At 7/24/09 06:28 PM, scarneck wrote:
At 7/24/09 02:06 PM, RubberTrucky wrote:
only, it doesn't take 10 roofies
:Roofies are a date rape drug. I dont mean to sound rude but it bugs me when someone amkes arguments and doesnt know what they are talking about. If it was just an honest mistake i apologize.
And to the earlier post, her dad getting mad when high? Are you sure thats the only drug he is on? If it is I assure thats an extremely rare case and he probably has other problems to work out besides the smoking.
Accualy, "roofies" is slang for rohypnol, witch is the most common/well known brand name for the substance Flunitrazepam, its prescribed as a treatment for severe insomnia...
At 7/24/09 08:15 PM, fatape wrote:
although Ive never treid pot , from being around people who smoke it, I think it's alot less annoying then cigerettes.
that being said, I support the legalization of all drugs.
Now that you'll have to explain...
I can see "soft drugs" being legal, substances like magic mushrooms, salvia divinorum etc. but heroin, crack cocaine and other "hard drugs", that i cant understand why anyone whould want to legalize, and the "everyone to their own" would'nt fit, nor proberly wouldnt work in that case..
At 7/25/09 09:39 PM, Dawnslayer wrote:
At 7/25/09 07:51 PM, stafffighter wrote:
And if you were to address the substance of the accusation you might have changed mine. As it stands the two things potheads are known to love are sweeping, unrealistic social change and not getting hasseled for their pot.Thanks for the stereotype and for freely admitting to the ad hominem fallacy. Now let us examine the "substance" of your responses to my proposal.
Initial assumption: "So in short, there's no way to make your plan happen. You're really displaying the steriotypical pot activists oversimplification here."
No substance. At least explain why it doesn't work.
Supplement to assumption, garnished with accusatory tone: "It's different in that it lets him bathe in his correctness about tha falibility of human nature, and get stoned."
Still not seeing the substance. This is a political discussion; talk about the issue.
Direct accusation: "Right. So out of pure concern for humanity you have a plan who's only practicle difference from prohabition is that if someone had weed, say from a home growing situation, they wouldn't get in trouble. But you also go on to dismiss the likelyhood of people doing just that even though, it's already done. You're trying to dismiss it's likelyhood under the guise of the grand sweeping gesture and we're supposed to beleive someone with no personal interest in pot came up with it?"
The "only difference from prohibition" part doesn't say why it isn't different, failing to build a proper counterargument. The "dismiss the likelihood" bit completely missed its mark, as I have made no such dismissal. Add the off-the-cuff sarcasm, and I have difficulty finding substance of any kind.
One more thing: if I were a pothead, what possible reason would I have for denying it? It's not like I'm running for political office.
Now would someone, anyone, kindly explain to me in terms of what I'm actually talking about why my idea would or would not work? This charade has gone on long enough. (My BBS posts, to make backtracking a little easier.)
Post quoted below (by pikmints) proberly explains one of the main reasons why countrys should do a legalization, allthough, i dont think it will work, some people as still seeing cannabis as a "killer drug" and thinks that after one toke you'll either be hooked on it or go crazy and start killing other people, alternatively, kill themself..
I dont think it will happen during my lifetime, it would have to be done though baby steps, first "easing" the laws, then tolerating it (wile still "illegal"), then decriminalize for medicinal purposes, then, when people are ready, legalize, regulate and tax...
At 7/25/09 11:04 PM, pikmints wrote:
If we tax it the debt will be gone in 3 months. Marijuana has medical uses such as shrinking tumors. We already have legalized cigarettes, and alcohol, two methods of death. Netherlands has legalized most substances and look how little they piss off the world. It would also decrease the amount of arrests made= less money spent to feed prisoners= less debt.
At 7/26/09 09:37 AM, GLaDOSKitten wrote:
The main reason marijuana has not been legalized like everywhere is because it is one of the main triggers for schizophrenia, depression and bi-polar.
Hearsay, unless you give a legitimate resource of that statement, it should be considered invalid..
For research about drugs, "MAPS" is the best source for legitimate reports, some countrys, especially Sweden where i'm at, does research, gets the resault, and then re formulates the sentencing for their own cause, that is criminalisation...
MAPS Medical Marijuana Research: