|
Post by NOTTHOR on Feb 17, 2009 14:55:44 GMT -6
"Jesus, if you were smoking pot in a park or walking down the street and got caught, it would probably rank somewhere between running a stop sign and assault."
WTF??? Really? Running a stop sign has a significant likelihood of causing great bodily injury. And there are varying degrees of running a stop sign. There's the old California stop where you unconsciously go like 2 mph all the way up to the 100 mph high speed chase run the stop sign. And assault is an intentional act to injure someone.
Take a hypothetical guy with a job, short hair, non-hippie, taxpayer, non-looter (basically, you're typical non-extremist libertarian who is not quite an anarchocapitalist) who is puffing on a J while walking through Central Park, minding his own business. Who is he endangering? Who is the stop sign runner endangering? Who is the assaulter endangering?
Trust me, I loathe hippies as much as the next guy, but they are second on my list behind big government as biggest internal threats to America's way of life.
|
|
|
Post by isu is shit on Feb 17, 2009 15:14:43 GMT -6
Who is Ernest Penfold?
|
|
|
Post by Master Blaster on Feb 18, 2009 21:55:30 GMT -6
Funny how my belief that pot being illegal automatically makes me a far right conservative in pursuit of keeping the oppressed down by limiting there "rights" to get high on pot, yet those that attack based on contradictory beliefs consider themselves the liberal right in pursuit of freedom. I personally find that ironic given my current situation. However, for those that look at me through the rose colored glasses they are wearing and consider me an automatic card carrying GOP died red, white and blue son of making everyone toe the line: please stop. I am not a active republican, although I am registered through their party. I am more of one to follow what I call the common sense party. I believe freedom is precious, that liberty is a right, not a privledge. I also believe however in the publics right to pass laws that protect the common good. And I believe that the mj being illegal falls under the intent therin. As for the driving argument, from Itheus' links, driving is equivalant to about the .07=.10 range and thus a legal intoxicant for the majority. BTR- you watched the Marijuana, Inc. show. Did it work for those that were in the area just wanting to grow their own supply? were they being harassed by the federal government? Honestly? Can there be responsible use openly and freely in todays society and would that outway the negatives? In my experience, pot use typically has resulted in poor choices and a negative impact to peoples lives. I have very rarely met someone who has used pot more than rarely that I would consider responsible. I'll draw the line for me at that point and live with the decision to outlaw it. You draw it for you and fight for what you want if it is important enough to you to do so. Not much more I guess to debate. And Itheus, thanks for at least bringing impartial debating to the table. although I don' necessarily buy all that the studies show or claim, at least it your arguments are somewhat factual vice emotional.
|
|
|
Post by NOTTHOR on Feb 18, 2009 22:07:11 GMT -6
My argument is factual.
Here it is in a nutshell:
The federal government is a government of enumerated powers.
Prohibition of marihuana is not one of those enumerated powers, therefore states have the sole power to prohibit marihuana.
|
|
|
Post by iammrhawkeyes on Feb 18, 2009 23:33:44 GMT -6
Funny how my belief that pot being illegal automatically makes me a far right conservative in pursuit of keeping the oppressed down by limiting there "rights" to get high on pot, yet those that attack based on contradictory beliefs consider themselves the liberal right in pursuit of freedom. I personally find that ironic given my current situation. However, for those that look at me through the rose colored glasses they are wearing and consider me an automatic card carrying GOP died red, white and blue son of making everyone toe the line: please stop. I am not a active republican, although I am registered through their party. I am more of one to follow what I call the common sense party. I believe freedom is precious, that liberty is a right, not a privledge. I also believe however in the publics right to pass laws that protect the common good. And I believe that the mj being illegal falls under the intent therin. As for the driving argument, from Itheus' links, driving is equivalant to about the .07=.10 range and thus a legal intoxicant for the majority. BTR- you watched the Marijuana, Inc. show. Did it work for those that were in the area just wanting to grow their own supply? were they being harassed by the federal government? Honestly? Can there be responsible use openly and freely in todays society and would that outway the negatives? In my experience, pot use typically has resulted in poor choices and a negative impact to peoples lives. I have very rarely met someone who has used pot more than rarely that I would