outrageously, the response from the landlord was to suggest that if i can't deal with the smoke then i should move.

that's the literal definition of negligence, in context.

"if you don't like the mold on the ceiling, you can always move."
"if you don't like the asbestos in the living room, you can always move."

it's the same thing, legally.

you see this frequently with legal illiterates: i'm just getting some, like, nineteenth century contract theory bullshit. libertarianism seems to be the basic starting point of ignorance, in this culture.

so, i'm going to have to write the board an essay, and this won't get mailed until tomorrow. the basic argument is negligence under the health regulations, and liability for breach of the enjoyment covenant.

but, i got a mailing address, at least. that wasn't obvious.

the truth is that they're actually kind of walking into a trap; it's not like i set the trap, but , if i did, they'd have walked right into it. they've given me everything i need to make the argument for negligence...

and, i need to reiterate: i like tort law. i think more of the law should be organized around tort law principles. tort reform, to me, means expanding the principles of tort law to further destroy contract theory. it's the criminal law that i don't like, and it's classical liberalism that pisses me off...

i have to make the complaint before i file the documents. it's a formality.

i'm really curious as to how they'll respond....

yes: she's been smoking all night.

i'll have to call the landlord around 8:30.

if you like a glass of wine now and again does that mean you're an alcoholic?

that you want your bed to smell like spilled vodka, and stale puke?

that you want your kitchen to smell like gin, or your bathroom to smell like barley?

that you want your clothes to smell of elderberry?

that you drink so much that you fall over?

just because you like a glass of wine at christmas, or a beer at a show? really?

this is not binary. we don't have to choose between never smoking and smoking an ounce a day. there's a large spectrum...

she may even be getting social validation from "being an addict" that she can't get anywhere else.

i'm posting in the rebuild right now about how marijuana isn't addictive.

and, it really isn't.

this is the first pot addict i've ever met...

and, she's no doubt more addicted to the idea of the drug than the drug itself. she probably thinks it makes her cool, or something; it's probably some kind of fear of missing out.

"marijuana is not physically addictive" is a factual statement. that is science. but, they claim it's "psychologically addictive" - which means that heavy users can trick themselves into thinking they're addicted, when they really aren't.

it's more like they want to be addicted, because they think being addicted is cool, and they don't want to miss out.

twisted. truly.

but, as i am contradicting myself, let be me clear: i am well aware that marijuana is not an addictive substance, and when i'm ranting about this woman being a drug addict, i shouldn't be taken fully literally. she's a wannabe addict.

i mean, when i go out, i make sure i have a good time.

but, it's a few times a month, usually.

i'm not out all of the time...

"so, how does she go out to party all the time, then?"

i don't.

i went out once in november, once in december, zero times in january, february or march and twice in april.

i'm often able to save a few dollars over the winter, so that i can go out more frequently in the summer. i also get those gst checks in every three months. but, the budget gives me about $100/month to spend, most months - which is enough for one or two nights out

and, the truth is that i spend most of my time inside in front of the computer.

as you can see.

rent: $700
groceries: $200
estrogen: $90
internet: $30
laundry: $10

roughly.

do i really have to make this argument?

i have one source of income: odsp.

it's $1150/month.

my expenses are $1026/month [if i spend $200 on groceries, which is often an exaggeration].

where do you propose that i get all of this money to get stoned all of the time?

i don't have an alternate source of income. i don't have a marijuana card.

please just accept the fact that i don't smoke.

i get pleasure out of learning, not out of burning out.

there's lots of people on this planet that just don't like marijuana.

i'm not going to say that, exactly.

but i certainly don't enjoy perpetual inebriation.

i'd really rather be sober.

and, i honestly don't know why i have this reputation, otherwise - i am, in fact, usually sober.

it's not that i'm living some kind of ascetic lifestyle or something.

i don't have any kind of philosophical objection to being a stoner - it's just not my idea of a good time.

i simply prefer being sharp-witted, awake, alert. i don't enjoy the sore throat. i don't like being tired....

if i was going to get addicted to something, it would be cocaine, not marijuana. as it is, i'm usually fine with coffee.

i need to be clear: the problem here is not the drugs, it's the user. drugs don't smoke themselves.

if she were to go take a walk, she wouldn't be bothering anybody. she really wouldn't.

but, her insistence on smoking inside is very much bothering somebody: she's making me very sick, and dramatically negatively impacting on my quality of life.

my costing is as follows:

