Outfctrl has a political agenda which he pursues agressively on this forum, and others I'm sure. From what I've noticed, he's fond of the same tired old retoric all social conservatives use to prop up their collective view of the world. Yes, this includes ridiculous assertions such as "legalisation will lead to the collapse of society! The nation will be reduced to anarchy!"
Yea, I have a political agenda, Right. Yes, I worry what would happen with pot heads all over the country.
Legislation permitting the use of medical marijuana is a wedge for those who support drug legalization, undeniably because they desire the high. California found that very few people going to medical marijuana clinics were terminally ill; the vast majority were simply potheads who wanted dope.
It is ironic that advocates for legalizing marijuana to help poor, suffering and pain-stricken individuals do not support the drug in other forms such as patches, suppositories, aerosols, or pill form. They only push for the smoked form of marijuana.
Legalization advocates argue that marijuana helps cure severe headaches, glaucoma and even Parkinson's disease, and say it prevents nausea, reduces pain, sparks the appetite, reduces muscle spasms and decreases eye fluid pressure in glaucoma cases. Bullshit!
However, glaucoma treatment is actually just delayed by marijuana, not helped. Medical marijuana is no better than medical gin — taking a shot of it blurs the pain and makes you hungry, too. Marijuana is not a miracle drug. It does not cure anything.
Science, not politics, and not "high hopes," should determine what is safe and effective medicine. Certainly, hot, burning smoke in someone's throat is not it. In comparison to tobacco, Dr. Zuo-Feng Zhang of UCLA's Jonsson Cancer Center points out that "the carcinogens in marijuana are much stronger than those in tobacco." At the same time, smoking marijuana can lead to tachycardia, a serious increase in heart rate, often accompanied by an increase in blood pressure. Concentration, motor coordination, memory, lungs and reproductive and immune systems are all adversely impacted by marijuana use, according to the National Institutes of Health.
Pot will and always will be against the law in the US. Deal with it, because it will never change!
Yes I did. And it's possible to use tabacco without harming yourself in the immediate future. Not possible with Heroin, Cocaine and opium. Every use is harmful, it can not be used with moderation. What would there be to regulate? It's like you would regulate the trade in cyanide, while still allowing every non-minor to buy it.
You obviously don't know many people who use cocaine on a recreational basis.....
Again, legalisation would eliminate the black market, and all the ills associated with it. Someone who buys cocaine is going to buy cocaine whether its legal or no.
You might be right about cocaine (and I do know people who use it "recreational") but it's still a harmful drug, despite that there is no physical addiction.
Legislating drugs wouldn't kill the black market. It's still thriving in Holland.
Heroin and opium are drugs that are almost impossible to use on a recreational basis. I don't see what good it would do to legalise something that harms as soon as there are pleasurable results when using. Why do you think there is a distinction between soft and hard drugs?
Besides, there are thousands of chemical drugs which are equally harmful that can still be exploited by the black market.
Outfctrl has a political agenda which he pursues agressively on this forum, and others I'm sure. From what I've noticed, he's fond of the same tired old retoric all social conservatives use to prop up their collective view of the world. Yes, this includes ridiculous assertions such as "legalisation will lead to the collapse of society! The nation will be reduced to anarchy!"
Yea, I have a political agenda, Right. Yes, I worry what would happen with pot heads all over the country.
Legislation permitting the use of medical marijuana is a wedge for those who support drug legalization, undeniably because they desire the high. California found that very few people going to medical marijuana clinics were terminally ill; the vast majority were simply potheads who wanted dope.
It is ironic that advocates for legalizing marijuana to help poor, suffering and pain-stricken individuals do not support the drug in other forms such as patches, suppositories, aerosols, or pill form. They only push for the smoked form of marijuana.
Legalization advocates argue that marijuana helps cure severe headaches, glaucoma and even Parkinson's disease, and say it prevents nausea, reduces pain, sparks the appetite, reduces muscle spasms and decreases eye fluid pressure in glaucoma cases. Bullshit!
However, glaucoma treatment is actually just delayed by marijuana, not helped. Medical marijuana is no better than medical gin — taking a shot of it blurs the pain and makes you hungry, too. Marijuana is not a miracle drug. It does not cure anything.
Science, not politics, and not "high hopes," should determine what is safe and effective medicine. Certainly, hot, burning smoke in someone's throat is not it. In comparison to tobacco, Dr. Zuo-Feng Zhang of UCLA's Jonsson Cancer Center points out that "the carcinogens in marijuana are much stronger than those in tobacco." At the same time, smoking marijuana can lead to tachycardia, a serious increase in heart rate, often accompanied by an increase in blood pressure. Concentration, motor coordination, memory, lungs and reproductive and immune systems are all adversely impacted by marijuana use, according to the National Institutes of Health.
Pot will and always will be against the law in the US. Deal with it, because it will never change!
You are willingly ignoring the good medical results in Holland, Switzerland and... Well, the rest of Europe. Medecinal cannabis has been in use as a pain killer and an aid in the fight against certain longue diseases for some time now.
By your reasoning Cocaine should've been legalised decades ago, since it has been in active medecinal use for decades in the US.
You might be right about cocaine (and I do know people who use it "recreational") but it's still a harmful drug, despite that there is no physical addiction.
Again, tobacco, alcohol, hell, caffeine....
Legislating drugs wouldn't kill the black market. It's still thriving in Holland.
No, it wouldn't outright kill the black market. What it would do is limit its scope by giving people a safe, legal and regulated alternative to buying their goods from a street-dealer. Legalisation would also eliminate much of the violence around the control and distribution of a substance. This, I think, goes without saying.
Heroin and opium are drugs that are almost impossible to use on a recreational basis.
You'd be surprised.
I don't see what good it would do to legalise something that harms as soon as there are pleasurable results when using.
I think I've already explained the good that it would do.
Why do you think there is a distinction between soft and hard drugs?
Liberals needed to cook up an imaginary distinction so that they could moraly justify their push for the legalisation of marijuana.
Besides, there are thousands of chemical drugs which are equally harmful that can still be exploited by the black market.
What's your point? There's also a black market for Darvocet, but the distinguishing feature is the lack of violent crime associated with the illegal distribution of this otherwise legal and regulated substance. You dig?
You might be right about cocaine (and I do know people who use it "recreational") but it's still a harmful drug, despite that there is no physical addiction.
Again, tobacco, alcohol, hell, caffeine....
What a flawless reasoning... So because there are other crazy legal drugs we should broaden the spectrum of legal substance abuse? Wonderful.
Legislating drugs wouldn't kill the black market. It's still thriving in Holland.
No, it wouldn't outright kill the black market. What it would do is limit its scope by giving people a safe, legal and regulated alternative to buying their goods from a street-dealer. Legalisation would also eliminate much of the violence around the control and distribution of a substance. This, I think, goes without saying.
People steal because they're addicted to alcohol, even tho it's legal. Hell, people steal because they're addicted to cannabis. People kill each other over anything. People will do all sorts of crimes to support all kinds of addictions, whether they're legal or not.
Heroin and opium are drugs that are almost impossible to use on a recreational basis.
You'd be surprised.
No I won't. Trust me.
I don't see what good it would do to legalise something that harms as soon as there are pleasurable results when using.
I think I've already explained the good that it would do.
Without thinking about the downsides.
Why do you think there is a distinction between soft and hard drugs?
Liberals needed to cook up an imaginary distinction so that they could moraly justify their push for the legalisation of marijuana.
The distinction isn't fake. Use those drugs and you'll know.
Besides, there are thousands of chemical drugs which are equally harmful that can still be exploited by the black market.
What's your point? There's also a black market for Darvocet, but the distinguishing feature is the lack of violent crime associated with the illegal distribution of this otherwise legal and regulated substance. You dig?
So how would you imagine the daily life of a legal heroin druggie? Go on, make me laugh.
What a flawless reasoning... So because there are other crazy legal drugs we should broaden the spectrum of legal substance abuse? Wonderful.
No, you're right, lets leave the distribution of such substances out on the street, in our school yards, and in the hands of organised crime, where it belongs....
People steal because they're addicted to alcohol, even tho it's legal. Hell, people steal because they're addicted to cannabis. People kill each other over anything. People will do all sorts of crimes to support all kinds of addictions, whether they're legal or not.
This isn't about people stealing to support an addiction. If that's all that comes to mind when refering to "violent crime in association with illegal substances", then you really are sheltered.
No I won't. Trust me.
Now you're just contradicting yourself.
Without thinking about the downsides.
What downsides? Please do enlighten me.
The distinction isn't fake. Use those drugs and you'll know.
I have, in excess. I still do, in excess. *shrugs*
So how would you imagine the daily life of a legal heroin druggie? Go on, make me laugh.
I could give a shit about the daily life of a legal heroin addict. What concerns me more are the lives of the kids who walk by his dealer's corner every day on their way to school. I guess its something you have to live with and see for yourself to appreciate....
What a flawless reasoning... So because there are other crazy legal drugs we should broaden the spectrum of legal substance abuse? Wonderful.
No, you're right, lets leave the distribution of such substances out on the street, in our school yards, and in the hands of organised crime, where it belongs....
Why not fight the distribution of these substances? Or wait... Here's a crazy idea... Why not make sure people will always have a back up so they're back on their feet when they are in a situation that they're weak enough to need those substances?
People steal because they're addicted to alcohol, even tho it's legal. Hell, people steal because they're addicted to cannabis. People kill each other over anything. People will do all sorts of crimes to support all kinds of addictions, whether they're legal or not.
This isn't about people stealing to support an addiction. If that's all that comes to mind when refering to "violent crime in association with illegal substances", then you really are sheltered.
The level of violence of the crimes has nothing to do with the legality of the substance. Alcohol is a great example of that.
No I won't. Trust me.
Now you're just contradicting yourself.
I mean that I won't be surprised as I have seen the so called "recreational" use of heroin. And every other sort of heroin use.
Without thinking about the downsides.
What downsides? Please do enlighten me.
The mere fact that the problem of addiction will become untrackable... As it is with gambling addiction or alcohol addiction... Even worse, it might get socially accepted.
The distinction isn't fake. Use those drugs and you'll know.
I have, in excess. I still do, in excess. *shrugs*
If you would have "in excess" then you wouldn't "still" do it. And besides, the differences between hard and soft drugs are very obvious.
So how would you imagine the daily life of a legal heroin druggie? Go on, make me laugh.