consider responsible. I'll draw the line for me at that point and live with the decision to outlaw it. You draw it for you and fight for what you want if it is important enough to you to do so. Not much more I guess to debate. And Itheus, thanks for at least bringing impartial debating to the table. although I don' necessarily buy all that the studies show or claim, at least it your arguments are somewhat factual vice emotional. Yo MC, beating this dead horse a bit more. I don't have a problem with your opinion at all on this and I agree with much of what you have to say politically. I'm seriously interested in how you can make the arguments in your previous post(to which I asked two simple questions) and still consider tobaco and alcohol to be alright. Any thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by Master Blaster on Feb 20, 2009 21:42:57 GMT -6
To answer your question, I think that alcohol actually does provide some benefit to society. It can be a useful tool to get the courage to meet the opposite sex for example or to relax after a long days work. Alcohol is ingrained in our society, we have effectively defined the use, you don't necessarily get high after one drink, it actually has some proven medical benefit and damn it can really hit the spot. And we did outlaw it, but it proved to be a disaster. That is the problem with introduction then restriction on potentially hazardous substances. Once in, it is nearly impossible to remove. Tobacco, well, that to me is a little harder to argue. I will say that chewing tobacco kept me awake on more than one long midwatch. It does not impair one to the point they cannot drive a car with say one cigarrette. The biggest reason it is still around is that the tobacco use is very ingrained in our history. Much more so than mj. And couple that with the fact that until 1960 or so, very little was known about the harmful affects. In fact, smokes were issued to GI's as late as Korea to relax with. When I joined, the navy still allowed smoking anywhere on the ship. Much has changed, and I see the end of smoking probably in about 20 years as it gets slowly phased out and less popular. Less sailors smoke now more than ever before. Couple that with more and more restrictive laws recognizing the health of the general public over the rights of the smoker and the end is near. Just a matter of time until smoking is just that big of a pain that people won't do it. I personnally see a time soon that health care won't cover those that do. The links are just to strong between smoking and health problems from chronic use. Why is the insurance company going to continue to pay out for it. Smoking has managed to keep its head above water by good lobbyists and historical use. Are some of these arguments slightly hypocritical towards pot? Absolutely. But keeping pot illegal gives precedence to keeping it from becoming yet one more legal hazardous substance. I'm back to the why legalize it argument? What benefit does it bring that measures strong enough to accept the negatives of use?
|
|
|
Post by Saggitariutt Jefferspin (ith) on Feb 21, 2009 13:43:10 GMT -6
Are some of these arguments slightly hypocritical towards pot? Absolutely. But keeping pot illegal gives precedence to keeping it from becoming yet one more legal hazardous substance. I'm back to the why legalize it argument? What benefit does it bring that measures strong enough to accept the negatives of use? I guess my argument would start with the fact that I don't see it as very hazardous. In previous posts, I've basically quoted physician and university studies that shows it's less harmful than both alcohol and tobacco. Is it good for you? Well, there are medicinal uses, but other than that, probably not. But it doesn't have the harmful chemicals of tabacco that cause cancer, either. The positives of legalizing it? First of all, we could cut down on the war on drugs. Stick to the war on 'the hard stuff'. Making MJ legal would take out the crime of selling it. During the prohibition, bootleggers and organized crime was at an all time high. So, we could save money in the prison system by not putting non-violent people in jail. By decriminalizing it, some of the dealers and the supposed violence it brings would be eliminated. The only reason there is violence involved with MJ isn't because use of it makes you violent, but because there is crime involved...just like the prohibition. Tax the shit out of MJ. (and fast food, for that matter, but that's whole other rant Our government needs the money. I don't think introduction of a legal MJ to society would be the shock that some it would be. The people I know that smoke, will continue to smoke it (obviously), but I highly doubt the people in my life that don't smoke would start. There would need to be education of responsible use, and I would certainly support an age of 18-21 for legal use. Unlike my other posts in this thread, I don't have a lot of links or quotes, but I truly believe this to be a potential positive thing for the government to legalize.
