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.

(Washington Post)   Why Mexico is rooting for U.S. states to legalize pot on election day, Taco Bell strangely silent on the matter   (washingtonpost.com) divider line 244
    More: Interesting, U.S., Mexico, marijuana legalization, Colorado, Oregon, U.S. states, Mexican, Rand Corporation  
•       •       •

14462 clicks; posted to Main » on 06 Nov 2012 at 12:00 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-06 04:38:00 PM  

Jon iz teh kewl: it's just a gay plant


What a gay plant might look like:

static.environmentalgraffiti.com
 
2012-11-06 04:44:04 PM  
Taco Bell?

What does the Mexican phone company have to do with this?
 
2012-11-06 04:47:29 PM  

SquiggsIN: Refusing to admit you are incorrect when faced with contradicting evidence is a sign of a delusional person. I don't mean to insult you but, perhaps you should seek help.


So now everyone who disagrees with you on the internet requires psychiatric intervention? That's a new low.

SquiggsIN: Cannabis doesn't make people stupid,


Oh, yes it does. Studies have shown that it does lower intelligence, although minimally.

SquiggsIN: listening to stubborn fools like you, however, does spread ignorance.


Ignorance is a state of being uninformed So, after reading my comments, people actually know less than they did before they read my comments? I have the power to erase knowledge from men's minds!!! Muahahaha!

4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-11-06 04:54:58 PM  

WeenerGord: SquiggsIN: Refusing to admit you are incorrect when faced with contradicting evidence is a sign of a delusional person. I don't mean to insult you but, perhaps you should seek help.

So now everyone who disagrees with you on the internet requires psychiatric intervention? That's a new low.

SquiggsIN: Cannabis doesn't make people stupid,

Oh, yes it does. Studies have shown that it does lower intelligence, although minimally.

SquiggsIN: listening to stubborn fools like you, however, does spread ignorance.

Ignorance is a state of being uninformed So, after reading my comments, people actually know less than they did before they read my comments? I have the power to erase knowledge from men's minds!!! Muahahaha!

[4.bp.blogspot.com image 324x393]


Tell that to my Genetics Prof. friend with 4 PHDs form Cornell, MIT, and UT. Just sayin.

And the only studies I can find, are in association to the developing brains of children.
 
2012-11-06 05:02:00 PM  

WeenerGord: So now everyone who disagrees with you on the internet requires psychiatric intervention? That's a new low.


Seriously dude, you've made yourself look like an absolute moron in this thread, just stop talking.
 
2012-11-06 05:03:41 PM  

WeenerGord: SquiggsIN: Cannabis doesn't make people stupid,

Oh, yes it does. Studies have shown that it does lower intelligence, although minimally.


I have to side with the Weiner on this one. There was a fark-linked article in the past couple of months that indicated that moderate smoking permanently lowered your IQ by a few points.
 
2012-11-06 05:08:31 PM  

WeenerGord: SquiggsIN: Refusing to admit you are incorrect when faced with contradicting evidence is a sign of a delusional person. I don't mean to insult you but, perhaps you should seek help.

So now everyone who disagrees with you on the internet requires psychiatric intervention? That's a new low.


That's not true and Squiggles was wrong for saying as much. You're not a stupid person, or a crazy person, you're simply wrong about one small piece of information and have been very stubborn in your refusal to accept that you were wrong. It's okay, lots of people are like that. My old man is the same way- he thinks he knows literally everything about everything and if you tell him he's incorrect about something he'll shout you down. Lots and lots of folks are like that.

SquiggsIN: Cannabis doesn't make people stupid,

Oh, yes it does. Studies have shown that it does lower intelligence, although minimally.


True, but that was only in adolescents.

SquiggsIN: listening to stubborn fools like you, however, does spread ignorance.

Ignorance is a state of being uninformed So, after reading my comments, people actually know less than they did before they read my comments? I have the power to erase knowledge from men's minds!!! Muahahaha!


