Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The New York Times)   New York State Supreme Court Justice, suffering from pancreatic cancer, begs state legislature to legalize medical marijuana: "It is barbaric to deny us access to one substance that has proved to ameliorate our suffering"   (nytimes.com) divider line 14
    More: Sad, new york state supreme court, supreme court justices, New York, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, state legislature, state senate, marijuana, palliative  
•       •       •

1779 clicks; posted to Politics » on 17 May 2012 at 11:34 PM (3 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Funniest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-05-17 09:37:54 PM  
4 votes:

Ryan2065: GAT_00: My refusal to fully back it is because I view the majority of supporters are nothing more than stoners looking to circumvent the laws. They care nothing of medical ethics, they just want to snicker and pretend they are sick and ask for weed. Look at how many dispensaries have nothing to do with medicine. I refuse to support such activity

GAT_00: Or just makes the rules to authorize it a lot harder to knock that shiat off. It wouldn't be hard. But the stoners who are the backers of this don't want that, so you're left with an idea with promise backed by a legion of worthless morons.

Or just legalize it...


He will not budge on this. I have him farkied as "99.9% right about everything, but tragically abused by pot smokers as a child."
2012-05-18 07:46:38 AM  
2 votes:
I HAVE VERY STRONG OPINIONS AND I WILL SHARE THEM WITH ALL OF YOU

THEY ARE CORRECT

BECAUSE I AM SAYING THEM

DAMN STONERS
2012-05-18 01:28:30 AM  
2 votes:
Clearly, cancer is a gateway condition to drugs. He should be jailed. In fact all people who have cancer should be placed in prison. We can't have then smoking dope. They should be paying the drug companies for all of their less than adequate pills.
2012-05-17 11:50:01 PM  
2 votes:
I hope this judge loses his job. He is admitting to criminal behavior while he sits in judgement of the law.

Such a hypocrite.. he must be a democrat.
2012-05-18 05:01:43 AM  
1 votes:
s3-ec.buzzfed.com
2012-05-18 02:23:36 AM  
1 votes:
Well. I guess SOMEBODY just got told...
2012-05-18 01:30:38 AM  
1 votes:

firefly212: GAT_00: Ryan2065: GAT_00: I don't have a problem with it in principle, and I see no legitimate reason to deny it to people like this. But the guidelines for getting it have to be toughen up to stop stones.

I see no legitimate reason to deny it to anyone 18+

My refusal to fully back it is because I view the majority of supporters are nothing more than stoners looking to circumvent the laws. They care nothing of medical ethics, they just want to snicker and pretend they are sick and ask for weed. Look at how many dispensaries have nothing to do with medicine. I refuse to support such activity.

So I shouldn't get the medicine my neurologist and I agree is best for my MS because you hate dirty hippies. Ya, that seems logical.


I wouldn't worry about it. Gat's sphere of influence beyond his mom's basement exists only in his own mind. By the time he's of voting age, he'll have mellowed out.
2012-05-18 12:33:25 AM  
1 votes:

tenpoundsofcheese: Judge breaking law because it is convenient to him.

What a surprise.


Reflexive idiot doesn't understand how a change in perspective works. What a surprise.
2012-05-17 11:48:42 PM  
1 votes:

Smackledorfer: GAT_00: I don't have a problem with it in principle, and I see no legitimate reason to deny it to people like this. But the guidelines for getting it have to be toughen up to stop stones.

Gat00, troll or closet authoritarian?


c: member of the Board of Directors for a major pharmaceutical or liquor corporation
2012-05-17 11:45:46 PM  
1 votes:

Fair_Poopsmith: GAT_00: Fair_Poopsmith: GAT_00:
False equivalence is false. The equivalence would be 'gay pe ...

Again, I say... You're not wrong about any of this, but it has no bearing on your conclusion that there is value in keeping criminal penalties for an unspecified cannabis-using lifestyle.

And where have I said anything about that?

GAT_00: I'm saying make sure it can't be abused.

