiction then I retract the implication that I recognize any impairment. If it does not impair the ability to perform a task, then I don’t se how it can be called an impairment at all, because what else does that word mean? > > Well, yes. I would expect that if you categorically rejected the conclusions of a study, you’d say something like, “I categorically reject the conclusions of this study,” and follow up with some logical reasons and so forth. > > Answering, “thanks for the cite. I am one of those people who never seemed to suffer any impairment.” implies, to me at any rate, that you’re accepting the conclusions of the study, and implicitly recognizing that there are a class of people that _do_ seem to suffer impairment (since you explicitly place yourself in the opposite class). > > So. Do you categorically reject the conclusion of the study that regular marijuana users in our study showed cognitive impairment in the author’s maze task? No. I accept that it may have “impaired” performance in the maze task (it wouldn’t have impaired ME, but that’s just me). I do not agree that the “impairment” (if it can even be called that. I’d just call it inexperience with altered cogntition) is significant enough to make driving dangerous. ---
**Author:** ![zut](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zut/32/2875_2.png) [@zut](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zut)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2010, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-steal-a-camera-during-my-workshop-fuck-you-you-piece-of-messed-up-shit/547223/286 "2010-07-27T17:17:41Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > No. I accept that it may have “impaired” performance in the maze task (it wouldn’t have impaired ME, but that’s just me). > > I do not agree that the “impairment” (if it can even be called that. I’d just call it inexperience with altered cogntition) is significant enough to make driving dangerous. So, to recap, when you said: > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Yes, [marijuana] _affects_ cognition, but that’s not the same as _impairing_ it. Since it does not impair the ability to perform tasks, I don’t see how it can be said to impair cognition. I would argue that it _enhances_ cognition. What you meant was: “Sometimes marijuana does impair cognition. Also, marijuana does impair the ability to perform tasks. However, the degree of impairment is not enough to make driving dangerous. In fact, I would argue it makes it safer.” Is that a fair statement? ---
**Author:** ![Crotalus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crotalus/32/41_2.png) [@Crotalus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crotalus)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2010, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-steal-a-camera-during-my-workshop-fuck-you-you-piece-of-messed-up-shit/547223/287 "2010-07-27T17:19:09Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > It was a joke, moron. This reminds of the fictional cliche in which the whole series, movie, book, whatever ends with the discovery that it was all a dream. ---
**Author:** ![PlainJain](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/5daacb/32.png) [@PlainJain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PlainJain)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2010, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-steal-a-camera-during-my-workshop-fuck-you-you-piece-of-messed-up-shit/547223/288 "2010-07-27T17:21:10Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > It was a joke, moron. From post 231: > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > All you’ve done is call people names… So we are on equal footing there. Next, how is that a joke? You’ve been arguing for pages that _“actual empirical data shows that driving stoned does not increase the risk for accidents.”_ Now referencing the sentence, _“The actual empirical data shows that driving stoned does not increase the risk for accidents”_, you claim it was a joke. If that’s true your entire position here is a joke. That’s called trolling. Moron. ---
**Author:** ![Turek](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/turek/32/18782_2.png) [@Turek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Turek)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2010, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-steal-a-camera-during-my-workshop-fuck-you-you-piece-of-messed-up-shit/547223/289 "2010-07-27T17:22:07Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > I AM the evidence. Actually, you’re just anecdotal bullshit. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2010, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-steal-a-camera-during-my-workshop-fuck-you-you-piece-of-messed-up-shit/547223/290 "2010-07-27T17:23:48Z")
> [@zut](#): > > > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > > > No. I accept that it may have “impaired” performance in the maze task (it wouldn’t have impaired ME, but that’s just me). > > > > I do not agree that the “impairment” (if it can even be called that. I’d just call it inexperience with altered cogntition) is significant enough to make driving dangerous. > > So, to recap, when you said: > > > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > > > Yes, [marijuana] _affects_ cognition, but that’s not the same as _impairing_ it. Since it does not impair the ability to perform tasks, I don’t see how it can be said to impair cognition. I would argue that it _enhances_ cognition. > > What you meant was: > “Sometimes marijuana does impair cognition. Also, marijuana does impair the ability to perform tasks. However, the degree of impairment is not enough to make driving dangerous. In fact, I would argue it makes it safer.” > > Is that a fair statement? I guess that’s pretty fair except I would not try to argue that it makes driving safer. I don’t think the data is strong enough to really conclude that. I’m satisfied with just saying it doesn’t statistically increase the risk of accidents. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2010, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-steal-a-camera-during-my-workshop-fuck-you-you-piece-of-messed-up-shit/547223/291 "2010-07-27T17:25:05Z")
> [@PlainJain](#): > > > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > > > It was a joke, moron. > > From post 231: > > > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > > > All you’ve done is call people names… > > So we are on equal footing there. Next, how is that a joke? You’ve been arguing for pages that _“actual empirical data shows that driving stoned does not increase the risk for accidents.”_ Now referencing the sentence, _“The actual empirical data shows that driving stoned does not increase the risk for accidents”_, you claim it was a joke. If that’s true your entire position here is a joke. That’s called trolling. Moron. No, idiot, I was saying that the “I am the evidence” line was a joke. ---
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2010, 5:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-steal-a-camera-during-my-workshop-fuck-you-you-piece-of-messed-up-shit/547223/292 "2010-07-27T17:28:31Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > …it wouldn’t have impaired ME, but that’s just me… Famous last words, worthy of the Darwin Awards. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2010, 5:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-steal-a-camera-during-my-workshop-fuck-you-you-piece-of-messed-up-shit/547223/293 "2010-07-27T17:32:15Z")
> [@JThunder](#): > > > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > > > …it wouldn’t have impaired ME, but that’s just me… > > Famous last words, worthy of the Darwin Awards. From the study cited by **mhendo** : > [@](#): > > there are some users who show little or no effect from using the drug. This is generally explained by a combination of genetic predisposition (i.e., some people seem to have a sort of natural resistance to the effects) and accumulated tolerance (i.e., some people who smoke a lot can build up their tolerance for it, and avoid some of the worst effects). I was one of those people. As I said upthread, one of the reasons I stopped was because it wasn’t getting me high anymore. ---
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2010, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-steal-a-camera-during-my-workshop-fuck-you-you-piece-of-messed-up-shit/547223/294 "2010-07-27T17:38:04Z")
Yes, I fully accept that certain people believe that they are among the ones who would remain unaffected. ---
**Author:** ![ivan\_astikov](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/58f4c7/32.png) [@ivan\_astikov](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ivan_astikov)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2010, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-steal-a-camera-during-my-workshop-fuck-you-you-piece-of-messed-up-shit/547223/295 "2010-07-27T17:45:28Z")
Can we accept that pot might impair task management when it comes to navigating a maze, or sorting out different coloured plastic objects into little piles, ie. “WTF am I doing this for?” tasks, but for flying a plane, driving a car, or even mountain-biking, it might actually help your concentration? ---
**Author:** ![Freudian\_Slit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/5daacb/32.png) [@Freudian\_Slit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freudian_Slit)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2010, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-steal-a-camera-during-my-workshop-fuck-you-you-piece-of-messed-up-shit/547223/296 "2010-07-27T17:47:22Z")
**Dio** did say that while driving he had to remind himself at times that he wasn’t in a video game. I can’t say that’s a ringing endorsement for driving while high. ---
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2010, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-steal-a-camera-during-my-workshop-fuck-you-you-piece-of-messed-up-shit/547223/297 "2010-07-27T17:52:04Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > I still maintain that whatever imparment occurs is still pretty negligable even for those more susceptable to it If I’m supposed to believe your anecdotal experience that smoking pot doesn’t affect your driving, why are you supposed to hand-wave away my personal experience? Listen, I know perfectly well that some people drive fine stoned. I’ve been in cars driven by stoned people before. But the point is get over your solipsistic worldview, not everyone reacts to the same drugs the same way. Trust me, you don’t want to get in a car with me when I’m toked up, especially if I’m having a bad panic-attack high (which is why I eventually gave up pot–a quarter of the time it would send me into a racing heart “oh-my-god-I’m gonna-die” panic, with rapid heart beat, depersonalization, and even fainting in extreme cases.) I am not unique in this regard, although it’s not the usual experience for most pot smokers. > [@](#): > > and anyone who’s ever been a stoner or around stoners knows that it’s not even close to the same kind of impairment as being drunk. Of course not. I’m not sure anyone is saying it is. ---
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2010, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-steal-a-camera-during-my-workshop-fuck-you-you-piece-of-messed-up-shit/547223/298 "2010-07-27T17:58:26Z")
> [@ivan\_astikov](#): > > Can we accept that pot might impair task management when it comes to navigating a maze, or sorting out different coloured plastic objects into little piles, ie. “WTF am I doing this for?” tasks, but for flying a plane, driving a car, or even mountain-biking, it might actually help your concentration? I’m willing to entertain the notion that for _some_ people it may help their concentration. There was also a study I read a few years ago that low blood alcohol levels (like in the .03-.04 range) was actually found in one study to improve driving performance, too, for similar reasons. But I also share the skepticism that it would help _all_ drivers. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2010, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-steal-a-camera-during-my-workshop-fuck-you-you-piece-of-messed-up-shit/547223/299 "2010-07-27T18:03:45Z")
> [@Freudian\_Slit](#): > > **Dio** did say that while driving he had to remind himself at times that he wasn’t in a video game. I can’t say that’s a ringing endorsement for driving while high. I said that happened on LSD, not pot. I admit I shouldn’t have driven on LSD. ---
**Author:** ![bucketybuck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/898d66/32.png) [@bucketybuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bucketybuck)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2010, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-steal-a-camera-during-my-workshop-fuck-you-you-piece-of-messed-up-shit/547223/300 "2010-07-27T18:13:06Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Yes, it _affects_ cognition, but that’s not the same as _impairing_ it. Since it does not impair the ability to perform tasks, I don’t see how it can be said to impair cognition. I would argue that it _enhances_ cognition. As a non drug taker, can somebody please enlighten me on something. If pot doesnt impair driving or cognition in any way, then why do stoners need to compensate for it when driving? What are they slowing down, and driving more carefully for? > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Anecodtes are not evidence.The actual empirical data shows that driving stoned does not increase the risk for accidents. There’s no way out of that box. That’s a checkmate for me. > [@](#): > > No, I’m saying that hard empirical data trumps anecdotal bullshit. Why the fuck do you think it should be otherwise? Troll [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-steal-a-camera-during-my-workshop-fuck-you-you-piece-of-messed-up-shit/547223.md?page=14) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/you-steal-a-camera-during-my-workshop-fuck-you-you-piece-of-messed-up-shit/547223.md?page=16)