Forum Topic: Why would weed be banned?

(809 views • 63 replies)

This topic is 3 pages long. [ 1 | 2 | 3 ]

<< < > >>
None

Pontificate

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 8/11/08 06:12 AM

Pontificate DARK LEVEL 05

Sign-Up: 02/21/07

Posts: 241

At 8/11/08 01:08 AM, Rideo wrote: I'm not suggesting drug use is a new thing, only that most drugs are new things. Marijuana has been around for over 12,000 years, longer than alcohol which was been in use since 9,500 BC , it's older than the American empire and it will outlast it, but most other drugs are quite new (except alcohol). Psychedelics have been in use since the dawn of man, but as I said already I don't consider them in the hard drug category so I'll dismiss talking about them.

I'm not talking about how long they've been with us because that does not affect matters in the slightest; computers have been widely available for less than 60 years but now they dominate our culture.

So are they part of modern society? yes, but are they ingrained in our culture like alcohol and marijuana? no not nearly, you could combine the age of every hard drug and it still wouldn't be as old as marijuana, so no they're not ingrained in society.

Yes they are ingrained in our society; you know a great deal about them as does everyone else. A great deal of people take them and certain substances are tied irrevocably to the glorification of celebrity. Drug usage is in the world's media, in the public's conscience and in most people's (directly or indirectly) lives to some extent.

As stated before age has little to do with societal ties; another example would be the internet but, hell, why not just mention every modern amenity and be done with it?

I'm not denying that the prohibition had a negative effect, hell, before heroin prohibition you could get a gram for 5 dollars, now it's twenty dollars a gram. They simply gave the drug dealers higher profits. But just because it isn't working doesn't mean we should give up completely, rather we should try new approaches.

It isn't working and is costing us all, regardless of nation, a great deal of money; furthermore it funds crime and terrorism making the world a much more dangerous place on a global and local level. It is turning people desperately in need of help in to pariahs and removing all quality control and regulations, meaning much more dangerous drugs sold to anyone with the money to buy them.

Legalisation and regulation (coupled with extensive public awareness campaigns) is a new approach.

The first step would to no longer make it a legal issue, but a medical one.

Does nothing to really remove the criminal element for most drugs: the majority do not take drugs because they're good for them.

Disclaimer: any and all opinions contained herewith are to be immediately disregarded if you are not of the 'right sort'. Failure to comply will result in immediate snubbing.


None

JackPhantasm

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 8/12/08 10:00 AM

JackPhantasm LIGHT LEVEL 37

Sign-Up: 09/29/03

Posts: 22,107

If you actually think it's right to keep anyone in jail you need to really rethink your life and how you think about other people.

Keeping someone in a fucking box.

YOU DISTURBED US. NOW WE ARE GOING TO PUT YOU AWAY.

That's fucking wrong and unnatural.


None

ChickenReaper

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 8/12/08 09:32 PM

ChickenReaper NEUTRAL LEVEL 13

Sign-Up: 05/07/08

Posts: 875

It should be legal It'll bring down crime and it will stop becoming cool because if it's legal the buisness will become cleaner and people will stop shooting eachother over it and people will get tired of it, you don't see everyone smoking when you walk down the streets so weed won't be that usual after a while

Stop Talking About The Mushet Dream, And Start Talking About The Dreams Of Mushet Citizens

BBS Signature

None

AznWarlord

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 8/12/08 09:33 PM

AznWarlord DARK LEVEL 13

Sign-Up: 11/27/07

Posts: 730

At 8/7/08 07:10 PM, IrishChrisman wrote: Based on several old studys "weed" was found to cause crime/death/disease/ *bullshit*.

And based on several "studies" weed was found to not be harmful. *bullshit*.

Hell yeah, Telecaster with Bigsby.

If you are reading this, then I guess it means that my post count +1.

BBS Signature

None

stayover

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 8/13/08 12:19 PM

stayover DARK LEVEL 07

Sign-Up: 08/11/08

Posts: 6

Weed can't kill you.
The reason why it's illegal is being Harry J. Anslinger compared it heroin, and said that people will go around killing people when smoking it. Which, is total bullshit. People don't know the real reason and think that you will lose everything you have and become a bum and you can't control yourself and what not when you do smoke, but it's not exactly true. It shouldn't be illegal, it shouldn't be banned, it should be legal for personal use.