I'm not sure how you plan to do this without 1) taking for granted that it's possible to "abuse" cannabis any more than you can abuse food (watching Dave Chappelle movies and eating chips while being sort of lazy may really stick in your craw, but it doesn't constitute "abuse") 2) drawing an arbitrary line somewhere, 3) enacting criminal penalties for crossing said line.


I abuse my penis every day. It is still not illegal (though I wouldn't put it past Republicans to pass a law...)
2012-05-17 10:19:41 PM  
1 votes:

GAT_00: djkutch: GAT_00: Ryan2065: GAT_00: I don't have a problem with it in principle, and I see no legitimate reason to deny it to people like this. But the guidelines for getting it have to be toughen up to stop stones.

I see no legitimate reason to deny it to anyone 18+

My refusal to fully back it is because I view the majority of supporters are nothing more than stoners looking to circumvent the laws. They care nothing of medical ethics, they just want to snicker and pretend they are sick and ask for weed. Look at how many dispensaries have nothing to do with medicine. I refuse to support such activity.

Stoners are too lazy for such Machiavellian activities.

I'd much rather be in a traffic with someone stoned on a mission to get to Taco Bell than the white collar guy that just drank his lunch.

Just legalize, regulate and tax it already.

And that's also why you can't get it passed. Pro-legalization protests are filled with people who show up stoned and look like the type of people who contribute nothing. If you really want legalization to get somewhere, you have to look like you're worth something. A crowd of people who don't look like stoners calling for legalization is worth far more than the usual protests.

If you want the establishment to listen, you have to play at least some of their game. If you look like you should be ignored, you'll get ignored. Its why I went to one OWS protest and left when I realized at least half of the people were currently stoned. Its so farking stupid and easy to not shoot yourself in the foot like that.


I would dare opine that marijuana legalization has less to do with the appearance of its proponents than a prohibition law that is just effective as alcohol and prohibition was.

And, the scary trend of privatizing prisons. You have to fill those cells up. There's money in those confused stoners overwhelmed with the choices for building a burrito at Chiptole.
2012-05-17 09:59:23 PM  
1 votes:
I say make it full legal, 21 and up.

But cmon, you're a justice, you should be able to get access to some good shiat.
2012-05-17 09:54:48 PM  
1 votes:

Fair_Poopsmith: GAT_00: I'm not saying throw them all in jail, I'm not saying make sentences more severe, I'm saying make sure it can't be abused.

What consititutes abuse? What would you suggest for a VERY heavy pot smoker who also holds down a good job, doesn't do anything stupid like drive while stoned, and keeps it away from children?


The abuse I'm taking about here is people getting bogus claims of pain and injury and getting access to legal pot, nothing more wide ranging than that.
2012-05-17 09:30:05 PM  
1 votes:

GAT_00: Chameleon: GAT_00: My refusal to fully back it is because I view the majority of supporters are nothing more than stoners looking to circumvent the laws. They care nothing of medical ethics, they just want to snicker and pretend they are sick and ask for weed. Look at how many dispensaries have nothing to do with medicine. I refuse to support such activity.

While I agree that seeing "medical" pot shops with shiatty pun names that cater to college kids with "back problems" is annoying as all damn hell, that's still not a good reason to keep it illegal. In fact, by legalizing pot completely, you'd get medical usage to gain back respectibility and authenticity since they can start, you know, actually providing it to medical patients.

Or just makes the rules to authorize it a lot harder to knock that shiat off. It wouldn't be hard. But the stoners who are the backers of this don't want that, so you're left with an idea with promise backed by a legion of worthless morons.


And yet, in every war on drugs thread you blame conservatives.

Yet here you are, the ever loyal drug warrior. Allowing people like the judge here to suffer needlessly because you hate stoners.

You complain about people mocking medical ethics, yet you support policies that allow tremendous amounts of suffering.

But hey, people living in agony are acceptable casualties in Gat's war on weed.
 
Displayed 14 of 14 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report