PDA

View Full Version : Your Basic Legalize Drugs Thread



Pages : [1] 2

jnkbortka
07-20-2011, 01:51 AM
drugs should be legalized, it's just modern prohibition, and how did that work out? end of story.

lacarnut
07-20-2011, 02:19 AM
drugs should be legalized, it's just modern prohibition, and how did that work out? end of story.

A moron like you wants to legalize all drugs. Pathetic. What are you on Junior?

Starbuck
07-20-2011, 10:28 AM
drugs should be legalized, it's just modern prohibition, and how did that work out? end of story.

End of Story?
No.
Prohibition did fail. So did 55 MPH speed limits. Illegal abortions. Open borders. And cocaine use failed Len Bias, who is no longer with us. Lots of ideas have failed.

Drugs - including pot - should be illegal. There will always be those who "choose" to ruin their bodies, and I say "choose" because they are young and listen to nonsense such as the type that influenced young Bias.

Show me a method that a police officer can use to determine whether or not a driver is currently under the influence (like the .08% standard) and I'll talk about marijuana being legalized. But not until you show me.

Here's a question: How many lives are saved and minds properly developed because our government has said loud and clear that certain drugs are dangerous and therefore illegal. How many young people - like I was - have said, "No. It's illegal, and I guess I won't go down that road."

Herman Cain will stand against drug use, and I will stand with him.

jnkbortka
07-20-2011, 12:05 PM
A moron like you wants to legalize all drugs. Pathetic. What are you on Junior?

I'm actually not on drugs. not even weed. i think because of all the gang violence caused by drugs, legalization would cripple them, as ending prohibition hurt the mafia. i think the only time we could possibly end that violence, is if we had a 20 ft high concrete wall at the mexican border. but even then city gangs would still be killing eachother, and the prices would skyrocket even further, creating more incentive.

jnkbortka
07-20-2011, 12:08 PM
Here's a question: How many lives are saved and minds properly developed because our government has said loud and clear that certain drugs are dangerous and therefore illegal. How many young people - like I was - have said, "No. It's illegal, and I guess I won't go down that road."

how many people, with their teenage, anarchistic tendencies have said, "its illegal = its cool"?

how many people die of gang violence and border wars over drugs?

a whole shitload

you did bring up a good point about the weed & driving, but i think a lot less people would be killed because all the gangs would be all but gone, with their biggest industry quashed

lacarnut
07-20-2011, 01:06 PM
how many people, with their teenage, anarchistic tendencies have said, "its illegal = its cool"?

how many people die of gang violence and border wars over drugs?

a whole shitload

you did bring up a good point about the weed & driving, but i think a lot less people would be killed because all the gangs would be all but gone, with their biggest industry quashed

Usage of drugs will go up if they are legalized and crime will increase. You are naive if you think gang violence and crime will decrease. They make huge sums of money. Why should we encourage more people to take drugs? Society is already f.....d up enough as it is. Just recently, a teenager killed his two parents and had a house party afterwards. Betcha this kid was high on something.

jnkbortka
07-20-2011, 03:02 PM
Usage of drugs will go up if they are legalized and crime will increase. You are naive if you think gang violence and crime will decrease. They make huge sums of money. Why should we encourage more people to take drugs? Society is already f.....d up enough as it is. Just recently, a teenager killed his two parents and had a house party afterwards. Betcha this kid was high on something.

Betcha $1 million cash the government illegalizing drugs didn't stop him from killing them :rolleyes:

legalizing drugs isn't encouraging people to use them. If we legalized heroin tommorow, it doesn't mean Everyone is gonna start using it. Do you have that little faith in American citizens? (ok, maybe there...) but Drug addiction should be a medical problem, not a legal one. Putting people in jail for drug offences just teaches them how to smuggle and hide their drugs better.

And most of the money that those gangs make is FROM drugs

Zathras
07-20-2011, 03:09 PM
Betcha $1 million cash the government illegalizing drugs didn't stop him from killing them :rolleyes:

legalizing drugs isn't encouraging people to use them. If we legalized heroin tommorow, it doesn't mean Everyone is gonna start using it. Do you have that little faith in American citizens? (ok, maybe there...) but Drug addiction should be a medical problem, not a legal one. Putting people in jail for drug offences just teaches them how to smuggle and hide their drugs better.

And most of the money that those gangs make is FROM drugs

And the bolded part shows just what a naive idiot you really are...well, that and supprting Ron Paul.

Starbuck
07-20-2011, 03:18 PM
........you did bring up a good point about the weed & driving, but i think a lot less people would be killed because all the gangs would be all but gone, with their biggest industry quashed........

See, what I hear from so many people is that they will smoke pot in their own home, and the gov't has no right to regulate what you do in your home. Until a test is developed that will determine the degree of impairment that applies at any given moment - like that .08 thing - then we are all screwed.

Drug addiction is a behavior problem. And it's illegal. My vote will be to keep it that way.:)

Flu. That's a medical problem.
Drugs. That's a behavior problem.

jnkbortka
07-20-2011, 03:52 PM
And the bolded part shows just what a naive idiot you really are...well, that and supprting Ron Paul.

Not really, its just saying that the government has no say in what you put in your own body. How do you think we can stop more gang violence? Drug legalization would keep less people in jail, thus saving money and reducing violence from trafficking and people being ripped off. I don't know why it's so hard for you to get this. The war on drugs is just modern prohibition

AmPat
07-20-2011, 06:24 PM
Not really, its just saying that the government has no say in what you put in your own body. How do you think we can stop more gang violence? Drug legalization would keep less people in jail, thus saving money and reducing violence from trafficking and people being ripped off. I don't know why it's so hard for you to get this. The war on drugs is just modern prohibition

Are you realy that dense? Drug trafficers and gangsters don't limit their illegal activities to drug use, they break many more laws and commit many violent offenses. Is it really your point that legalizing drugs leads to less crime? Absurd is the kindest word I can use right now.

jnkbortka
07-20-2011, 06:42 PM
Are you realy that dense? Drug trafficers and gangsters don't limit their illegal activities to drug use, they break many more laws and commit many violent offenses. Is it really your point that legalizing drugs leads to less crime? Absurd is the kindest word I can use right now.

Of course it does. While drugs aren't the only thing that hangs are involved in they make up a large portion. And the money we save on prisons can be spent on rehab facilities.

AmPat
07-20-2011, 07:09 PM
Of course it does. While drugs aren't the only thing that hangs are involved in they make up a large portion. And the money we save on prisons can be spent on rehab facilities.

NO, NO, and Triple NO! We should not spend money on rehab for people who make bad choices. The money to success ratio is cost prohibitive. They chose to take drugs so they need to choose to stop taking them. I didn't and don't pay for their addiction and I don't want to be saddled with their "rehab.":mad:

Zathras
07-20-2011, 07:25 PM
Not really, its just saying that the government has no say in what you put in your own body. How do you think we can stop more gang violence? Drug legalization would keep less people in jail, thus saving money and reducing violence from trafficking and people being ripped off. I don't know why it's so hard for you to get this. The war on drugs is just modern prohibition

Drug legalization will not reduce gang violence you idiot. They will still fight over the same turf to get a bigger slice of the pie. The same thugs that sell drug illegally will still be violent and rip people off even if the product they sell is legal. And then you add those felons that are in prison now to the mix and all hell will break loose.

You fucking Ronulans are really braindead idiots aren't you.

fettpett
07-21-2011, 08:21 AM
Hemp is about the only one that I've ever thought should be legalized, and that's because it has so many other benefits in it's growing, and it's where the bulk of drug money is spent. When California legalized medicinal pot, drug cartels lost 2/3rds of their cash practically overnight. Hemp is a Class 1 narcotic, wtf is up with that? Cocain and Heroin don't even have that designation. The whole system is messed up and does need change, but pot at lest needs to be dealt with in a different way than the other drugs

Wei Wu Wei
07-21-2011, 03:37 PM
End of Story?
No.
Prohibition did fail. So did 55 MPH speed limits. Illegal abortions. Open borders. And cocaine use failed Len Bias, who is no longer with us. Lots of ideas have failed.

Drugs - including pot - should be illegal. There will always be those who "choose" to ruin their bodies, and I say "choose" because they are young and listen to nonsense such as the type that influenced young Bias.

Show me a method that a police officer can use to determine whether or not a driver is currently under the influence (like the .08% standard) and I'll talk about marijuana being legalized. But not until you show me.

Here's a question: How many lives are saved and minds properly developed because our government has said loud and clear that certain drugs are dangerous and therefore illegal. How many young people - like I was - have said, "No. It's illegal, and I guess I won't go down that road."

Herman Cain will stand against drug use, and I will stand with him.


Do you need the government to tell you what you can and can't put into your body? I have no problem with the government putting out real, legitimate, scientifically-based information about the health hazards regarding drug use, but prohibition doesn't work.

As for the "danger", that's a stupid argument. Tylenol is FAR more dangerous than marijuana. The vast majority of prescription drugs are far more dangerous than marijuana. Tobacco and Alcohol are perhaps the most dangerous drugs in existence.

The danger level of a drug never has been, and is still not, the criteria used for what drugs are legal or illegal. I've got stacks of pharmacology books right here that I can quote from that speak volumes about the health hazards of dozens of legal drugs.

The greatest health danger from marijuana use is from the general danger of inhaling smoke, however marijuana doesn't have to be smoked so let's forget that argument.

You say that you benefited from hearing the government's message about drugs? Well I benefit from my own brain. I don't use any illegal drugs at all, and I choose that myself. ARe you telling me that you are so weak-willed that if the government decriminalized marijuana you would go out and smoke a pound tomorrow?


The government should treat drug problems as health issues, because they are. The government isn't your daddy. It's not the government's job to tell you what's good or bad for you to do to yourself. The government is supposed to uphold the rights of the people, which justifies laws against murder, theft, rape, and so on. Laws against marijuana use are absolutely stupid and based on backwards morality.

If this were about the health risks then the government would treat it as a health issue.


Let's talk about what really makes the world go round, and let's not be naive about it: MONEY. The prison industries make TONS of money off of the war on drugs.

America puts more people in prison (as a percent of population) than any other nation in the world, and this is because of the War on Drugs.
http://i.imgur.com/ejQGy.png

Some entire communities are supported by the prison industry, which is an incredibly effective lobby. Making drugs illegal and going after people puts money into the pockets of law enforcement and prisons, so it makes sense that they want it to continue, but the science does not back up the logic of the laws.

Study after study after study comes out saying that marijuana has numerous health benefits and is relatively harmless compared to other already-legal drugs. However the government continues with the stupid propaganda that even teenagers can see right through.;

If you want your kids to stay off of drugs, teach them the value of having a clean consciousness, teach them the real dangers of drug use (without hyperbole, because they will learn only to ignore authority's claims about this), teach them that their body is a temple for God and they should not abuse it. It's the job of the government and their laws to protect the rights of the people, not to be the morality police or Daddy.

Wei Wu Wei
07-21-2011, 03:45 PM
As for crime, the issues of drug-related crime are caused by the prohibition of drugs like marijuana. Drugs like meth are a different story, obviously, but let's talk about marijuana.

Almost all crime associated with marijuana comes from the black market marijuana trade. Turf wars occur, business disputes that cannot be settled through legit channels, huge sums of money are at stake (billions of dollars), and the ever-present risk of the law causes people to engage in violent criminal behavior.

If you banned caffeine tomorrow, you can bet your ass a black market would emerge to fill that void, and those people who provide it would have to engage in violent practices to conduct their business. Would we then claim that caffeine causes violence?

People do not smoke weed and go out and rob a bank, no one is going to rob a liquor store in order to get their "fix" of weed (it is not physically addictive), it is simply not a violent drug. It doesn't cause people to behave violently like cocaine, meth, and alcohol does.

Look at what is going on in Mexico right now. Certain areas of Mexico are considered the most dangerous places in the world outside of active war zones. Are they shooting RPG's at each other because they got in a fight over who gets the last bag of Doritos? NO! The violence is over MONEY. It's always about MONEY. The drug trade in Mexico is a multi-billion dollar industry and it's run by thugs.

Criminals control the marijuana market because law-abiding citizens are not legally allowed to do it. If we put the industry into the hands of non-violent law-abiding citizens you can bet that the $10 billion that goes to Mexican drug cartels will stay in this country instead of being used to buy military equptment to murder people.

Madisonian
07-21-2011, 06:02 PM
End of Story?
Here's a question: How many lives are saved and minds properly developed because our government has said loud and clear that certain drugs are dangerous and therefore illegal. How many young people - like I was - have said, "No. It's illegal, and I guess I won't go down that road."



Not to argue with what you are saying, but our government funded public schools are screwing up more young minds than some drugs could ever hope to.

AmPat
07-22-2011, 09:19 AM
It appears as though you "legalize drug" proponents are concerned with the large prison population as a main reason to legalize it. I say we throw liberals in prison. Liberalism is the main reason we have poverty and crime increasing in this country.:cool:

jnkbortka
07-22-2011, 02:04 PM
Not to argue with what you are saying, but our government funded public schools are screwing up more young minds than some drugs could ever hope to.

very true :D

jnkbortka
07-22-2011, 02:05 PM
It appears as though you "legalize drug" proponents are concerned with the large prison population as a main reason to legalize it. I say we throw liberals in prison. Liberalism is the main reason we have poverty and crime increasing in this country.:cool:

damn first ammendment! :rolleyes:

i disagree with what you say but i will defend to the death your right to say it!

on poverty? yes. on crime? no.

Starbuck
07-22-2011, 02:29 PM
Not to argue with what you are saying, but our government funded public schools are screwing up more young minds than some drugs could ever hope to.
Of course, your comment was rhetorical. Public schools, while inadequate, could not hope to damage the mind the way drugs, which kill, do.

jnkbortka
07-22-2011, 02:45 PM
prescription (ahem... LEGAL) drugs now kill more people than cocaine and heroin (http://healthimpactnews.com/2011/prescription-drugs-now-killing-more-young-people-than-crack-cocaine-in-the-1980s-and-heroin-in-the-1970s-combined/)

lacarnut
07-22-2011, 05:44 PM
Not to argue with what you are saying, but our government funded public schools are screwing up more young minds than some drugs could ever hope to.

Not true when I went to school. Today we have bad teachers, bad school boards, no discipline, bad parents, etc. There is nothing wrong with public school. It is society that is f....up and you want to add another layer of bad behavior in the schools and the work place. People doing drugs at work is quite prevalent. You legalize it and usage and crime will will increase. Looks like the governmental officials in the Netherlands found that out cause they have closed down half of the prostitution and drugs houses because of crime .

lacarnut
07-22-2011, 05:51 PM
prescription (ahem... LEGAL) drugs now kill more people than cocaine and heroin (http://healthimpactnews.com/2011/prescription-drugs-now-killing-more-young-people-than-crack-cocaine-in-the-1980s-and-heroin-in-the-1970s-combined/)

They started out on pot too. Then progressed to more potent drugs like oxycontin.

jnkbortka
07-22-2011, 06:56 PM
They started out on pot too. Then progressed to more potent drugs like oxycontin.

Alcohol and tobacco are most often before weed which are legal too (http://www.drugscience.org/sfu/sfu_gateway.html)

Wei Wu Wei
07-22-2011, 07:45 PM
They started out on pot too. Then progressed to more potent drugs like oxycontin.

Correlation does not imply causation. This is a basic logical fallacy.

The vast majority of heroin addicts tried coffee and soda before becoming addicted to smack. Is caffeine a gateway drug? :rolleyes:

Apache
07-22-2011, 07:51 PM
Correlation does not imply causation. This is a basic logical fallacy.

The vast majority of heroin addicts tried coffee and soda before becoming addicted to smack. Is caffeine a gateway drug? :rolleyes:

Does coffee or soda cause irrational behavior? Do they cause euphoria? Do they cloud judgement or impair motor skills?

Starbuck
07-22-2011, 07:55 PM
[QUOTE=Wei Wu Wei;435172.........The vast majority of heroin addicts tried coffee and soda before becoming addicted to smack...............[/QUOTE]

How do you know that?

Apache
07-22-2011, 07:57 PM
How do you know that?

It's a culture thing...:p

Wei Wu Wei
07-22-2011, 07:59 PM
Does coffee or soda cause irrational behavior?

Yes, actually. Caffeine can cause anxiety, irritability, agitation, aggressiveness, and in high doses they can cause paranoid reactions similar to psychotic reactions seen with cocaine binges.


Do they cause euphoria?

Many people experience increased mood and other positive emotional reactions when they inject caffeine.


Do they cloud judgement or impair motor skills?

Yes, both with high doses and when withdrawing.

Wei Wu Wei
07-22-2011, 08:01 PM
How do you know that?

Because the vast majority of Americans try caffeine.

Most people who use heroin used caffeine first. ->gateway.

Of course, most people who use caffeine never go on to use heroin, but the same is true of most people who use marijuana.

Apache
07-22-2011, 08:10 PM
Yes, actually. Caffeine can cause anxiety, irritability, agitation, aggressiveness, and in high doses they can cause paranoid reactions similar to psychotic reactions seen with cocaine binges.



Many people experience increased mood and other positive emotional reactions when they inject caffeine.



Yes, both with high doses and when withdrawing.

Now, answer the question as posed...:rolleyes:

Wei Wu Wei
07-22-2011, 08:26 PM
The same logic follows with alcohol.

The vast majority of people who check in to rehab for treatment for heroin or meth addiction report drinking alcohol before these harder drugs.

Alcohol causes irrational behavior, aggressiveness, it is addictive, it causes euphoria, it impairs judgement and motor skills, and law enforcement professionals will tell you that alcohol is the number 1 substance that contributes to violent behavior.

By any measure, alcohol is more dangerous than marijuana. This is obvious.

However, is alcohol a gateway drug?

Apache
07-22-2011, 08:48 PM
The same logic follows with alcohol.

The vast majority of people who check in to rehab for treatment for heroin or meth addiction report drinking alcohol before these harder drugs.

Alcohol causes irrational behavior, aggressiveness, it is addictive, it causes euphoria, it impairs judgement and motor skills, and law enforcement professionals will tell you that alcohol is the number 1 substance that contributes to violent behavior.

By any measure, alcohol is more dangerous than marijuana. This is obvious.

However, is alcohol a gateway drug?

Now, answer the question as posed... :rolleyes:

Wei Wu Wei
07-22-2011, 08:57 PM
What question?

Apache
07-22-2011, 09:02 PM
What question?




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Does coffee or soda cause irrational behavior? Do they cause euphoria? Do they cloud judgement or impair motor skills?

Apache
07-22-2011, 09:03 PM
Dammit! That was # 4000....:mad:

Wei Wu Wei
07-22-2011, 09:24 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Does coffee or soda cause irrational behavior? Do they cause euphoria? Do they cloud judgement or impair motor skills?

yes yes and yes

Apache
07-22-2011, 09:41 PM
yes yes and yes

Well at least you're honest about being dishonest. Not that I expected much more...:rolleyes:

jnkbortka
07-22-2011, 09:45 PM
yes yes and yes

only in large amounts

Wei Wu Wei
07-22-2011, 10:19 PM
only in large amounts

that's right

lacarnut
07-23-2011, 02:31 AM
Correlation does not imply causation. This is a basic logical fallacy.

The vast majority of heroin addicts tried coffee and soda before becoming addicted to smack. Is caffeine a gateway drug? :rolleyes:

Not a fallacy. I had two stepsons that started out smoking pot. They progressed to legal and illegal drugs (orally and injecting). Both overdosed and are six feet under.

Now tell we what your experiences with drugs are? Pot is a gateway to hard drugs. Not everyone becomes addicted but your post above tells me you do not know your ass from the hole in the ground.

txradioguy
07-23-2011, 04:40 AM
A moron like you wants to legalize all drugs. Pathetic. What are you on Junior?

He's a Ronobot...further proof of why people should "just say no" to drugs.

txradioguy
07-23-2011, 04:42 AM
Not a fallacy. I had two stepsons that started out smoking pot. They progressed to legal and illegal drugs (orally and injecting). Both overdosed and are six feet under.

Now tell we what your experiences with drugs are? Pot is a gateway to hard drugs. Not everyone becomes addicted but your post above tells me you do not know your ass from the hole in the ground.

This thread just re-enforces my belief that Libtards and 99.9% of Ronulans are one in the same.

I mean a card carrying Communist like Wee Wee and an alleged "Conservative" like ink defending the same thing.

What are the odds? :rolleyes:

Wei Wu Wei
07-23-2011, 04:55 AM
Not a fallacy. I had two stepsons that started out smoking pot. They progressed to legal and illegal drugs (orally and injecting). Both overdosed and are six feet under.

Now tell we what your experiences with drugs are? Pot is a gateway to hard drugs. Not everyone becomes addicted but your post above tells me you do not know your ass from the hole in the ground.

I've had two family members die directly from drug overdoses and a few others who have had problems with addiction (immediate relatives). I know this is a serious subject. This is not something I take lightly.

I've known plenty of people in my life who have tried pot, others who have tried harder drugs, and others who have never touched drugs.

This isn't the personal anecdote hour though, marijuana isn't inherently a gateway drug and I'm not going to let personal feelings get in the way of that fact.

Some people move onto harder drugs because of drug culture and social connections. For example, because marijuana is illegal, the only way people can get it is from drug dealers. Developing the social circles necessary to get access to marijuana often leads to access to other drugs. Drug dealers often sell multiple drugs, which means that someone who just wants to smoke weed may find themselves around people who use and sell heroin. That alone isn't going to make someone use those drugs, but it is a big factor.

Who says when someone "starts" their drug experiences? Is it when they have their first beer? Is it when they have their first cigarette? Is it when they have their first puff of weed? Why do you choose to single out marijuana as the "starting point" for drug use?

I've known and worked with many addicts in my lifetime, some of them serious life-destroying addictions, and almost all of them drank ALCOHOL before moving onto harder substances. Why don't you consider alcohol a gateway drug? Is it because it is legal? Because it is socially accepted more? Because you drink alcohol yourself? Whatever the reason, the logic doesn't work.

Just because A precedes B, doesn't mean A caused B.

I've known people who tried pot a few times in college and got over it and are successful happy people, I know people who smoke pot regularly and are also successful happy people with professional careers balanced lives, I know people who are hopelessly addicted to substances, including pot.

The picture of marijuana addiction and the move towards harder drugs is just as complex and varied as it is with alcohol, and any attempt to reduce it to something simple and broad-brushed is ignorant. The real difference between alcohol and marijuana is that alcohol is FAR more dangerous physically, mentally, short term, long term, and in it's social consequences.

If the vast majority of people who smoke marijuana never use harder drugs like meth or heroin, then how in the world is marijuana a gateway drug other than knowing someone who did one before the other? If almost all addicts drink alcohol before becoming addicted to hard drugs, then why don't you consider alcohol a gateway drug?

RobJohnson
07-23-2011, 04:59 AM
I read a quote from a Libertarian that suggeted that all laws are bad, including drug laws.

We are a land of laws.

In fact, the same person suggested that all Rx drugs should be legal to buy over the counter without a prescription. Do you agree with that? We could be a nation that self medicates ourselves & our children....

Molon Labe
07-23-2011, 07:10 AM
Usage of drugs will go up if they are legalized and crime will increase.

That's actually not true. It's the exact opposite. Study Alcohol prohibition for evidence. If pushers cannot "push" drugs at black market values anymore, then they have no business. Costs go down and there is no incentive to do so.

Madisonian
07-23-2011, 08:57 AM
Some people move onto harder drugs because of drug culture and social connections. For example, because marijuana is illegal, the only way people can get it is from drug dealers. Developing the social circles necessary to get access to marijuana often leads to access to other drugs. Drug dealers often sell multiple drugs, which means that someone who just wants to smoke weed may find themselves around people who use and sell heroin. That alone isn't going to make someone use those drugs, but it is a big factor.



This would be the most accurate description of why so many people get hooked into the hard drug scenario.
When I was in high school and college in the late 60's and early 70's, when tolerance for marijuana was greater, the people that sold pot only sold pot for the most part. The usual scenario was buy a quarter pound for about 80 to 90, sell off 3 ounces and get an ounce for yourself free.

As penalties increased, the pot only sellers got out of the business and was taken over by the true drug dealers that sold everything from pot to coke and heroin.
Now today, if I could grow a plant in my back yard and smoke a bowl now and then, I probably would. To find a person that only sold a bit of weed and not everything else is most likely impossible. Having smoked and drank, I always preferred the buzz of a couple bowls than a couple shots.

AmPat
07-23-2011, 12:14 PM
Because the vast majority of Americans try caffeine.

Most people who use heroin used caffeine first. ->gateway.

Of course, most people who use caffeine never go on to use heroin, but the same is true of most people who use marijuana.

You are completely ignoring the culture of drugs and the lure of illicit activity. this is not a simplistic comparison of my drug is ok because yours is. Caffein and cocaine cannot be compared equally. I'm sure a large number of the crack users in the country have also tried a banana. I don't believe you'd suggest banana consumption is causative behavior and a gateway to snorting a few lines.:rolleyes:

Rockntractor
07-23-2011, 12:31 PM
Y I don't believe you'd suggest banana consumption is causative behavior and a gateway to snorting a few lines.:rolleyes:

In the 60's they dried banana peelings and smoked them, calling it mellow yellow.

jnkbortka
07-23-2011, 12:34 PM
He's a Ronobot...further proof of why people should "just say no" to drugs.

just because i think drug legalization is the right thing to do doesn't mean i do drugs. i havent even smoked weed for christs sake! speaking of jesus and pot, ever wonder if jesus smoked hash? it was from that region...

Wei Wu Wei
07-23-2011, 12:37 PM
You are completely ignoring the culture of drugs and the lure of illicit activity. this is not a simplistic comparison of my drug is ok because yours is. Caffein and cocaine cannot be compared equally. I'm sure a large number of the crack users in the country have also tried a banana. I don't believe you'd suggest banana consumption is causative behavior and a gateway to snorting a few lines.:rolleyes:

That is exactly my point!

Just because someone does X before Y doesn't mean that X caused Y. This logical fallacy is the entire basis for the "gateway" argument.

Most people who use marijuana never use hard drugs like heroin or crack, but some people do.

Many people who try heroin or crack tried marijuana before, but it doesn't mean marijuana caused them to try heroin or crack. Just like many people who try heroin and crack try caffeine and bananas before they become addicts, doesn't mean that's what caused it.

You have outlined the flaw in the "gateway theory" which is nothing more than mistaking correlation with causation.

Rockntractor
07-23-2011, 12:46 PM
just because i think drug legalization is the right thing to do doesn't mean i do drugs. i havent even smoked weed for christs sake! speaking of jesus and pot, ever wonder if jesus smoked hash? it was from that region...

You don't understand the very nature of God if you think he had any need for drugs.

txradioguy
07-23-2011, 01:07 PM
just because i think drug legalization is the right thing to do doesn't mean i do drugs. i havent even smoked weed for christs sake! speaking of jesus and pot, ever wonder if jesus smoked hash? it was from that region...


You are an idiot. Thank you for confirming that.

obx
07-23-2011, 01:30 PM
Lets ask Amy Winehouse, Oh wait....nevermind.

lacarnut
07-23-2011, 01:37 PM
That's actually not true. It's the exact opposite. Study Alcohol prohibition for evidence. If pushers cannot "push" drugs at black market values anymore, then they have no business. Costs go down and there is no incentive to do so.

News to me cause I thought pot grown in CA was quite expensive. If it is legalized, the price will go up further cause the government will want to tax it. The black market will continue. The government will hire many, many gov. employees to regulate, collect and police it. What do you think would happen if the ATF was disbanded. Stills and home grown tobacco would pop up and taxes would plummet. I though libertarians were against a more bloated number of government employees.

lacarnut
07-23-2011, 01:53 PM
!

Many people who try heroin or crack tried marijuana before, but it doesn't mean marijuana caused them to try heroin or crack. Just like many people who try heroin and crack try caffeine and bananas before they become addicts, doesn't mean that's what caused it.

You have outlined the flaw in the "gateway theory" which is nothing more than mistaking correlation with causation.

Most people that try it for the first time are young. They try it because their friends do it and they think it is cool. For some, they move on to something stronger. Now, if they had never tried pot in the first place, they would never have tried H. or crack. That is why pot is called a gateway drug.

Here is a question for you. Why do people get high? In my opinion, those that do are f.....d up and need help. So, why would I want to support something that is going to hurt people. Society is screwed up enough without legalizing a substance that will harm them. I guess you do not believe that you are your brother's keeper. If not, you are a pathetic human being.

Wei Wu Wei
07-23-2011, 02:23 PM
Most people that try it for the first time are young. They try it because their friends do it and they think it is cool. For some, they move on to something stronger. Now, if they had never tried pot in the first place, they would never have tried H. or crack. That is why pot is called a gateway drug.

I already explained how the minimal gateway effect has far more to do with the social connections caused by marijuana's illegal status.

If some 18 year old wants marijuana and meets with regular drug users and drug dealers, he is far more likely to be exposed to heroin than he would if he went to a legal clinic with a giant happy face on the front of the store.

If you have to meet in some shady guy's basement who goes by a single nickname and you have to meet a friend of a friend of a friend and all that bullshit, you are far more likely to come in contact with other illegal drugs. Other posters have already explained this as well.

It's about the context and the setting. Marijuana by itself is not like other, harder drugs. It's nothing like heroin or crack or any of those. The drug itself doesn't cause people to try harder drug. All of the negative effects people keep talking about are side effects of prohibition.

If you go amsterdam and visit a cafe and get high there, you are far less likely to even see heroin than you are if you hang around drug dealers in America.

If we change the laws so that marijuana can be purchased at a store, people who smoke marijuana will be far less likely to ever come in contact with hard drugs.




Here is a question for you. Why do people get high? In my opinion, those that do are f.....d up and need help.

There are many reasons, it's pretty diverse. Often times it is a symptom of mental health problems, or it's a crutch. Other times it's not so negative, for example some people smoke a little to relax, others use it in social settings, other people use it for medicinal purposes.

You can't wrap it all up into a stereotyped image.


So, why would I want to support something that is going to hurt people. Society is screwed up enough without legalizing a substance that will harm them.

Prohibition hurts more people than the drug itself does. Even if we agree that drug use is negative, it's stupid to pursue a course of action if the cure is worse than the disease.

I agree that for the most part drug use is a bad idea, like I said, I do not use any illegal drugs myself. However, we should be realistic about drug use in America and stop making the problem worse by using solutions that aren't thought out well.

If you are concerned about the health of people, we should stop pouring billions of dollars into fighting drugs as a criminal issue, and put some of that money into treating drugs as a health issue. We can put out information about the risks of drug use and help rehabilitate people who become addicts, but treating marijuana smokers the same as violent criminals is insane.


I guess you do not believe that you are your brother's keeper. If not, you are a pathetic human being.

What are you talking about? This is why I believe in providing treatment for people rather than throwing them in prison and sticking them with a drug charge that will prevent them from ever having a job again. Don't play the "brother's keeper' card and say that you support throwing these people in prison.

I am my brother's keeper, but I am not his Daddy. I'm not going to tell him what's right and wrong to put into his body. We should look at this based on societal costs and health hazards, and in those terms, marijuana is a very benign drug.

Rockntractor
07-23-2011, 02:28 PM
I already explained how the minimal gateway effect has far more to do with the social connections caused by marijuana's illegal status.

If some 18 year old wants marijuana and meets with regular drug users and drug dealers, he is far more likely to be exposed to heroin than he would if he went to a legal clinic with a giant happy face on the front of the store.

If you have to meet in some shady guy's basement who goes by a single nickname and you have to meet a friend of a friend of a friend and all that bullshit, you are far more likely to come in contact with other illegal drugs. Other posters have already explained this as well.

It's about the context and the setting. Marijuana by itself is not like other, harder drugs. It's nothing like heroin or crack or any of those. The drug itself doesn't cause people to try harder drug. All of the negative effects people keep talking about are side effects of prohibition.

If you go amsterdam and visit a cafe and get high there, you are far less likely to even see heroin than you are if you hang around drug dealers in America.

If we change the laws so that marijuana can be purchased at a store, people who smoke marijuana will be far less likely to ever come in contact with hard drugs.





There are many reasons, it's pretty diverse. Often times it is a symptom of mental health problems, or it's a crutch. Other times it's not so negative, for example some people smoke a little to relax, others use it in social settings, other people use it for medicinal purposes.

You can't wrap it all up into a stereotyped image.



Prohibition hurts more people than the drug itself does. Even if we agree that drug use is negative, it's stupid to pursue a course of action if the cure is worse than the disease.