$1000 for moving costs
$300 for materials used to smoke-proof the apartment (which the landlord ordered me to take down)
$500 for laundry & dry-cleaning
$100 for cleaning supplies
$500 for a new bed [my mattress is ruined]
25% of rent paid is $1400, presuming the lease ends august 1st.
==========
$3800

i hope it makes people think twice about renting to drug addicts.

given that she's obviously smoking this much because she can't get high any more, she's probably actually at risk of moving to something harder.

i've seen studies arguing both ways, and they're probably both right, depending on the context. i can understand how marijuana could help a heroin addict - although i might suggest methadone, instead. less harmful. on the other hand, when your tolerance to marijuana is as absurd as this woman's is, and the delivery method is giving you pneumonia, it's easy to understand the appeal of something stronger, too.

it probably depends on what stage the addict is in. an opiate addict that wants to get better but is physically addicted could use pot as a crutch, even if they relapse in the long run; a desperate pothead that just isn't getting high anymore might look at opiates as the only way to get what they're after. and, i might have thought that was obscure a few months ago, but i never thought i'd meet somebody that smokes as much as she does, either.

she's obviously just not getting high.

the way marijuana works is that the more you smoke, the less high you get. all drugs are like this: it's the law of diminishing returns.

so, if you wanted to emulate me, for whatever reason, the way to do this is to only smoke once in a while. that way, you get really high from just getting in on the odd round. when you smoke as little as i do, you only have to buy a $5 pre-roll to get stoned enough that you're still feeling it in the morning. those rastas don't even get a buzz off of that.

whatever media exists of me baked is in fact strong evidence that i don't get high very often, as i would be less obviously trashed if i did.

and, the key to accomplishing this level of inebriation on a regular basis is actually to buy into the culture of sobriety. my daily drug of choice is coffee, not marijuana. i've quit tobacco. but, i drink a pot of coffee a day, and only smoke up a couple of times a month - if that. some months, i don't get stoned at all.

you need that space to prevent yourself from developing tolerance; what my media footprint really is is a lack of tolerance, due to sporadic use.

if i smoked as much as people seem to think i do, i wouldn't get high in public at all - i'd just be your average "chill" stoner.

and, if i disappear from public view for a long period, as i tend to, it's safe to assume i'm completely sober during that period. and, i don't want to build up a tolerance - that would just make my infrequent binges less fun.

this should all be obvious, but it isn't, for some reason. people seem to think i somehow get completely ripped from a random toke at the bar, then go home and smoke mad amounts. but, that doesn't actually make any sense, and you should all know that it doesn't...my obviously low tolerance is evidence that i don't smoke much at all....

right now, i just have a sore throat and wish i was more awake.

she's still blazing. every twenty minutes. it's surreal.

if i was writing policy, that would be my primary focus: to get rid of this ridiculous idea that marijuana is some kind of medicine.

that is utterly ignorant.

that must be corrected.

marijuana is a recreational drug that is relatively safe, if consumed in moderation, and should be heavily taxed like alcohol and cigarettes.


it is not a medicine. and, like alcohol, it can be abused with disastrous consequences.

i don't normally sit in this room.

as far as i can tell, she lights a joint about every 20 minutes. and, i've seen these things - they're not joints, they're cigars, really.

she's been chain smoking since about 3:30, maybe a bit before. she seems to have overwhelmed my defenses around 3:30, anyways. let's say 3:40 to make the math easier.

that means she has smoked at least 10 cigar-sized joints in the last 3.5 hours. that's probably at least $50 worth of pot. in the last 3.5 hours. by herself.

that's more expensive than cocaine.

me? i take one three-toke pass between sets and i'm licked until the morning. and, then i don't touch it for three weeks - until the next show.

if she's smoking that much, the sad truth is that it must be because it doesn't actually get her high, anymore. and, so, what's the point of even smoking it?

it's easy to deduce that this woman goes to work all day in order to spend all her money on a drug that makes her really sick, pisses off her neighbours and doesn't even get her high.

doctor's orders?

what a sad joke.

this isn't a medicine, and it's not doing anything for her.

it's an addiction that is ruining her life.

in fact, i am a health nut and enviro-fascist.

i have an extremely healthy diet.

i don't smoke.

i get a lot of exercise.

i recycle in buildings that don't.

i compost.

i don't own a car; i walk, i bike.

i had a struggle with cigarettes that i've won. but, my entire life is centered around minimizing my carbon output and living as healthily and as safely as possible. and, living in other people's smoke is consequently an impossibility - a contradiction, an unacceptable premise.