Shots fired from Canadian government, the war against marijuana may end in 7 days.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 NEXT
 

Regnes:

mikeybuthge:

Don't those examples happen around the world anyways? What ifs don't really count in this situation I don't think

Hmmm, you do see that sort of thing in other countries, but this is Canada, we are known for being one of the most free countries ever, and we have that reputation to uphold.

It is true that there are rules for every right in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, but they're all regulated within sound reasoning.

You have the right to life, but if you're endangering that right for other people, that right may be lawfully waived in your case for example. I don't really see any situation where they could say you're not allowed to smoke weed if it's a right.

I would assume they'd end up regulating it and distributing it like cigarrettes and alcohol though, that makes the most sense, making it a right to smoke weed seems weird, if people that smoke up have the right to smoke up, everyone's gonna want rights to everything else

mikeybuthge:

Regnes:

mikeybuthge:

Don't those examples happen around the world anyways? What ifs don't really count in this situation I don't think

Hmmm, you do see that sort of thing in other countries, but this is Canada, we are known for being one of the most free countries ever, and we have that reputation to uphold.

It is true that there are rules for every right in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, but they're all regulated within sound reasoning.

You have the right to life, but if you're endangering that right for other people, that right may be lawfully waived in your case for example. I don't really see any situation where they could say you're not allowed to smoke weed if it's a right.

I would assume they'd end up regulating it and distributing it like cigarrettes and alcohol though, that makes the most sense, making it a right to smoke weed seems weird, if people that smoke up have the right to smoke up, everyone's gonna want rights to everything else

I'm not sure that you should call it a right. It's a privilege you should enjoy if you can do it without harming anybody else. Lindsey Lohan had the her drinking privileges revoked because was clearly unable to do it with out fucking up.

Well, one thing's for sure. Canada's going to get a lot of american illegal immigrants in the coming months after the bill gets passed. If it gets passed.

ACman:

mikeybuthge:

Regnes:

Hmmm, you do see that sort of thing in other countries, but this is Canada, we are known for being one of the most free countries ever, and we have that reputation to uphold.

It is true that there are rules for every right in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, but they're all regulated within sound reasoning.

You have the right to life, but if you're endangering that right for other people, that right may be lawfully waived in your case for example. I don't really see any situation where they could say you're not allowed to smoke weed if it's a right.

I would assume they'd end up regulating it and distributing it like cigarrettes and alcohol though, that makes the most sense, making it a right to smoke weed seems weird, if people that smoke up have the right to smoke up, everyone's gonna want rights to everything else

I'm not sure that you should call it a right. It's a privilege you should enjoy if you can do it without harming anybody else. Lindsey Lohan had the her drinking privileges revoked because was clearly unable to do it with out fucking up.

It should be regulated just like cigarettes and alcohol, possibly with more laws about smoking it around children... there's harmful effects, and positive effects, but around children, it just shouldn't happen

mikeybuthge:

ACman:

mikeybuthge:

I would assume they'd end up regulating it and distributing it like cigarrettes and alcohol though, that makes the most sense, making it a right to smoke weed seems weird, if people that smoke up have the right to smoke up, everyone's gonna want rights to everything else

I'm not sure that you should call it a right. It's a privilege you should enjoy if you can do it without harming anybody else. Lindsey Lohan had the her drinking privileges revoked because was clearly unable to do it with out fucking up.

It should be regulated just like cigarettes and alcohol, possibly with more laws about smoking it around children... there's harmful effects, and positive effects, but around children, it just shouldn't happen

By that logic you should ban drinking (Or perhaps just getting drunk.) around children. Actually a sensible idea, but not very practical.

Christopher Dudgeon:
If this get's passed My new home will be in Canada!!

Toke on brothers!

Amen.

I'm American but I frequently think that if it wasn't for Canada this entire hemisphere would be damned for eternity, ruined by the insanity of it's own denizens.

Tubez:

Funny part is that government scientist is not allowed to give interviews without the government consent :/ (In canada)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-16861468

"The protocol requires that all interview requests for scientists employed by the government must first be cleared by officials. A decision as to whether to allow the interview can take several days, which can prevent government scientists commenting on breaking news stories."

""The more controversial the story, the less likely you are to talk to the scientists. They (government media relations staff) just stonewall. If they don't like the question you don't get an answer.""

""You have a government that is micromanaging the message, obsessively. The Privy Council Office (which works for the Prime Minister, Stephen Harper) seems to vet everything that goes out to the media," she said."