I agree that for the most part drug use is a bad idea, like I said, I do not use any illegal drugs myself. However, we should be realistic about drug use in America and stop making the problem worse by using solutions that aren't thought out well.

If you are concerned about the health of people, we should stop pouring billions of dollars into fighting drugs as a criminal issue, and put some of that money into treating drugs as a health issue. We can put out information about the risks of drug use and help rehabilitate people who become addicts, but treating marijuana smokers the same as violent criminals is insane.



What are you talking about? This is why I believe in providing treatment for people rather than throwing them in prison and sticking them with a drug charge that will prevent them from ever having a job again. Don't play the "brother's keeper' card and say that you support throwing these people in prison.

I am my brother's keeper, but I am not his Daddy. I'm not going to tell him what's right and wrong to put into his body. We should look at this based on societal costs and health hazards, and in those terms, marijuana is a very benign drug.
Amy Winehouse.

txradioguy
07-23-2011, 02:32 PM
Amy Winehouse.

Drew Barrymore

http://img2.timeinc.net/people/i/2006/celebdatabase/drewbarrymore/drew_barrymore4_180_135.jpg

NJCardFan
07-23-2011, 02:35 PM
drugs should be legalized, it's just modern prohibition, and how did that work out? end of story.

Known drug user Amy Winehouse was just found dead. This is the legacy of drugs.

Wei Wu Wei
07-23-2011, 02:36 PM
Amy Winehouse.

How many bong hits do you think it took to kill her? :rolleyes:


If it turns out that she died from a marijuana overdose, I will concede everything here.

Wei Wu Wei
07-23-2011, 02:37 PM
Known drug user Amy Winehouse was just found dead. This is the legacy of drugs.

not all drugs are the same. only a fool uses the blanket term "drugs" and thinks they are equal

Zathras
07-23-2011, 02:41 PM
not all drugs are the same. only a fool uses the blanket term "drugs" and thinks they are equal

And it's even a bigger fool that thinks legalising all drugs is perfectly ok.

Wei Wu Wei
07-23-2011, 02:43 PM
And it's even a bigger fool that thinks legalising all drugs is perfectly ok.

That's probably why I'm not talking about legalizing all drugs ;)

JB
07-23-2011, 04:56 PM
Are you telling me that you are so weak-willed that if the government decriminalized marijuana you would go out and smoke a pound tomorrow?Excellent question. Spoken like a true conservative. Be careful We you may have to turn in your commie card. ;)

And every argument you've made in this thread regarding legalizing marijuana is more than sound. I have not read one reply that makes your position unfounded.

lacarnut
07-23-2011, 05:07 PM
That's probably why I'm not talking about legalizing all drugs ;)

Legalization of pot and prostitution has not worked out to well in the red light district of the Netherlands. Half of those places have been shut down because of crime and disease.

If pot was legalized, do you think that employers would quit drug testing? They do it for a purpose FYI. Legalizing it will only encouraging more pot usage. I suspect that some on this board and many in public that state they want to legalize it are lying out of their eye teeth when they say they have never used it. They are self serving hypocrites. Just what the economy needs, more potheads. Not going to get people off of food stamps and the unemployment line with this kind of stupidity.

Another one your bull shit arguments is that the war on drugs has not or will not work. It has never been fought as a war. It is like what we are doing in Afghanistan. There is no plan for victory. Bring the troops home send them to Mexico and other countries growing the shit, destroy the crops, and kill the drug lords. Do the same in this country and then we can talk about a war on drugs. BTW, don't give me any of your b.s about invading a foreign country. That dog won't hunt. Also, put troops on the border. That will dry up supply and drastically increase price and decrease usage. That is how to fight a war on drugs.

FeebMaster
07-23-2011, 05:09 PM
Known drug user Amy Winehouse was just found dead. This is the legacy of drugs.


That's hard to believe.

Drugs are illegal.

NJCardFan
07-23-2011, 06:21 PM
That's hard to believe.

Drugs are illegal.

There is never a happy story associated with drugs either.

jnkbortka
07-23-2011, 06:46 PM
Amy Winehouse.

yep and the almighty government didn't stop her :rolleyes:

FeebMaster
07-23-2011, 06:57 PM
There is never a happy story associated with drugs either.


I know what you mean. They all end in death and/or the government.

What a downer.

RobJohnson
07-24-2011, 04:38 AM
That's actually not true. It's the exact opposite. Study Alcohol prohibition for evidence. If pushers cannot "push" drugs at black market values anymore, then they have no business. Costs go down and there is no incentive to do so.

While our gov't gets bigger and bigger trying to regulate the drug industry...:p

RobJohnson
07-24-2011, 04:40 AM
Not a fallacy. I had two stepsons that started out smoking pot. They progressed to legal and illegal drugs (orally and injecting). Both overdosed and are six feet under.

Now tell we what your experiences with drugs are? Pot is a gateway to hard drugs. Not everyone becomes addicted but your post above tells me you do not know your ass from the hole in the ground.

Very sorry to hear this. :mad:

txradioguy
07-24-2011, 04:42 AM
Excellent question. Spoken like a true conservative. Be careful We you may have to turn in your commie card. ;)

And every argument you've made in this thread regarding legalizing marijuana is more than sound. I have not read one reply that makes your position unfounded.

Imagine that...yet another self proclaimed "real conservative" agreeing with a card carrying socialist.

Thank you for yet again giving validity to my claim that there is no difference between the two of you.

KhrushchevsShoe
07-24-2011, 05:04 AM
I am wholly for all drugs (maybe excluding pot, because who really cares) being kept illegal. I already have a big enough problem living in a country addicted to money, let's not add brand name store bought narcotics to the mix.

Maybe a few Hamsterdams here and there because the crime associated with them gets out of control, but local and state law enforcement should be left to make that call.

KhrushchevsShoe
07-24-2011, 05:05 AM
I've always been one to believe that a just war is always worth fighting, even if its impossible to win. The rationale behind the war on drugs to me has always been sound.

txradioguy
07-24-2011, 05:08 AM
While our gov't gets bigger and bigger trying to regulate the drug industry...:p

And that's what these people who say "legalize it and tax it" don't comprehend. For a bunch of people that preach smaller government and less taxes to us unwashed knuckle draggers...all they end up doing is promoting MORE government and MORE taxes...just so THEY don't get hassled trying to get high.

txradioguy
07-24-2011, 05:10 AM
I've always been one to believe that a just war is always worth fighting, even if its impossible to win. The rationale behind the war on drugs to me has always been sound.

I don't think it should have ever been called a "war". That term in and of itself brings up connotations and expectations in peoples minds that are impossible to live up to when it comes to trying to limit the amount of illegal drugs coming into and being used in the U.S.

Same thing with the "war" on poverty. Or the "war" on hunger etc etc

fettpett
07-24-2011, 08:58 AM
And that's what these people who say "legalize it and tax it" don't comprehend. For a bunch of people that preach smaller government and less taxes to us unwashed knuckle draggers...all they end up doing is promoting MORE government and MORE taxes...just so THEY don't get hassled trying to get high.

the thing is, it takes a bigger Government to deal with the "Drug War" than it would to have a product and tax it the same as everything else. ATF and DEA are such examples, it's wasteful spending, particularly since weed is the biggest "problem". Half of all drug related crimes are due to pot, and most are for possession under and ounce.

Under current laws it can't even be researched for medical purposes, can't be grown for non-drug commercial purposes unless it is specific EXTREMELY expensive THC-free strands. It takes MORE and BIGGER Government to deal with this kind of stupidity than it does to let the market deal with it as it was done before Harry Anslinger got a hold of it in the 30's and started this whole anti-hemp propaganda. In fact the AMA was very against the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937 because Ansilnger lied about what "marihuana" was.

JB
07-24-2011, 10:16 AM
And that's what these people who say "legalize it and tax it" don't comprehend. For a bunch of people that preach smaller government and less taxes to us unwashed knuckle draggers...all they end up doing is promoting MORE government and MORE taxes...just so THEY don't get hassled trying to get high.LMAO. Are you kidding me?

The war on drugs is a one trillion dollar colossal failure.

Here's what you do: take the $200 billion or so that gets spent on weed enforcement, legalize weed, hire a couple more guys at the ATF, rename it the WATF, give them $2 billion or so and then refund the excess $198 billion to the taxpayers.

Maybe it's time you took a shower and stood up straight.

JB
07-24-2011, 10:27 AM
Imagine that...yet another self proclaimed "real conservative" agreeing with a card carrying socialist.Wee wanted to know if you are so weak willed that if the government legalized marijuana would you go out and smoke a pound tomorrow.

If the answer is no, then you, me and wee are on the same side of the argument.

If the answer is yes, then you are just a weak willed individual that needs the government to tell him what to do.

So which is it?

fettpett
07-24-2011, 11:14 AM
Wee wanted to know if you are so weak willed that if the government legalized marijuana would you go out and smoke a pound tomorrow.

If the answer is no, then you, me and wee are on the same side of the argument.

If the answer is yes, then you are just a weak willed individual that needs the government to tell him what to do.

So which is it?

you will get a lot of those people, for a short amount of time, but then it'll be like cigarettes, but probably less likely to be smoked in public

lacarnut
07-24-2011, 12:08 PM
And that's what these people who say "legalize it and tax it" don't comprehend. For a bunch of people that preach smaller government and less taxes to us unwashed knuckle draggers...all they end up doing is promoting MORE government and MORE taxes...just so THEY don't get hassled trying to get high.

Plus, the ones that use pot/drugs are hypocrites cause they live in fear of getting caught and losing their jobs.

Legalization would cause more usage. Many of our leaders in Congress are a product of the hippie generation. If it feels good, do it. You see where that has gotten us. Our country is heading down the wrong path because of stupid shit like legalizing drugs. Pot has no redeeming factor other than to get high. Cancer victims are a small percentage of users. Unlike alcohol, most people that drink do not drink to get drunk. Every single solitary person that has smoked pot did it to get stoned. I know that because, unlike liars on this board, I admit I used to smoke it.

Another fact is that it is a gateway drug. Once a person becomes a user rather than an occasional smoker, the odds of his or her advancing to stronger drugs becomes greater because like most drugs the more you use the more it takes for you to get high.

jnkbortka
07-24-2011, 12:11 PM
Plus, the ones that use pot/drugs are hypocrites cause they live in fear of getting caught and losing their jobs.

Legalization would cause more usage. Many of our leaders in Congress are a product of the hippie generation. If it feels good, do it. You see where that has gotten us. Our country is heading down the wrong path because of stupid shit like legalizing drugs. Pot has no redeeming factor other than to get high. Cancer victims are a small percentage of users. Unlike alcohol, most people that drink do not drink to get drunk. Every single solitary person that has smoked pot did it to get stoned. I know that because, unlike liars on this board, I admit I used to smoke it.

Another fact is that it is a gateway drug. Once a person becomes a user rather than an occasional smoker, the odds of his or her advancing to stronger drugs becomes greater because like most drugs the more you use the more it takes for you to get high.

that has already been explained. it is the illegality that causes people to come in contact with harder drugs

lacarnut
07-24-2011, 12:25 PM
Wee wanted to know if you are so weak willed that if the government legalized marijuana would you go out and smoke a pound tomorrow.

If the answer is no, then you, me and wee are on the same side of the argument.

If the answer is yes, then you are just a weak willed individual that needs the government to tell him what to do.

So which is it?

With that analogy, why not legalize all drugs. To show you how stupid your assessment is why not have any laws at all then you could go beat up your neighbor if you did not like him. I would not but many would. So which is it.

Hiring more government employees to police and tax pot does not seem to be a conservative value to me. Most people do NOT want to legalize drugs. Tough shit if you do.

Molon Labe
07-24-2011, 02:13 PM
Lets ask Amy Winehouse, Oh wait....nevermind.

great point. Drugs are illegal and she's still dead. So I guess it's safe to assume that keeping them illegal doesn't prevent anything.

fettpett
07-24-2011, 02:30 PM
. Pot has no redeeming factor other than to get high. .

http://www.voteindustrialhemp.com/
http://www.hempusa.org/hmps/articles/hemp-uses.html
http://www.hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/ncnu02/v5-284.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemp

Hemp is used for a wide variety of purposes, an estimated 50,000 products can be produced from hemp in the United States, including the manufacture of cordage of varying tensile strength, everlasting clothing and nutritional products. The bast fibers can be used in 100% hemp products, but are commonly blended with other organic fibers such as flax, cotton or silk, for apparel and furnishings, most commonly at a 55%/45% hemp/cotton blend. The inner two fibers of hemp are more woody, and are more often used in non-woven items and other industrial applications, such as mulch, animal bedding and litter. The oil from the fruits ("seeds") oxidizes (commonly, though inaccurately, called "drying") to become solid on exposure to air, similar to linseed oil, and is sometimes used in the manufacture of oil-based paints, in creams as a moisturizing agent, for cooking, and in plastics. Hemp seeds have been used in bird seed mix as well.[17] Hempseed is also used as a fishing bait. [18]
[edit] Food
Shelled hemp seeds

Hemp seeds can be eaten raw, ground into a meal, sprouted, made into hemp milk (akin to soy milk), prepared as tea,[19] and used in baking. The fresh leaves can also be eaten in salads. Products include cereals, frozen waffles, hemp tofu, and nut butters, to name a few. A few companies produce value added hemp seed items that include the seed oils, whole hemp grain (which is sterilized by law in the United States, where they import it from China and Canada), dehulled hemp seed (the whole seed without the mineral rich outer shell), hemp flour, hemp cake (a by-product of pressing the seed for oil) and hemp protein powder. Hemp is also used in some organic cereals, for non-dairy milk[20] somewhat similar to soy and nut milks, and for non-dairy hemp "ice cream."

Within the UK, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) has treated hemp as purely a non-food crop. Seed appears on the UK market as a legal food product, and cultivation licenses are available for this purpose. In North America, hemp seed food products are sold, typically in health food stores or through mail order. The United States Department of Agriculture estimates that "the market potential for hemp seed as a food ingredient is unknown. However, it probably will remain a small market, like those for sesame and poppy seeds."[21]

http://www.informationdistillery.com/hemp.htm

I could go on (http://www.google.com/#hl=en&cp=12&gs_id=1a&xhr=t&q=Uses+for+hemp&qe=VXNlcyBmb3IgaGVt&qesig=nFc6SgnTKItCINL-Ow4Pmw&pkc=AFgZ2tmD9EET5q_otHO1-nx_QQf5V4swRl7TkBJD7f8wkxt0qtVN92o1B-_X92PgZUJVFhBgd3JqD6r2P5JvwJ3JAXnVeetMyg&pf=p&sclient=psy&safe=off&source=hp&pbx=1&oq=Uses+for+hem&aq=0&aqi=g5&aql=&gs_sm=&gs_upl=&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=7acb2c039c8d8b9a&biw=1680&bih=921)

Rockntractor
07-24-2011, 02:33 PM
I could go on.

Later, go burn one, you need a break!:nono:

fettpett
07-24-2011, 02:34 PM
Later, go burn one, you need a break!:nono:

:p:party:

Molon Labe
07-24-2011, 03:01 PM
Hiring more government employees to police and tax pot does not seem to be a conservative value to me. Most people do NOT want to legalize drugs. Tough shit if you do.


do you know how many more government and police and taxes have been needed over the last 30 years to carry on the war on drugs. You are right that having more of all that is not a conservative value.

Let's talk about acohol and it's dangers:

Alcohol is the only drug that can kill you when you detoxify from it. Alcohol also has limited health benefits as compared to the disadvantages and health risks.

So it's really just legal because it's more socially acceptable to have a glass in your hand.

I've always concluded from my conservative readings that anything that expands the role of government is a negative. There aren't many better examples than the ubiquitous war on drugs. Whatever that means

RobJohnson
07-24-2011, 07:45 PM
:

Alcohol is the only drug that can kill you when you detoxify from it.

That is not true.

RobJohnson
07-24-2011, 07:53 PM
And that's what these people who say "legalize it and tax it" don't comprehend. For a bunch of people that preach smaller government and less taxes to us unwashed knuckle draggers...all they end up doing is promoting MORE government and MORE taxes...just so THEY don't get hassled trying to get high.


I agree. I ran into some tree huggers yesterday at a nonpartisan recall petion drive of a county official.

Somehow the discussion turned to smoking pot. I heard the legalize and tax it stuff...I said "just what we need more taxes on poor people, and what about those that need it for medical reasons, should they be taxed also?"