MR. ANSLINGER: It affects different individuals in different ways. Some individuals have a complete loss of sense of time or a sense of value. They lose their sense of place. That have an increased feeling of physical strength and power.

Some people will fly into a delirious rage, and they are temporarily irresponsible and may commit violent crimes. Other people will laugh uncontrollably. It is impossible to say what the effect will be on any individual. Those research men who have tried it have always been under control. They have always insisted upon that.

--

MR. ANSLINGER: Here is a gang of seven young men, all seven of them, young men under 21 years of age. They terrorized central Ohio for more than two months, and they were responsible for 38 stick-ups. They all boast they did those crimes while under the influence of marihuana.

MR. LEWIS: Was that as an excuse, or a defense?

MR. ANSLINGER: No, sir.

MR. LEWIS: Does it strengthen the criminal will; does it operate as whisky might, to provoke recklessness?

MR. ANSLINGER: I think it makes them irresponsible. A man does not know what he is doing. It has not been recognized as a defense by the courts, although it has been used as a defense.

MR. LEWIS: Probably the word "excuse" or "mitigation" would be better than defense, I think.

(http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/hem p/taxact/anslng1.htm)


None

Zoraxe7

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 8/13/08 05:12 PM

Zoraxe7 LIGHT LEVEL 20

Sign-Up: 01/23/07

Posts: 4,037

If it becomes legal, this will become more comon.

I just updated my blog for Christmas, long after christmas had already gone by, but... whatever.
Sig by Azteca89

BBS Signature

None

SadisticMonkey

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 8/14/08 02:53 AM

SadisticMonkey FAB LEVEL 17

Sign-Up: 11/16/04

Posts: 5,506

At 8/13/08 05:12 PM, Zoraxe7 wrote: If it becomes legal, this will become more comon.

LOL LUCKY NO ONES DRINK DRIVES

"Liberals want the government to be your Mommy. Conservatives want government to be your Daddy. Libertarians want it to treat you like an adult." ~ Andre Marrou

BBS Signature

Elated

Zoraxe7

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 8/14/08 03:53 AM

Zoraxe7 LIGHT LEVEL 20

Sign-Up: 01/23/07

Posts: 4,037

At 8/14/08 02:53 AM, SadisticMonkey wrote: LOL LUCKY NO ONES DRINK DRIVES

LOLLOLOL, WHAT WE NEAD IS ANOTHER WIDESPREAD SUBSTANCE LIKE ALCOHOL!!!!11!1!!!1 YEAH
harharhar...

I just updated my blog for Christmas, long after christmas had already gone by, but... whatever.
Sig by Azteca89

BBS Signature

None

SadisticMonkey

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 8/14/08 04:03 AM

SadisticMonkey FAB LEVEL 17

Sign-Up: 11/16/04

Posts: 5,506

At 8/14/08 03:53 AM, Zoraxe7 wrote: LOLLOLOL,

then ban alcohol.

"Liberals want the government to be your Mommy. Conservatives want government to be your Daddy. Libertarians want it to treat you like an adult." ~ Andre Marrou

BBS Signature

None

Zoraxe7

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 8/14/08 04:11 AM

Zoraxe7 LIGHT LEVEL 20

Sign-Up: 01/23/07

Posts: 4,037

At 8/14/08 04:03 AM, SadisticMonkey wrote:
At 8/14/08 03:53 AM, Zoraxe7 wrote: LOLLOLOL,
then ban alcohol.

That would be too hard, the ban diddnt work when it was in effect here.
But why have 2 substances widespread like that, I would rather there be only one than two.

I just updated my blog for Christmas, long after christmas had already gone by, but... whatever.
Sig by Azteca89

BBS Signature

None

SadisticMonkey

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 8/14/08 04:18 AM

SadisticMonkey FAB LEVEL 17

Sign-Up: 11/16/04

Posts: 5,506

At 8/14/08 04:11 AM, Zoraxe7 wrote:
That would be too hard, the ban diddnt work when it was in effect here.
But why have 2 substances widespread like that, I would rather there be only one than two.

Why would weed-driving increase?