Harper has been under a lot of criticism for his religious views since taking office. He's never going to openly state he bases his decisions around religion, but you really have to wonder about some of his decisions in the past.

Such as appointing a new minister of science who is openly religious and refuses to talk about evolution.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/story/2009/03/17/tech-090317-gary-goodyear-evolution.html

ACman:

mikeybuthge:

ACman:

I'm not sure that you should call it a right. It's a privilege you should enjoy if you can do it without harming anybody else. Lindsey Lohan had the her drinking privileges revoked because was clearly unable to do it with out fucking up.

It should be regulated just like cigarettes and alcohol, possibly with more laws about smoking it around children... there's harmful effects, and positive effects, but around children, it just shouldn't happen

By that logic you should ban drinking (Or perhaps just getting drunk.) around children. Actually a sensible idea, but not very practical.

If we can guilt marijuana users into not smoking around children it'll work. But getting drunk around children doesn't run as much risk as getting a child high, and i think that you should be able to choose whether or not you smoke up

mikeybuthge:

ACman:

mikeybuthge:

It should be regulated just like cigarettes and alcohol, possibly with more laws about smoking it around children... there's harmful effects, and positive effects, but around children, it just shouldn't happen

By that logic you should ban drinking (Or perhaps just getting drunk.) around children. Actually a sensible idea, but not very practical.

If we can guilt marijuana users into not smoking around children it'll work. But getting drunk around children doesn't run as much risk as getting a child high, and i think that you should be able to choose whether or not you smoke up

How exactly is the child going to get high? If you're smoking enough weed that the air is enough to get someone high then I agree you shouldn't be around children.

But I would be far more worried about children being harmed or killed by alcohol intoxication and I think being heavily drunk around children is far worse than the sleepy giggiliness that pot induces.

ACman:

mikeybuthge:

ACman:

By that logic you should ban drinking (Or perhaps just getting drunk.) around children. Actually a sensible idea, but not very practical.

If we can guilt marijuana users into not smoking around children it'll work. But getting drunk around children doesn't run as much risk as getting a child high, and i think that you should be able to choose whether or not you smoke up

How exactly is the child going to get high? If you're smoking enough weed that the air is enough to get someone high then I agree you shouldn't be around children.

But I would be far more worried about children being harmed or killed by alcohol intoxication and I think being heavily drunk around children is far worse than the sleepy giggiliness that pot induces.

Blood conditions and tolerance levels are different for everyone, and yeah, there's less marijuana related deaths than alcohol, but its the same thing, shouldn't be done around children

mikeybuthge:

ACman:

mikeybuthge:

If we can guilt marijuana users into not smoking around children it'll work. But getting drunk around children doesn't run as much risk as getting a child high, and i think that you should be able to choose whether or not you smoke up

How exactly is the child going to get high? If you're smoking enough weed that the air is enough to get someone high then I agree you shouldn't be around children.

But I would be far more worried about children being harmed or killed by alcohol intoxication and I think being heavily drunk around children is far worse than the sleepy giggiliness that pot induces.

Blood conditions and tolerance levels are different for everyone, and yeah, there's less marijuana related deaths than alcohol, but its the same thing, shouldn't be done around children

Less marijuana related deaths. If by less you mean zero then yes there are less.

Obviously I am leaving out car accidents and other heavy machinery but if you can be around kids on valium then why not pot?

Obviously it is better not to be intoxicated around children in any way but I see little reason to discriminate against pot when valium and legal painkillers are ignored and alcohol is far worse.

ACman:

mikeybuthge:

ACman:

How exactly is the child going to get high? If you're smoking enough weed that the air is enough to get someone high then I agree you shouldn't be around children.

But I would be far more worried about children being harmed or killed by alcohol intoxication and I think being heavily drunk around children is far worse than the sleepy giggiliness that pot induces.

Blood conditions and tolerance levels are different for everyone, and yeah, there's less marijuana related deaths than alcohol, but its the same thing, shouldn't be done around children

Less marijuana related deaths. If by less you mean zero then yes there are less.

Obviously I am leaving out car accidents and other heavy machinery but if you can be around kids on valium then why not pot?

Obviously it is better not to be intoxicated around children in any way but I see little reason to discriminate against pot when valium and legal painkillers are ignored and alcohol is far worse.

Agree to the idea that none of it should be done around children then? cuz this is gonna go on for awhile, and i'd rather just agree on some kinda middle ground than just argue the same points post for post, i'm alright with marijuana being legalized, however, i think that there should be some discretion on who it's used around, agreeable?

mikeybuthge:

ACman:

mikeybuthge:

Blood conditions and tolerance levels are different for everyone, and yeah, there's less marijuana related deaths than alcohol, but its the same thing, shouldn't be done around children

Less marijuana related deaths. If by less you mean zero then yes there are less.

Obviously I am leaving out car accidents and other heavy machinery but if you can be around kids on valium then why not pot?

Obviously it is better not to be intoxicated around children in any way but I see little reason to discriminate against pot when valium and legal painkillers are ignored and alcohol is far worse.

Agree to the idea that none of it should be done around children then? cuz this is gonna go on for awhile, and i'd rather just agree on some kinda middle ground than just argue the same points post for post, i'm alright with marijuana being legalized, however, i think that there should be some discretion on who it's used around, agreeable?

Well yeah but realistically this can only be limited to moralising. You can't exactly criminalise doing these things around children.

Of course if child protection get involved then that's different. But that's only really going to happen when there are a full spectrum of problems (ie. delinquency, poor school attendance, poor hygiene etc etc.)

Can someone, ANYONE, explain to me why weed is so popular? I have done it, and while it was ok, it's not the greatest thing ever. I don't understand this rampant "OH MY GOD! I LOVE WEED!" type of attitude. I don't care if you smoke it mind you, but if you want to help your case (with me at least) try and curb your enthusiasm. If you think weed is the greatest thing ever, try having sex sometime. Just my 2 cents.

Th3Ch33s3Cak3:
Guess I'm never going to Canada again :/.

Seriously, what goverment would have such disrespect and lack of dignity to pass something like this? If my goverment were to do such a thing, I would leave the country.

You do not compromise with criminals, you arrest them. Such scum in humanity should be severly punished.

Obvious troll is obvious.

ACman:

mikeybuthge:

ACman:

Less marijuana related deaths. If by less you mean zero then yes there are less.

Obviously I am leaving out car accidents and other heavy machinery but if you can be around kids on valium then why not pot?

Obviously it is better not to be intoxicated around children in any way but I see little reason to discriminate against pot when valium and legal painkillers are ignored and alcohol is far worse.

Agree to the idea that none of it should be done around children then? cuz this is gonna go on for awhile, and i'd rather just agree on some kinda middle ground than just argue the same points post for post, i'm alright with marijuana being legalized, however, i think that there should be some discretion on who it's used around, agreeable?

Well yeah but realistically this can only be limited to moralising. You can't exactly criminalise doing these things around children.

Of course if child protection get involved then that's different. But that's only really going to happen when there are a full spectrum of problems (ie. delinquency, poor school attendance, poor hygiene etc etc.)

Super Six One:

GrandmaFunk:

Super Six One:
but think about this, you can smoke a fag, then climb in a car and drive away, without anything altering your judgement. If you get high and do the same thing you could easily get someone killed.

how would that be any different that alcohol?

(I say this, despite the fact that i don't even like comparing dope and alcohol)

It's not, but how would making marijuana legal help the situation at all? There is already a problem with people who think its ok to get behind the wheel of a car intoxicated. Making marijuana legal will create the same problem that alcohol has, people who think its ok to get high, then drive home. Hell the fact that it is legal might actually be better in that respect, people who smoke it might be avoid doing such because they are aware that if somthing happens(as in they get someone killed) they will get punished, possibly ever worse thank a drunk driver who did the same.

People drive high all the time. All the time. That's why they have laws against it. There's DWI, driving while intoxicated, and DUI, driving under the influence. To the layman, these are practically the same, but they're very different. DUI's can be for anything that impairs you behind the wheel. It's just as illegal to rail some coke or smoke some pot, if not more so, as it is to drive drunk . People already do this, there are already precautions in place. This argument has no real relevance to it's legalization whatsoever.

crazyarms33:
Can someone, ANYONE, explain to me why weed is so popular? I have done it, and while it was ok, it's not the greatest thing ever. I don't understand this rampant "OH MY GOD! I LOVE WEED!" type of attitude. I don't care if you smoke it mind you, but if you want to help your case (with me at least) try and curb your enthusiasm. If you think weed is the greatest thing ever, try having sex sometime. Just my 2 cents.

Because people like to get fucked up and anything higher up the ladder of drugs gets kind of scary for the average Joe. It's like the pop music or pepperoni pizza of drugs, lowest common denominator. Everyone can get down. There's a rebellious and spiritual aspect that goes with it, but to be honest, it comes down to feeling good. It affects people differently, some like it more than others. It's just preference, really.

crazyarms33:
Can someone, ANYONE, explain to me why weed is so popular? I have done it, and while it was ok, it's not the greatest thing ever. I don't understand this rampant "OH MY GOD! I LOVE WEED!" type of attitude. I don't care if you smoke it mind you, but if you want to help your case (with me at least) try and curb your enthusiasm. If you think weed is the greatest thing ever, try having sex sometime. Just my 2 cents.

I personally hate the way that pot make me feel. Specifically how ineloquent it makes me.

I used to love it but recently I've found that it just makes me paranoid.

But a lot of people I know seem to find that it puts them in a good place after a hard day of work.

Each to their own.

BOOM headshot65:

geK0:

BOOM headshot65:
-

That's a little off topic, but sure!

Legitimize it, regulate it, tax it!
Less STD infection, less abuse towards prostitutes, less human trafficking; seems like it would make it better for all parties involved.

;_;

I think i just died a little inside.

Yopaz:
They don't make something illegal just because it's harmful. They always need a reason to make something illegal. Also as long as marijuana is illegal the government got no control over it. It can be grown almost anywhere. It can take up toxins from the ground and cause widespread heavy metal poisoning. If it's legal there can be some proper control over it. Also you really think it will help sending users of marijuana to rehab? THC is stored within fat cells so it can take months before it's out of the system meaning they can go quite a while without ever being clean. You are misinformed about the subject and believe what you're being told. I don't want it to be legalized any more than you do, but I know that keeping it illegal wont do shit. You want addicts to be treated like criminals, but addiction isn't a crime.

You say it is not harmful or addicting. And yet:

THC is stored within fat cells so it can take months before it's out of the system

That seems harmful and addicting to me.

I just though I should throw this disclaimer out. You are talking to someone who want to be a cop. I would be more than happy busting people who do drugs. Heck, If I could, I would do that for being drunk or smoking ANYTHING, but I cant do that. Thats against the rules. But what I said still stands. The people who are using it are just victums of this disese known as illegal drugs. They need treatment. The people pushing it are the ones who are criminals. THEY need to be locked up for extended periods of time (20+ years). And the drug lords...

image

GrandmaFunk:

prostitutes are not some evil force that needs to be "taken down" by the national guard..that's totally ludicrous.

Prostitutes are not the evil ones here, and I never said they were. They are vitums too. They should go to rehab to (although, rehab from sexual abuse in this case). Its thier PIMPS that I want shot or locked up.

Ahaha, you want to be a cop. That impresses no one. For God sake you will be a terrible cop if you have this gun-ho attitude. You can't even spell properly let alone reason correctly. Grow up, get off Halo and stop being so outlandish.

crazyarms33:
Can someone, ANYONE, explain to me why weed is so popular? I have done it, and while it was ok, it's not the greatest thing ever. I don't understand this rampant "OH MY GOD! I LOVE WEED!" type of attitude. I don't care if you smoke it mind you, but if you want to help your case (with me at least) try and curb your enthusiasm. If you think weed is the greatest thing ever, try having sex sometime. Just my 2 cents.

I enjoy weed because I enjoy the occasional impairment to entertain/distract me. Alcohol is much more dangerous and much more expensive, and requires much more effort to get intoxicated, often with the side effect of nausea and hangovers. On the other hand, weed is an instant high, relatively cheap to grow, and of course much less health risks.

I don't worship it and my life doesn't revolve around it, but damn it would be nice to be able to enjoy it without having to watch my back constantly.

Th3Ch33s3Cak3:
Guess I'm never going to Canada again :/.

Seriously, what goverment would have such disrespect and lack of dignity to pass something like this? If my goverment were to do such a thing, I would leave the country.

You do not compromise with criminals, you arrest them. Such scum in humanity should be severly punished.

I can't tell if your trolling or serious, so I'll run with the assumption that your serious for now.

Firstly, I'd love if people who are blindly for the war on drugs would leave the country. It'd be a much better place without people who are in favour of wasting billions of dollars prosecuting people for non-violent offenses which are only illegal because some people don't like drugs, not because they should actually be criminal offences. In fact, the very idea of an act being criminal when it doesn't directly harm another human being is positively disgusting.