They quickly changed the subject as I walked away :)

RobJohnson
07-24-2011, 07:56 PM
you will get a lot of those people, for a short amount of time, but then it'll be like cigarettes, but probably less likely to be smoked in public

That's a good point.

We already deal with second and third hand smoke.

What about second and third hand THC?

fettpett
07-24-2011, 08:37 PM
That's a good point.

We already deal with second and third hand smoke.

What about second and third hand THC?

munchies??:popcorn::pig:

RobJohnson
07-24-2011, 10:50 PM
munchies??:popcorn::pig:

:D

Rockntractor
07-24-2011, 11:33 PM
I agree. I ran into some tree huggers yesterday

Are they okay?:eek:

CueSi
07-24-2011, 11:45 PM
That is not true.

Yes. It is possible to die from alcohol withdrawal. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_withdrawal_syndrome)

And I quote,


Alcohol withdrawal syndrome is the set of symptoms seen when an individual reduces or stops alcohol consumption after prolonged periods of excessive alcohol intake. Excessive abuse of alcohol leads to tolerance, physical dependence, and an alcohol withdrawal syndrome. The withdrawal syndrome is largely due to the central nervous system being in a hyper-excitable state. Unlike most withdrawals from other drugs, alcohol withdrawal can be fatal. The withdrawal syndrome can include seizures and delirium tremens and may lead to excito-neurotoxicity.[1]

~QC

lacarnut
07-24-2011, 11:51 PM
do you know how many more government and police and taxes have been needed over the last 30 years to carry on the war on drugs. You are right that having more of all that is not a conservative value.

Let's talk about acohol and it's dangers:

Alcohol is the only drug that can kill you when you detoxify from it. Alcohol also has limited health benefits as compared to the disadvantages and health risks.

So it's really just legal because it's more socially acceptable to have a glass in your hand.

I've always concluded from my conservative readings that anything that expands the role of government is a negative. There aren't many better examples than the ubiquitous war on drugs. Whatever that means

Unless you are blind, dumb and stupid, I have stated there has never been a war on drugs. When you fight a war, you fight it to win. It could be won if we destroyed crops around the world and killed the drug growers and suppliers. Then the supply would dry up, the price would go sky high and usage would drop off drastically. Bring the troops home from those two M.E. shit-hole countries, kill the poppy farms, and use our troops to invade every country that grows the shit including destroying crops in the US and you have cut off the head of a great percentage of the illegal drug trade. We have already spent billions trying to kill Gaddafi so invading Mexico and other countries would be a piece of cake.

Once again, most people that indulge in alcohol do not drink to get drunk. The first joint you smoke, you smoke it to get high. Can you not see the difference? I have done my share of drinking and smoked a few joints in college so the statement above is indisputable. Comparing booze with dope is like comparing apples to oranges.

Legalizing pot will lead to more usage, taxation and more government employees. That is not a conservative value. Like I said, the majority of people do not want legalization of pot. Same can be said for queers marrying queers.

Sonnabend
07-24-2011, 11:51 PM
Alcohol is the only drug that can kill you when you detoxify from it.

Wrong.

Detox / withdrawal from many drugs can kill.

lacarnut
07-25-2011, 12:30 AM
Wrong.

Detox / withdrawal from many drugs can kill.

yep...heroin for example. Only dopes do drugs.

FeebMaster
07-25-2011, 01:38 AM
Unless you are blind, dumb and stupid, I have stated there has never been a war on drugs. When you fight a war, you fight it to win. It could be won if we destroyed crops around the world and killed the drug growers and suppliers. Then the supply would dry up, the price would go sky high and usage would drop off drastically. Bring the troops home from those two M.E. shit-hole countries, kill the poppy farms, and use our troops to invade every country that grows the shit including destroying crops in the US and you have cut off the head of a great percentage of the illegal drug trade. We have already spent billions trying to kill Gaddafi so invading Mexico and other countries would be a piece of cake.

Once again, most people that indulge in alcohol do not drink to get drunk. The first joint you smoke, you smoke it to get high. Can you not see the difference? I have done my share of drinking and smoked a few joints in college so the statement above is indisputable. Comparing booze with dope is like comparing apples to oranges.

Legalizing pot will lead to more usage, taxation and more government employees. That is not a conservative value. Like I said, the majority of people do not want legalization of pot. Same can be said for queers marrying queers.


Drug warriors are so cute when they're deluded and psychotic.

It's a pity their addiction is so harmful.

lacarnut
07-25-2011, 01:45 AM
Drug warriors are so cute when they're deluded and psychotic.

It's a pity their addiction is so harmful.

You should know about the deluded and psychotic part.

FeebMaster
07-25-2011, 01:47 AM
You should know about the deluded and psychotic part.


I'm not psychotic.

CueSi
07-25-2011, 02:02 AM
BTW- - - it was neither heroin or anything illegal that dealt the final blow to Amy Winehouse. It was alcohol; vodka, to be specific. (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2018385/Amy-Winehouse-drank-death-day-telling-mum-I-love-you.html)

So, there's that to chew on.

~QC

RobJohnson
07-25-2011, 02:14 AM
Yes. It is possible to die from alcohol withdrawal. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_withdrawal_syndrome)

And I quote,



~QC

I should of been more clear. My point was people die from other drug withdraws, not just alcohol.

.

RobJohnson
07-25-2011, 02:18 AM
Plus, the ones that use pot/drugs are hypocrites cause they live in fear of getting caught and losing their jobs.

Legalization would cause more usage. Many of our leaders in Congress are a product of the hippie generation. If it feels good, do it. You see where that has gotten us. Our country is heading down the wrong path because of stupid shit like legalizing drugs. Pot has no redeeming factor other than to get high. Cancer victims are a small percentage of users. Unlike alcohol, most people that drink do not drink to get drunk. Every single solitary person that has smoked pot did it to get stoned. I know that because, unlike liars on this board, I admit I used to smoke it.

Another fact is that it is a gateway drug. Once a person becomes a user rather than an occasional smoker, the odds of his or her advancing to stronger drugs becomes greater because like most drugs the more you use the more it takes for you to get high.

I have heard from teenagers that tell me the "weed of today" is some very strong stuff...one or two hits and you can hardly walk. That is just what we need to legalize...more emergecy room visits by people with no insurance.

RobJohnson
07-25-2011, 02:23 AM
great point. Drugs are illegal and she's still dead. So I guess it's safe to assume that keeping them illegal doesn't prevent anything.

But many others were able to get help, quit, and save their lives & families.

I'm pretty sure Amy's medical bills were paid...who will be picking up the tab for drug users that have no insurance that have to go to rehab? Let me give you a hint: The taxpayers.

lacarnut
07-25-2011, 02:26 AM
BTW- - - it was neither heroin or anything illegal that dealt the final blow to Amy Winehouse. It was alcohol; vodka, to be specific. (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2018385/Amy-Winehouse-drank-death-day-telling-mum-I-love-you.html)

So, there's that to chew on.

~QC

You need to learn how to read. The police think, think, think, it was booze. The facts are as the article states, that it has yet to be determined how she died. One of those thingies like an autopsy will determine that.

So, there's that to chew on.

lacarnut
07-25-2011, 02:30 AM
I'm not psychotic.

That leaves deluded. :)

RobJohnson
07-25-2011, 02:31 AM
http://www.voteindustrialhemp.com/
http://www.hempusa.org/hmps/articles/hemp-uses.html
http://www.hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/ncnu02/v5-284.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemp


http://www.informationdistillery.com/hemp.htm

I could go on (http://www.google.com/#hl=en&cp=12&gs_id=1a&xhr=t&q=Uses+for+hemp&qe=VXNlcyBmb3IgaGVt&qesig=nFc6SgnTKItCINL-Ow4Pmw&pkc=AFgZ2tmD9EET5q_otHO1-nx_QQf5V4swRl7TkBJD7f8wkxt0qtVN92o1B-_X92PgZUJVFhBgd3JqD6r2P5JvwJ3JAXnVeetMyg&pf=p&sclient=psy&safe=off&source=hp&pbx=1&oq=Uses+for+hem&aq=0&aqi=g5&aql=&gs_sm=&gs_upl=&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=7acb2c039c8d8b9a&biw=1680&bih=921)

Pot as a recreational drug and Hemp used in manufacturing are two different things.

I used to live in an area known for all the wild hemp, as it was commercially grown during WW II for rope to be used on ships. Then the area made the cover of High Times magazine many years later as the "Hemp capitol of the US"...it kept the State Police very busy... It was simply "ditch weed" with very low THC, drug dealers would drive many miles to harvest it, haul it back home and mix it with other weed to make more profit.

RobJohnson
07-25-2011, 02:46 AM
BTW- - - it was neither heroin or anything illegal that dealt the final blow to Amy Winehouse. It was alcohol; vodka, to be specific. (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2018385/Amy-Winehouse-drank-death-day-telling-mum-I-love-you.html)

So, there's that to chew on.

~QC

Now there is more info out there...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2018126/Amy-Winehouse-bought-ecstasy-cocaine-ketamine-tragic-death.html

txradioguy
07-25-2011, 02:50 AM
That's a good point.

We already deal with second and third hand smoke.

What about second and third hand THC?

What about the increased rates of lung cancer because when you roll your own there are no filters.

CueSi
07-25-2011, 02:54 AM
You need to learn how to read.The police think, think, think, it was booze. The facts are as the article states, that it has yet to be determined how she died. One of those thingies like an autopsy will determine that.

So, there's that to chew on.

There's no evidence at this point that it was anything else but vodka. Right now, the cause is alcohol till it's said different. It's entirely possible it's something else, but since everyone is so concentrated on the danger of illegal substances, a little blinder pulling was in order.But if you want to keep them on, so be it.

http://wwwdelivery.superstock.com/WI/223/1828/PreviewComp/SuperStock_1828R-3398.jpg


~QC

lacarnut
07-25-2011, 02:58 AM
Now there is more info out there...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2018126/Amy-Winehouse-bought-ecstasy-cocaine-ketamine-tragic-death.html

Kinda blows the alcohol theory to shit.

RobJohnson
07-25-2011, 02:59 AM
What about the increased rates of lung cancer because when you roll your own there are no filters.

True.

That will be great for health insurance rates.

RobJohnson
07-25-2011, 03:03 AM
There's no evidence at this point that it was anything else but vodka. Right now, the cause is alcohol till it's said different. It's entirely possible it's something else, but since everyone is so concentrated on the danger of illegal substances, a little blinder pulling was in order.But if you want to keep them on, so be it.

http://wwwdelivery.superstock.com/WI/223/1828/PreviewComp/SuperStock_1828R-3398.jpg


~QC

I clicked on the link you provided, and it led me to a link from the same source today.

It's sad no matter what she died from. Her family & friends could use our prayers.

lacarnut
07-25-2011, 03:06 AM
There's no evidence at this point that it was anything else but vodka. Right now, the cause is alcohol till it's said different. It's entirely possible it's something else, but since everyone is so concentrated on the danger of illegal substances, a little blinder pulling was in order.But if you want to keep them on, so be it.


~QC

You are the one that needs blinders being that you jumped the gun on the cause of death. There is eyewitness evidence that she purchased several types of drugs the night of her death. You need to read the article that Rob Johnson posted (# 115) then you would not be talking out of your ass.

Wei Wu Wei
07-25-2011, 03:35 AM
What about the increased rates of lung cancer because when you roll your own there are no filters.

Marijuana doesn't have to be smoked. Most medicinal marijuana clinics provide alternative means of consumption, which are far safer.

RobJohnson
07-25-2011, 03:48 AM
Marijuana doesn't have to be smoked. Most medicinal marijuana clinics provide alternative means of consumption, which are far safer.

Or you can avoid breaking federal law by using this:


Medical marijuana already exists. It's called Marinol.

http://www.justice.gov/dea/ongoing/marinol.html

Of course, it can't be used in bongs & comes in pill form. It's not very popular. Imagine that.

fettpett
07-25-2011, 09:00 AM
Or you can avoid breaking federal law by using this:



http://www.justice.gov/dea/ongoing/marinol.html

Of course, it can't be used in bongs & comes in pill form. It's not very popular. Imagine that.

it's not very popular because it acts very differently from natural THC. I've had friends who have used it and their reactions are much different than when they smoke pot.

The thing is that there is NO way for hemp to be even used as research material in the United States because it's a Class 1 narcotic which is fucking insane. Heroin, cocaine, LSD, and some other hard drugs don't even have that classification. That classification completely prevents any kind of medical research with hemp. The ONLY place that has sanctioned medical research on hemp is Israel, which is where Marinol was developed.

CueSi
07-25-2011, 11:15 AM
Now there is more info out there...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2018126/Amy-Winehouse-bought-ecstasy-cocaine-ketamine-tragic-death.html

We wouldn't belive an anonymous source in the White House, but we're believing it here. Ok. ;)

~QC

CueSi
07-25-2011, 11:23 AM
You are the one that needs blinders being that you jumped the gun on the cause of death. There is eyewitness evidence that she purchased several types of drugs the night of her death. You need to read the article that Rob Johnson posted (# 115) then you would not be talking out of your ass.

From an anonymous source...are you beliving it because it conforms to your impressions, or is this just a f*ck the police kind of day?
My point is, if we're going to be talking harm, let's put all drugs on the table, let's review them all.

~QC

Rebel Yell
07-25-2011, 11:32 AM
Drug addiction should be a medical problem

That's where you lost me. Nobody "catches" a crack problem. IT IS NOT A FUCKING DISEASE. It is a choice.

fettpett
07-25-2011, 01:23 PM
That's where you lost me. Nobody "catches" a crack problem. IT IS NOT A FUCKING DISEASE. It is a choice.

no, and I agree with you.

Addiction of any kind is an issue though.

jnkbortka
07-25-2011, 03:10 PM
That's where you lost me. Nobody "catches" a crack problem. IT IS NOT A FUCKING DISEASE. It is a choice.

addiction is a neurological problem, which is why it should be considered a medical problem

Zathras
07-25-2011, 03:12 PM
addiction is a neurological problem, which is why it should be considered a medical problem

Which should not be paid for by the tax payers.

jnkbortka
07-25-2011, 03:17 PM
Which should not be paid for by the tax payers.

the war on drugs is also very costly

Zathras
07-25-2011, 03:23 PM
the war on drugs is also very costly

You know how you solve the war on drugs? You deal drugs? Execution with no chance for appeal within 30 days of conviction. You get caught running drugs? No quarter given, shot dead on the border. If you're caught running drugs on the water, sink the boat doing it and machine gun their crews. If you're running drugs via aircraft? AIM-9 Sidewinder up the ass.

fettpett
07-25-2011, 03:26 PM
Which should not be paid for by the tax payers.

I agree, but taxpayers shouldn't pay for either though

jnkbortka
07-25-2011, 03:27 PM
You know how you solve the war on drugs? You deal drugs? Execution with no chance for appeal within 30 days of conviction. You get caught running drugs? No quarter given, shot dead on the border.

the death penalty hasn't worked as a deterrent for murder, why would it for drugs?

Zathras
07-25-2011, 03:31 PM
the death penalty hasn't worked as a deterrent for murder, why would it for drugs?

That's because it takes so damned long to execute people in this country you moron. If there was immediate, fatal punishment for drug dealing you'd see drug use drop by a large amount.

fettpett
07-25-2011, 03:39 PM
That's because it takes so damned long to execute people in this country you moron. If there was immediate, fatal punishment for drug dealing you'd see drug use drop by a large amount.

it would still happen, having a much more pro-gun attitude through out the Country and media would go further than quick executions. Look at Swtizerland

Rebel Yell
07-25-2011, 03:48 PM
addiction is a neurological problem, which is why it should be considered a medical problem

If I take an ax and cut my fucking arm off, is my stump diseased, or was it a bad choice from me?

Zathras
07-25-2011, 03:58 PM
it would still happen, having a much more pro-gun attitude through out the Country and media would go further than quick executions. Look at Swtizerland

Agreed. That's why I would include it along with the other methods I propose.

lacarnut
07-25-2011, 04:35 PM
From an anonymous source...are you beliving it because it conforms to your impressions, or is this just a f*ck the police kind of day?
My point is, if we're going to be talking harm, let's put all drugs on the table, let's review them all.

~QC

The autopsy report released today by some rag in the UK stated the cause was inconclusive. That is hard to believe. However, instead of waiting for the autopsy, you are the one that jumped on the f.....g band wagon that it was vodka rather than drugs. Capiche.