I could give a shit about the daily life of a legal heroin addict. What concerns me more are the lives of the kids who walk by his dealer's corner every day on their way to school. I guess its something you have to live with and see for yourself to appreciate....
So now kids don't smoke or do alcohol? My dear, I started drinking when I was six and the only reason I never smoked was because I didn't have the money to get addicted to it in the first place. Both of those drugs are legal. I know from teachers that kids are drunk in class in elementary school... So please open your eyes and recognize it as a social, in stead of a criminal problem.
Outfctrl has a political agenda which he pursues agressively on this forum, and others I'm sure. From what I've noticed, he's fond of the same tired old retoric all social conservatives use to prop up their collective view of the world. Yes, this includes ridiculous assertions such as "legalisation will lead to the collapse of society! The nation will be reduced to anarchy!"
Yea, I have a political agenda, Right. Yes, I worry what would happen with pot heads all over the country.
Legislation permitting the use of medical marijuana is a wedge for those who support drug legalization, undeniably because they desire the high. California found that very few people going to medical marijuana clinics were terminally ill; the vast majority were simply potheads who wanted dope.
It is ironic that advocates for legalizing marijuana to help poor, suffering and pain-stricken individuals do not support the drug in other forms such as patches, suppositories, aerosols, or pill form. They only push for the smoked form of marijuana.
Legalization advocates argue that marijuana helps cure severe headaches, glaucoma and even Parkinson's disease, and say it prevents nausea, reduces pain, sparks the appetite, reduces muscle spasms and decreases eye fluid pressure in glaucoma cases. Bullshit!
However, glaucoma treatment is actually just delayed by marijuana, not helped. Medical marijuana is no better than medical gin — taking a shot of it blurs the pain and makes you hungry, too. Marijuana is not a miracle drug. It does not cure anything.
Science, not politics, and not "high hopes," should determine what is safe and effective medicine. Certainly, hot, burning smoke in someone's throat is not it. In comparison to tobacco, Dr. Zuo-Feng Zhang of UCLA's Jonsson Cancer Center points out that "the carcinogens in marijuana are much stronger than those in tobacco." At the same time, smoking marijuana can lead to tachycardia, a serious increase in heart rate, often accompanied by an increase in blood pressure. Concentration, motor coordination, memory, lungs and reproductive and immune systems are all adversely impacted by marijuana use, according to the National Institutes of Health.
Pot will and always will be against the law in the US. Deal with it, because it will never change!
Bullshit? Have you ever been high? Have you ever seen anyone high? Cannabis is famous for giving people the "munchies" and reducing nausea. And it helps with muscle pains, thats why so many athletes use it. Peoples eyes become red or "bloodshot' when high because it reduces the eye pressure (why its good for glaucoma)
Prohibition in the US demonstrated exactly the kinds of problems society faces when criminalising a substance that there is a large demand for.
Oh, thats smart. Lets legalize cocaine too, there is a large demand for that. Why stop there? How about opium? Heroine?
Great advice. A whole nation of addicts.
Where are you going to stop? Are you going to stop at criminalizing cigarettes? Or how about criminalizing Captain Morgan and Budweiser?
The boat rocks both ways. We're already pretty much a nation of addicts if you get right down to it. The only thing that's going to change that is having non-violent drug users get the help they need. Not lock them up in prison with violent criminals. They're dope users, not murderers.
Think about it, you are putting someone who uses drugs in jail with people who murder people. That's insanity. An even more insane action than someone who smokes pot can come up with.
Yes, drugs are bad. They are very bad for you. But our current President used them and became President of the United States. Proof that drug users can turn their lives around!
Outfctrl has a political agenda which he pursues agressively on this forum, and others I'm sure. From what I've noticed, he's fond of the same tired old retoric all social conservatives use to prop up their collective view of the world. Yes, this includes ridiculous assertions such as "legalisation will lead to the collapse of society! The nation will be reduced to anarchy!"
Yea, I have a political agenda, Right. Yes, I worry what would happen with pot heads all over the country.
Legislation permitting the use of medical marijuana is a wedge for those who support drug legalization, undeniably because they desire the high.
I'm for legalization and I've never done any drugs in my whole life. Well, I puffed a cigarette once and coughed my ass off for 10 minutes if that counts. Then wondered why anyone would want to do that.
I just see the lunacy of sticking non-violent drug users in prison with violent offenders. It doesn't make any sense.
If you genuinely worry about drug users then why would you want to put them in that environment?
But that's another myth the conservatives perpetuate. That all people who are for legalization are just in it to do drugs legally. Not true at all. I'm proof.
While blasting against marijuana, why not blast against alcohol? Alcohol has messed up our society much more than marijuana has. Just look up the statistics of driving while impaired (usually alcohol, rarely marijuana), domestic abuse (again, no one smokes a joint and then knocks his kids room to room), random acts of violence, criminal acts, addiction (you know, you cant get physically addicted to marijuana), overdoses (you cant overdose on marijuana), and so on.
Not that marijuana is perfect. One joint is the equivalent of smoking 5 cigarettes as to the damage it does to your lungs. Eating all those nachos will catch up to you eventually...
Did he pick the tag "Outctrl" to be ironic? Because clearly, as others have stated, his mind is under control of the Rush Limbaugh (famous dope fiend) Camp. What do they call themselves?
