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 Raw Story)   "I think it's really absurd to be criminalizing possession or use or distribution of marijuana. I can't see any difference between that and cigarettes". Said by: A) Cheech B) Chong C) A highly respected, conservative, Reagan-appointed Federal Judge   (rawstory.com) divider line 278
    More: Spiffy, Posner, Ronald Reagan, distribution, marijuana legalization, cigarettes, marijuana  
•       •       •

7789 clicks; posted to Main » on 09 Sep 2012 at 12:11 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



278 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-09-09 12:51:41 PM

Pathman: Shadowknight: The rest of the harder drugs should stay illegal

why?
what kind of harder drugs?


Coke, crack, "bath salts" and meth, illegally obtained medicinal narcotics... you know, that kind of stuff. Especially meth and bath salts. Hell, include "Spice" in that too.

I'll take 10,000 crack heads in my ambulance before I want to be dealing with another meth user. Twitchy, violent bastards.
 
2012-09-09 12:52:52 PM

Zizzowop: All I know about DARE is, they have cool cars/drag cars, etc.


Oh yes. Our DARE officer had a sweet ride, and he is still the nicest cop I've ever interacted with in person.

I almost feel bad he had to shovel that garbage to us in retrospect. A lot of my friends lost a lot of respect for him and the police in general. They smoked pot and realized everything that they learned from the longest police interaction in their lives was a complete lie.

I think DARE is one of the biggest reasons my generation believes cops are inherently liars.
 
2012-09-09 12:53:37 PM

fluffy2097: Shadowknight: because programs like D.A.R.E. tell kids that they'll be hopelessly hooked and be sucking cocks for joints after the first time. Then they try it and go "Huh, they lied about that. Probably lied about the rest too."

*DING DING DING DING DING!*

D.A.R.E Also showed me what a properly rolled joint looks like, and how to identify weed as opposed to say, oregano. DARE only made me a better educated drug user.

"huh they lied about this, the rest must be lies too" is almost word for word the conclusion I came to after trying pot.

D.A.R.E got me to say no to drugs from 6th to 9th grade. I didn't even have a guy before then thus had no access.


I knew about drugs before I had to sit through D.A.R.E. presentations, thanks to right-winger child-raising books my mom kept. There's one by Dobson (UGH) where he lists ALL manner of drugs, their street names, their descriptions, and their effects, all in a nice, neat chart in the back of the book. GOOD JOB, JAMES.
 
2012-09-09 12:54:41 PM

moefuggenbrew: Shadowknight: /probably never will smoke it, even if it was legal

When you get old and your body starts to deteriorate; or if you get injured. Your choices for pain relief will undoubtedly come down to a prescription with insanely high cost and many, terrible side effects.

Or

Weed.


That's why I said "Probably." In my life, I've learned to never say never. But how about I amend that to say "Probably never smoke it for pleasure."

I already eat terrible with nightly munchies and giggle at cartoons. Getting high would be a disaster for me.
 
2012-09-09 12:55:07 PM

Shadowknight: Coke, crack, "bath salts" and meth, illegally obtained medicinal narcotics... you know, that kind of stuff. Especially meth and bath salts. Hell, include "Spice" in that too.


Bath salts is the dumbest shiat I've seen in my life. You'd be much safer drinking pure wood alcohol.

The prohibition of them is only making them worse. They ban a chemical compound and the chemists just synthesize another analogue of the chemical, which is inevitably more dangerous then the previous chemical.

/Not to mention almost all of the people who use it do so because its "a legal high"
 
2012-09-09 12:56:04 PM

Zizzowop: I agree with what someone else said, why shouldn't you be able to grow a plant-for personal use-in your backyard. It's no different than growing tomatoes, except tomatoes don't get you high, but if I could grow a six-pack of beer in my backyard, I would.


Six packs brew in the kitchen, not the garden, Francis.
 
2012-09-09 12:56:06 PM

Quaker: Shadowknight: The rest of the harder drugs should stay illegal...

Why? Keeping them illegal hasn't kept them out of the hands of the people who want them, and in the process it's provided an enormous source of funding for violent street gangs and cartels both domestically and abroad. Additionally, prohibition exponentially increases the cost to the end user, which encourages them to commit other crimes like burglaries and robberies to fund their addictions.


Fine, let's put all drugs OTC , but when you overdose, misuse, misdiagnose, end up in a wreck, or end up a wreck, you can't sue or get on tv and whine about it, and you pay for your own medical/addiction treatment, or treatment of those you might have injured.
 
2012-09-09 12:57:01 PM

snocone: Six packs brew in the kitchen, not the garden, Francis.


You could grow hops and wheat/barley in the back yard for beer if you had a sufficiently large back yard.
 
2012-09-09 12:58:27 PM

fluffy2097: Shadowknight: Coke, crack, "bath salts" and meth, illegally obtained medicinal narcotics... you know, that kind of stuff. Especially meth and bath salts. Hell, include "Spice" in that too.

Bath salts is the dumbest shiat I've seen in my life. You'd be much safer drinking pure wood alcohol.

The prohibition of them is only making them worse. They ban a chemical compound and the chemists just synthesize another analogue of the chemical, which is inevitably more dangerous then the previous chemical.

/Not to mention almost all of the people who use it do so because its "a legal high"


Again, I think DARE needs to prioritize better. Tell the truth about weed (You probably won't die unless it's laced with something, but you likely won't be very productive either") and start educating people as to what these so called "legal" highs are made of.

Just because a trailer park chemist says it's legal, doesn't mean it's a god idea.
 
2012-09-09 12:58:30 PM

fluffy2097: snocone: Six packs brew in the kitchen, not the garden, Francis.

You could grow hops and wheat/barley in the back yard for beer if you had a sufficiently large back yard.


Not in Minnesota.
Fortunately, available and cheap, as God intended.
 
2012-09-09 12:59:34 PM

Shadowknight: fluffy2097: Shadowknight: Coke, crack, "bath salts" and meth, illegally obtained medicinal narcotics... you know, that kind of stuff. Especially meth and bath salts. Hell, include "Spice" in that too.

Bath salts is the dumbest shiat I've seen in my life. You'd be much safer drinking pure wood alcohol.

The prohibition of them is only making them worse. They ban a chemical compound and the chemists just synthesize another analogue of the chemical, which is inevitably more dangerous then the previous chemical.

/Not to mention almost all of the people who use it do so because its "a legal high"

Again, I think DARE needs to prioritize better. Tell the truth about weed (You probably won't die unless it's laced with something, but you likely won't be very productive either") and start educating people as to what these so called "legal" highs are made of.

Just because a trailer park chemist says it's legal, doesn't mean it's a god idea.


Simply telling the truth for a change might be an option, but I doubt it can happen.
 
2012-09-09 12:59:52 PM

give me doughnuts: zvoidx: What if it becomes legalized, but can only be purchased in "packs" from big tobacco companies?

Just think of all the additives they would add, like ammonia and ether - like they do with cigarettes. Link

Then do what millions already do: Grow your own.


I'm not saying it as a matter-of-fact, just considering that as a possible future scenario; legalized, but only if it involves big corporate profits.

I mean, if it was legal for people to grow their own there really wouldn't be any incentive to pass a law versus a controlled profit scheme. I can see this as an eventual compromise.

And, if so - there would be a ton of additives involved.
 
2012-09-09 01:01:39 PM
Here's my take on it, decriminalize possession of ALL drugs in recreational or medicinal amounts. Allow the growing and distribution of Marijuana in small batches such as personal use and to friends and such, allow larger scale production and regulated in the same way as it is done for tobacco. Allow possession of the harder stuff with a prescription. Allow production of these substances in order to treat addiction and handle the whole thing on the healthcare side. Criminal possession only comes into play if you possess more than you could possibly consume by yourself. Possession without a prescription means confiscation of drugs and a referral to some sort of rehab. Treatment of addiction as a medical problem rather than a legal problem would probably do far more to cut demand of these drugs than just arresting the end users and throwing them into jail for decades.
 
2012-09-09 01:02:34 PM

stiletto_the_wise: give me doughnuts: zvoidx: What if it becomes legalized, but can only be purchased in "packs" from big tobacco companies?

Just think of all the additives they would add, like ammonia and ether - like they do with cigarettes. Link

Then do what millions already do: Grow your own.

Good luck with that. Part of a "legalization" package would almost certainly include bans on growing. The corporations wouldn't allow otherwise.


Growing and selling without an undogly amount of paperwork, pointless 'quality control' and prohibitively expensive equipment? Yeah they won't allow that. But growing for personal use they have no choice but to allow in that deal.

And guys being high behind the wheel makes you about as dangerous as driving past your bedtime. It's just not that big of an issue. I really don't understand why people get hung up on that. It's not like booze and you know this, man!

FYI: You passed several stoned drivers last week and didn't even know or need to know.

You passed even more seniors whacked out on scripts too.
 
2012-09-09 01:03:54 PM

snocone: Zizzowop: I agree with what someone else said, why shouldn't you be able to grow a plant-for personal use-in your backyard. It's no different than growing tomatoes, except tomatoes don't get you high, but if I could grow a six-pack of beer in my backyard, I would.

Six packs brew in the kitchen, not the garden, Francis.


True, I had a friend that loved brewing his own stuff, but nothing is as simple as clipping the plant, letting it dry and you're done.
 
2012-09-09 01:04:26 PM

zvoidx: I'm not saying it as a matter-of-fact, just considering that as a possible future scenario; legalized, but only if it involves big corporate profits.

I mean, if it was legal for people to grow their own there really wouldn't be any incentive to pass a law versus a controlled profit scheme. I can see this as an eventual compromise.

And, if so - there would be a ton of additives involved.


Pot users wont stand for additives.

Philip Morris might be able to to produce chemical laden joints, but existing growers would probably just incorporate, grow high quality weed, and force tobacco companies out of the market by producing a better quality profit. The current growers would become the large corporations making money hand over fist if it was legalized. It's not even legal now and non profit growers are making enough money to afford million dollar paychecks for it's employees.
 
2012-09-09 01:04:27 PM
I am very right-wing (as evidenced by my politics posts) and I see no issue with marijuana. It's effect is not warranting putting it in a prohibited status. Save the prohibitions for stuff that can't be safely consumed in moderation.

And for the posters who want to land the drug war entirely at the feet of Republicans. The federal gov't is in the hands of Democrats almost in its entirety. So what's up with federal raids on medicinal marijuana places?
 
2012-09-09 01:04:35 PM

Shadowknight: moefuggenbrew: Shadowknight: /probably never will smoke it, even if it was legal

When you get old and your body starts to deteriorate; or if you get injured. Your choices for pain relief will undoubtedly come down to a prescription with insanely high cost and many, terrible side effects.

Or

Weed.

That's why I said "Probably." In my life, I've learned to never say never. But how about I amend that to say "Probably never smoke it for pleasure."

I already eat terrible with nightly munchies and giggle at cartoons. Getting high would be a disaster for me.


Cool, for some reason you made me think of this video. =)
Grandpa smokes weed for the first time
 
2012-09-09 01:04:47 PM
Legalize everything, and allow natural selection to work.
 
2012-09-09 01:05:36 PM

lewismarktwo: stiletto_the_wise: give me doughnuts: zvoidx: What if it becomes legalized, but can only be purchased in "packs" from big tobacco companies?

Just think of all the additives they would add, like ammonia and ether - like they do with cigarettes. Link

Then do what millions already do: Grow your own.

Good luck with that. Part of a "legalization" package would almost certainly include bans on growing. The corporations wouldn't allow otherwise.

Growing and selling without an undogly amount of paperwork, pointless 'quality control' and prohibitively expensive equipment? Yeah they won't allow that. But growing for personal use they have no choice but to allow in that deal.

And guys being high behind the wheel makes you about as dangerous as driving past your bedtime. It's just not that big of an issue. I really don't understand why people get hung up on that. It's not like booze and you know this, man!

FYI: You passed several stoned drivers last week and didn't even know or need to know.

You passed even more seniors whacked out on scripts too.


In just a very few short years, cars will be driving themselves.

Where is your NANNY MINDSET now? You are going to need a new con to keep your precious drug profits.
 
2012-09-09 01:07:55 PM

lewismarktwo: stiletto_the_wise: give me doughnuts: zvoidx: What if it becomes legalized, but can only be purchased in "packs" from big tobacco companies?

Just think of all the additives they would add, like ammonia and ether - like they do with cigarettes. Link

Then do what millions already do: Grow your own.

Good luck with that. Part of a "legalization" package would almost certainly include bans on growing. The corporations wouldn't allow otherwise.

Growing and selling without an undogly amount of paperwork, pointless 'quality control' and prohibitively expensive equipment? Yeah they won't allow that. But growing for personal use they have no choice but to allow in that deal.

And guys being high behind the wheel makes you about as dangerous as driving past your bedtime. It's just not that big of an issue. I really don't understand why people get hung up on that. It's not like booze and you know this, man!

FYI: You passed several stoned drivers last week and didn't even know or need to know.

You passed even more seniors whacked out on scripts too.


As a former police officer and a current medic, you are very wrong about the DUI thing. I've been to too many accidents for you to tell me otherwise. It's an intoxicant, let's not fool ourselves.

You've likely passed quite a few drunks well over the legal limit too this week. Doesn't mean it's a good idea.
 
2012-09-09 01:09:28 PM
Actually, that's what any real conservative would say. Drug laws were pushed onto this country by the progressive left.
 
2012-09-09 01:09:32 PM

D_Evans45: Also the plants are bright green and grow out of the ground! This is so dangerous and illegal.


The illegal drugs are always easy to spot because they don't have Merck, Phizer or Eli Lily stamped on them.
 
2012-09-09 01:10:21 PM

Shadowknight: As a former police officer and a current medic, you are very wrong about the DUI thing. I've been to too many accidents for you to tell me otherwise. It's an intoxicant, let's not fool ourselves.


Yup, you can absolutely get too high to drive. The whole tolerance model of it is vastly different from alcohol though. A chronic stoner will be a much safer driver then a chronic drunk.
 
2012-09-09 01:11:45 PM

Mrbogey: I am very right-wing (as evidenced by my politics posts) and I see no issue with marijuana. It's effect is not warranting putting it in a prohibited status. Save the prohibitions for stuff that can't be safely consumed in moderation.

And for the posters who want to land the drug war entirely at the feet of Republicans. The federal gov't is in the hands of Democrats almost in its entirety. So what's up with federal raids on medicinal marijuana places?


It's not a left or right issue, in this case. Granted, people on the left seem baby and large more in favor of legalization, but the people at the top of both parties are unwilling to state their true beliefs on this issue simply because we have three decades worth of telling kids that pot will kill you if you so much as smell it.

It would be, in their estimation, political suicide to come out and say you want to legalize something the government has spent the last century demonizing. So it's not likely to change.
 
2012-09-09 01:11:46 PM

Mrbogey: Save the prohibitions for stuff that can't be safely consumed in moderation.


You don't even have to worry about moderation with weed. Consume too much of it, you just fall asleep.
 
2012-09-09 01:12:37 PM
Thanks judge. Sick of the noisy black Fed helicopters. What a waste.
 
2012-09-09 01:13:06 PM

yelmrog: You don't even have to worry about moderation with weed. Consume too much of it, you just fall asleep.


You can pass out, fall down and hit your head. It's called whiting out.
 
2012-09-09 01:14:43 PM

Shadowknight: Quaker: Shadowknight: The rest of the harder drugs should stay illegal...

Why? Keeping them illegal hasn't kept them out of the hands of the people who want them, and in the process it's provided an enormous source of funding for violent street gangs and cartels both domestically and abroad. Additionally, prohibition exponentially increases the cost to the end user, which encourages them to commit other crimes like burglaries and robberies to fund their addictions.

Don't get me wrong, I think more money should be diverted from enforcement and put into prevention and rehab programs, but keeping them an enforceable material still helps keep it scarce.

Ever dealt with a tweaker while they were coming down? I have, and have scars on my legs to prove it.


that's not an argument for keeping "harder" drugs illegal
ever dealt with someone with delirium tremens?
 
2012-09-09 01:15:14 PM

Shadowknight: If I found a bail in your trunk, yeah, you're going to jail... I'd usually just take the small personal stash and turn it into evidence disposal...


Drugs shouldn't be illegal, but stealing and kidnapping should.

Asshole.
 
2012-09-09 01:17:31 PM

Shadowknight: It's time to end such a silly prohibition and treat it like we do alcohol.


The alcohol companies - as well as tobacco and pharmaceutical companies - have a problem with this, which is one of the reasons marijuana remains illegal.

I don't agree with them, of course - protectionism is not a practice of a free market - but their influence over drug policy more than likely trumps the moral outrage of social conservatives.
 
2012-09-09 01:17:51 PM

fluffy2097: Shadowknight: As a former police officer and a current medic, you are very wrong about the DUI thing. I've been to too many accidents for you to tell me otherwise. It's an intoxicant, let's not fool ourselves.

Yup, you can absolutely get too high to drive. The whole tolerance model of it is vastly different from alcohol though. A chronic stoner will be a much safer driver then a chronic drunk.


But anyone who is actively high, actively drunk, or tired beyond belief is about an equal and dangerous risk on the road.

We do have ways of checking for active intoxication, mostly having to do with movement and dilation of the pupils. We'd have to find a solid way of documenting and quantifying that, as that reasoning may be enough for a probable cause search but not prosecution being that it's based on personal observation. That means money in training, equipment, and of course the regulatory laws that would have to come along with legalization...

Eh, there is a couple reasons I got out of enforcement. These headaches are one of them.
 
2012-09-09 01:18:19 PM

Shadowknight: Mrbogey: I am very right-wing (as evidenced by my politics posts) and I see no issue with marijuana. It's effect is not warranting putting it in a prohibited status. Save the prohibitions for stuff that can't be safely consumed in moderation.

And for the posters who want to land the drug war entirely at the feet of Republicans. The federal gov't is in the hands of Democrats almost in its entirety. So what's up with federal raids on medicinal marijuana places?

It's not a left or right issue, in this case. Granted, people on the left seem baby and large more in favor of legalization, but the people at the top of both parties are unwilling to state their true beliefs on this issue simply because we have three decades worth of telling kids that pot will kill you if you so much as smell it.

It would be, in their estimation, political suicide to come out and say you want to legalize something the government has spent the last century demonizing. So it's not likely to change.


Is it not a curious state of affairs when the political leaders are afraid of thelling the truth?

That is some super double military secret strength fearmongering right there.
 
2012-09-09 01:20:01 PM

Shadowknight: lewismarktwo: stiletto_the_wise: give me doughnuts: zvoidx: What if it becomes legalized, but can only be purchased in "packs" from big tobacco companies?

Just think of all the additives they would add, like ammonia and ether - like they do with cigarettes. Link

Then do what millions already do: Grow your own.

Good luck with that. Part of a "legalization" package would almost certainly include bans on growing. The corporations wouldn't allow otherwise.

Growing and selling without an undogly amount of paperwork, pointless 'quality control' and prohibitively expensive equipment? Yeah they won't allow that. But growing for personal use they have no choice but to allow in that deal.

And guys being high behind the wheel makes you about as dangerous as driving past your bedtime. It's just not that big of an issue. I really don't understand why people get hung up on that. It's not like booze and you know this, man!

FYI: You passed several stoned drivers last week and didn't even know or need to know.

You passed even more seniors whacked out on scripts too.

As a former police officer and a current medic, you are very wrong about the DUI thing. I've been to too many accidents for you to tell me otherwise. It's an intoxicant, let's not fool ourselves.

You've likely passed quite a few drunks well over the legal limit too this week. Doesn't mean it's a good idea.


I saw a
 
2012-09-09 01:20:22 PM

Pathman: Shadowknight: Quaker: Shadowknight: The rest of the harder drugs should stay illegal...

Why? Keeping them illegal hasn't kept them out of the hands of the people who want them, and in the process it's provided an enormous source of funding for violent street gangs and cartels both domestically and abroad. Additionally, prohibition exponentially increases the cost to the end user, which encourages them to commit other crimes like burglaries and robberies to fund their addictions.

Don't get me wrong, I think more money should be diverted from enforcement and put into prevention and rehab programs, but keeping them an enforceable material still helps keep it scarce.

Ever dealt with a tweaker while they were coming down? I have, and have scars on my legs to prove it.

that's not an argument for keeping "harder" drugs illegal
ever dealt with someone with delirium tremens?


Yes, and I agree it can be worse than some of the others. Heroin included. But alcohol takes a LONG time to get to that level in your system.
 
2012-09-09 01:20:41 PM
Damnit, it ate my link
 
2012-09-09 01:21:24 PM

Shadowknight: lewismarktwo: stiletto_the_wise: give me doughnuts: zvoidx:...

As a former police officer and a current medic, you are very wrong about the DUI thing. I've been to too many accidents for you to tell me otherwise. It's an intoxicant, let's not fool ourselves.

You've likely passed quite a few drunks well over the legal limit too this week. Doesn't mean it's a good idea.