I don't really give a shit how she died. She was alcoholic and a druggie. Trying to convice someone otherwise is really retarded.

jnkbortka
07-25-2011, 04:36 PM
If I take an ax and cut my fucking arm off, is my stump diseased, or was it a bad choice from me?

lol neither it's a one way ticket to a mental hospital :rolleyes:

jnkbortka
07-25-2011, 04:38 PM
That's because it takes so damned long to execute people in this country you moron. If there was immediate, fatal punishment for drug dealing you'd see drug use drop by a large amount.

taking a life for anything but taking another life is not ethical, and with the current system, plenty of people have been wrongfully executed.

JB
07-25-2011, 04:41 PM
You know how you solve the war on drugs? You deal drugs? Execution with no chance for appeal within 30 days of conviction. You get caught running drugs? No quarter given, shot dead on the border. If you're caught running drugs on the water, sink the boat doing it and machine gun their crews. If you're running drugs via aircraft? AIM-9 Sidewinder up the ass.We'll have to whack some CIA folk then.

Them guys love dealing the dope.

Rebel Yell
07-25-2011, 04:46 PM
taking a life for anything but taking another life is not ethical, and with the current system, plenty of people have been wrongfully executed.

I bet even more guilty ones have walked.

Wei Wu Wei
07-25-2011, 04:49 PM
That's because it takes so damned long to execute people in this country you moron. If there was immediate, fatal punishment for drug dealing you'd see drug use drop by a large amount.

You're being an idiot. Executing people without trial is 100% against what America is about, but you're willing to destroy every good value this country has stood for, just in order to prevent some shaggy haired college kid from eating a pot brownie while he watches comedy central?

Yes you sound like a big tough on crime manly man, we get it. Let's be a little bit more realistic though.

Even your speedy 2 week execution plan is insane. You know how long it takes for someone to be executed today? I'm gonna bet you believe it takes too damn long, well we STILL keep finding case after case of innocent people being executed because the system was too eager to kill them with little evidence. With DNA evidence, we now know there have been several cases of innocent people being MURDERED by the state, just because people like you want revenge.

and you want people with drug crimes to be executed immediately? come on, that's just insane.

Where's the limit? Do you want some college kid selling a few little bags of weed to his friends getting killed a month after being arrested?

This is what I'm talking about with the cure being worse than the disease. I agree that drugs are a problem, some of them far worse problems than others, but when you take this ridiculous hardline approach you end up creating a monster that is far worse than the drug could ever be.

Wei Wu Wei
07-25-2011, 04:59 PM
This will not solve the problem either. All it's going to do is make it worse:

The harsher the punishments are, the fewer people are willing to engage in the drug trade, BUT, there will ALWAYS be some people willing to participate because that means more money.

If the drug laws are harsher and harsher, the price of the drugs goes up to match the risk as well as extra precautions. Higher prices means more profit. If we are looking at extreme punishments, you might stop some people from selling weed, like you might stop the 20 year old college dropout from selling weed or you might stop the 65 year old hippie throwback down the street from selling weed, but all that does is strangle the market.

Demand will be the same, as there is always high demand for drugs, but because there are less people supplying it, the people who ARE willing to take the risk will get HUGE returns for their risk.

So what type of people are not afraid to engage in very risky, extremely profitable, illegal business that might result in a lifetime in prison or worse? We're talking hardened gangsters. Mafia types, large dangerous organized criminals.

These are people who aren't afraid to murder people, and are already at risk of going to prison. These people are willing to take those risks because they see the money involved. If you crack down harder on drugs with these types of reactionary laws, you only give them a bigger share of the market, and increase their profits.

The end result is that the marijuana market becomes more dangerous, more expensive, more brutal, and run by even worse types of violent criminals.

on the other side you'll have a bunch of 20-something year old burnouts that you can execute if that makes you feel any better

jnkbortka
07-25-2011, 05:14 PM
I bet even more guilty ones have walked.

---


better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer

Molon Labe
07-25-2011, 05:51 PM
Wrong.

Detox / withdrawal from many drugs can kill.

Example or STFU.

The only medical emergency from detoxification is alcohol...period.

you get really sick and feel like you are going to die on heroin, cocaine..etc. but your not going to.

Alcohol is the only illegal drug that is a MEDICAL EMERGENCY.
DTS are serious stuff in the medical field.

You don't know what the hell your talking about as usual...but why should I be surprised.

Hawkgirl
07-25-2011, 06:21 PM
Those in favor of legalization are making simplistic and short sighted statements. Legalization may lessen the violence surrounding drug dealing, but the real problem is violence resulting from drug use. You see enough violence and bar fights from drunks, now add drugs to the mix. Any substance (even legal) should be taken under the supervision of a physician. The government should not be in the business of Drug Dealing.

Hawkgirl
07-25-2011, 06:27 PM
LMAO. Are you kidding me?

The war on drugs is a one trillion dollar colossal failure.

Here's what you do: take the $200 billion or so that gets spent on weed enforcement, legalize weed, hire a couple more guys at the ATF, rename it the WATF, give them $2 billion or so and then refund the excess $198 billion to the taxpayers.

Maybe it's time you took a shower and stood up straight.




Any tax revenue collected resulting from legalization would be minimal compared to the social & monetary cost of addiction.

Hawkgirl
07-25-2011, 06:33 PM
Not really, its just saying that the government has no say in what you put in your own body. How do you think we can stop more gang violence? Drug legalization would keep less people in jail, thus saving money and reducing violence from trafficking and people being ripped off. I don't know why it's so hard for you to get this. The war on drugs is just modern prohibition


You think getting people drunk and high means keeping less people in jail?? We will also be paying for the marijuana users increased health problems, reduced productivity, injuries from auto accidents, and crime...and if you want us to treat it as a medical problem, then imagine the cost of sending them to treatment centers that are already over-burdened.

JB
07-25-2011, 06:37 PM
Any tax revenue collected resulting from legalization would be minimal compared to the social & monetary cost of addiction.Using that argument you'd also have to be in favor of outlawing booze. Talk about detrimental to society. That shit's toxic.

FeebMaster
07-25-2011, 06:46 PM
Using that argument you'd also have to be in favor of outlawing booze. Talk about detrimental to society. That shit's toxic.


Don't encourage them.

fettpett
07-25-2011, 06:51 PM
Those in favor of legalization are making simplistic and short sighted statements. Legalization may lessen the violence surrounding drug dealing, but the real problem is violence resulting from drug use. You see enough violence and bar fights from drunks, now add drugs to the mix. Any substance (even legal) should be taken under the supervision of a physician. The government should not be in the business of Drug Dealing.

Pot use has a very long history and very little of that has been violent, only the last 30ish years has there been a really violent history with drug dealers and gangs. Alcohol has a much MUCH worse history and has killed far more people than probably any other drug in history, and yet it is legal because it caused far more problems while illegal, which incidentally pot has too.

The Government is already in the business of drug dealing, Medicaid part B, FDA, ATF, CIA, etc, whether it's legal prescription drugs (which many are illegal to use or have without a prescription), or illegal drugs.


Any tax revenue collected resulting from legalization would be minimal compared to the social & monetary cost of addiction.

Pot does not have a phyiscal addictive quality to it. The ONLY addictive issue with pot is with the individual and those people will have addictions to other things. Cigarettes and Alcohol are both physically addictive and yet they are both legal.


You think getting people drunk and high means keeping less people in jail?? We will also be paying for the marijuana users increased health problems, reduced productivity, injuries from auto accidents, and crime...and if you want us to treat it as a medical problem, then imagine the cost of sending them to treatment centers that are already over-burdened.

Pot has far fewer health related issues than tobacco and alcohol. Many people are more productive on pot than without. all the other issues you mentioned are higher with alcohol than they are with pot. Alcohol is abused far more and far more often than pot.

Hawkgirl
07-25-2011, 07:32 PM
Pot does not have a phyiscal addictive quality to it.

While most pot users may not have a physical addiction to it, they do psychologically. Pot smoking does have psycholical effects like a slowed reaction time, paranoia, distorted sense of time, anxiety and depression. People smoke it cause it can give them a sence of euphoria or getting stoned. Add all of these factors to the effects of alcohol. How can this benefit society as a whole???

Rockntractor
07-25-2011, 07:36 PM
While most pot users may not have a physical addiction to it, they do psychologically. Pot smoking does have psycholical effects like a slowed reaction time, paranoia, distorted sense of time, anxiety and depression. People smoke it cause it can give them a sence of euphoria or getting stoned. Add all of these factors to the effects of alcohol. How can this benefit society as a whole???

When I quit smoking it 20 years ago Duncan Hines had to lay off two people on the soft and chewy chocolate chip cookie line, so it might be somewhat good for the economy.:confused:

Hawkgirl
07-25-2011, 07:42 PM
When I quit smoking it 20 years ago Duncan Hines had to lay off two people on the soft and chewy chocolate chip cookie line, so it might be somewhat good for the economy.:confused:

You may have quit smoking it, but I can still see the latent side effects of it.:cool:

Rockntractor
07-25-2011, 07:48 PM
You may have quit smoking it, but I can still see the latent side effects of it.:cool:

Got any cookies?:pig:

Molon Labe
07-25-2011, 08:01 PM
Those in favor of legalization are making simplistic and short sighted statements. Legalization may lessen the violence surrounding drug dealing, but the real problem is violence resulting from drug use. You see enough violence and bar fights from drunks, now add drugs to the mix. Any substance (even legal) should be taken under the supervision of a physician. The government should not be in the business of Drug Dealing.

Yeah...everybody knows how violent a pothead gets and how many 7-11's he holds up for snacks when he gets the munchies. :p

Go ahead and believe there is more violence from doing drugs than from the actual trade. I really would like to see a good scholarly study to back that up, but I'm going to figure that we won't be able to find one because it's just not so.

Oh.... and the government is already in the business of drug dealing. The government makes laws all the time that say which drugs you can and cannot use. You can read that book I posted that pretty well clears up any misconception about how deep in the drug trade some parts of the federal government are.

I agree with you that physicians should be the arbiters of which drugs to prescribe and the government should get out of the way

I've never done an illegal drug in my life, so this isn't about smoking pot for me....its about watching a war that's caused a whole lot more pain with so many deaths of both innocents and police officers over the last 30 years than any good it's done. There are still the same number of people addicted to drugs now as there were when Nixon started going after them. Some success...

Hawkgirl
07-25-2011, 08:17 PM
Yeah...everybody knows how violent a pothead gets and how many 7-11's he holds up for snacks when he gets the munchies. :p

Go ahead and believe there is more violence from doing drugs than from the actual trade. I really would like to see a good scholarly study to back that up, but I'm going to figure that we won't be able to find one because it's just not so.

Oh.... and the government is already in the business of drug dealing. The government makes laws all the time that say which drugs you can and cannot use. You can read that book I posted that pretty well clears up any misconception about how deep in the drug trade some parts of the federal government are.

I agree with you that physicians should be the arbiters of which drugs to prescribe and the government should get out of the way

I've never done an illegal drug in my life, so this isn't about smoking pot for me....its about watching a war that's caused a whole lot more pain with so many deaths of both innocents and police officers over the last 30 years than any good it's done. There are still the same number of people addicted to drugs now as there were when Nixon started going after them. Some success...


Title of the thread says "drugs"...I'm not limiting my comments to weed. Most of the big drug cartels are not dealing in marijuana only, they are dealing in cocaine, heroin and all the other illicit drugs. If we just decriminalize marijuana, then the drug killings will continue on. Or are you for legalization for ALL drugs, which is it??

jnkbortka
07-25-2011, 08:41 PM
Got any cookies?:pig:

somebody's got the munchies :D

jnkbortka
07-25-2011, 08:43 PM
Title of the thread says "drugs"...I'm not limiting my comments to weed. Most of the big drug cartels are not dealing in marijuana only, they are dealing in cocaine, heroin and all the other illicit drugs. If we just decriminalize marijuana, then the drug killings will continue on. Or are you for legalization for ALL drugs, which is it??

marijuana mainly, but other drugs too. but i would put a clause in that bill allowing employers to continue giving drug tests and firing people as usual for all but weed.

lacarnut
07-25-2011, 08:44 PM
Title of the thread says "drugs"...I'm not limiting my comments to weed. Most of the big drug cartels are not dealing in marijuana only, they are dealing in cocaine, heroin and all the other illicit drugs. If we just decriminalize marijuana, then the drug killings will continue on. Or are you for legalization for ALL drugs, which is it??

Don't confuse him with a question; his types are for queers marrying queers also.

jnkbortka
07-25-2011, 08:45 PM
Don't confuse him; his types are for queers marrying queers also.

i'm not

Rockntractor
07-25-2011, 08:46 PM
i'm not

He means Melon Lube.

Wei Wu Wei
07-25-2011, 09:44 PM
Those in favor of legalization are making simplistic and short sighted statements. Legalization may lessen the violence surrounding drug dealing, but the real problem is violence resulting from drug use. You see enough violence and bar fights from drunks, now add drugs to the mix. Any substance (even legal) should be taken under the supervision of a physician. The government should not be in the business of Drug Dealing.

Marijuana does not cause increases in aggression.

Wei Wu Wei
07-25-2011, 09:50 PM
Title of the thread says "drugs"...I'm not limiting my comments to weed. Most of the big drug cartels are not dealing in marijuana only, they are dealing in cocaine, heroin and all the other illicit drugs. If we just decriminalize marijuana, then the drug killings will continue on. Or are you for legalization for ALL drugs, which is it??

it is true that drug cartels usually deal in other drugs than just marijuana, but marijuana is by far the #1 cash crop, it is their big money-maker. Because the violence associated with black market drug cartels is fueled by money, taking marijuana out of their market will decrease the amount of violence (but you are right that it will not eliminate it).

Also, because so much marijuana money is going to drug cartels (it's several billion dollars a year), taking the market away from them by legalizing it means they will have several billion dollars less to buy weapons to kill police and civilians

No one is talking about eliminating all problems by legalizing marijuana, but it will reduce many problems and lessen the adverse side-effects caused by prohibition,.

Simply put, the side effects from legalizing the relatively benign drug Marijuana will be FAR less than the side effects of prohibiting it. This is in terms of money, lives, social problems, and crime. Not to mention the Big Government civil rights issues.

Rockntractor
07-25-2011, 10:00 PM
they will have several billion dollars less to buy weapons to kill police and civilians



The left and our president sends them all the weapons they need.

FeebMaster
07-25-2011, 10:06 PM
Don't confuse him with a question; his types are for queers marrying queers also.

Strictly speaking, "our types" are for getting the government out of the marriage business completely. A subtle distinction, usually lost on your average small government conservative.

For my part, I'll be happy to answer the question. Yes. I am perfectly comfortable with a person walking into the local pharmacy, or convenience store, and buying a kilo of heroin, or morphine, or amphetamines, or cocaine, or PCP, or marijuana, or Oxycontin sans acetaminophen. Or ordering it on the internet for convenient home delivery.

Hawkgirl
07-25-2011, 10:07 PM
it is true that drug cartels usually deal in other drugs than just marijuana, but marijuana is by far the #1 cash crop, it is their big money-maker..

I wouldn't be so sure about that. If you look at the CIA website, marijuana is the tip of the iceberg. There is a plethora of drugs out there, and money to be made. Marijuana is a tiny piece of the action. Legalizing stoners would not eliminate OR reduce the drug violence.

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2086.html

Hawkgirl
07-25-2011, 10:08 PM
Marijuana does not cause increases in aggression.

No, that's why we call stoners "burn outs" back in my day.

fettpett
07-26-2011, 08:03 AM
I wouldn't be so sure about that. If you look at the CIA website, marijuana is the tip of the iceberg. There is a plethora of drugs out there, and money to be made. Marijuana is a tiny piece of the action. Legalizing stoners would not eliminate OR reduce the drug violence.

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2086.html

http://www.cnbc.com/id/36179677/How_Big_Is_The_Marijuana_Market

the thing is, pot is far cheaper and easier to grow than 90% of other drugs out there, so it's easier to sell and sell much more than any other drug.

When California legalized medicinal pot, the blackmarket market practaclly dried up over night and they (drug dealers) lost around $2 BILLION in income. even the semi-legal form of pot in states like CA is having a adverse (to dealers) affect on the market.

Molon Labe
07-26-2011, 11:59 AM
Title of the thread says "drugs"...I'm not limiting my comments to weed. Most of the big drug cartels are not dealing in marijuana only, they are dealing in cocaine, heroin and all the other illicit drugs. If we just decriminalize marijuana, then the drug killings will continue on. Or are you for legalization for ALL drugs, which is it??

I'm perfectly comfortable with all legalization.



Strawman argument about me wanting to sell it to kids in 3.....2.......1......

Molon Labe
07-26-2011, 12:02 PM
Don't confuse him with a question; his types are for queers marrying queers also.


I am not perfectly comfortable with that. Show where I wish that were the case.

My belief is that the Government should be out of the marriage business. Let the church decide as they did for about 1900 years before this century.

CueSi
07-26-2011, 02:40 PM
The autopsy report released today by some rag in the UK stated the cause was inconclusive. That is hard to believe. However, instead of waiting for the autopsy, you are the one that jumped on the f.....g band wagon that it was vodka rather than drugs. Capiche.

I don't really give a shit how she died. She was alcoholic and a druggie. Trying to convice someone otherwise is really retarded.

And Rob jumped right on the opposite one, believing an anonymous source rather than the cops. . .everyone did a little bandwagon jumping. Just I jumped on the one you don't agree with. :D

~QC

Wei Wu Wei
07-26-2011, 03:26 PM
I wouldn't be so sure about that. If you look at the CIA website, marijuana is the tip of the iceberg. There is a plethora of drugs out there, and money to be made. Marijuana is a tiny piece of the action. Legalizing stoners would not eliminate OR reduce the drug violence.

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2086.html

Again, I never said Marijuana was the ONLY source of money for drug cartels, but it is a MAJOR one.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/nightline-investigation-finds-mexican-drug-cartels-expand-marijuana/story?id=13951860


"Marijuana is the No. 1 cash crop for the cartels in Mexico," said assistant special DEA agent Mel Rodriguez. "The moneys, the proceeds from the sale of the marijuana ultimately go to finance other illegal activities for the cartel, such as [the] purchase of weapons and additional resources."

"Additional resources" include funding armies of criminals who have fought the U.S. and Mexican governments.

Even the DEA admits that marijuana is the top money maker for these violent criminals.


According to Official estimates, Marijuana makes up 60% of drug cartel profits. 60%!!


I admit that legalizing marijuana would not kill the drug cartels or stop drug-related violence, but it would help.

These cartels deal with billions of dollars a year, which they use for weapons and training armies, who wouldn't want to cut up to 60% of that away from them?



Lots of people are going based on uneasy feelings, not based on facts, evidence, or reason.

fettpett
07-26-2011, 04:20 PM
Again, I never said Marijuana was the ONLY source of money for drug cartels, but it is a MAJOR one.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/nightline-investigation-finds-mexican-drug-cartels-expand-marijuana/story?id=13951860



Even the DEA admits that marijuana is the top money maker for these violent criminals.


According to Official estimates, Marijuana makes up 60% of drug cartel profits. 60%!!


I admit that legalizing marijuana would not kill the drug cartels or stop drug-related violence, but it would help.

These cartels deal with billions of dollars a year, which they use for weapons and training armies, who wouldn't want to cut up to 60% of that away from them?



Lots of people are going based on uneasy feelings, not based on facts, evidence, or reason.

QFT, we don't agree on much, but on this we do. Cut out the money and it's like cutting the legs and arms off a giant.

Wei Wu Wei
07-26-2011, 04:28 PM
I think this is a rather conservative opinion that I agree with. IT's about smaller government, personal liberty, fiscal common sense, less government spending, all of that.

The only people who disagree are fake conservatives who want to be morality police and enforce good and bad behavior with draconian punishments that don't work, just because it makes them feel good.

lacarnut
07-26-2011, 05:09 PM
Lots of people are going based on uneasy feelings, not based on facts, evidence, or reason.

You have no facts to back up your statement that legalization would decrease the violence and killing or slow down the Cartels. That is your opinion.

Here are a few facts for you where legalization has been tried. The red light district in the Netherlands have decided they do not like the crime and disease that has increased. So, they have reduced the number of pot/ prostitution shops in half. Also, Americans are not welcomed in that area. Since you seem to be an expert on pot maybe you can give us (not opinion) why this is so.

If you could wave a magic wand under these two outcomes, Eradication marijuana or legalization it.....which one would you choose.

Hawkgirl
07-26-2011, 05:32 PM
I'm perfectly comfortable with all legalization.



Strawman argument about me wanting to sell it to kids in 3.....2.......1......

No, of course not...Everyone knows that drug dealers are going to stop selling to kids if we were to legalize drugs for adults.:rolleyes:
Most people who try pot for the first time ARE teens or even younger adolescents.

Hawkgirl
07-26-2011, 05:36 PM
Again, I never said Marijuana was the ONLY source of money for drug cartels, but it is a MAJOR one.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/nightline-investigation-finds-mexican-drug-cartels-expand-marijuana/story?id=13951860



Even the DEA admits that marijuana is the top money maker for these violent criminals.


According to Official estimates, Marijuana makes up 60% of drug cartel profits. 60%!!


I admit that legalizing marijuana would not kill the drug cartels or stop drug-related violence, but it would help.

These cartels deal with billions of dollars a year, which they use for weapons and training armies, who wouldn't want to cut up to 60% of that away from them?



Lots of people are going based on uneasy feelings, not based on facts, evidence, or reason.

The link you supplied said marijuana was the bigger export from Mexico. I'd say Cocaine is the biggest from Columbia...which uses the Mexico border and Haiti via Miami to get it here.
What concerns me even more though is the illegal sale of oxycodone..which is killing so many people...they are making it everywhere now..including central america, south america, europe..etc

Hawkgirl
07-26-2011, 05:49 PM
I think this is a rather conservative opinion that I agree with. IT's about smaller government, personal liberty, fiscal common sense, less government spending, all of that.

.

Yes, it makes fiscal common sense to get more americans in rehab centers, more unemployement benefits to the addicted who get fired from their jobs for lack of productiviy, or maybe killing patients, more security to schools to keep the drug dealers at bay, lack of new ideas since cocktail lunches will now include white lines...more business will go overseas since they'd rather hire drug free employees...and the list goes on and on...

lacarnut
07-26-2011, 05:59 PM
Yes, it makes fiscal common sense to get more Americans in rehab centers, more unemployment benefits to the addicted who get fired from their jobs for lack of productivity, or maybe killing patients, more security to schools to keep the drug dealers at bay, lack of new ideas since cocktail lunches will now include white lines...more business will go overseas since they'd rather hire drug free employees...and the list goes on and on...

But, but, but, but, those that want to legalize pot/drugs are only concerned about their rights and don't give a shit about the consequences that you described above. Or, do you think that they could be hypocritical users. Naw, that would never happen.

Molon Labe
07-26-2011, 06:11 PM
I think this is a rather conservative opinion that I agree with. IT's about smaller government, personal liberty, fiscal common sense, less government spending, all of that.

The only people who disagree are fake conservatives who want to be morality police and enforce good and bad behavior with draconian punishments that don't work, just because it makes them feel good.

smaller government is in complete opposition to socialism.

I don't believe it is "fake" conservatives to want to be morality police. What I think it is are usually good people who have inconsistant beliefs about what real freedom from government means.

fettpett
07-26-2011, 06:16 PM
smaller government is in complete opposition to socialism.

I don't believe it is "fake" conservatives to want to be morality police. What I think it is are usually good people who have inconsistant beliefs about what real freedom from government means.

yep, and those of that support legalizing some drugs, mostly pot, are called hypocrites but they can't see it in themselves when it comes to that and other "moral" issues. Let the government tax goods and services for what is needed national defense and other Constitutionally mandated responsibilities , but stay the hell out of my house.

lacarnut
07-26-2011, 06:30 PM
yep, and those of that support legalizing some drugs, mostly pot, are called hypocrites but they can't see it in themselves when it comes to that and other "moral" issues. Let the government tax goods and services for what is needed national defense and other Constitutionally mandated responsibilities , but stay the hell out of my house.

If you or any of your cohorts here can afford pot, you'll certainly can afford to make a donation to CU. :p

fettpett
07-26-2011, 07:23 PM
If you or any of your cohorts here can afford pot, you'll certainly can afford to make a donation to CU. :p

dude, first of all I never said I bought it, second I have more important things right now to deal with, and Third http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/showpost.php?p=427558&postcount=164

jnkbortka
07-26-2011, 07:27 PM
Yes, it makes fiscal common sense to get more americans in rehab centers

instead of jails, which will just teach people better ways to get drugs and hide them


more unemployment benefits to the addicted who get fired from their jobs for lack of productivity

you make a good point here, but this happens anyway.


or maybe killing patients

a possibility, but people kill themselves with drugs already, and the cost in lives would be much less because there would no longer be border drug wars


more security to schools to keep the drug dealers at bay

where'd this come from? the fact of drugs being legal doesnt mean any unknown people would be able to go into the schools and sell drugs


lack of new ideas since cocktail lunches will now include white lines

bullshit... just because drugs are legal doesnt mean everyone will go out and use them.


...more business will go overseas since they'd rather hire drug free employees

i've said it before, allow companies to continue their drug testing

FeebMaster
07-26-2011, 07:33 PM
Yes, it makes fiscal common sense to get more americans in rehab centers, more unemployement benefits to the addicted who get fired from their jobs for lack of productiviy, or maybe killing patients, more security to schools to keep the drug dealers at bay, lack of new ideas since cocktail lunches will now include white lines...more business will go overseas since they'd rather hire drug free employees...and the list goes on and on...


You're right. It's much cheaper to imprison them on the government's dime while all of those things you like to cry about happen anyway.


But more importantly, Florida offers unemployment benefits to people who have been fired? Damn. I should really move.

lacarnut
07-26-2011, 07:35 PM
dude, first of all I never said I bought it, second I have more important things right now to deal with, and Third http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/showpost.php?p=427558&postcount=164

Dude/dudette/dudeit, first of all learn how to read. I used the word IF. Second, do you smoke other people's shit? Third, I guess you do not feel like a cheapskate.

fettpett
07-26-2011, 07:44 PM
Dude/dudette/dudeit, first of all learn how to read. I used the word IF. Second, do you smoke other people's shit? Third, I guess you do not feel like a cheapskate.

Well if you can't remember that I am a guy, guess that's your problem. The old timers must be starting to set in

lacarnut
07-26-2011, 07:52 PM
Well if you can't remember that I am a guy, guess that's your problem. The old timers must be starting to set in

I was just joshing you but I see you dodged my post.

Hawkgirl
07-26-2011, 07:57 PM
You're right. It's much cheaper to imprison them on the government's dime while all of those things you like to cry about happen anyway.


.

I'm not crying about it. Street drugs will never become legal in this country..at least not during my lifetime. (Except for the burnouts using pot for "medicinal" purposes":rolleyes:)

RobJohnson
07-27-2011, 12:48 AM
it's not very popular because it acts very differently from natural THC. I've had friends who have used it and their reactions are much different than when they smoke pot.

The thing is that there is NO way for hemp to be even used as research material in the United States because it's a Class 1 narcotic which is fucking insane. Heroin, cocaine, LSD, and some other hard drugs don't even have that classification. That classification completely prevents any kind of medical research with hemp. The ONLY place that has sanctioned medical research on hemp is Israel, which is where Marinol was developed.


Sorry, but you are wrong:


Schedule I drugs with a high abuse risk. These drugs have NO safe, accepted medical use in the United States. Some examples are heroin, marijuana, LSD, PCP, and crack cocaine.

http://www.tsbp.state.tx.us/consumer/broch2.htm

RobJohnson
07-27-2011, 12:54 AM
You think getting people drunk and high means keeping less people in jail?? We will also be paying for the marijuana users increased health problems, reduced productivity, injuries from auto accidents, and crime...and if you want us to treat it as a medical problem, then imagine the cost of sending them to treatment centers that are already over-burdened.

I agree.

fettpett
07-27-2011, 10:32 AM
Sorry, but you are wrong:



http://www.tsbp.state.tx.us/consumer/broch2.htm

ok, so i was, but that still doesn't mean that Pot should be classified as such, particularly since there is evidence quite the opposite.

Molon Labe
07-27-2011, 10:50 AM
I'm not crying about it. Street drugs will never become legal in this country..at least not during my lifetime. (Except for the burnouts using pot for "medicinal" purposes":rolleyes:)

lol. My 85 year old aunt uses pot for medicinal purposes...she is not a "burnout".

Wei Wu Wei
07-27-2011, 02:20 PM
Sorry, but you are wrong:



http://www.tsbp.state.tx.us/consumer/broch2.htm

schedule II drugs include amphetamines, cocaine, and prescription painkillers

you must out of your mind if you think marijuana is worse than those, either that, or your paycheck probably comes from that classification

Zafod
07-27-2011, 02:46 PM
I find it funny that a whole lot of the make pot legal crowd also wants to make tabaco illegal....

Zafod
07-27-2011, 02:52 PM
lets be like portugal and finish pulling the toilet flush handle......

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_policy_of_Portugal

txradioguy
07-27-2011, 04:21 PM
I find it funny that a whole lot of the make pot legal crowd also wants to make tabaco illegal....

Exactly...

FeebMaster
07-27-2011, 04:56 PM
I find it funny that a whole lot of the make pot legal crowd also wants to make tabaco illegal....

Exactly...

Who here has suggested that?

Every crowd has its halfwits. Lots of pro-gun people run around screeching about "Shall Not Be Infringed" and are perfectly happy requiring permits to carry handguns or licenses to sell them.

CaughtintheMiddle1990
07-27-2011, 05:22 PM
I can see both sides' points for legalizing drugs or keeping them prohibited. The problem isn't really whether drugs are illegal or not, but ultimately the problem our society faces due to drug addiction and overdose is the financial and social burden the care and tolerance of and for drug addicts creates. I don't know whether Weed should be legalized or not. I'm not a fan of drugs personally.

I just got out of the Hospital getting my appendix cut out of me and they briefly had me on Morphine and other drugs for pain and anesthesia, and when I came out of the anesthesia I didn't feel like "myself"--I knew everything (who I was, where I was, why I was there, etc) but I felt uninhibited, like my higher functions were lacking etc--And I hated that feeling. I don't understand why people would voluntarily surrender command of their cognitive functions to a drug, or to alcohol. But that's getting off point.

There are many objectively sound arguments both for and against legalizing some drugs, and objectively I can see both sides of that issue and so sadly have little else to say. I will say that subjectively--my own personal opinion--is that drugs should remain illegal. I look down upon recreational drug use and especially upon drug addicts, but objectively can understand why some become drug addicts. I try to separate the objective from the subjective; what I feel from what I know.

I will say however that one taboo I think should be legalized--both objectively and subjectively speaking--is Prostitution. That's a trade that breaks my heart personally.

jnkbortka
07-27-2011, 06:59 PM
Who here has suggested that?

Hmmmm, let's see...

NOBODY!

Zafod
07-27-2011, 07:21 PM
oh wait thats right, they dont want to make tobaco illegal.....just tax the shit out of it and make it illegal to smoke it ANYWHERE!!!!!

fettpett
07-27-2011, 07:21 PM
I find it funny that a whole lot of the make pot legal crowd also wants to make tabaco illegal....

actually it would cause practically the same problems as Prohibition of alcohol in the 20's did and pot (and other drugs, but pots the biggest issue) prohibition does today

jnkbortka
07-27-2011, 07:31 PM
oh wait thats right, they dont want to make tobaco illegal.....just tax the shit out of it and make it illegal to smoke it ANYWHERE!!!!!

none of the people here want to do that. learn the difference between liberal and libertarian.

Molon Labe
07-27-2011, 08:39 PM
Who here has suggested that?

Every crowd has its halfwits. Lots of pro-gun people run around screeching about "Shall Not Be Infringed" and are perfectly happy requiring permits to carry handguns or licenses to sell them.

Yep....the NRA for example. And they're considered Pro 2nd Amendment. :rolleyes:

RobJohnson
07-29-2011, 03:04 AM
schedule II drugs include amphetamines, cocaine, and prescription painkillers

you must out of your mind if you think marijuana is worse than those, either that, or your paycheck probably comes from that classification

C II drugs are used under the supervision of a medical professional. Cocaine is simply in that class as it used to be used as a anesthetic for eye and nasal surgery. It's also available in a 4% solution for injection. It's very rare to be used today, but the need for it does exist in some medical circumstances.