Oh yeah, 'Ditto-heads.'
How nice and simple for you to have your opinons pre-packaged for you. Requires zero critical thought (you'd probably hurt yourself) or intelligence at all, really.
Did he pick the tag "Outctrl" to be ironic? Because clearly, as others have stated, his mind is under control of the Rush Limbaugh (famous dope fiend) Camp. What do they call themselves? Oh yeah, 'Ditto-heads.' How nice and simple for you to have your opinons pre-packaged for you. Requires zero critical thought (you'd probably hurt yourself) or intelligence at all, really. Good show!!
I love how kool-aid drinking liberals are the first to point out Rush Limbaugh's past, while completely overlooking the drug scandals that so many congress members and politicians have been a part of...as if lLImbaugh is the only one...but I suppose it's an easy jab right? Stick to arguments about policy, not character, because character assassination can be commited on just about any given politician.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
Prohibition in the US demonstrated exactly the kinds of problems society faces when criminalising a substance that there is a large demand for.
Oh, thats smart. Lets legalize cocaine too, there is a large demand for that. Why stop there? How about opium? Heroine?
Great advice. A whole nation of addicts.
You must understand the use of cannabis is relativity safe. There have been no confirmed deaths from its use alone...
Tobacco claims over 400k lives a year
Alcohol about 120k lives
Cannabis : 0
I'm sorry to be devils advocate here, but you can't say that those people weren't already predetermined for cancer. Not only that its the environment they live in. How they live their lives. Its all about these factors. And thats why still to this day we can't "prove" tobacco is deadly. I never said it doesn't harm your health cause I was an 80s kid. Both my parents smoked and in the house and same room as I was in. I'm almost (besides the fact that I'm lazy) screwed up my body.
Like you said with cannabis. Its all relative. THC is a mild form of acid. I know someone that used to have a photographic memory that lost it when she started smoking weed. Use of it does put holes in your head. (Not physical mind you) I just think its funny when pot heads says weeds harmless. Which is a lie. There are even people hopelessly addicted to it as well. It really differs from person to person.
With Alcohol are you counting DWIs? Cause thats under the influence of anything which could very well be Cannabis.
I have a lot of druggy friends who all say don't do any drugs at all. Even an EX that dropped acid that just was like "Whatever you do please don't do drugs. You don't need that in your life." So I'd like to say from my friends experience that they are right.
Siehst du mich Erkennst du mich Ganz tief in meinem Herz ist noch ein Platz f?r dich Ich suche dich Ich sehne mich nach dem was ich geliebt hab doch ich find es nicht
Did he pick the tag "Outctrl" to be ironic? Because clearly, as others have stated, his mind is under control of the Rush Limbaugh (famous dope fiend) Camp. What do they call themselves? Oh yeah, 'Ditto-heads.' How nice and simple for you to have your opinons pre-packaged for you. Requires zero critical thought (you'd probably hurt yourself) or intelligence at all, really. Good show!!
I love how kool-aid drinking liberals are the first to point out Rush Limbaugh's past, while completely overlooking the drug scandals that so many congress members and politicians have been a part of...as if lLImbaugh is the only one...but I suppose it's an easy jab right? Stick to arguments about policy, not character, because character assassination can be commited on just about any given politician.
What led you to believe I am a liberal?
I am most certainly not a liberal. And if you'd like to discuss congress members and their drug use, sexual deviancy, thievery, etc. I'd be more than happy to. I don't like any of them.
I found this article rather interesting. Go figure. They screwed up and now are paying for it. HAHA You better think twice before you partake in this. Legalizing this sort of thing is not right and they are finding out the hard way. UK Indpendent, After Championing Decrimilization Of Marijuana, Now Reverses Policy As The Addicts Come Rolling In.............LOL Quote: The link between cannabis and psychosis is quite clear now; it wasn't 10 years ago." Many medical specialists agree that the debate has changed. Robin Murray, professor of psychiatry at London's Institute of Psychiatry, estimates that at least 25,000 of the 250,000 schizophrenics in the UK could have avoided the illness if they had not used cannabis. "The number of people taking cannabis may not be rising, but what people are taking is much more powerful, so there is a question of whether a few years on we may see more people getting ill as a consequence of that." "Society has seriously underestimated how dangerous cannabis really is," said Professor Neil McKeganey, from Glasgow University's Centre for Drug Misuse Research. "We could well see over the next 10 years increasing numbers of young people in serious difficulties." LINK
this doesn't even address the issue of government legislating morality on the individual.
go have fun chasing your red herring and drinking your socially-acceptable drug you call alcohol (which is far more damaging to the body than THC)
Did he pick the tag "Outctrl" to be ironic? Because clearly, as others have stated, his mind is under control of the Rush Limbaugh (famous dope fiend) Camp. What do they call themselves? Oh yeah, 'Ditto-heads.' How nice and simple for you to have your opinons pre-packaged for you. Requires zero critical thought (you'd probably hurt yourself) or intelligence at all, really. Good show!!