I think it would be more accurate to say that you're unknowingly spreading misinformation, which indeed could lead to other people being misinformed as well. You don't have the power to erase knowledge, but you do have the power to alter and influence it. We all do. We are very social creatures and this is largely how we learn- by listening to others. The first step, though, is humbly admitting that you don't know everything and that others out there have something to teach you.
 
2012-11-06 05:10:42 PM  

SquiggsIN: vudukungfu : everything you said is accurate except the 2 plants = 1 year supply part. Look at places where cannabis is grown legally and they are not getting those yields even with the best methods. Most plants aren't going to get you more than an ounce or a few at most. Even the highest quality cannabis can be consumed at rates of an ounce a week or more. (I have a cousin that burns about a half an ounce a day)

Just like brewing your own beer or wine, with legalized cannabis there will be ridiculous regulations preventing the sale or transfer to other parties. Most people will seek distributors for the convenience factor. However, just like microbrewers/vintners, there will always be connoisseurs who see their products as an art form and would want to grow their own.



Two plants a year works for me.
www.esquire.com
 
2012-11-06 06:06:34 PM  

JohnBigBootay: Or Washington. Where it is polling ahead by a substantial margin.


Where are you following the elections?

Every place I've pulled up still has zeros for everything.
 
2012-11-06 06:26:19 PM  

Leeds: WeenerGord: SquiggsIN: Cannabis doesn't make people stupid,

Oh, yes it does. Studies have shown that it does lower intelligence, although minimally.

I have to side with the Weiner on this one. There was a fark-linked article in the past couple of months that indicated that moderate smoking permanently lowered your IQ by a few points.


And there are studies you, the American taxpayer has funded not once, but three times.
These studies refute this information. The plant is found to be non-toxic with no, none, not any long term effects.
There is a consensus(a "real" one) of these studies for decriminalizing the plant.
Your elected officials, both GOP and DFL have totally ignored the advice they spent krillions of your dollars obtaining.
Go figure.
 
2012-11-06 06:29:57 PM  

radarlove: WeenerGord: radarlove: you damn well better expect people with more experience to correct you

All that I expect, is that no matter what you say on Fark, some assclown may pop up and troll you, and sure enough, it continues to happen.

You sure are full of yourself. Where TF do you get all your imagined "experience"? Do you have a horticultural degree?

That's because due to its gigantic userbase, no matter what you say on Fark someone is bound to know more about the subject than you. I don't go into lifeguard threads and say, "Backstroke is clearly better than breaststroke!" because I know shiat all about swimming and I know I'll get my ass handed to me. In fact, there are really only two things that I really know well because there are only two industries that I've spent a considerable amount of time in: the Medical Marijuana industry and the Adult Entertainment industry. I've spent many years in each and so I feel comfortable jumping into discussions about them and contributing. But the fact of the matter is that there is still probably someone on Fark who knows a lot more about growing pot or making smut than I do, and I generally cede to their experience. On any other topic, I pretty much know dick-all and freely admit to it. Except maybe eschatology, but that's just a hobby.

With regards to cannabis, I could spend every single day for the rest of my life learning something new about this plant and still never learn everything about it. It is a beautifully complex plant and I find it to be very humbling to my supposed intelligence and experience.


We do have all of recorded history with the plant to research.
 
2012-11-06 06:30:51 PM  

Snarfangel: That choice will lead to a loss of $1.425 billion to the cartels if Colorado legalizes, $1.372 billion if Washington approves the ballot measure, and $1.839 billion if Oregon votes yes, the study says.

Woohoo, Oregon wins!

/Do we smoke the most pot or something?


I think that Eugene is pulling most of the weight on this one...
 
2012-11-06 06:36:35 PM  

snocone: We do have all of recorded history with the plant to research.


Sure, but 3,500 years of recorded use is a lot for me to dig through and I'd rather learn by experience in this case. ;-)
 
2012-11-06 06:47:21 PM  
snocone

The plant is found to be non-toxic with no, none, not any long term effects.