|
|
|
Post by Iowafan1 on Feb 21, 2009 14:22:12 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Master Blaster on Feb 21, 2009 16:46:23 GMT -6
Are some of these arguments slightly hypocritical towards pot? Absolutely. But keeping pot illegal gives precedence to keeping it from becoming yet one more legal hazardous substance. I'm back to the why legalize it argument? What benefit does it bring that measures strong enough to accept the negatives of use? I guess my argument would start with the fact that I don't see it as very hazardous. In previous posts, I've basically quoted physician and university studies that shows it's less harmful than both alcohol and tobacco. Is it good for you? Well, there are medicinal uses, but other than that, probably not. But it doesn't have the harmful chemicals of tabacco that cause cancer, either. www.nida.nih.gov/infofacts/marijuana.htmlwww.cancer.org/docroot/NWS/content/NWS_1_1x_Smoking_Marijuana_May_Increase_Cancer_Risk.aspwww.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1277837Not every study says that mj has no carcinogens. In fact, there are several that say the effects are significantly greater than that equivilent to a cigarette, and some that say they are not. I quoted both here. It is a different effect, not necessarily hazard free. Promoting that, along with the THC effect on the brain and long term use is not necessarily a true statement. I'd say at least admit that both sides argue about the health effects. But it isn't harmless, most somewhat nuetral views state that. If exposure rates become similar to that of cigarettes, will new unkown effects be produced? Probably? The extent of those? Somewhat uncertain.
|
|
|
Post by Master Blaster on Feb 21, 2009 16:53:16 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Saggitariutt Jefferspin (ith) on Feb 21, 2009 18:11:53 GMT -6
Even with this evidence that it is similiar in nature to cigarette smoking...and essentially taking away the 'harmlessness' of it, I feel the good outweighs the bad. A large difference between cigarettes and MJ is that nicotine is addicitve, the latter is not. I think we'll probably have to agree to disagree on this one...however I appreciate your well thought out posts - as opposed to...well, you get the idea (see picture above). I understand where you're coming from, I think we just think differently on the 'end point', or results of legalization.
|
|
|
Post by Iowafan1 on Feb 21, 2009 19:28:42 GMT -6
Even with this evidence that it is similiar in nature to cigarette smoking...and essentially taking away the 'harmlessness' of it, I feel the good outweighs the bad. A large difference between cigarettes and MJ is that nicotine is addicitve, the latter is not. I think we'll probably have to agree to disagree on this one...however I appreciate your well thought out posts - as opposed to...well, you get the idea (see picture above). I understand where you're coming from, I think we just think differently on the 'end point', or results of legalization. Come on Itheus....despite the "pro-mj legalization" links you have posted, the fact of the matter is that several people on this thread have debunked those pro-mj legaization links. Again, aside from the health risks pointed out by MCPO above, we have also gone to the points of practicality. If mj users were as reliable as you and others claim, please explain why virtually every business in the Country spend God knows how much money to have drug tests administered for new employees and random drug tests administered for continuing employment. It would make no sense whatsoever for employers to do this if the risks of it's usage were not overwhelming, right? I actually find it very hard to argue the point that you and others make pertaining to the cigarette comparison, as I believe it is a great point. That being said, why bring yet one more substance into society that can do nothing but harm people? If practical risks, such as health to adults, as well as children, the employment problems aren't enough to convince you, that can only leave us to conclude that the only reason left for those advocating it's legalization is the picture above.
|
|
|
Post by Saggitariutt Jefferspin (ith) on Feb 21, 2009 19:48:52 GMT -6
Iowafan babbled:
"Come on Itheus....despite the "pro-mj legalization" links you have posted, the fact of the matter is that several people on this thread have debunked those pro-mj legaization links. "
Me: No one has really debunked anything I posted in those links. Sorry. I think I have done most of the debunking. MCPO did point out the MJ isn't completely harmless (and a valid point), but neither is eating food with preservatives.
"Again, aside from the health risks pointed out by MCPO above, we have also gone to the points of practicality. If mj users were as reliable as you and others claim, please explain why virtually every business in the Country spend God knows how much money to have drug tests administered for new employees and random drug tests administered for continuing employment. It would make no sense whatsoever for employers to do this if the risks of it's usage were not overwhelming, right?"
Most major corporations don't anymore. Regardless, this is a completely weak argument. It doesn't address anything except the stupidity and hypocrisy of the government and society. Read my previous posts. I have worked for 3 major corporations and never was piss tested.
"I actually find it very hard to argue the point that you and others make pertaining to the cigarette comparison, as I believe it is a great point. That being said, why bring yet one more substance into society that can do nothing but harm people? If practical risks, such as health to adults, as well as children, the employment problems aren't enough to convince you, that can only leave us to conclude that the only reason left for those advocating it's legalization is the picture above.
Me: You are stuck in the same time frame the poster was taken.