What you also completely ignore in your desire to not compromise with criminals is that the criminals have the power when it comes to drugs because it was given to them when governments made drugs illegal. If they were legalized, regulated and freely available to those who want them like alcohol, then there would be no need for people to consort with some legitimately dangerous people in order to get them. Instead, governments created, and have spent decades perpetuating a system whereby drugs are big business for those willing to risk jail time or even death providing them, and just like with alcohol prohibition in the early part of last century, that means actual criminals and generally bad people stepping in to fill the supply void left by drug prohibition.

Meanwhile, governments spend billions fighting a war on drugs they can't win any other way but through legalization (again, lessons learned a hundred goddamn years ago with alcohol), overcrowding jails with people convicted of minor drug possession charges, and perpetuating a status quo whereby cartels are happy to fight it out for their piece of the pie in places like Mexico while innocent people are caught in the crossfire. And that's without ever getting into the mistakes that are made in regularly sending SWAT teams to serve no knock warrants to people holding maybe a few ounces of pot, or getting the wrong address, and people who have died because of overzealous police trigger fingers.

Every government that still treats drug use and possession as criminal is responsible for every death that happens as a result of the war on drugs because they created the profitable situation for the criminals, and maintained that situation so long as they don't do anything to abolish bad legislation like this.

Th3Ch33s3Cak3:
Guess I'm never going to Canada again :/.

Seriously, what goverment would have such disrespect and lack of dignity to pass something like this? If my goverment were to do such a thing, I would leave the country.

You do not compromise with criminals, you arrest them. Such scum in humanity should be severly punished.

Someone has lived a sheltered life, lol. To be ignorant, im told, is bliss :)

OT - i think this is a wonderful step forward, and i wish my country was as mature and open. The medicinal applications for marijuana are manifold, and wouldn't you rather all that money that is ALREADY being given to drug dealers, instead go back to the government so they can improve infrastructure?

Plus, its so just much safer than alcohol. I challenge anybody to name even ONE person who has died directly from the use of marijuana.

Jonluw:

Jimmybobjr:

Jonluw:
You are aware that cannabis has been legal for thousands of year as well, right?
The bans on the drug started in the 20th century.

Alcohol is also technically a drug, and cannabis is already common.

I used the word "Legal" For lack of a better word... Perhaps a word like "Accepted", "Dependent" or "Integrated" would better suit what i mean. People drank more Alcoholic beverages than water, people worshiped wine, stuff like that.

Also, "Technicaly", almost all modern medicine is a drug.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis_(drug)#History

Cannabis was certainly both accepted and integrated in culture long ago. It doesn't say much about the recreational use, but from what I hear, there was no social stigma attached to it as late as the 18th century in the US.

The reason I pointed out that alcohol is a drug is that you said cannabis should be illegal because it is a drug, which just doesn't fly with me.

From what i read in that article, it seemed more of a thing that was used in Cults to get high and (Presumably) see god (Or something)

At no point in that link did it state that Cannabis was something you would go down to a local establishment and smoke.

I find this hardly a example of society being almost reliant on it.

this thread makes me incredibly angry

not because of Canada but because of the incredible bias against pot and the constant threats being made.

I prefer weed to alcohol for the following reasons. With weed you have an incredibly low chance of a hangover or other lasting ill-feeling.
You can feel a tad lazy for a day or two though. I also like the effects more because they aren't as strong as the effects of alcohol on your system. Another downside is that you have to be a pretty regular smoker if you "just want to get a tad tipsy" otherwise the effects will sort of hit you harder then a beer or 3/4. On the other hand the effects of weed can be brought down pretty quickly by eating, sugar and vitamin D. Alcohol is debilitating for as long as it's in your bloodstream.

I dislike alcohol because I find drunkenness disgusting most of the time. Because alcohol barely hits you at all sometimes and other times a glass or two can take you by surprise. And last of all of how addicting it is. I've had summers where i smoked tons of weed during the holiday but i've never felt the urge for some weed. Though if I look at the amounts of booze that the average person drinks throughout a normal month in college is just scary. It's become normal to drink untill you puke and then drink again at so many parties.

on a side note though I get my weed legally in Holland and carry it to my country illegally. I also believe a person should not touch pot before the age of 18(also keep in mind that the drinking age in my country is 16 for beer and 18 for liquor) (i sure as hell didn't) and that one should treat weed as if it's liquor. It's no problem to smoke it but for god's sake don't do it every day and treat it as if it could seriously mess you up, like you'd treat a bottle of wodka. You don't down wodka every weekend and you shouldn't smoke weed every week.

that's just my take on i, don't crucify me for it and thank you for reading it if you did :D

Jimmybobjr:

Jonluw:

Jimmybobjr:

I used the word "Legal" For lack of a better word... Perhaps a word like "Accepted", "Dependent" or "Integrated" would better suit what i mean. People drank more Alcoholic beverages than water, people worshiped wine, stuff like that.