Except for lung cancer, but that's no big deal.
 
2012-11-06 06:57:45 PM  

Civil_War2_Time: snocone

The plant is found to be non-toxic with no, none, not any long term effects.

Except for lung cancer, but that's no big deal.


Incorrect. Smoking anything produces carcinogens, to be sure, but cannabis has actually been shown to have anti-tumorial benefits, and there are a whole host of ways of indulging in it that do not require combustion and produce zero carcinogens.
 
2012-11-06 07:08:40 PM  

Spam Pajamas: Two plants a year works for me.


I hope it grows up to be big and strong.
 
2012-11-06 07:15:45 PM  

radarlove: Civil_War2_Time: snocone

The plant is found to be non-toxic with no, none, not any long term effects.

Except for lung cancer, but that's no big deal.

Incorrect. Smoking anything produces carcinogens, to be sure, but cannabis has actually been shown to have anti-tumorial benefits, and there are a whole host of ways of indulging in it that do not require combustion and produce zero carcinogens.


thing is, much of the same could be said of tobacco if you wanted to .
MUCH, not ALL..

you can just as easily pack your vaporizer with tobacco as you can with pot.

no idea why you would want to, but it can be done.

why are you arguing with people that fundamentally agree with you?
 
2012-11-06 07:18:55 PM  

radarlove: Civil_War2_Time: snocone

The plant is found to be non-toxic with no, none, not any long term effects.

Except for lung cancer, but that's no big deal.

Incorrect. Smoking anything produces carcinogens, to be sure, but cannabis has actually been shown to have anti-tumorial benefits, and there are a whole host of ways of indulging in it that do not require combustion and produce zero carcinogens.


You and I both know that most people that partake in intaking weed don't do it through brownies, and/or any other method. I was an 18 year smoker, and I only ate brownies three times during that span. I don't intake any nowadays, and I don't miss it at all.

Yes, it has great benefits when taken in through a vaporizer or through brownies, there is NO argument against that. It's just not nearly the norm in any way, shape or form. A joint (or blunt) is probably at least 75% of the way people partake, and you know that.
 
2012-11-06 07:24:21 PM  

Cerebral Knievel: radarlove: Civil_War2_Time: snocone

The plant is found to be non-toxic with no, none, not any long term effects.

Except for lung cancer, but that's no big deal.

Incorrect. Smoking anything produces carcinogens, to be sure, but cannabis has actually been shown to have anti-tumorial benefits, and there are a whole host of ways of indulging in it that do not require combustion and produce zero carcinogens.

thing is, much of the same could be said of tobacco if you wanted to .
MUCH, not ALL..

you can just as easily pack your vaporizer with tobacco as you can with pot.

no idea why you would want to, but it can be done.

why are you arguing with people that fundamentally agree with you?


I'm not arguing with people at all, I'm correcting incorrect information. Who is saying it or what their position is on any given issue is irrelevant to me if the information is wrong.

Tobacco, to the best of my knowledge, does not provide any medical benefits at all much less the anti-cancer benefits that cannabis has been shown to provide. Furthermore tobacco contains carcinogens regardless of whether it is smoked or not. Chewing tobacco will give you oral cancer just as quickly as smoking will give you lung cancer. 

/tried tobacco out of my vaporizer once...it was really, really, REALLY bad
 
2012-11-06 07:25:32 PM  

Strik3r: We are voting to leagaize pot today ??????????????????

/ didn't get the memo...........


In Washington, that means voting for Initiative 502, baby! We're not just decriminalizing possession, we're licensing the growing, manufacturing, distributing of it, too.

It won't be long before half the state wakes and bakes. Should be fun.
 
2012-11-06 07:26:09 PM  
Cerebral Knievel

I was typing out my reply, so I didn't see yours...obviously.

I am in complete agreement that it has its benefits, and once my lung cancer sets in from smoking so much of it, I'll probably be eating brownies and using a vaporizer to handle the chemo.

That's just a bit ironic...
 