I love how kool-aid drinking liberals are the first to point out Rush Limbaugh's past, while completely overlooking the drug scandals that so many congress members and politicians have been a part of...as if lLImbaugh is the only one...but I suppose it's an easy jab right? Stick to arguments about policy, not character, because character assassination can be commited on just about any given politician.I think the jabs at Limbaugh make sense considering that his platform is based on the fact that behavior such as that is wrong. Its like that Evangelical church leader (sorry, I dont remember his name) that recently came out of the closet; you are a member of a gay hating organization, yet you are gay. Its hypocritical. It is like Tom Daschle, who was all for Clinton for invading Iraq, but he was against Bush invading Iraq. Either side of the political coin... you shouldnt do the whole "Do as I say, not as I do" thing. Alot of this goes down in government, the media and even our daily lives and it isnt right.
Did he pick the tag "Outctrl" to be ironic? Because clearly, as others have stated, his mind is under control of the Rush Limbaugh (famous dope fiend) Camp. What do they call themselves? Oh yeah, 'Ditto-heads.' How nice and simple for you to have your opinons pre-packaged for you. Requires zero critical thought (you'd probably hurt yourself) or intelligence at all, really. Good show!!
I love how kool-aid drinking liberals are the first to point out Rush Limbaugh's past, while completely overlooking the drug scandals that so many congress members and politicians have been a part of...as if lLImbaugh is the only one...but I suppose it's an easy jab right? Stick to arguments about policy, not character, because character assassination can be commited on just about any given politician.I think the jabs at Limbaugh make sense considering that his platform is based on the fact that behavior such as that is wrong. Its like that Evangelical church leader (sorry, I dont remember his name) that recently came out of the closet; you are a member of a gay hating organization, yet you are gay. Its hypocritical. It is like Tom Daschle, who was all for Clinton for invading Iraq, but he was against Bush invading Iraq. Either side of the political coin... you shouldnt do the whole "Do as I say, not as I do" thing. Alot of this goes down in government, the media and even our daily lives and it isnt right.
Yeah, I didn't think it necessary to point that out, but people love to throw out red-herrings, albino. I generally don't respond to them cause you are wasting your breath....er.... I mean fingers.
Did he pick the tag "Outctrl" to be ironic? Because clearly, as others have stated, his mind is under control of the Rush Limbaugh (famous dope fiend) Camp. What do they call themselves? Oh yeah, 'Ditto-heads.' How nice and simple for you to have your opinons pre-packaged for you. Requires zero critical thought (you'd probably hurt yourself) or intelligence at all, really. Good show!!
I love how kool-aid drinking liberals are the first to point out Rush Limbaugh's past, while completely overlooking the drug scandals that so many congress members and politicians have been a part of...as if lLImbaugh is the only one...but I suppose it's an easy jab right? Stick to arguments about policy, not character, because character assassination can be commited on just about any given politician.I think the jabs at Limbaugh make sense considering that his platform is based on the fact that behavior such as that is wrong. Its like that Evangelical church leader (sorry, I dont remember his name) that recently came out of the closet; you are a member of a gay hating organization, yet you are gay. Its hypocritical. It is like Tom Daschle, who was all for Clinton for invading Iraq, but he was against Bush invading Iraq. Either side of the political coin... you shouldnt do the whole "Do as I say, not as I do" thing. Alot of this goes down in government, the media and even our daily lives and it isnt right.
Yeah, I didn't think it necessary to point that out, but people love to throw out red-herrings, albino. I generally don't respond to them cause you are wasting your breath....er.... I mean fingers.
Just because I tell people that I'm not a conservative does not make it true.
By the way, don't argue with me about contemporary vs classical liberalism, I'm not interested in arguing semantics.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
Did he pick the tag "Outctrl" to be ironic? Because clearly, as others have stated, his mind is under control of the Rush Limbaugh (famous dope fiend) Camp. What do they call themselves? Oh yeah, 'Ditto-heads.' How nice and simple for you to have your opinons pre-packaged for you. Requires zero critical thought (you'd probably hurt yourself) or intelligence at all, really. Good show!!
I love how kool-aid drinking liberals are the first to point out Rush Limbaugh's past, while completely overlooking the drug scandals that so many congress members and politicians have been a part of...as if lLImbaugh is the only one...but I suppose it's an easy jab right? Stick to arguments about policy, not character, because character assassination can be commited on just about any given politician.I think the jabs at Limbaugh make sense considering that his platform is based on the fact that behavior such as that is wrong. Its like that Evangelical church leader (sorry, I dont remember his name) that recently came out of the closet; you are a member of a gay hating organization, yet you are gay. Its hypocritical. It is like Tom Daschle, who was all for Clinton for invading Iraq, but he was against Bush invading Iraq. Either side of the political coin... you shouldnt do the whole "Do as I say, not as I do" thing. Alot of this goes down in government, the media and even our daily lives and it isnt right.
Yeah, I didn't think it necessary to point that out, but people love to throw out red-herrings, albino. I generally don't respond to them cause you are wasting your breath....er.... I mean fingers.
Just because I tell people that I'm not a conservative does not make it true.
By the way, don't argue with me about contemporary vs classical liberalism, I'm not interested in arguing semantics.
Comments
Yea, I have a political agenda, Right. Yes, I worry what would happen with pot heads all over the country.
Legislation permitting the use of medical marijuana is a wedge for those who support drug legalization, undeniably because they desire the high. California found that very few people going to medical marijuana clinics were terminally ill; the vast majority were simply potheads who wanted dope.
It is ironic that advocates for legalizing marijuana to help poor, suffering and pain-stricken individuals do not support the drug in other forms such as patches, suppositories, aerosols, or pill form. They only push for the smoked form of marijuana.
Legalization advocates argue that marijuana helps cure severe headaches, glaucoma and even Parkinson's disease, and say it prevents nausea, reduces pain, sparks the appetite, reduces muscle spasms and decreases eye fluid pressure in glaucoma cases. Bullshit!
However, glaucoma treatment is actually just delayed by marijuana, not helped. Medical marijuana is no better than medical gin — taking a shot of it blurs the pain and makes you hungry, too. Marijuana is not a miracle drug. It does not cure anything.
Science, not politics, and not "high hopes," should determine what is safe and effective medicine. Certainly, hot, burning smoke in someone's throat is not it. In comparison to tobacco, Dr. Zuo-Feng Zhang of UCLA's Jonsson Cancer Center points out that "the carcinogens in marijuana are much stronger than those in tobacco." At the same time, smoking marijuana can lead to tachycardia, a serious increase in heart rate, often accompanied by an increase in blood pressure. Concentration, motor coordination, memory, lungs and reproductive and immune systems are all adversely impacted by marijuana use, according to the National Institutes of Health.
Pot will and always will be against the law in the US. Deal with it, because it will never change!
Again, legalisation would eliminate the black market, and all the ills associated with it. Someone who buys cocaine is going to buy cocaine whether its legal or no.
You might be right about cocaine (and I do know people who use it "recreational") but it's still a harmful drug, despite that there is no physical addiction.
Legislating drugs wouldn't kill the black market. It's still thriving in Holland.
Heroin and opium are drugs that are almost impossible to use on a recreational basis. I don't see what good it would do to legalise something that harms as soon as there are pleasurable results when using. Why do you think there is a distinction between soft and hard drugs?
Besides, there are thousands of chemical drugs which are equally harmful that can still be exploited by the black market.
CLICK HERE TO GET A LIST OF FREE MMO LISTS!!!
Sorry to break it to you, friend, but there already are pot heads all over the country. I'll bet more than one lives on your block. Shocking but true.
Proud and Loyal Member of S.W.A.R.M
Yea, I have a political agenda, Right. Yes, I worry what would happen with pot heads all over the country.
Legislation permitting the use of medical marijuana is a wedge for those who support drug legalization, undeniably because they desire the high. California found that very few people going to medical marijuana clinics were terminally ill; the vast majority were simply potheads who wanted dope.
It is ironic that advocates for legalizing marijuana to help poor, suffering and pain-stricken individuals do not support the drug in other forms such as patches, suppositories, aerosols, or pill form. They only push for the smoked form of marijuana.
Legalization advocates argue that marijuana helps cure severe headaches, glaucoma and even Parkinson's disease, and say it prevents nausea, reduces pain, sparks the appetite, reduces muscle spasms and decreases eye fluid pressure in glaucoma cases. Bullshit!
However, glaucoma treatment is actually just delayed by marijuana, not helped. Medical marijuana is no better than medical gin — taking a shot of it blurs the pain and makes you hungry, too. Marijuana is not a miracle drug. It does not cure anything.
Science, not politics, and not "high hopes," should determine what is safe and effective medicine. Certainly, hot, burning smoke in someone's throat is not it. In comparison to tobacco, Dr. Zuo-Feng Zhang of UCLA's Jonsson Cancer Center points out that "the carcinogens in marijuana are much stronger than those in tobacco." At the same time, smoking marijuana can lead to tachycardia, a serious increase in heart rate, often accompanied by an increase in blood pressure. Concentration, motor coordination, memory, lungs and reproductive and immune systems are all adversely impacted by marijuana use, according to the National Institutes of Health.
Pot will and always will be against the law in the US. Deal with it, because it will never change!
You are willingly ignoring the good medical results in Holland, Switzerland and... Well, the rest of Europe. Medecinal cannabis has been in use as a pain killer and an aid in the fight against certain longue diseases for some time now.
By your reasoning Cocaine should've been legalised decades ago, since it has been in active medecinal use for decades in the US.
CLICK HERE TO GET A LIST OF FREE MMO LISTS!!!
Again, tobacco, alcohol, hell, caffeine....
No, it wouldn't outright kill the black market. What it would do is limit its scope by giving people a safe, legal and regulated alternative to buying their goods from a street-dealer. Legalisation would also eliminate much of the violence around the control and distribution of a substance. This, I think, goes without saying.
You'd be surprised.
I think I've already explained the good that it would do.
Liberals needed to cook up an imaginary distinction so that they could moraly justify their push for the legalisation of marijuana.
What's your point? There's also a black market for Darvocet, but the distinguishing feature is the lack of violent crime associated with the illegal distribution of this otherwise legal and regulated substance. You dig?
Proud and Loyal Member of S.W.A.R.M
Again, tobacco, alcohol, hell, caffeine....
What a flawless reasoning...No, it wouldn't outright kill the black market. What it would do is limit its scope by giving people a safe, legal and regulated alternative to buying their goods from a street-dealer. Legalisation would also eliminate much of the violence around the control and distribution of a substance. This, I think, goes without saying.
People steal because they're addicted to alcohol, even tho it's legal. Hell, people steal because they're addicted to cannabis. People kill each other over anything. People will do all sorts of crimes to support all kinds of addictions, whether they're legal or not.
You'd be surprised.
No I won't. Trust me.
I think I've already explained the good that it would do.
Without thinking about the downsides.
Liberals needed to cook up an imaginary distinction so that they could moraly justify their push for the legalisation of marijuana.
The distinction isn't fake. Use those drugs and you'll know.
What's your point? There's also a black market for Darvocet, but the distinguishing feature is the lack of violent crime associated with the illegal distribution of this otherwise legal and regulated substance. You dig?
So how would you imagine the daily life of a legal heroin druggie? Go on, make me laugh.
CLICK HERE TO GET A LIST OF FREE MMO LISTS!!!
No, you're right, lets leave the distribution of such substances out on the street, in our school yards, and in the hands of organised crime, where it belongs....
This isn't about people stealing to support an addiction. If that's all that comes to mind when refering to "violent crime in association with illegal substances", then you really are sheltered.
Now you're just contradicting yourself.
What downsides? Please do enlighten me.
I have, in excess. I still do, in excess. *shrugs*
I could give a shit about the daily life of a legal heroin addict. What concerns me more are the lives of the kids who walk by his dealer's corner every day on their way to school. I guess its something you have to live with and see for yourself to appreciate....
Proud and Loyal Member of S.W.A.R.M
No, you're right, lets leave the distribution of such substances out on the street, in our school yards, and in the hands of organised crime, where it belongs....
Why not fight the distribution of these substances? Or wait... Here's a crazy idea... Why not make sure people will always have a back up so they're back on their feet when they are in a situation that they're weak enough to need those substances?This isn't about people stealing to support an addiction. If that's all that comes to mind when refering to "violent crime in association with illegal substances", then you really are sheltered.
The level of violence of the crimes has nothing to do with the legality of the substance. Alcohol is a great example of that.
Now you're just contradicting yourself.
I mean that I won't be surprised as I have seen the so called "recreational" use of heroin. And every other sort of heroin use.
What downsides? Please do enlighten me.
The mere fact that the problem of addiction will become untrackable... As it is with gambling addiction or alcohol addiction... Even worse, it might get socially accepted.
I have, in excess. I still do, in excess. *shrugs*
If you would have "in excess" then you wouldn't "still" do it. And besides, the differences between hard and soft drugs are very obvious.
I could give a shit about the daily life of a legal heroin addict. What concerns me more are the lives of the kids who walk by his dealer's corner every day on their way to school. I guess its something you have to live with and see for yourself to appreciate....
So now kids don't smoke or do alcohol? My dear, I started drinking when I was six and the only reason I never smoked was because I didn't have the money to get addicted to it in the first place. Both of those drugs are legal. I know from teachers that kids are drunk in class in elementary school... So please open your eyes and recognize it as a social, in stead of a criminal problem.
CLICK HERE TO GET A LIST OF FREE MMO LISTS!!!
Oh, thats smart. Lets legalize cocaine too, there is a large demand for that. Why stop there? How about opium? Heroine?
Great advice. A whole nation of addicts.
You must understand the use of cannabis is relativity safe. There have been no confirmed deaths from its use alone...
Tobacco claims over 400k lives a year
Alcohol about 120k lives
Cannabis : 0
Yea, I have a political agenda, Right. Yes, I worry what would happen with pot heads all over the country.
Legislation permitting the use of medical marijuana is a wedge for those who support drug legalization, undeniably because they desire the high. California found that very few people going to medical marijuana clinics were terminally ill; the vast majority were simply potheads who wanted dope.
It is ironic that advocates for legalizing marijuana to help poor, suffering and pain-stricken individuals do not support the drug in other forms such as patches, suppositories, aerosols, or pill form. They only push for the smoked form of marijuana.
Legalization advocates argue that marijuana helps cure severe headaches, glaucoma and even Parkinson's disease, and say it prevents nausea, reduces pain, sparks the appetite, reduces muscle spasms and decreases eye fluid pressure in glaucoma cases. Bullshit!
However, glaucoma treatment is actually just delayed by marijuana, not helped. Medical marijuana is no better than medical gin — taking a shot of it blurs the pain and makes you hungry, too. Marijuana is not a miracle drug. It does not cure anything.
Science, not politics, and not "high hopes," should determine what is safe and effective medicine. Certainly, hot, burning smoke in someone's throat is not it. In comparison to tobacco, Dr. Zuo-Feng Zhang of UCLA's Jonsson Cancer Center points out that "the carcinogens in marijuana are much stronger than those in tobacco." At the same time, smoking marijuana can lead to tachycardia, a serious increase in heart rate, often accompanied by an increase in blood pressure. Concentration, motor coordination, memory, lungs and reproductive and immune systems are all adversely impacted by marijuana use, according to the National Institutes of Health.
Pot will and always will be against the law in the US. Deal with it, because it will never change!
Bullshit? Have you ever been high? Have you ever seen anyone high? Cannabis is famous for giving people the "munchies" and reducing nausea. And it helps with muscle pains, thats why so many athletes use it. Peoples eyes become red or "bloodshot' when high because it reduces the eye pressure (why its good for glaucoma)
Oh, thats smart. Lets legalize cocaine too, there is a large demand for that. Why stop there? How about opium? Heroine?
Great advice. A whole nation of addicts.
Where are you going to stop? Are you going to stop at criminalizing cigarettes? Or how about criminalizing Captain Morgan and Budweiser?The boat rocks both ways. We're already pretty much a nation of addicts if you get right down to it. The only thing that's going to change that is having non-violent drug users get the help they need. Not lock them up in prison with violent criminals. They're dope users, not murderers.
Think about it, you are putting someone who uses drugs in jail with people who murder people. That's insanity. An even more insane action than someone who smokes pot can come up with.
Yes, drugs are bad. They are very bad for you. But our current President used them and became President of the United States. Proof that drug users can turn their lives around!
Yea, I have a political agenda, Right. Yes, I worry what would happen with pot heads all over the country.
Legislation permitting the use of medical marijuana is a wedge for those who support drug legalization, undeniably because they desire the high.
I'm for legalization and I've never done any drugs in my whole life. Well, I puffed a cigarette once and coughed my ass off for 10 minutes if that counts. Then wondered why anyone would want to do that.
I just see the lunacy of sticking non-violent drug users in prison with violent offenders. It doesn't make any sense.
If you genuinely worry about drug users then why would you want to put them in that environment?
But that's another myth the conservatives perpetuate. That all people who are for legalization are just in it to do drugs legally. Not true at all. I'm proof.
To the OP...
While blasting against marijuana, why not blast against alcohol? Alcohol has messed up our society much more than marijuana has. Just look up the statistics of driving while impaired (usually alcohol, rarely marijuana), domestic abuse (again, no one smokes a joint and then knocks his kids room to room), random acts of violence, criminal acts, addiction (you know, you cant get physically addicted to marijuana), overdoses (you cant overdose on marijuana), and so on.
Not that marijuana is perfect. One joint is the equivalent of smoking 5 cigarettes as to the damage it does to your lungs. Eating all those nachos will catch up to you eventually...
Did he pick the tag "Outctrl" to be ironic? Because clearly, as others have stated, his mind is under control of the Rush Limbaugh (famous dope fiend) Camp. What do they call themselves?
Oh yeah, 'Ditto-heads.'
How nice and simple for you to have your opinons pre-packaged for you. Requires zero critical thought (you'd probably hurt yourself) or intelligence at all, really.
Good show!!
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
Oh, thats smart. Lets legalize cocaine too, there is a large demand for that. Why stop there? How about opium? Heroine?
Great advice. A whole nation of addicts.
You must understand the use of cannabis is relativity safe. There have been no confirmed deaths from its use alone...
Tobacco claims over 400k lives a year
Alcohol about 120k lives
Cannabis : 0
I'm sorry to be devils advocate here, but you can't say that those people weren't already predetermined for cancer. Not only that its the environment they live in. How they live their lives. Its all about these factors. And thats why still to this day we can't "prove" tobacco is deadly. I never said it doesn't harm your health cause I was an 80s kid. Both my parents smoked and in the house and same room as I was in. I'm almost (besides the fact that I'm lazy) screwed up my body.Like you said with cannabis. Its all relative. THC is a mild form of acid. I know someone that used to have a photographic memory that lost it when she started smoking weed. Use of it does put holes in your head. (Not physical mind you) I just think its funny when pot heads says weeds harmless. Which is a lie. There are even people hopelessly addicted to it as well. It really differs from person to person.
With Alcohol are you counting DWIs? Cause thats under the influence of anything which could very well be Cannabis.
I have a lot of druggy friends who all say don't do any drugs at all. Even an EX that dropped acid that just was like "Whatever you do please don't do drugs. You don't need that in your life." So I'd like to say from my friends experience that they are right.
Siehst du mich
Erkennst du mich
Ganz tief in meinem Herz
ist noch ein Platz f?r dich
Ich suche dich
Ich sehne mich
nach dem was ich geliebt hab
doch ich find es nicht
What led you to believe I am a liberal?
I am most certainly not a liberal. And if you'd like to discuss congress members and their drug use, sexual deviancy, thievery, etc. I'd be more than happy to. I don't like any of them.
go have fun chasing your red herring and drinking your socially-acceptable drug you call alcohol (which is far more damaging to the body than THC)
==========================
Yeah, I didn't think it necessary to point that out, but people love to throw out red-herrings, albino. I generally don't respond to them cause you are wasting your breath....er.... I mean fingers.
Yeah, I didn't think it necessary to point that out, but people love to throw out red-herrings, albino. I generally don't respond to them cause you are wasting your breath....er.... I mean fingers.
Just because I tell people that I'm not a conservative does not make it true.
By the way, don't argue with me about contemporary vs classical liberalism, I'm not interested in arguing semantics.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
Yeah, I didn't think it necessary to point that out, but people love to throw out red-herrings, albino. I generally don't respond to them cause you are wasting your breath....er.... I mean fingers.
Just because I tell people that I'm not a conservative does not make it true.
By the way, don't argue with me about contemporary vs classical liberalism, I'm not interested in arguing semantics.
Eh? What are you on about now?
Time for your Ritalin maybe?
==========================
I like you because you debate like a 12 year old...yep, I need my medicine...you got me there oh boy!
I love pseudo intellectuals.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.