If you ever go to medical school, you might understand some of this. :D

fettpett
07-29-2011, 10:36 AM
C II drugs are used under the supervision of a medical professional. Cocaine is simply in that class as it used to be used as a anesthetic for eye and nasal surgery. It's also available in a 4% solution for injection. It's very rare to be used today, but the need for it does exist in some medical circumstances.

If you ever go to medical school, you might understand some of this. :D

explain why hemp, has been classified as Class 1 when there are clearly medical benefits from it, other that the BS political and racial reasons started by Harry Anslinger

Wei Wu Wei
07-29-2011, 05:34 PM
oh wait thats right, they dont want to make tobaco illegal.....just tax the shit out of it and make it illegal to smoke it ANYWHERE!!!!!

Personally, I think businesses should be allowed to decide whether or not they allow smoking in their establishments.

Molon Labe
07-29-2011, 06:35 PM
Personally, I think businesses should be allowed to decide whether or not they allow smoking in their establishments.

Wow...You haven't been smoking anything yourself have you...cause that's a very "free market" principle. ;)

RobJohnson
07-30-2011, 09:34 PM
explain why hemp, has been classified as Class 1 when there are clearly medical benefits from it, other that the BS political and racial reasons started by Harry Anslinger


The term "marijuana" commonly refers to the flowering tops and leaves of the hemp plant. That is the part of the plant that gets you high. It's been on the Schedule I list for many years, way before any scientific health studies which still do not sell me on the fact that the drug can be good for you.

jnkbortka
07-30-2011, 09:47 PM
The term "marijuana" commonly refers to the flowering tops and leaves of the hemp plant. That is the part of the plant that gets you high. It's been on the Schedule I list for many years, way before any scientific health studies which still do not sell me on the fact that the drug can be good for you.

but there's nothing that proves it's worse than alcohol or tobacco

RobJohnson
07-30-2011, 09:50 PM
but there's nothing that proves it's worse than alcohol or tobacco

Just because something is legal does not mean it's right!

Both tobacco and alcohol have use limts. (Smoking in public, public intoxication, etc)

lacarnut
07-30-2011, 10:07 PM
Just because something is legal does not mean it's right!

Both tobacco and alcohol have use limts. (Smoking in public, public intoxication, etc)

Dope is for dopes.

jnkbortka
07-30-2011, 10:47 PM
Dope is for dopes.

but is it not our constitutional right to be stupid?

AmPat
07-30-2011, 10:56 PM
but is it not our constitutional right to be stupid?

There is the problem. I want you to go out and feel free to sniff all the nose candy your nostrils can handle. Smoke all the noxious poison your lungs can contain. I want you to shove the biggest needle your veins can stand.

Just don't make your habit MY PROBLEM!
Drugs lead to crime. Please don't be stupid and attempt to quibble that fact away.
Drug use also leads to expensive medical problems at taxpayer expense.
If you can contain or fix those two realities, I'm on your side. Until then, I want drugs controlled.

fettpett
07-30-2011, 11:50 PM
The term "marijuana" commonly refers to the flowering tops and leaves of the hemp plant. That is the part of the plant that gets you high. It's been on the Schedule I list for many years, way before any scientific health studies which still do not sell me on the fact that the drug can be good for you.

bullshit, marijuana was derived from the Mexican word for cannabis, the lead up and during the hearing for the 1937 Marihuana tax act, there was such an propaganda campaign against "Marihuana" lead by Anslinger, and Randolph Hearst that people thought it was the next opium den type thing. The AMA didn't know "marihuana" was Cannabis until literally the days before the hearing in the Senate that marihuana was cannabis and Opposed the bill, flat out.

The American Medical Association (AMA) opposed the act because the tax was imposed on physicians prescribing cannabis, retail pharmacists selling cannabis, and medical cannabis cultivation/manufacturing; instead of enacting the marijuana Tax Act, the AMA proposed cannabis be added to the Harrison Narcotics Tax Act.[13] The bill was passed over the last-minute objections of the American Medical Association. Dr. William Woodward, legislative counsel for the A.M.A. objected to the bill on the grounds that the bill had been prepared in secret without giving proper time to prepare their opposition to the bill.[14] He doubted their claims about marijuana addiction, violence, and overdosage; he further asserted that because the word Marijuana was largely unknown at the time, the medical profession did not realize they were losing cannabis. "Marijuana is not the correct term... Yet the burden of this bill is placed heavily on the doctors and pharmacists of this country." [14] from Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1937_Marihuana_Tax_Act)and the Senate hearing

Wei Wu Wei
07-30-2011, 11:52 PM
There is the problem. I want you to go out and feel free to sniff all the nose candy your nostrils can handle. Smoke all the noxious poison your lungs can contain. I want you to shove the biggest needle your veins can stand.

Just don't make your habit MY PROBLEM!
Drugs lead to crime. Please don't be stupid and attempt to quibble that fact away.
Drug use also leads to expensive medical problems at taxpayer expense.
If you can contain or fix those two realities, I'm on your side. Until then, I want drugs controlled.

So don't be inconsistent. Alcohol use causes more crime than all other drugs combined. Alcohol makes people more aggressive, impairs judgement (for practically everyone), and always causes impaired motor functions. Law enforcement professionals understand how much alcohol use contributes to crime, especially violent crime. Do you want alcohol to be illegal?

Also, alcohol causes more physical damage than almost every other drug as well. Alcohol use damages most major organs and can cause organ failure and death. Long term alcohol use almost always results in poorer health. The same applies with cigarettes.

All of your arguments apply ten fold to alcohol and cigarettes, so do you believe they should be illegal?

Think about all of the crimes that alcohol causes people to do, or makes them considerably more likely to commit. Now, what sort of crimes do marijuana cause people to engage in? Eating too many quesadillas? that's not a crime. Laughing too loudly in a bad movie? Annoying, but not a crime. Let's be real about this. Marijuana can often times make people do stupid things, but it does not make people more aggressive or violent like alcohol does.

Rockntractor
07-31-2011, 12:00 AM
So don't be inconsistent. Alcohol use causes more crime than all other drugs combined. Alcohol makes people more aggressive, impairs judgement (for practically everyone), and always causes impaired motor functions. Law enforcement professionals understand how much alcohol use contributes to crime, especially violent crime. Do you want alcohol to be illegal?

Also, alcohol causes more physical damage than almost every other drug as well. Alcohol use damages most major organs and can cause organ failure and death. Long term alcohol use almost always results in poorer health. The same applies with cigarettes.

All of your arguments apply ten fold to alcohol and cigarettes, so do you believe they should be illegal?

Think about all of the crimes that alcohol causes people to do, or makes them considerably more likely to commit. Now, what sort of crimes do marijuana cause people to engage in? Eating too many quesadillas? that's not a crime. Laughing too loudly in a bad movie? Annoying, but not a crime. Let's be real about this. Marijuana can often times make people do stupid things, but it does not make people more aggressive or violent like alcohol does.

What kind did you drink tonight.

Wei Wu Wei
07-31-2011, 12:06 AM
A little bit of Sangria.

I'm not sitting here saying it should be illegal though.

I use some legal drugs sometimes, (alcohol, an occasional cigarette), knowing full well that they are far more dangerous, harmful, and addictive than illegal drugs like marijuana. I don't use marijuana by my own choosing.

However, I don't need the government to tell me what I can or can't use. They could make cocaine legal tomorrow but I wouldn't want to go use it, I have self-control.

I recognize that alcohol is terrible but I also realize that prohibition would cause more problems than alcohol creates, and it wouldn't even stop people from drinking anyway.

Use your brains people, the evidence is clear as day. Some people cannot understand that something being legal doesn't mean you are condoning it. Saying hateful racist things is unacceptable to me, but it should not be illegal. You should be allowed to say those things, but you should not do them, I don't want to do them, and I would teach any child of mind why those things are wrong.


There are exceptions, I don't believe in total anarchy or in legalizing all drugs. Some drugs are extremely harmful, they pose insane health risks, they absolutely destroy people and communities, and are so addictive they are impossible to use while maintaining self-control. An example of this is Methamphetamine. This drug should absolutely stay illegal, because the science will show you that the effects of this drug are absolutely horrific.. However, anyone without an agenda and with a brain can look at marijuana and meth and see that they are not even in the same ballpark.

AmPat
07-31-2011, 10:10 AM
So don't be inconsistent. Alcohol use causes more crime than all other drugs combined. Alcohol makes people more aggressive, impairs judgement (for practically everyone), and always causes impaired motor functions. Law enforcement professionals understand how much alcohol use contributes to crime, especially violent crime. Do you want alcohol to be illegal?

Also, alcohol causes more physical damage than almost every other drug as well. Alcohol use damages most major organs and can cause organ failure and death. Long term alcohol use almost always results in poorer health. The same applies with cigarettes.

All of your arguments apply ten fold to alcohol and cigarettes, so do you believe they should be illegal?

Think about all of the crimes that alcohol causes people to do, or makes them considerably more likely to commit. Now, what sort of crimes do marijuana cause people to engage in? Eating too many quesadillas? that's not a crime. Laughing too loudly in a bad movie? Annoying, but not a crime. Let's be real about this. Marijuana can often times make people do stupid things, but it does not make people more aggressive or violent like alcohol does.

I'm not inconsistent. Add alcohol to the list. I don't care how much alcohol you consume either. Once you make it my problem, you have a problem. Jail, loss of license, etc. Tell me Wei Wei, how much do you think alcohol costs this nation in terms of litigation, penalization, hospitalization, and work related economics???
Still think drugs don't cost this nation. It is NOT a singular person's problem, although I'm for their individual choice. I object to your precious Nanny McGovernment making me pay for the clean up and fallout drugs leave behind.
I'll tell you this; let a drunk or drugged out person cause my family harm and they'll pray for prison time. I don't care what their political ideology is, they have made their problem my problem, now they got a worse problem!

jnkbortka
07-31-2011, 11:27 AM
There is the problem. I want you to go out and feel free to sniff all the nose candy your nostrils can handle. Smoke all the noxious poison your lungs can contain. I want you to shove the biggest needle your veins can stand.

Just don't make your habit MY PROBLEM!
Drugs lead to crime. Please don't be stupid and attempt to quibble that fact away.
Drug use also leads to expensive medical problems at taxpayer expense.
If you can contain or fix those two realities, I'm on your side. Until then, I want drugs controlled.

the legalization would cause less crime including less violent crime from gangs, dealers, etc

no one has disputed the medical problems, we just have said more lives could be saved if it was legalized

lacarnut
07-31-2011, 11:32 AM
the legalization would cause less crime including less violent crime from gangs, dealers, etc

no one has disputed the medical problems, we just have said more lives could be saved if it was legalized

Wrong. Case in point is the red light district in the Netherlands where crime and disease has increased.

Wei Wu Wei
07-31-2011, 02:08 PM
I'm not inconsistent. Add alcohol to the list.

Ok, so you want all drugs, including alcohol and tobacco which cause far more in health costs and crime to this society, to be illegal.

Tell me, why do you believe that alcohol prohibition was reversed in the United States? They believed just like you, that it should be illegal, and they tried, so why did they reverse it?


I don't care how much alcohol you consume either. Once you make it my problem, you have a problem. Jail, loss of license, etc. Tell me Wei Wei, how much do you think alcohol costs this nation in terms of litigation, penalization, hospitalization, and work related economics???
Still think drugs don't cost this nation. It is NOT a singular person's problem, although I'm for their individual choice. I object to your precious Nanny McGovernment making me pay for the clean up and fallout drugs leave behind.
I'll tell you this; let a drunk or drugged out person cause my family harm and they'll pray for prison time. I don't care what their political ideology is, they have made their problem my problem, now they got a worse problem!

Yes, drug use causes many problems in society, including health costs, but prohibiting drugs costs even more. Hell marijuana doesn't even make people violent or aggressive like alcohol does.

How much does it cost to fund the police to arrest someone, put them through the court system, pay legal costs, and keep someone in a prison? It's a LOT.

We're only looking at monetary costs right now, which look to be at least 23 billion dollars in just this year. If you are looking at the monetary costs, your argument doesn't make sense because you are pretending that prohibition is free. Waging a war on marijuana requires a huge bureaucracy, invasive laws, it grants more powers to the federal government, it fills our prisons and costs billions of dollars.

Just think about it rationally - What are the costs of marijuana prohibition? there's billions of dollars, increased prison populations, it helps violent drug cartels to get a monopoly on the market which funds terrorism and other crime. What are the benefits though? Marijuana use is still EXTREMELY prevalent, there are so many people who smoke weed, according to federal government statistics, the majority of young adults have at least tried it in their lifetime.

If over half of young adults can at least try it, then you cannot say that marijuana prohibition works. It doesn't stop people from using it, we just throw billions of dollars into a huge bureaucracy.

Now, if we legalized marijuana, we could save billions of dollars a year, and use that same money to help treat people with addictions rather than throw them in prison. It shouldn't cost any more because we won't have to spend so much on law enforcement, court costs, and prison costs. Money would flow into the legal above-market economy, (we're talking billions of dollars a year) rather than funding illegal drug cartels' private armies.


Your justifications for wanting alcohol illegal do not make sense because you are pretending that prohibition is a magic wand that's free and that works. It is neither free nor does it work.

All we do is throw money at the law enforcement and prison industries, and if you do a little research, you'll discover that these are the primary two lobbying forces who want marijuana to stay illegal. Their paychecks depend on it.

Wei Wu Wei
07-31-2011, 02:25 PM
Wrong. Case in point is the red light district in the Netherlands where crime and disease has increased.

In the Netherlands, drug use is actually significantly lower than it is in many other European countries with drug policies similar to our own ( such as the UK, germany, italy, ect)

They actually reduce drug-related deaths:


The reported number of deaths linked to the use of drugs in the Netherlands, as a proportion of the entire population, is together with Poland, France, Slovakia, Hungary and the Czech Republic the lowest of the EU.

As for the red light district, that is the result of a concentration of shady activities. Outside of these areas, crime is practically non-existent. In fact, they are being forced to close down prisons in the Netherlands because they don't have enough prisoners: http://www.lifemeanshealth.com/health-videos/health-politics/netherlands-closing-8-prisons-due-to-plummeting-crime-rates.html


The Dutch government has announced that it does not have enough prisoners to fill its prisons, and as a result is closing down 8 prisons. Currently, the Netherlands has the capacity for 14,000 prisoners, but only has 12,000 people to fill those jails. The shutting down of these prisons are being attributed to an ever decreasing crime rate in the Netherlands.

Your assertion that looser laws like those in the Netherlands results in increased crime is totally wrong. Simply incorrect:


The Netherlands has a population of 16.6 million and a prison population of roughly 12,000, putting its percentage of prisoners as 0.07%


According to the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) 2,292,133 adults were incarcerated in U.S. prisons and jails at year-end 2009 about 1% of adults in the U.S. resident population.

As a percentage of population, we have about 14 times the prison population as the Netherlands, with our tough laws.

You're trying to compare a country with one of the lowest crime rates in the world to the country with the highest prison population in the entire world, and say that their drug policies have failed by increasing crime? You're nuts.

Facts are better than anecdotal hearsay.

AmPat
07-31-2011, 02:32 PM
Ok, so you want all drugs, including alcohol and tobacco which cause far more in health costs and crime to this society, to be illegal.

Tell me, why do you believe that alcohol prohibition was reversed in the United States? They believed just like you, that it should be illegal, and they tried, so why did they reverse it?



Yes, drug use causes many problems in society, including health costs, but prohibiting drugs costs even more. Hell marijuana doesn't even make people violent or aggressive like alcohol does.

How much does it cost to fund the police to arrest someone, put them through the court system, pay legal costs, and keep someone in a prison? It's a LOT.

We're only looking at monetary costs right now, which look to be at least 23 billion dollars in just this year. If you are looking at the monetary costs, your argument doesn't make sense because you are pretending that prohibition is free. Waging a war on marijuana requires a huge bureaucracy, invasive laws, it grants more powers to the federal government, it fills our prisons and costs billions of dollars.

Just think about it rationally - What are the costs of marijuana prohibition? there's billions of dollars, increased prison populations, it helps violent drug cartels to get a monopoly on the market which funds terrorism and other crime. What are the benefits though? Marijuana use is still EXTREMELY prevalent, there are so many people who smoke weed, according to federal government statistics, the majority of young adults have at least tried it in their lifetime.

If over half of young adults can at least try it, then you cannot say that marijuana prohibition works. It doesn't stop people from using it, we just throw billions of dollars into a huge bureaucracy.