2012-11-06 07:34:10 PM  

Civil_War2_Time: A joint (or blunt) is probably at least 75% of the way people partake, and you know that.


In my experience a pipe, bong, bullet, etc is far more commonly used than joints or blunts. Of course with lower quality that changes. Your main point that smoking is the most often used method of ingestion is correct, but those numbers are changing. Vaporizers in particularl are becoming more affordable, portable and reliable. Edibles I suspect with generally remain fringe. They take a bit longer to come on and can be too much for even seasoned smokers if you eat more than you realize.
 
2012-11-06 07:39:35 PM  

Civil_War2_Time: radarlove: Civil_War2_Time: snocone

The plant is found to be non-toxic with no, none, not any long term effects.

Except for lung cancer, but that's no big deal.

Incorrect. Smoking anything produces carcinogens, to be sure, but cannabis has actually been shown to have anti-tumorial benefits, and there are a whole host of ways of indulging in it that do not require combustion and produce zero carcinogens.

You and I both know that most people that partake in intaking weed don't do it through brownies, and/or any other method. I was an 18 year smoker, and I only ate brownies three times during that span. I don't intake any nowadays, and I don't miss it at all.

Yes, it has great benefits when taken in through a vaporizer or through brownies, there is NO argument against that. It's just not nearly the norm in any way, shape or form. A joint (or blunt) is probably at least 75% of the way people partake, and you know that.


I think your estimation of around 75% of people smoking is probably correct. This is purely anecdotal, but at my old dispensary our sales were split around 60%/40% between herb and edibles. We got a lot of people into vaporizers as well, as we really were a "health first" kind of dispensary that tailored to people with severe conditions, but I'm certain that a fair amount of our customers were smoking.

NOW, that being said, the original statement that you replied to was this:

"The plant is found to be non-toxic with no, none, not any long term effects."

To which you replied:

"Except for lung cancer"

Which again, I say is incorrect. The plant is not carcinogenic. Smoking is carcinogenic and should be discouraged no matter what is being smoked, but cannabis in and of itself will not give you cancer, and people should be encouraged to use it in a manner that is consistent with improving their health and quality of life.

I realize that we're splitting hairs and getting into semantics at this point, and I apologize for that because you and indeed all of Fark deserve a more robust discussion about the health hazards and benefits of cannabis use.
 
2012-11-06 07:51:22 PM  

SquiggsIN: where'd weenergord go?

I was really hoping he'd attempt to support his argument on a topic he knows next to nothing about.

I guess it was just an internet argument where supporting your position is less required the more stubborn you are.


I imagine he's left work and is now walking into a bar so he can tell the bartender that, although he's never had a drink in his life, he knows that getting drunk on natural fermented berries you find on the forest floor is better than any of the hundreds of bottles they have in their bar because that's for 'Alcohol snobs".
 
2012-11-06 07:52:44 PM  

Civil_War2_Time: I am in complete agreement that it has its benefits, and once my lung cancer sets in from smoking so much of it, I'll probably be eating brownies and using a vaporizer to handle the chemo.


Show me one case of someone getting lung cancer strictly from smoking marijuana.
 
2012-11-06 07:53:33 PM  

Spam Pajamas: SquiggsIN: where'd weenergord go?

I was really hoping he'd attempt to support his argument on a topic he knows next to nothing about.

I guess it was just an internet argument where supporting your position is less required the more stubborn you are.

I imagine he's left work and is now walking into a bar so he can tell the bartender that, although he's never had a drink in his life, he knows that getting drunk on natural fermented berries you find on the forest floor is better than any of the hundreds of bottles they have in their bar because that's for 'Alcohol snobs".


i LOLed HARD
 
2012-11-06 07:54:49 PM  

Wasilla Hillbilly: Civil_War2_Time: A joint (or blunt) is probably at least 75% of the way people partake, and you know that.

