Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Pot is awesome

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Attached Files

    Comment


    • Attached Files

      Comment


      • I would venture to guess if this guy smoked pot every day he wouldn't have went into a movie theatre and shoot over 70 people.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Rascal View Post
          One year of data isn't enough to be considered a trend when comparing years to years.
          No, but I think the takeaway here is that Colorado didn't descend into anarchy like the anti-pot scare tactic people would have had you believe.

          Comment


          • So we shouldn't legalize things that are "damaging" eh?

            Looks like sugar is going to have to be banned.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Fedaykin View Post
              So we shouldn't legalize things that are "damaging" eh?

              Looks like sugar is going to have to be banned.
              Yep. Coca Cola is out. And all fast foods. Start with McDonald's.

              Comment


              • Carrying guns into bars is more dangerous, but I trust that the gun owners won't buy a beer. Nyuk doesn't even trust other adults in the privacy of their own homes. She likes to pick and choose when the government needs to babysit us.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by gunns View Post
                  Another example of wanting to believe what you read, not what is actually happening. Reminds me of the scare tactics of the late 60's. Any brain damage I may have after 40+ years of smoking has probably come from reading posts like this on the OM. You are one person who would be absolutely shocked at who actually smokes.
                  Because haughty ad hominem somehow magically overrides decades of scientific research.

                  Cognitive dissonance is accusing someone of wanting to believe what they want to read by ignoring decades of consistent scientific research and invoking old Reefer Madness anecdotes.

                  Please, continue.

                  Oh and did I mention that because my work decided to drug test a few years ago I just stopped with no issues whatsoever. Now that they are only drug testing when you show reason to be I'm doing it again. Working FT at a management position with glowing reviews. It's called experience, not theory or consensus.
                  Pot heads have a lovely tendency so be so scientifically challenged that they think their experience (or their perception of it) overrides decades of replicated scientific studies.

                  Please, continue.
                  Last edited by nyuk nyuk; 08-26-2014, 10:27 AM.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Arkie View Post
                    Carrying guns into bars is more dangerous, but I trust that the gun owners won't buy a beer. Nyuk doesn't even trust other adults in the privacy of their own homes. She likes to pick and choose when the government needs to babysit us.
                    Go ahead, drink Drano for all I care.

                    The problem with ignorant potheads is that they have the "me me me" fixation and have no concept or even interest in considering wider social implications of widespread drug use.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Rohirrim View Post
                      The question is, is pot so dangerous that society should suffer the enormous costs that interdiction (ie. "the drug war") has brought down on our society?
                      Is there a specific reason why you blame law enforcement and not the drug user?

                      These people are getting a huge percentage of their fix from very violent, mass murdering drug lords. You'd think that knowledge alone would cause these people to think twice, but no --- they ignore it and smoke up as if they were addicted or something.

                      The truth is, the "war on drugs" (dealing with drugs as a massive law enforcement problem rather than as a social issue), is just as stupid, and has been almost as destructive, as the "war on terror", an international police issue that was turned over to the military in order to make up for the loss of the Cold War. And what garbage has that "war" unleashed on America?

                      Bad policy, and bad ideologies, can destroy countries, and often does.
                      The truth is, invoking an old legalization canard which falsely frames the argument in terms of "crime gangs" doesn't accurately or honestly address the impact of legalization.

                      Here's a hint: We didn't have mass numbers of deaths from drunken driving and alcohol abuse until after prohibition.

                      We have nearly 90,000 dead from alcohol abuse in this country each year, yet the legalization tards can only say, "We don't have so many gang killings!"

                      I'm sorry, I'm not such a gullible moron that I don't notice that legalization of alcohol has unleashed countless other massive problems on society which would not have been there nearly to this level if alcohol sales were still prohibited and a few gangsters capped each other in the ass.

                      You need to come up with a MUCH better justification than this.