"Liberals want the government to be your Mommy. Conservatives want government to be your Daddy. Libertarians want it to treat you like an adult." ~ Andre Marrou

BBS Signature

None

Zoraxe7

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 8/14/08 04:19 AM

Zoraxe7 LIGHT LEVEL 20

Sign-Up: 01/23/07

Posts: 4,037

At 8/14/08 04:18 AM, SadisticMonkey wrote:
At 8/14/08 04:11 AM, Zoraxe7 wrote:
That would be too hard, the ban diddnt work when it was in effect here.
But why have 2 substances widespread like that, I would rather there be only one than two.
Why would weed-driving increase?

Are you stupid? that like asking why drunk driving would incress when more alcohol is available.

I just updated my blog for Christmas, long after christmas had already gone by, but... whatever.
Sig by Azteca89

BBS Signature

None

Sajberhippien

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 8/14/08 04:21 AM

Sajberhippien DARK LEVEL 09

Sign-Up: 07/11/07

Posts: 1,273

At 8/14/08 04:11 AM, Zoraxe7 wrote:
At 8/14/08 04:03 AM, SadisticMonkey wrote:
At 8/14/08 03:53 AM, Zoraxe7 wrote: LOLLOLOL,
then ban alcohol.
That would be too hard, the ban diddnt work when it was in effect here.
But why have 2 substances widespread like that, I would rather there be only one than two.

Because people only have X time and resources to spend on drugs. The more they use marijuana, the less they have time and money for alcohol. And while smoking and driving is pure idiocy, drinking and driving is at least as bad, and most other factors are better for cannabis (alcohol increases violent behaviour, alcohol does more physical damage, alcohol is more addictive and so on).
So a toast to anyone that smokes a joint instead of drinking a bottle of vodka!

You shouldn't believe that you have the right of free thinking, it's a threat to our democracy.

Med all respekt för alla rika svin jag känner - ni blir aldrig mina vänner.


None

SadisticMonkey

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 8/14/08 04:29 AM

SadisticMonkey FAB LEVEL 17

Sign-Up: 11/16/04

Posts: 5,506

At 8/14/08 04:19 AM, Zoraxe7 wrote: Are you stupid? that like asking why drunk driving would incress when more alcohol is available.

Why would there be more weed?

If you really want weed, you can get it.

"Liberals want the government to be your Mommy. Conservatives want government to be your Daddy. Libertarians want it to treat you like an adult." ~ Andre Marrou

BBS Signature

None

ThePretenders

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 8/14/08 04:32 AM

ThePretenders DARK LEVEL 23

Sign-Up: 12/23/07

Posts: 3,556

At 8/14/08 04:29 AM, SadisticMonkey wrote:
At 8/14/08 04:19 AM, Zoraxe7 wrote: Are you stupid? that like asking why drunk driving would incress when more alcohol is available.
Why would there be more weed?

If you really want weed, you can get it.

Sssshhh.... The anti-druggies believe that the strategy is working.

BBS Signature

Thinking

Zoraxe7

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 8/14/08 04:36 AM

Zoraxe7 LIGHT LEVEL 20

Sign-Up: 01/23/07

Posts: 4,037

At 8/14/08 04:32 AM, ThePretenders wrote: Sssshhh.... The anti-druggies believe that the strategy is working.

I know that, but it gives it better Consequences.
Lol, especialy if I was president, Id establish a "Drugee to Draftee" program if I could.

I just updated my blog for Christmas, long after christmas had already gone by, but... whatever.
Sig by Azteca89

BBS Signature

None

JackPhantasm

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 8/14/08 10:41 AM

JackPhantasm LIGHT LEVEL 37

Sign-Up: 09/29/03

Posts: 22,107

At 8/14/08 04:36 AM, Zoraxe7 wrote:
I know that, but it gives it better Consequences.

You mean it infringes on our rights to privacy. Oh and all laws do is create crime, if there were no laws, no one would want to break any. Barriers automatically create opposition, you create disorder.

How can you think that the government has a right to put you in a box? That's so unnatural. So wasteful money wise too. You know who's responsibility it is to give out consequences on this level? You, your friends, your community, your family, not the fucking government, he's supposed to be doing more important things.

Lol, especialy if I was president, Id establish a "Drugee to Draftee" program if I could.

Guess what. Potheads aren't druggies*. Even by definition.