Now, if we legalized marijuana, we could save billions of dollars a year, and use that same money to help treat people with addictions rather than throw them in prison. It shouldn't cost any more because we won't have to spend so much on law enforcement, court costs, and prison costs. Money would flow into the legal above-market economy, (we're talking billions of dollars a year) rather than funding illegal drug cartels' private armies.


Your justifications for wanting alcohol illegal do not make sense because you are pretending that prohibition is a magic wand that's free and that works. It is neither free nor does it work.

All we do is throw money at the law enforcement and prison industries, and if you do a little research, you'll discover that these are the primary two lobbying forces who want marijuana to stay illegal. Their paychecks depend on it.
I realize that you want everybody to sanction your drug use but i won't. I don't give a rats @$$ how you kill yourself. The problem is you liberals won't take the responsibility for your bad habits. You insist that I and others pay for the negatives of your bad choices. If the individuals were to be forced to pay for their habit, I'd be for it. Until then, I pay for drug (and alcohol) abuser's use so I cannot just simply say; "go for it and let the consequences be damned." You cannot put that genie back in the bottle and expect that liberals would make that deal.

Wei Wu Wei
07-31-2011, 02:57 PM
I realize that you want everybody to sanction your drug use but i won't.

I don't use drugs you moron. You have poorer reading comprehension than actual drug accicts.

This is not about me, it's about sensible, sane, policy that affects everyone.

You simply ignore all the evidence, all the facts, all the arguments and logic, and simply say "hurr drugs bad!!".



I don't give a rats @$$ how you kill yourself. The problem is you liberals won't take the responsibility for your bad habits. You insist that I and others pay for the negatives of your bad choices. If the individuals were to be forced to pay for their habit, I'd be for it. Until then, I pay for drug (and alcohol) abuser's use so I cannot just simply say; "go for it and let the consequences be damned." You cannot put that genie back in the bottle and expect that liberals would make that deal.

I don't want to pay to put people in prison, I don't want to pay to have police chasing down weed smokers, I don't want to pay to maintain a monopoly for mexican drug cartels.

I don't want my tax dollars going to something that doesn't work, costs too much money, and which causes more problems that it solves.

AmPat
07-31-2011, 07:03 PM
I don't use drugs you moron. You have poorer reading comprehension than actual drug accicts.

This is not about me, it's about sensible, sane, policy that affects everyone.

You simply ignore all the evidence, all the facts, all the arguments and logic, and simply say "hurr drugs bad!!".




I don't want to pay to put people in prison, I don't want to pay to have police chasing down weed smokers, I don't want to pay to maintain a monopoly for mexican drug cartels.

I don't want my tax dollars going to something that doesn't work, costs too much money, and which causes more problems that it solves.

Well then, I think we disagree on opinion. You believe the money we spend to keep drugs checked outweighs the money drug abuse costs us. I believe the opposite. If I could, I'd let everybody stuff all the drugs they desired into every orifice they have. The problem is when their drug use interferes with my right to safety and a peaceful existence. Short of 357 justice, I don't see a solution.

Wei Wu Wei
07-31-2011, 08:07 PM
Well then, I think we disagree on opinion. You believe the money we spend to keep drugs checked outweighs the money drug abuse costs us. I believe the opposite.

This isn't a matter of flimsly emotional opinions though, we have hard data on how much money is spent on marijuana prohibitions, for police and prisons and courts.

We have fairly reasonable estimates on how much could be gained if marijuana were taxed as well.

We're talking about billions of dollars per year saved or gained from marijuana legalization.

Where is the money being lost by legalizing marijuana? The only place I can see is health care costs associated with marijuana use and the costs of treating addiction.

So let's think about both: If marijuana were legal, safer ways of injesting it would become more popular, as they are in california clinics where edibles and vaporizors are sold, which eliminate the health risks associated with smoke. If we're looking at things like rising costs of health care, I fully support sensible policies such as testing people for marijuana use and making them pay a little more for their health care plans. This is fair.

Making people who smoke marijuana pay more for their health insurance should offset the increased costs of their health problems.

As for treating addicts, we could use half of the money saved (stipulate half by law) from legalizing it and put that towards treating addicts. The other half of those several billion dollars can go towards better things like education, or paying down our debt.




If I could, I'd let everybody stuff all the drugs they desired into every orifice they have. The problem is when their drug use interferes with my right to safety and a peaceful existence. Short of 357 justice, I don't see a solution.

There is no 100% solution, no policy is perfect, but you can look at two options objectively and see which is better if you take off the blinders.

AmPat
08-01-2011, 09:23 AM
This isn't a matter of flimsly emotional opinions though, we have hard data on how much money is spent on marijuana prohibitions, for police and prisons and courts.

We have fairly reasonable estimates on how much could be gained if marijuana were taxed as well.

We're talking about billions of dollars per year saved or gained from marijuana legalization.

Where is the money being lost by legalizing marijuana? The only place I can see is health care costs associated with marijuana use and the costs of treating addiction.

So let's think about both: If marijuana were legal, safer ways of injesting it would become more popular, as they are in california clinics where edibles and vaporizors are sold, which eliminate the health risks associated with smoke. If we're looking at things like rising costs of health care, I fully support sensible policies such as testing people for marijuana use and making them pay a little more for their health care plans. This is fair.

Making people who smoke marijuana pay more for their health insurance should offset the increased costs of their health problems.

As for treating addicts, we could use half of the money saved (stipulate half by law) from legalizing it and put that towards treating addicts. The other half of those several billion dollars can go towards better things like education, or paying down our debt.





There is no 100% solution, no policy is perfect, but you can look at two options objectively and see which is better if you take off the blinders.

Did you intentionally shift the goalpost again? We began talking about drugs in general. Some here narrowed it down to MJ, I broadened it to all drugs. You attempted to label me as "inconsistent" by dragging alcohol and tobacco into the discussion. I accepted these two drugs as well even though they are legal. Now we're back to MJ.

Tell me again how much these drugs cost us as a society? Do you actually believe that legalizing MJ is the magic bullet to flood our coffers with money? Do you actually believe that legalizing MJ is the end state of the legalize drugs crowd? Do you not see massive degradation of the society with the eventual legalization of all drugs?

lacarnut
08-01-2011, 02:20 PM
In the Netherlands, drug use is actually significantly lower than it is in many other European countries with drug policies similar to our own ( such as the UK, germany, italy, ect)

They actually reduce drug-related deaths:



As for the red light district, that is the result of a concentration of shady activities. Outside of these areas, crime is practically non-existent. In fact, they are being forced to close down prisons in the Netherlands because they don't have enough prisoners: http://www.lifemeanshealth.com/health-videos/health-politics/netherlands-closing-8-prisons-due-to-plummeting-crime-rates.html



Your assertion that looser laws like those in the Netherlands results in increased crime is totally wrong. Simply incorrect:





As a percentage of population, we have about 14 times the prison population as the Netherlands, with our tough laws.

You're trying to compare a country with one of the lowest crime rates in the world to the country with the highest prison population in the entire world, and say that their drug policies have failed by increasing crime? You're nuts.

Facts are better than anecdotal hearsay.

No country in the world is marijuana fully legal. That should tell a druggie like you something.

The government is clamping down on the red light district because of crime. Drug use and prostitution also brings disease and unscrupulous characters. Why do you think the government is banning Americans and foreign tourist from coffee shops selling marijuana. Half of these places have been closed down. This is a perfect example why marijuana should never be legalized. You are the one that is nuts. All you have is your opinion and can not offer any country in the world where usage and sales are legal. Come on big mouth. Show me.

CueSi
08-23-2011, 12:34 PM
You need to learn how to read. The police think, think, think, it was booze. The facts are as the article states, that it has yet to be determined how she died. One of those thingies like an autopsy will determine that.

So, there's that to chew on.

Her Toxicology report is now out. The police thought it was booze. And they may be right. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2011/aug/23/amy-winehouse-toxicology-reports)

Chew on that. ;)

~QC

Novaheart
08-23-2011, 01:22 PM
Do you not see massive degradation of the society with the eventual legalization of all drugs?

About the only thing I would do differently if we had open access to drugs would be that I would keep a jar of Ambien, Librium, and Demerol in the house. Ambien for when I can't sleep. Librium for the occasional foul mood, and Demerol for pain.

I have access to marijuana and other illegal drugs right now. I don't use them, not because they are illegal or because my employer tests for them, but because pot makes me paranoid and cocaine makes me twitchy. Legalizing these drugs will not make me more likely to use them, and keeping them illegal doesn't seem to stop the folks who want to use them. All it really does is generate a revolving door at booking and a steady business in petty crimes.

lacarnut
08-23-2011, 01:52 PM
Her Toxicology report is now out. The police thought it was booze. And they may be right. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2011/aug/23/amy-winehouse-toxicology-reports)

Chew on that. ;)

~QC

Eyewitnesses saw her purchase drugs the night before her death. She was a known druggie. I smell a rat with the report.

Like Richard Prior used to say, the M.F. is dead, she did not move a muscle. BTW, I don't give a shit how she died. Chew on that.:eek:

CueSi
08-23-2011, 02:27 PM
Eyewitnesses saw her purchase drugs the night before her death. She was a known druggie. I smell a rat with the report.

Like Richard Prior used to say, the M.F. is dead, she did not move a muscle. BTW, I don't give a shit how she died. Chew on that.:eek:

Sure you do.:rolleyes:

Eyewitnesses saw, but her body while it lies, doesn't lie. She may have been a known drug addict, but she died clean. Given that you were soo convinced of your own rightness, minimize and push it away all you want, but that you staked her death as drug related and used it to buttress your arguments, the facts that contradicted it had to be made clear.

You assumed wrong, and it had to be proven. I hope you like crow. :D

~QC

fettpett
08-23-2011, 02:44 PM
Eyewitnesses saw her purchase drugs the night before her death. She was a known druggie. I smell a rat with the report.

Like Richard Prior used to say, the M.F. is dead, she did not move a muscle. BTW, I don't give a shit how she died. Chew on that.:eek:

so what? you call bullshit because people that don't give a rats ass what you or anyone else think did an autopsy that completely busted your argument?

yep makes sense:rolleyes::rolleyes:

RobJohnson
08-23-2011, 06:06 PM
bullshit, marijuana was derived from the Mexican word for cannabis, the lead up and during the hearing for the 1937 Marihuana tax act, there was such an propaganda campaign against "Marihuana" lead by Anslinger, and Randolph Hearst that people thought it was the next opium den type thing. The AMA didn't know "marihuana" was Cannabis until literally the days before the hearing in the Senate that marihuana was cannabis and Opposed the bill, flat out.
from Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1937_Marihuana_Tax_Act)and the Senate hearing

Sorry, it' not bullshit in the context of my post. But thanks for your feedback.

RobJohnson
08-23-2011, 06:14 PM
Her Toxicology report is now out. The police thought it was booze. And they may be right. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2011/aug/23/amy-winehouse-toxicology-reports)

Chew on that. ;)

~QC


Yup.

Not sure where the media and police came up with the eye witness reports...

Or the family spent big bucks for a false report, which I doubt.

She did not have any drugs in her system so the cause of death is still pending

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/08/23/uk-amywinehouse-toxicology-idUKTRE77M3ZY20110823?feedType=RSS&feedName=domesticNews


One report, however, quoted family sources as saying it could have been caused by sudden alcohol withdrawal.

Her father Mitch said at her funeral that Winehouse was "the happiest she had been for years.

"Three years ago, Amy conquered her drug dependency -- the doctors said it was impossible but she really did it," he said in remarks reported by the British media.

To sum it up... QC was right! :D

lacarnut
08-23-2011, 06:27 PM
Sure you do.:rolleyes:

Eyewitnesses saw, but her body while it lies, doesn't lie. She may have been a known drug addict, but she died clean. Given that you were soo convinced of your own rightness, minimize and push it away all you want, but that you staked her death as drug related and used it to buttress your arguments, the facts that contradicted it had to be made clear.

You assumed wrong, and it had to be proven. I hope you like crow. :D

~QC

You were the one that jumped the gun and assumed that it was booze prior to the autopsy. I questioned the fact that the police made a determination as the cause of death. Policeman are not medical doctors. So, I called that bullshit. The first report of an autopsy was inconclusive. How is that possible? It would not be the first time a high profile autopsy had been botched or purposely altered.

If you want to eat some buzzard, go for it.

lacarnut
08-23-2011, 06:30 PM
so what? you call bullshit because people that don't give a rats ass what you or anyone else think did an autopsy that completely busted your argument?

yep makes sense:rolleyes::rolleyes:

Go smoke a joint druggie; you will feel better.

Hawkgirl
08-23-2011, 06:38 PM
Abusing drugs and alcohol can kill you. Withdrawal from drugs and alcohol can kill you.

Moral of the story: Don't abuse/use either.

fettpett
08-23-2011, 07:04 PM
Go smoke a joint druggie; you will feel better.

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

fettpett
08-23-2011, 07:16 PM
Sorry, it' not bullshit in the context of my post. But thanks for your feedback.

what i was calling bullshit on was the term, yes the bud is what gets you high when smoking.

CueSi
08-23-2011, 07:18 PM
You were the one that jumped the gun and assumed that it was booze prior to the autopsy.Based on the original police reports and the story I posted

I questioned the fact that the police made a determination as the cause of death. Policeman are not medical doctors.But the eyewitness testimony is gospel.Funny that.

So, I called that bullshit.Thank you for admitting your call for it what it was.

The first report of an autopsy was inconclusive. How is that possible?
like you said yourself earlier, it was a first report

It would not be the first time a high profile autopsy had been botched or purposely altered. why would they do that? It was known she was a drug addict. If it turned out she was on drugs when she died, who would it spoil? NO ONE.

If you want to eat some buzzard, go for it.you first, you were the one that was wrong and you're trying to tap dance away from it.And tripping over your dick as you do so.

Just needed to fix that post a little. . . ;)

~QC

lacarnut
08-23-2011, 08:05 PM
Just needed to fix that post a little. . . ;)

~QC

Here is the latest. The Toxicology report was turned over to the family that stated that no illegal drugs were found in her system. The statement did not mention if any LEGAL drugs were found. At the present time, the cause of death is inconclusive. The inquest will be held in October.

Since you are so sure that NO drugs were found, let's bet 50 bucks that drugs are found. Loser donates to CU. Either that or STFU. You will be the one eating buzzard, and you will be shown as a donor to CU instead of being a cheapskate.

JB
08-23-2011, 08:08 PM
If legal drugs killed her then we need to make legal drugs illegal since they too can kill. :rolleyes:

lacarnut
08-23-2011, 08:16 PM
If legal drugs killed her then we need to make legal drugs illegal since they too can kill. :rolleyes:

Whatever floats your boat.

CueSi
08-23-2011, 08:21 PM
Here is the latest. The Toxicology report was turned over to the family that stated that no illegal drugs were found in her system. The statement did not mention if any LEGAL drugs were found. At the present time, the cause of death is inconclusive. The inquest will be held in October.

Since you are so sure that NO drugs were found, let's bet 50 bucks that drugs are found. Loser donates to CU. Either that or STFU. You will be the one eating buzzard, and you will be shown as a donor to CU instead of being a cheapskate.

"no illegal drugs were found in her system".

Full stop. The original argument was hinging on illegal drugs. You're moving the goalposts to legal drugs to save your ego and to strong arm me into donating into the site.

I don't play those games. I will give to this site if and when I am good and damned ready. And right now, I have a car to pay for, a small vacation and a place to save up for. So fuck your fig leaf bet.

~QC

Hawkgirl
08-23-2011, 08:36 PM
Legal drugs like oxycontin are killing more people than any of the illicit drugs of the past. South Florida kids are dying by the dozens...don't know how widespread it is...but it will be if we don't find a way to stop the black market drug business.

Hawkgirl
08-23-2011, 08:39 PM
"no illegal drugs were found in her system".

Full stop. The original argument was hinging on illegal drugs. You're moving the goalposts to legal drugs to save your ego and to strong arm me into donating into the site.

I don't play those games. I will give to this site if and when I am good and damned ready. And right now, I have a car to pay for, a small vacation and a place to save up for. So fuck your fig leaf bet.

~QC

Donating to CU is on a volunteer basis...

fettpett
08-23-2011, 08:45 PM
Donating to CU is on a volunteer basis...

yeah, no shit :rolleyes:

Hawkgirl
08-23-2011, 08:46 PM
yeah, no shit :rolleyes:


just underscoring that and not letting QC feel guilty, moron.