                      Over 10,000 dead a year from drunken driving alone but HEY we don't have moonshiners shooting each other!

                      sc0re!

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by nyuk nyuk View Post
                        Is there a specific reason why you blame law enforcement and not the drug user?

                        These people are getting a huge percentage of their fix from very violent, mass murdering drug lords. You'd think that knowledge alone would cause these people to think twice, but no --- they ignore it and smoke up as if they were addicted or something.



                        The truth is, invoking an old legalization canard which falsely frames the argument in terms of "crime gangs" doesn't accurately or honestly address the impact of legalization.

                        Here's a hint: We didn't have mass numbers of deaths from drunken driving and alcohol abuse until after prohibition.

                        We have nearly 90,000 dead from alcohol abuse in this country each year, yet the legalization tards can only say, "We don't have so many gang killings!"

                        I'm sorry, I'm not such a gullible moron that I don't notice that legalization of alcohol has unleashed countless other massive problems on society which would not have been there nearly to this level if alcohol sales were still prohibited and a few gangsters capped each other in the ass.

                        You need to come up with a MUCH better justification than this.

                        Over 10,000 dead a year from drunken driving alone but HEY we don't have moonshiners shooting each other!

                        sc0re!
                        So, now you want to return to Prohibition?

                        You spend all your time on here attacking everybody else. It would be interesting to discover what your political views are. You never state them, other than to admit that you were once a sucker for Marxism, but then you got over it. Judging by that, I suppose you're the sucker of some new extremism. Sounds like you support some sort of authoritarianism since you blame the outrages of police in their misguided pursuit of a "Drug War" victory, on the victims and their right to ingest whatever the hell they want to ingest. In fact, I'm still trying to find in the Constitution where any law enforcement gang is sanctioned to smash down your door, throw a flash bang grenade in your kid's crib, and hold your wife and children up against the wall at gunpoint because they "think" you might be hiding an ounce of pot. Which amendment is that?

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by nyuk nyuk View Post
                          The problem with ignorant potheads is that they have the "me me me" fixation and have no concept or even interest in considering wider social implications of widespread drug use.
                          The problem with prohibitionists is that they have a "nag nag nag" fixation and have no concept or even interest in considering the wider social implications of the dangers of the authoritarianism required to keep folks from having fun.

                          Ponder this - without Prohibition, would the Mafia have become as powerful as it did?

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by nyuk nyuk View Post
                            Is there a specific reason why you blame law enforcement and not the drug user?

                            These people are getting a huge percentage of their fix from very violent, mass murdering drug lords. You'd think that knowledge alone would cause these people to think twice, but no --- they ignore it and smoke up as if they were addicted or something.



                            The truth is, invoking an old legalization canard which falsely frames the argument in terms of "crime gangs" doesn't accurately or honestly address the impact of legalization.

                            Here's a hint: We didn't have mass numbers of deaths from drunken driving and alcohol abuse until after prohibition.

                            We have nearly 90,000 dead from alcohol abuse in this country each year, yet the legalization tards can only say, "We don't have so many gang killings!"

                            I'm sorry, I'm not such a gullible moron that I don't notice that legalization of alcohol has unleashed countless other massive problems on society which would not have been there nearly to this level if alcohol sales were still prohibited and a few gangsters capped each other in the ass.

                            You need to come up with a MUCH better justification than this.

                            Over 10,000 dead a year from drunken driving alone but HEY we don't have moonshiners shooting each other!

                            sc0re!
                            Absolute doublespeak, typical of someone who doesn't actually have a position, but likes to lecture and argue.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by nyuk nyuk View Post
                              Here's a hint: We didn't have mass numbers of deaths from drunken driving and alcohol abuse until after prohibition.
                              We didn't have mass numbers of cars until after prohibition, but drunken driving arrests exploded during the first year of prohibition along with crime in general.

                              Comment


                              • I sleep better at night knowing that Nyuk's extremist views on this issue have become unpopular and irrelevant.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X