None

JackPhantasm

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 8/14/08 10:43 AM

JackPhantasm LIGHT LEVEL 37

Sign-Up: 09/29/03

Posts: 22,107

Better consequences.

You like the idea of putting another human being in a cell?

Taking away ALL their natural rights because they bucked an UNnatural system?

Real thoughtful.


None

ThePretenders

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 8/14/08 10:49 AM

ThePretenders DARK LEVEL 23

Sign-Up: 12/23/07

Posts: 3,556

At 8/14/08 10:43 AM, JackPhantasm wrote: Better consequences.

You like the idea of putting another human being in a cell?

Taking away ALL their natural rights because they bucked an UNnatural system?

Real thoughtful.

Jail fails (rhyme, lol). It costs more to jail a drug user, than to treat them. Every drug user you lock up takes away space to lock violent offenders, like pedophiles and rapists.

BBS Signature

None

Jackrabbit-slims

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 8/14/08 02:25 PM

Jackrabbit-slims LIGHT LEVEL 10

Sign-Up: 09/03/06

Posts: 643

At 8/14/08 10:49 AM, ThePretenders wrote: Jail fails (rhyme, lol). It costs more to jail a drug user, than to treat them. Every drug user you lock up takes away space to lock violent offenders, like pedophiles and rapists.

agreed, but this logic doesn't seem to reach the people in power. in fact, the most common remaining argument (which is also very empty) for prohibiting cannibis is that, "it has no medical value", along with "we cant let it in our schools" or "think about the children"

even then, a DEA (public enemy #1) judge said, and i paraphrase, "pot does not make crazy and is not dangerous"

i think whoever is in power is trying harder to make it seem dangerous than we are at explaining that it is not dangerous


None

ChickenReaper

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 8/14/08 05:09 PM

ChickenReaper NEUTRAL LEVEL 13

Sign-Up: 05/07/08

Posts: 875

At 8/14/08 04:03 AM, SadisticMonkey wrote:
At 8/14/08 03:53 AM, Zoraxe7 wrote: LOLLOLOL,
then ban alcohol.

The last time they banned alchohol crime went up as well as mobsters like Al Capone the smuggling became lucrative and rival gangs fought over it,sound like modern day weed once they legalized it crime got lowered don't you think they should do the same for weed

Stop Talking About The Mushet Dream, And Start Talking About The Dreams Of Mushet Citizens

BBS Signature

None

Der-Lowe

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 8/14/08 06:30 PM

Der-Lowe LIGHT LEVEL 19

Sign-Up: 04/30/04

Posts: 3,570

Negative Externalities.

Relying on institutional investors to self-regulate is the economic equivalent of letting children decide their own diets.- Barry Eichengreen


Angry

aranS

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 8/15/08 07:54 AM

aranS LIGHT LEVEL 04

Sign-Up: 05/11/08

Posts: 30

At 8/14/08 05:09 PM, ChickenReaper wrote:
At 8/14/08 04:03 AM, SadisticMonkey wrote:
At 8/14/08 03:53 AM, Zoraxe7 wrote: LOLLOLOL,
then ban alcohol.
The last time they banned alchohol crime went up as well as mobsters like Al Capone the smuggling became lucrative and rival gangs fought over it,sound like modern day weed once they legalized it crime got lowered don't you think they should do the same for weed

The prohibition didnt work because the government officials and police forces were amazingly corrupt. The police force was cleaned up, and for a short time before prohibition was stopped, it worked great. And i do think alcohol should be banned. People think its good, but if your sober and you're around alot of drunk people you'll see how bad most people are.

And on a side note, it really pisses me off when people assume weed isnt dangerous, and it has no long term effects...
It will give you lung cancer,
but wait you're wrong aran, people dont get cancer from smoking weed
Yes and someone would rather admit to smoking weed rather than a cigurette...
Second, weed not only makes you paranoid, it will also give you schizophrenia, my dad as an example
He didnt even smoke that much and he got it really bad.

arguing on the internets is like being in the special olyipmics, even if you win you're still retarded


None

Pontificate

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 8/15/08 10:00 AM

Pontificate DARK LEVEL 05

Sign-Up: 02/21/07

Posts: 241

At 8/15/08 07:54 AM, aranS wrote: The prohibition didnt work because the government officials and police forces were amazingly corrupt. The police force was cleaned up, and for a short time before prohibition was stopped, it worked great. And i do think alcohol should be banned. People think its good, but if your sober and you're around alot of drunk people you'll see how bad most people are.

The true measure of whether the prohibition works is whether it stopped people drinking; not whether it generated a lot of crime. Studies have shown that not only did people continue drinking but people started drinking earlier in life.

Even if we take your point to be true, which I doubt (I should like to see some verification in that area), the fact that the prohibition caused crime is still beyond question. Whether this was compounded by corruption is moot.

And on a side note, it really pisses me off when people assume weed isnt dangerous, and it has no long term effects...

People do not assue cannabis is not dangerous; they just know it is considerably less dangerous than many legal inebriants.

It will give you lung cancer,
but wait you're wrong aran, people dont get cancer from smoking weed
Yes and someone would rather admit to smoking weed rather than a cigurette..

Studies have shown smoking weed causes considerably more damage (though personally I imagine that has more to do with how long the smoke remains in the lungs) if smoked. If only there were other ways of taking the substance... oh wait, there are.

Second, weed not only makes you paranoid, it will also give you schizophrenia, my dad as an example
He didnt even smoke that much and he got it really bad.

If one has a family history of mental illness taking any psychoactive is contraindicated; including alcohol and coffee.

That is regardless however as how damaging a substance is not really the issue (though it is an established fact that cannabis is less harmful than most substances); it is whether making it illegal actually solves the issue. The answer to which is a patent and resounding no.

Disclaimer: any and all opinions contained herewith are to be immediately disregarded if you are not of the 'right sort'. Failure to comply will result in immediate snubbing.


None

Rideo

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 8/15/08 10:41 AM

Rideo EVIL LEVEL 16

Sign-Up: 12/20/04

Posts: 5,220

At 8/15/08 07:54 AM, aranS wrote: The prohibition didnt work because the government officials and police forces were amazingly corrupt. The police force was cleaned up, and for a short time before prohibition was stopped, it worked great. And i do think alcohol should be banned. People think its good, but if your sober and you're around alot of drunk people you'll see how bad most people are.

"For a short time" why was the law repealed if it worked so well?

And on a side note, it really pisses me off when people assume weed isnt dangerous, and it has no long term effects...
It will give you lung cancer,

THC and cannabinol are two of the strongest cancer fighting substances we know of and both are released in marijuana smoke. The tar in marijuana is non-radioactive as well so it barely contributes to cancer growth at all, it's safe to say it fights cancer more than it contributes to it.
(
http://www.cannabisculture.com/articles/
4946.html
)

Second, weed not only makes you paranoid, it will also give you schizophrenia, my dad as an example
He didnt even smoke that much and he got it really bad.

Marijuana can not cause schizophrenia, it can only trigger an underlying condition of it. If your family has a history of schizophrenia then you may trigger it with marijuana, many other things can trigger the underlying condition such as getting into a car crash or severe emotional trauma, but we're not going to outlaw cars or long-term relationships are we?

The paranoia can differ between different weed strains. You see THC-9 is what causes the side effect of paranoia, but there are other chemicals present in marijuana that inhibit the effects of paranoia, I believe the main one that inhibits paranoia is called cannabidol (I'll have to check that later) and is present in higher quantities in higher quality weed.

What can a thoughtful man hope for mankind on Earth, given the experience of the past million years? Nothing

BBS Signature

None

JackPhantasm

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 8/15/08 10:48 AM

JackPhantasm LIGHT LEVEL 37

Sign-Up: 09/29/03

Posts: 22,107

I'd like to say that I have met more than a few people who have had really bad asthma, they started smoking pot and now they don't have asthma.

No lie.


None

Jackrabbit-slims

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 8/15/08 03:10 PM

Jackrabbit-slims LIGHT LEVEL 10

Sign-Up: 09/03/06

Posts: 643

It should be mandatory for everyone here to look up the LEAP organization (Law Enforcement Against Prohibition http://www.leap.cc/cms/index.php)

It's basically a bunch of former police officers who have experience in the 'war on drugs' who would rather have drugs decriminalized because of the effect prohibition has on society.