Also, "Technicaly", almost all modern medicine is a drug.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis_(drug)#History

Cannabis was certainly both accepted and integrated in culture long ago. It doesn't say much about the recreational use, but from what I hear, there was no social stigma attached to it as late as the 18th century in the US.

The reason I pointed out that alcohol is a drug is that you said cannabis should be illegal because it is a drug, which just doesn't fly with me.

From what i read in that article, it seemed more of a thing that was used in Cults to get high and (Presumably) see god (Or something)

At no point in that link did it state that Cannabis was something you would go down to a local establishment and smoke.

I find this hardly a example of society being almost reliant on it.

Reliant? No.
Socially accepted? Yes.

Just watch it.

DailonCmann:

Super Six One:

GrandmaFunk:

how would that be any different that alcohol?

(I say this, despite the fact that i don't even like comparing dope and alcohol)

It's not, but how would making marijuana legal help the situation at all? There is already a problem with people who think its ok to get behind the wheel of a car intoxicated. Making marijuana legal will create the same problem that alcohol has, people who think its ok to get high, then drive home. Hell the fact that it is legal might actually be better in that respect, people who smoke it might be avoid doing such because they are aware that if somthing happens(as in they get someone killed) they will get punished, possibly ever worse thank a drunk driver who did the same.

People drive high all the time. All the time. That's why they have laws against it. There's DWI, driving while intoxicated, and DUI, driving under the influence. To the layman, these are practically the same, but they're very different. DUI's can be for anything that impairs you behind the wheel. It's just as illegal to rail some coke or smoke some pot, if not more so, as it is to drive drunk . People already do this, there are already precautions in place. This argument has no real relevance to it's legalization whatsoever.

Um, yes, it kind of does. Having it legal means it would be widley available to everyone, which means more people could smoke it, which means more people could "Drive high all the time. All the time". The arguement that just because people do it already when it is illegal and that the law should just fold over and make it legal so it is convenient for those people is idiotic. I'm not even against the drug, people just seem to think making it legal will have no downsides or repuercussions at all.

If you want to put drugs in your body, who am I to stop you? Carry on.

sunsetspawn:

Just watch it.

It's like a conspiracy man...

Eh, really though, I tend to disregard arguments when they use bad analogies right off the bat. Not that he's making zero sense, and he does make a few typical valid points but it kind of seems to me he doesn't quite get it.

So much condeming argument of me disrespecting the "holy plant"...I cant answer it all. So I will answer some and you can go from there.

Abandon4093:

Off the top of my head, your stance on war (all of them involving America it seems.)

Well, considering that is my "obsession"...I love researching any war the US has been involved in, and I support them all. Plus, I am pro-intervention, thus putting me into the minority that supported Korea, Vietnam, and Iraq, and now want to invade Syria, Iran, and I would personally like to add N. Korea to that list.

image

Your opinion of law enforcement and government.

What is there to it? 98% of the time, police and the Government are right.

And your understanding of anyone who isn't American.

Any true American will follow the laws of this land. If you break the law, you better have a VERY good reason, ie "Because the law is racist against black people"=good reason; "because I wanted some weed"=bad reason

You seem to view the world in stark black and white. "These are good people, these are bad people." But that's seldom ever the case.

In most cases I have seen, it is easy to sort out like that:

US Gov't=Good guy; China Gov't=Bad Guy
US Army=Good guy; Al'quida=bad guy
Police=Good guy; Drug Lords=bad guy

Olrod:
I'd hate to think what BOOM's opinion of the Netherlands is...

I will never go there, and If I could I would try to get them to change thier laws.

Let me guess, we should just nuke them, right?

No. Nukes are just as much of an abomination as drugs are, and I would love to get rid of those too.

JoesshittyOs:
Did I not just say it wasn't because I was being rebellious? Or did you miss that part? No, I got educated. I got smart. I realized that the government isn't always looking out for my best interest. It's not because I "think it's cool". It's because I can decide for myself. I look up facts, and the facts point to it being almost entirely docile.

So, you decided to just throw out the wisdom and expericance offered by your elders because "I want to do as I please?" Sounds rebellious to me.

And really? I was sort of joking around with the Above the Influence commercials, because anyone with an ounce of sense can see straight through them. Yeah. Pot turns you into a dwarf. Your dog doesn't like it when you smoke pot. Honestly? For one, they never even try to say what's dangerous about weed. They're against pot for... they never really say. Apparently it just makes us lazy. And that's fucking insane to them. Hell, in the couch one, they end up saying it's not even dangerous. And you really can't see the problem with those?

You obviously dont understand the symbols behind them. The first one is that peer pressure can be crushing to even the strongest morals (unless you are VERY strong-willed) Also, YES, lazyness IS insane. I know the he is supposed to be the bad guy, but Eden speaks alot of sense when he says:

"Lazyness Breeds stupidity." And now, I know that you are going to try and say that I am lazy. You, would be wrong. I go to school for 5 hours, then go and sack groceries for 4 hours, then go home and do homework until 9pm.

So basically what you're saying is they should enforce weed laws merely because it's a law? Not because it's dangerous, which you seem to be avoiding, but merely because it's a law? Because it would look bad if they didn't?

Yes, If they didnt enforce the law, then criminals would start to ask themselves "if I can get away with that one, then what else can I get away with?"

Cartel is making a large profit.

But the Cartels will just find a new revenue pit when you legalize this. By your definition, they should have died off after the alcohol prohibition, BUT THEY DIDNT! They just found something else to sell. The only way to get them is to destroy them.

Ever heard of Medical Marijuana?

Yes, I have, and I would be OK with it being legalized for medical purposes for EXTREME cases. And it would fall under my other defintion of drugs: Use as directed to the letter=good; even 1 pill/once/drop over=bad

Not to mention it's not my responsibility to provide sources for it not being bad. It's your responsibility to tell me exactly how it is bad. But hell, I'll do it anyways.http://www.drugpolicy.org/facts/drug-facts/marijuana-facts

They're probably the most reliable source out there. They compile data and test against some of the myths.

Sorry, they lost any chance of me seeing them as an objective, unbiased, and reliable the second I opened it and a petition calling to "end the drug war" poped up. They want to provide facts, that fine. Calling for an end to the drug war is not.

And guess what? Nothing bad's ever happened, besides getting a little paranoid.

But what about a year from now? Or 5 years? Or 20 years? Are you looking that far ahead?

That... honestly tells me a lot. Because they're pretty much the ones that have an agenda, and they're also ones that are gonna ignore the facts. Military? Elected officials? Business- How old are you?

I am 18, just finishing High school and going to college to study military history in the fall. But to answer your question; They have the most experiance, they are my elders, my bosses, my authority figures, thus, they will instantly get my attention.

Why the fuck did you list communists in there?

image
Thats why

And War protesters?

Because they refuse to support our soldiers. One of the soldiers I have talked to says he is annoyed whenever people tell him "I support you as a soldier, I just dont support the war." As he said "You cant seperate the two. Either you support both the war AND the soldier, or you support NEITHER the war and the soldier." As I have always said "If you cant stand behind our troops, please feel free to stand in front of them."

I'm getting a pretty good idea of what type of person you are. And I'm realizing just how close minded you are. Let me guess... You're still waiting for Obama to show his birth certificate?

No, and I want to smack Donald Trump across the face for even thinking that up. Barrack Obama may be a sub-par president, but he is a legal citizen of the United States and as president deserves respect, even if you dont approve of the job he is doing. Its a shame, while I didnt like his policy to begin with, I was hoping he would at least to good because he was our first African-American president. Shame.

Also, guess which one of the categories I fit into? Not one of them.

image

You would fall into this one:"People who says drugs are not bad for you"

And maybe this one: "Other teenagers" But I could be wrong since I dont know your age.

I got a brother in the army. Even considering joining myself.

I would be too, if it wasnt for two things:
1) I wouldnt be able to take getting shot at.
2) I wouldnt be able to take the constant moving between bases

Although, I LOVE the values they teach and follow them anyway (loyalty, brotherhood, patriotism, self-sacrifice for the greater good)

Now I doubt any of my words are getting through to you, but I do know something for a fact. You are against marijuana because someone else told you it's bad for you. Someone else decided for you.

Learn to take things with a grain of salt. Get educated.

You know what? Fine. Destroy any shread of morality and sense that still exist in America, just as long as you dont care that I will not bat an eyelash, shed a single tear, or give a damn when something bad happens from you being on this drug.

BOOM headshot65:
snip

Your opinions are painful to read. So much ignorance in one post.

Also you're not allowed to use images anymore. You abuse them and I think they give you a totally undeserved sense of satisfaction.

You know what? Fine. Destroy any shread of morality and sense that still exist in America, just as long as you dont care that I will not bat an eyelash, shed a single tear, or give a damn when something bad happens from you being on this drug.

Go look at the countries in the Netherlands, they're pretty much everything you hate and they're higher on the demographic scale than the US... Just saying.

Regnes:

sunsetspawn:

Just watch it.

It's like a conspiracy man...

Eh, really though, I tend to disregard arguments when they use bad analogies right off the bat. Not that he's making zero sense, and he does make a few typical valid points but it kind of seems to me he doesn't quite get it.

So is he wrong about the pharmaceutical lobby, tobacco lobby, prison lobby, or alcohol lobby?
Is he wrong about there being no deaths attributed to cannabis?

To just cry conspiracy-theorist reeks of disingenuousness when you don't actually address the points made in the video. Hurr durr, conspiracy, herp derp, jesus.
The truth is, the information contained in the video speaks for itself and I don't need to come here to defend it. But there's another point that the video doesn't make that I often ponder.

Marijuana is actually far more dangerous being illegal, but nobody dares talk about it.
Since the US government has labeled it schedule 1, which is on par with heroin and meth, and worse than cocaine, when youths learn that it's actually harmless they may begin to question the government's scheduling of all drugs. Anyone that approaches cocaine, meth, or heroin (and many prescription drugs) with the same level of nonchalance with which they can approach weed could very well be in for life ruining consequences, and possibly death.

Unfortunately, this is one of those topics where the vastly uninformed feel compelled to throw their opinions into the mix, no matter how wrong they are. I don't get it. For example, I know fuck-all about pottery, so I just stay the hell out of discussions about it.

Super Six One:

DailonCmann:

Super Six One:

(I say this, despite the fact that i don't even like comparing dope and alcohol)

It's not, but how would making marijuana legal help the situation at all? There is already a problem with people who think its ok to get behind the wheel of a car intoxicated. Making marijuana legal will create the same problem that alcohol has, people who think its ok to get high, then drive home. Hell the fact that it is legal might actually be better in that respect, people who smoke it might be avoid doing such because they are aware that if somthing happens(as in they get someone killed) they will get punished, possibly ever worse thank a drunk driver who did the same.

People drive high all the time. All the time. That's why they have laws against it. There's DWI, driving while intoxicated, and DUI, driving under the influence. To the layman, these are practically the same, but they're very different. DUI's can be for anything that impairs you behind the wheel. It's just as illegal to rail some coke or smoke some pot, if not more so, as it is to drive drunk . People already do this, there are already precautions in place. This argument has no real relevance to it's legalization whatsoever.

Um, yes, it kind of does. Having it legal means it would be widley available to everyone, which means more people could smoke it, which means more people could "Drive high all the time. All the time". The arguement that just because people do it already when it is illegal and that the law should just fold over and make it legal so it is convenient for those people is idiotic. I'm not even against the drug, people just seem to think making it legal will have no downsides or repuercussions at all.

You're going on the logical fallacy that because something is legal, it means more people will smoke. Pot is already widely available. Everyone who wants to smoke pot can do so fairly easily. It's actually easier for most kids to get than more legal drugs like alcohol or tobacco. Listen, the fact of the matter is that you are not part of this culture and as such you have no idea what pot, people who smoke pot, or anything you can't glean from the internet is like. From what you've said in your arguments, you seem to have very little firsthand experience. The positives that are gained from legalization, regulation, and taxation seem to vastly outweigh any societal ills you can come up with.

sunsetspawn:

So is he wrong about the pharmaceutical lobby, tobacco lobby, prison lobby, or alcohol lobby?
Is he wrong about there being no deaths attributed to cannabis?

To just cry conspiracy-theorist reeks of disingenuousness when you don't actually address the points made in the video. Hurr durr, conspiracy, herp derp, jesus.
The truth is, the information contained in the video speaks for itself and I don't need to come here to defend it. But there's another point that the video doesn't make that I often ponder.

You're aware I made this thread and that I'm pro-legalization right? The conspiracy bit was a joke, I was simply pointing out that he's pretty bad at making analogies. The reason why marijuana has been outlawed is because of false reasoning that it is addictive and thus prone to be abused. Going on to say that by the same reasoning we should outlaw bridges because people jump off of them, implying that jumping off of bridges is addictive in nature, as is stabbing yourself with a fork.

I don't disagree with his core points, just saying he could have made them better.

Now if you will excuse me, I need to go stab myself with a fork.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked