Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Pot is awesome

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by DenverBrit View Post
    Cherry picking again.

    It continues but doesn't support your beliefs so you ignore it:

    But because underage smoking and alcohol use typically precede marijuana use, marijuana is not the most common, and is rarely the first, “gateway” to illicit drug use. There is no conclusive evidence that the drug effects of marijuana are causally linked to the subsequent abuse of other illicit drugs.

    You're welcome!
    Pot is the first illicit drug used most often, thus is the gateway to other illicit drugs, which your article specifically admits to.

    If you want to claim otherwise, be more careful with your sources.

    There is no "conclusive evidence" that plutonium causes cancer, so it really did not cause that spike in brain cancers oddly seen around the Rocky Flats plant. You're ignoring the meat of what your article is admitting about pot and what it's use is commonly associated with so as to rescue the reputation of pot as a gateway to other illicit drugs, which your article says IT IS.

    Read your own quotation in full and absorb the contents in full context.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by TDmvp View Post
      As someone who has smoked pot almost everyday for 20 years , and has the money to do whatever drug he wants . I have never done or wanted to do any other drug , so no idea how it is a gateway drug.
      Same here, never touched another drug.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by nyuk nyuk View Post
        Pot is the first illicit drug used most often, thus is the gateway to other illicit drugs, which your article specifically admits to.

        If you want to claim otherwise, be more careful with your sources.
        Right. An argumentative Marxist on a forum board is a better source than the report commissioned by Congress, written by:

        The Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences

        Who's report clearly states:

        There is no conclusive evidence that the drug effects of marijuana are causally linked to the subsequent abuse of other illicit drugs.

        Seriously, you will dance and spin until dizzy rather than accept anything contrary to your beliefs.

        Typical of a ideologue.

        Comment


        • #34
          Nyuk, were you against the war on drugs back when you were an extreme liberal?

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Arkie View Post
            Nyuk, were you against the war on drugs back when you were an extreme liberal?
            I've never been for legalizing dangerous chemicals. The "war on drugs" isn't being pursued properly and the answer is NOT legalization.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by DenverBrit View Post
              Right. An argumentative Marxist on a forum board is a better source than the report commissioned by Congress, written by:

              The Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences

              Who's report clearly states:

              There is no conclusive evidence that the drug effects of marijuana are causally linked to the subsequent abuse of other illicit drugs.

              Seriously, you will dance and spin until dizzy rather than accept anything contrary to your beliefs.

              Typical of a ideologue.
              If you want to cherry pick one thing out of context, then don't use a source let alone paste an entire section that contradicts your assertion.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by nyuk nyuk View Post
                I've never been for legalizing dangerous chemicals. The "war on drugs" isn't being pursued properly and the answer is NOT legalization.
                What's the proper tactic?

                If not legalization, then continued prohibition?

                Tell us how to end the perversion of so much that the War on (Some) Drugs has created.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by nyuk nyuk View Post
                  If you want to cherry pick one thing out of context, then don't use a source let alone paste an entire section that contradicts your assertion.
                  I posted the paragraph from the report, intact.
                  You decided to cherry pick and leave out the definitive statement that concluded the paragraph.
                  If you think the report is wrong, take it up with the The Institute of Medicine of The National Academy of Sciences and explain why they are wrong and dazzle them with your expertise.

                  After all, you're qualified to critique their report, just show them your credentials.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by nyuk nyuk View Post
                    I've never been for legalizing dangerous chemicals. The "war on drugs" isn't being pursued properly and the answer is NOT legalization.
                    Gotta protect Americans from themselves and the very dangerous cannabis plant! Soda, tobacco, alcohol, fast food, and donuts should be illegal too. I didn't know you were for the government telling us what we can put into our bodies. Are you for Michelle Obama's school lunch agenda too?

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by nyuk nyuk View Post
                      You seem to not know what the term illicit means. Let me help you.

                      Illicit: not legally permitted or authorized; unlicensed; unlawful.

                      Alcohol and nicotine are legal and thus in far more widespread use. There is no reason to legalize other bad things because two bad things are already legalized. That's like saying we should let people rob banks and do home invasions because 7-11 got away with ripping someone off with dishonest advertising.

                      You're going to have to try MUCH harder than that.
                      So Nyuk, if it was within your power, would you bring back alcohol prohibition and outlaw tobacco?

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by W*GS View Post
                        What's the proper tactic?

                        If not legalization, then continued prohibition?

                        Tell us how to end the perversion of so much that the War on (Some) Drugs has created.
                        Perversion? What you mean, Willis?

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Obama has been playing the long game on pot, much as he has on some other booby-trapped issues. On gays in the military, he arranged for the policy change to emerge from within the Pentagon. On marriage equality, he let the states, the courts, and public opinion take the lead while he himself “evolved” just slowly enough to avoid a scorched-earth Tea Party counteroffensive. On health care, instead of dropping a finished plan on Congress, he learned from the Clintons’ experience and let Congress fashion the details itself, so as to coax legislators into investing their egos in it. (The result might as accurately be called Congresscare—or Senatecare, or Baucuscare—as Obamacare. And unlike Hillarycare, it is law.)

                          In the same manner, the President has been strategically circumspect on the weed question. He has used his executive discretion to allow Colorado and Washington State to go forward with full legalization, and to permit thirty-three other states to experiment with allowing cannabis for medicinal use, even though all such activities are illegal under federal law. He ought to go further.

                          On Sunday, July 27th, the editorial board of the Times explicitly called for an end to marijuana prohibition, and all of last week the paper followed up with editorial-page articles exploring various aspects of what legalization would entail. (The whole package is well worth reading as a thorough primer on the issue.) The Times’ evolution is emblematic of a slow but profound change, over decades, in élite opinion. But the change is hardly limited to élites—or to liberals. Polls show that a plurality of Americans—including a solid third of Republicans and large majorities of people in their teens, twenties, and thirties—favor legalization. Among political figures, admitted violators of the federal pot laws come from all across the political spectrum. Wikipedia, as of this writing, has a well-sourced list of forty-three of them, ranging from Clarence Thomas, Rick Santorum, Sarah Palin, and Newt Gingrich to Howard Dean, Andrew Cuomo, Al Gore, and John Kerry, not to mention the last three Presidents: the non-inhaler, the twelve-stepper, and the roof-hitter.

                          When it comes to executive orders, the roof-hitter has a long way to go before he catches up with Carter (320), Reagan (381), Clinton (364), or George W. Bush (291). At last count, Obama had issued a hundred and eighty-three. One more he could issue—and should, without delay—would remove marijuana from the government’s list of Schedule I drugs, which includes heroin and LSD, and demote it to, say, Schedule V, down there with codeine cough syrup—or, at the very least, to Schedule II, with cocaine and methadone. It’s time for Obama to get out in front of the parade. The times, as well as the Times, they are a-changin’.
                          http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-...ite-house-weed

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by W*GS View Post
                            What's the proper tactic?

                            If not legalization, then continued prohibition?

                            Tell us how to end the perversion of so much that the War on (Some) Drugs has created.
                            Push for legalization if you want cartels opening up in corner stores and selling heroin at 7-11.

                            We handle drug dealers and smugglers too kindly, thanks to liberals.

                            Smugglers of anything stronger than weed should be executed first offense. As for street level dealers since they're selling smaller amounts, I'm willing to give them a couple strikes before removing their heads.

                            And for executing these people, executions should be done where drug dealers already serving time are brought so they can witness their future lest they straighten the **** up.

                            And now for your outbursts of moral outrage and warm sympathy for social predators...

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by Rohirrim View Post
                              Perversion? What you mean, Willis?

                              That has nothing to do with "The War on Drugs." What brought that about? Have you ever bothered inquiring? Do you see what it says on it there, "RESCUE"?

                              Let me give you a hint:



                              Are you also aware that an ambulance used to evacuate injured children at Columbine was peppered with bullets?

                              I take it you're not from around here.

                              What is YOUR alternative for evacuating people under live fire, sir?
                              Last edited by nyuk nyuk; 08-07-2014, 10:44 AM.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by nyuk nyuk View Post
                                We handle drug dealers and smugglers too kindly, thanks to liberals.

                                Smugglers of anything stronger than weed should be executed first offense.
                                Yes, because public executions are one of the tenets of conservatism.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X