Unless they were distracted by dropping their joint ala Big Lewbowski, those accidents had nothing to do with the weed. It makes you drive like someone who needs to take a nap, nothing more. There are these scientific tests and stuff, duder.

I've driven drunk and I've driven high. The experience is not the same. Being drunk severely effects your motor control and thinking process, being comfortably high does not. I will never drive drunk again because it really is pathetically irresponsible.

If you ever manage to get get stoned enough to where driving would actually be similarly dangerous, you simply never get around to driving. 'These stale Ritz crackers are not so bad, I'll go shopping later ...zzzzzz'

I'm sure you saw many accidents where weed was admitted to being used, mainly because that shiat is obvious and they know they have to cop to it.. They forgot to tell you about the fistful of Xannies they took. I bet you saw a lot of cigarettes and water bottles too.
 
2012-09-09 01:21:30 PM

Alphakronik: Legalize everything, and allow natural selection to work.


That was the de facto drug policy for the majority of human history. Only int he last 100 years, after we distilled natural substances into concentrated addictive forms did it become a problem. People in the South America have (and do) chew Cocoa leaves like gum to relieve fatigue cause my high altitude with little negative effect to their overall health. Opium was considered a divine blessing for its pain reliving properties.

Addiction has more to do with genetic makeup and emotional health than any drug. No five year old wants to be a crack whore when she grow up. Sure drug addiction ruins lives, but so does gambling addiction, shopping addiction, sex addiction, etc.

TL;DR: You can take drugs away addicts but they are still addicts. Drug addiction is a health and not criminal issue.
 
2012-09-09 01:21:39 PM

Pathman: zvoidx: What if it becomes legalized, but can only be purchased in "packs" from big tobacco companies?

Just think of all the additives they would add, like ammonia and ether - like they do with cigarettes. Link

yeah - kind of like how growing your own tomatos is illegal.


It is though illegal to sell said tomatoes (hygiene trails and all), but (depending on your local laws) you may be able to give them away.
 
2012-09-09 01:21:49 PM

DrPainMD: Shadowknight: If I found a bail in your trunk, yeah, you're going to jail... I'd usually just take the small personal stash and turn it into evidence disposal...

Drugs shouldn't be illegal, but stealing and kidnapping should.

Asshole.


This would be other other major reason I got out of the police department after I got hurt. I was always the asshole, even when I could have run their lives into the dirt and instead cut them a break.
 
2012-09-09 01:22:56 PM

Commander_Neckbeard: Damnit, it ate my link


That's OK, I
 
2012-09-09 01:24:35 PM

nmemkha: Alphakronik: Legalize everything, and allow natural selection to work.

That was the de facto drug policy for the majority of human history. Only int he last 100 years, after we distilled natural substances into concentrated addictive forms did it become a problem. People in the South America have (and do) chew Cocoa leaves like gum to relieve fatigue cause my high altitude with little negative effect to their overall health. Opium was considered a divine blessing for its pain reliving properties.

Addiction has more to do with genetic makeup and emotional health than any drug. No five year old wants to be a crack whore when she grow up. Sure drug addiction ruins lives, but so does gambling addiction, shopping addiction, sex addiction, etc.

TL;DR: You can take drugs away addicts but they are still addicts. Drug addiction is a health and not criminal issue.


You criminalize it in order to make it pay for the enforcement and w/ luck a bit o profit.
Treating addiction is a pure expense.
 
2012-09-09 01:26:18 PM

Jefferson Biatchmagnet: This is the thing the stoners will have to accept: because of the way marijuana stays in your system (as compared with alcohol), you will likely always test as "under the influence".


This is a feature, not a flaw. It opens up a much larger window for the "treatment and rehabilitation" industry.

Shadowknight: Tell the truth about weed (You probably won't die unless it's laced with something, but you likely won't be very productive either")


blogs-images.forbes.comupload.wikimedia.orgthebertshow.comstatic1.businessinsider.com


These guys are all curious as to what you mean by "but you likely won't be very productive either"
 
2012-09-09 01:26:39 PM

lewismarktwo: stiletto_the_wise: give me doughnuts: zvoidx: What if it becomes legalized, but can only be purchased in "packs" from big tobacco companies?

Just think of all the additives they would add, like ammonia and ether - like they do with cigarettes. Link

Then do what millions already do: Grow your own.

Good luck with that. Part of a "legalization" package would almost certainly include bans on growing. The corporations wouldn't allow otherwise.

Growing and selling without an undogly amount of paperwork, pointless 'quality control' and prohibitively expensive equipment? Yeah they won't allow that. But growing for personal use they have no choice but to allow in that deal.


Although beer brewing recently became legal in the 1970s, it's still illegal to distill your own spirits, even for personal use. Why? Because with Moonshine, the government doesn't get their tax.
 
2012-09-09 01:27:58 PM

Zizzowop: I agree with what someone else said, why shouldn't you be able to grow a plant-for personal use-in your backyard. It's no different than growing tomatoes, except tomatoes don't get you high, but if I could grow a six-pack of beer in my backyard, I would.


I can and do - though its in the laundry.
 
2012-09-09 01:28:09 PM
i331.photobucket.com

My Black Domina girl swooned, but my Sour Diesel lady kept cracking snarky Republican jokes.
 
2012-09-09 01:28:59 PM

stiletto_the_wise: lewismarktwo: stiletto_the_wise: give me doughnuts: zvoidx: What if it becomes legalized, but can only be purchased in "packs" from big tobacco companies?

Just think of all the additives they would add, like ammonia and ether - like they do with cigarettes. Link

Then do what millions already do: Grow your own.

Good luck with that. Part of a "legalization" package would almost certainly include bans on growing. The corporations wouldn't allow otherwise.

Growing and selling without an undogly amount of paperwork, pointless 'quality control' and prohibitively expensive equipment? Yeah they won't allow that. But growing for personal use they have no choice but to allow in that deal.


Although beer brewing recently became legal in the 1970s, it's still illegal to distill your own spirits, even for personal use. Why? Because with Moonshine, the government doesn't get their tax.


A principle that created this government in the first place.
 
2012-09-09 01:29:32 PM

lewismarktwo: Shadowknight: lewismarktwo: stiletto_the_wise: give me doughnuts: zvoidx:...

As a former police officer and a current medic, you are very wrong about the DUI thing. I've been to too many accidents for you to tell me otherwise. It's an intoxicant, let's not fool ourselves.

You've likely passed quite a few drunks well over the legal limit too this week. Doesn't mean it's a good idea.

Unless they were distracted by dropping their joint ala Big Lewbowski, those accidents had nothing to do with the weed. It makes you drive like someone who needs to take a nap, nothing more. There are these scientific tests and stuff, duder.

I've driven drunk and I've driven high. The experience is not the same. Being drunk severely effects your motor control and thinking process, being comfortably high does not. I will never drive drunk again because it really is pathetically irresponsible.

If you ever manage to get get stoned enough to where driving would actually be similarly dangerous, you simply never get around to driving. 'These stale Ritz crackers are not so bad, I'll go shopping later ...zzzzzz'

I'm sure you saw many accidents where weed was admitted to being used, mainly because that shiat is obvious and they know they have to cop to it.. They forgot to tell you about the fistful of Xannies they took. I bet you saw a lot of cigarettes and water bottles too.


Weed slows down your reactions too, but has a different impairment than that of alcohol. Dilation of time perception, speed, and depth, among other things.

You are arguing the same argument as how many people back in the 70s and 80s when they started cracking down on drunk driving. Yes, yo are impaired. No, you shouldn't be driving.
 
2012-09-09 01:30:31 PM

Shadowknight: But anyone who is actively high, actively drunk, or tired beyond belief is about an equal and dangerous risk on the road.



Uh yeah, 16,000 people a year die from drunk driving wrecks last I checked, cannabis isn't even on the map.

Your devil weed hard-on is showing kid, maybe you should tone it down a bit.
 
2012-09-09 01:30:44 PM

stiletto_the_wise: give me doughnuts: zvoidx: What if it becomes legalized, but can only be purchased in "packs" from big tobacco companies?

Just think of all the additives they would add, like ammonia and ether - like they do with cigarettes. Link

Then do what millions already do: Grow your own.

Good luck with that. Part of a "legalization" package would almost certainly include bans on growing. The corporations wouldn't allow otherwise.


Why would they bother? You're allowed to grow your own tobacco and brew/distill your own alcohol, and "the corporations" make plenty of money on those. Their selling point in convenience, not exclusive access.
 
Displayed 50 of 278 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report