I feel that more lives would be spared by legalizing it. Please don't play the pastor's wife from the Simpson's "THINK ABOUT THE KIIIIIIIIIIDSS!" If it's age mandated, then there won't be any difference to the kiiiiiids. It will still be illegal underage. It will actually probably have less appeal to the 'rebels'. You still spew ignorance. You make no valid points, and have nothing to back up anything.
|
|
|
Post by lpcalihawk on Feb 21, 2009 21:46:59 GMT -6
Itheus...I would normally jump in here, but you are making great points all the way around.
Well done.
|
|
|
Post by Iowafan1 on Feb 21, 2009 22:56:47 GMT -6
Iowafan babbled: "Come on Itheus....despite the "pro-mj legalization" links you have posted, the fact of the matter is that several people on this thread have debunked those pro-mj legaization links. " Me: No one has really debunked anything I posted in those links. Sorry. I think I have done most of the debunking. MCPO did point out the MJ isn't completely harmless (and a valid point), but neither is eating food with preservatives. "Again, aside from the health risks pointed out by MCPO above, we have also gone to the points of practicality. If mj users were as reliable as you and others claim, please explain why virtually every business in the Country spend God knows how much money to have drug tests administered for new employees and random drug tests administered for continuing employment. It would make no sense whatsoever for employers to do this if the risks of it's usage were not overwhelming, right?" Most major corporations don't anymore. Regardless, this is a completely weak argument. It doesn't address anything except the stupidity and hypocrisy of the government and society. Read my previous posts. I have worked for 3 major corporations and never was piss tested. "I actually find it very hard to argue the point that you and others make pertaining to the cigarette comparison, as I believe it is a great point. That being said, why bring yet one more substance into society that can do nothing but harm people? If practical risks, such as health to adults, as well as children, the employment problems aren't enough to convince you, that can only leave us to conclude that the only reason left for those advocating it's legalization is the picture above. Me: You are stuck in the same time frame the poster was taken. I feel that more lives would be spared by legalizing it. Please don't play the pastor's wife from the Simpson's "THINK ABOUT THE KIIIIIIIIIIDSS!" If it's age mandated, then there won't be any difference to the kiiiiiids. It will still be illegal underage. It will actually probably have less appeal to the 'rebels'. You still spew ignorance. You make no valid points, and have nothing to back up anything. "Most major corporations don't anymore"....ItheusNo sense in arguing with a man that says something like that.
|
|
|
Post by mattahawk on Feb 22, 2009 1:22:50 GMT -6
If you get caught smoking it while driving, then it's bye bye time. For like a year, (I feel the same way about drunk drivers), minimum. Dude, you are a pothead. Nazi. I am assuming you have never smoked up before. I suppose people talking on their cell phones or drinking coffee while driving should not get locked up for at least six months, right? Actually, I take that back, you aren't a Nazi.pothead. Just more of a "holier than though" type of asshole. You should move to Kansas.California with the rest of the potheads. Also, drinking impairs your driving ability WAY more than weed. You know what is just as bad as drinking and driving? Lack of sleep and driving. I suppose anyone who doesn't get at least 7 hours of sleep before getting behind the wheel should be locked up too. f**k it, why not throw everything but fun hating, far right, Rush Limbaugh left dopes in jail. Hey twine, fixed it for ya.
|
|
|
Post by roxxstar on Feb 22, 2009 19:45:41 GMT -6
My pot just got here.....................sweet.
|
|
|
Post by twinegarden on Feb 23, 2009 0:07:58 GMT -6
Dude, you are a pothead. Nazi. I am assuming you have never smoked up before. I suppose people talking on their cell phones or drinking coffee while driving should not get locked up for at least six months, right? Actually, I take that back, you aren't a Nazi.pothead. Just more of a "holier than though" type of asshole. You should move to Kansas.California with the rest of the potheads. Also, drinking impairs your driving ability WAY more than weed. You know what is just as bad as drinking and driving? Lack of sleep and driving. I suppose anyone who doesn't get at least 7 hours of sleep before getting behind the wheel should be locked up too. f**k it, why not throw everything but fun hating, far right, Rush Limbaugh left dopes in jail. Hey twine, fixed it for ya. Matta, I got to tell you man, you are confusing the hell out of me. Edit: Okay, I think I see what you have done here. Nice work, I have to give you a little credit for your in modifying that post.
|
|