In my experience a pipe, bong, bullet, etc is far more commonly used than joints or blunts. Of course with lower quality that changes. Your main point that smoking is the most often used method of ingestion is correct, but those numbers are changing. Vaporizers in particularl are becoming more affordable, portable and reliable. Edibles I suspect with generally remain fringe. They take a bit longer to come on and can be too much for even seasoned smokers if you eat more than you realize.


I'm not arguing trends or anything like that. The "No. None." comment is just not factual in any way.
 
2012-11-06 08:08:34 PM  
one thing I want to say to anti pot folks. regardless of what party you voted to be president in the past 5 elections you willingly voted for a pot smoker as our potus. dumasses. LOLOLOL.........
 
2012-11-06 08:33:52 PM  

radarlove: Civil_War2_Time: radarlove: Civil_War2_Time: snocone

The plant is found to be non-toxic with no, none, not any long term effects.

Except for lung cancer, but that's no big deal.

Incorrect. Smoking anything produces carcinogens, to be sure, but cannabis has actually been shown to have anti-tumorial benefits, and there are a whole host of ways of indulging in it that do not require combustion and produce zero carcinogens.

You and I both know that most people that partake in intaking weed don't do it through brownies, and/or any other method. I was an 18 year smoker, and I only ate brownies three times during that span. I don't intake any nowadays, and I don't miss it at all.

Yes, it has great benefits when taken in through a vaporizer or through brownies, there is NO argument against that. It's just not nearly the norm in any way, shape or form. A joint (or blunt) is probably at least 75% of the way people partake, and you know that.

I think your estimation of around 75% of people smoking is probably correct. This is purely anecdotal, but at my old dispensary our sales were split around 60%/40% between herb and edibles. We got a lot of people into vaporizers as well, as we really were a "health first" kind of dispensary that tailored to people with severe conditions, but I'm certain that a fair amount of our customers were smoking.

NOW, that being said, the original statement that you replied to was this:

"The plant is found to be non-toxic with no, none, not any long term effects."

To which you replied:

"Except for lung cancer"

Which again, I say is incorrect. The plant is not carcinogenic. Smoking is carcinogenic and should be discouraged no matter what is being smoked, but cannabis in and of itself will not give you cancer, and people should be encouraged to use it in a manner that is consistent with improving their health and quality of life.

I realize that we're splitting hairs and getting into semantics at this point, and I apologize for that be ...


Yes, we're splitting hairs, but I will never agree that it is not a Carcinogen if smoked in abundance...like I have done. And, good for you that you helped people with providing it in a legal and safe way.

And that leads me into a reply to TheJoe03.

Who in the history of the world has ever JUST smoked weed, and nothing else? There's ALWAYS something else they have smoked...if just once. Maybe it takes only one cigarette, or 500 joints, or one Salvia hit that causes Cancer. Who knows. Nobody has ever studied people that have just smoked weed in their lives, so that study will never come about. Ever.

I don't want it legalized, but wholly decrinalized for small amounts (~1/4 oz.) in ALL states.
 
2012-11-06 08:54:44 PM  

WorthNoting: JohnBigBootay: Or Washington. Where it is polling ahead by a substantial margin.

Where are you following the elections?

Every place I've pulled up still has zeros for everything.


No official polls out yet. Nitr til polls close on west coast. I was referring to unofficial preliminary polls.
 
2012-11-06 10:10:38 PM  
Wow... I could do this all night.
 
2012-11-06 10:47:20 PM  

Civil_War2_Time: snocone

The plant is found to be non-toxic with no, none, not any long term effects.

Except for lung cancer, but that's no big deal.


Eat it. Vape it. Apply it to your skin...

/smoking ain't the only way
 
2012-11-06 10:48:00 PM  

Civil_War2_Time: snocone

The plant is found to be non-toxic with no, none, not any long term effects.

Except for lung cancer, but that's no big deal.


Eat it. Vape it. Apply it to your skin...

/smoking aint the only way
 
2012-11-06 10:49:13 PM  
I don't know why that posted twice.
 
2012-11-06 11:45:27 PM  
almost 2 million votes in and initiative 502 is up 55 to 45% in wa state!

/4:20
 
2012-11-07 01:41:57 AM  
As a Colorado citizen, who smoked a fattie before I voted YES on 64, I'm really getting a kick out of these replies.
 
2012-11-07 12:26:28 PM  

AllUpInYa: My concern is that we'd be importing the fighting, terrorism and corruption that exists in Mexico. because of the drug trade.
Cartel grow ops, trying to dominate the market; using whatever means to remove competition from the market.

Is it a bit naive to think that if the borders are changed, that Cartels will give up their old ways?


One would think that things would also escalate in terms of violent and illegal activity. You put any animal in a corner and it is bound to bite. Your only options are to put the dog down or figure out a way to tame it. This won't tame the dog. People think that by miraculously legalizing it the cartels will cease to exist operations. No, they will adapt and be even harder to combat. The same thing holds true how wars used to be fought to how they are fought now. Before, it was clear cut who the aggressors or your enemy was, they wore color coded uniforms signifying "I am your enemy". Now, with guerilla style warfare taking precedence, it is hard to pinpoint just who your enemy is, how many of them there are, and what the rules for "winning" are. I don't think flushing the rats OUT of the sewer and letting them run around the city is going to turn them suddenly into cute little pet mice. They are still rats.
 
2012-11-07 01:27:57 PM  

scottydoesntknow: SquiggsIN: (I have a cousin that burns about a half an ounce a day)

I find that hard to believe. 14 grams a day? Does he do anything besides chain smoke one after the other?


He doesn`t SMOKE it you fool, he just burns it. Some people do that. I have no idea why though. Most of the ones I know who do that have bipolar and put lots of tobacco with it so it burns away without being smoked.
 
2012-11-07 01:34:25 PM  

Civil_War2_Time: snocone

The plant is found to be non-toxic with no, none, not any long term effects.

Except for lung cancer, but that's no big deal.


It`s so much not a big deal that you made that up to try to make it look bad...

Of course, you can supply a link or citation to back up the cancer from only smoking weed rather than the cancer from smoking tobacco. Please. I need a good laugh.

You ARE campaigning for the prohibition of tobacco and alcohol aren`t you? Don`t want to be a hypocrite!

/some of the biggest killers are cooking over open fires indoors and frying food. Both are very bad for your lungs
 
2012-11-07 05:27:14 PM  

dready zim: scottydoesntknow: SquiggsIN: (I have a cousin that burns about a half an ounce a day)

I find that hard to believe. 14 grams a day? Does he do anything besides chain smoke one after the other?

He doesn`t SMOKE it you fool, he just burns it. Some people do that. I have no idea why though. Most of the ones I know who do that have bipolar and put lots of tobacco with it so it burns away without being smoked.


Maybe it keeps mosquitoes away.
 
2012-11-07 05:58:48 PM  
Does anyone know what the pot law will actually do now? I mean, if you live in Washington st, how soon can you start buying it? I assume they have to set up distribution lines, figure out tax layers, etc... Is there a plan yet, or an ETA?
 
2012-11-07 06:39:49 PM  

the money is in the banana stand: One would think that things would also escalate in terms of violent and illegal activity.


Like what happened when alcohol prohibition ended? You might get some sputters and gasps, but going by history - both in the USA and other countries, violence will decrease. They just can't afford it. I'm willing to consider the occasional mobster family going legit and entering politics to be a acceptible consequence.

To put it another way, I see it less of 'flushing rats out of a sewer' and more getting rid of their food. Like pests, get rid of their food/money and they'll eventually move on.
 
2012-11-08 09:29:49 AM  

BMFPitt: Wow... I could do this all night.


That's cocaine you're thinking of.
 
2012-11-08 04:11:02 PM  
radarlove: So looks like Longmont is reversing. Interesting eh? I just heard on the news, "It's not clear at this time if licenses will be reinstated."
 
Displayed 44 of 244 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
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