Now you can rely on your 15 year old logic all you want, but these guys have the most experience anyone could possibly have on this issue.

drugs r bad mmmkay

Expressionless

Evark

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 8/15/08 04:59 PM

Evark LIGHT LEVEL 44

Sign-Up: 10/22/03

Posts: 10,732

Here's a few of the thought-processes behind this, and why I personally find them ridiculous:
- "Weed demotivates you"

Absolutely. In a society where marijuana is prohibited, rather than accepted as a form of recreation, users withdraw. They're told all sorts of half-truths regarding the drug growing up, and then personal experience challenges the validity of all those assertions. Naturally, a user who can't let on publically that he uses marijuana recreationally won't find the motivation necessary to continue bettering himself in society. He's already stepped outside the bounds of societal acceptance, the only way to maintain social acceptance is to either stop smoking, or continue smoking and lie about it.

- "Weed makes you paranoid"

Absolutely. When you're treated like a criminal for strolling through a neighborhood rolling pungeant-smelling cigarettes and relaxing, you've got to develop a sense of fear. I mean, you're typically not bothering anybody with your activities, yet discovery puts you in a position to lose your livelihood, personal freedom, and personal effects. The habit's expensive, you can't afford to cavalier about when smoking simply because you've invested a decent amount in the substance itself and any paraphernelia associated. You're fearing for your reputation, your personal effects, and your very liberty itself. Yea... you're paranoid.

- "Weed is addictive"

Well, yea. Everything in this world is addictive. The human brain is wired to respond favorably to things that act favorably. Smoking is relaxing and fun. There is no established link to physically addictive properties of the drug, so that puts it's addiction level on par with several other legal activities: gambling, sex, driving, riding roller coasters, ice-cream, candy, coffee, alcohol, really good massages, exercise, etc.

- "Weed effects short term memory"

Yep. Memory, especially short-term, is a function of the brain. The effect cannabinoid receptors have on the brain is such that they attach to specific neurons for the duration of their stay within the respiritory system. Alcohol functions similarly, except alcohol can go so far as to subtract hours from your remembered life.

- "Marijuana smoke is worse for you than cigarette smoke."

I dunno about this one. Weed smoke just doesn't behave the same as cigarette smoke. Someone who smokes cigarettes frequently is more readily identifiable than someone who smokes weed frequently. The cigarette smoke clings to things it encounters: clothing, lungs, walls, whatever. While marijuana smoke generally does not. Regardless of that, smoking is only one way to induce TCH into one's system. Pot consumption is equally potent to the user at zero of the assumed cost to the lungs.

- "Weed is a gateway drug."

Correlation does not prove causality. Simply because any percieved majority of weed users may then escalate their usage to other drugs does not mean that it was the marijuana use that caused it. It could also mean that a certain predisposition to heavy drug use exists, and since weed is the most readily and easily available of the illicit drugs, it's simply the first manifestation of that predisposition.

I dunno, there's more I could debunk but if I do I'll be late for work and not be able to eat my dinner.

BBS Signature

None

JackPhantasm

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 8/16/08 01:22 AM

JackPhantasm LIGHT LEVEL 37

Sign-Up: 09/29/03

Posts: 22,107

Also someone I know got cancer, he smoked cigs and weed. He was taking the cancer, he had to stop smoking the cigs, he kept smoking weed, after his next checkup or something the cancer was gone.

Maybe it was like emphysema or some other non cancerous disease. The point remains.


None

SadisticMonkey

Reply To Post Reply & Quote

Posted at: 8/16/08 03:12 AM

SadisticMonkey FAB LEVEL 17

Sign-Up: 11/16/04

Posts: 5,506

At 8/14/08 05:09 PM, ChickenReaper wrote: The last time they banned alchohol crime went up

thank you. This speaks volumes about banning drugs.

Obviously I didn't actually think banning alcohol would be a good idea.

"Liberals want the government to be your Mommy. Conservatives want government to be your Daddy. Libertarians want it to treat you like an adult." ~ Andre Marrou

BBS Signature

All times are Eastern Standard Time (GMT -5) | Current Time: 05:39 PM

<< Back

This topic is 3 pages long. [ 1 | 2 | 3 ]

<< < > >>
You need a Grounds Gold Account to post on the NG BBS! If you don't have one, click here to sign up now! It's fast, free, and easy — and opens up tons of great NG features!